- 11 - 10 - TABLE I COGRITIVE MUM COMPARISONS OE lhe Peabody Individual Achievement Tests(PIAT), Peabody Picture PILOT AND CONTROL GROUP TEST Vocabulary Test (PAM, and the DrawiA-PersonTest were adodnistered on a RESULTS ON PIATPPVI 'AND DRAW-A-PERS011 TEST changes in cognitive behavior resulting from pre : post basis tor assessing prugram or project participation. CONTROL GROUP (ft 2 29) .,t-11 COGNITIVE ARCA PILOT GROUP (11 . 31) The PIAT tests provided intonation relatilie to matheowtics,reading Pre M . 37.8 1.1 ! PreM : 41.7 reco nition, reading comorehension,spelling, general information, and a s . 15.3 The HI test provides information relative to , Post h 2 39.3 3.1 ChiPh site measurement, Mathematics Post M 3 47.6 developmental or s : 8,5 vng;lula.ry skill, and the Draw-A-Person Test served as a s 2 11.6 1,083 artistic'ability measure. t-ratio3.721" t-ratio 2,1 change l5.9 . change 1.5 The results.of the PIAT tests indicated that there wasno significant .5 Pre M . 39.3 Pre M . 41.0 differences between the groups ih all areas when theproject began (see s . 11.2 s . 10,0 The pilot group Table 1), This was also true fur the PPVT test results. Post M . 42.2 1,2 Readng Post M . 46,3 wade signi f icamt gains from preio post test in all areas except spelling s . 9.6 . only s . 15.3 (P< .01), The control c@de significant gaihs from pre to post test in 1.933 t-ratIci., 5,887" 1-ratite though comparable to Recognition the area of spelling (P4:.05).' The pilot group, even 4,3 change 7.0 change 1.2 the control group on the pretest, scoredsignificantly higher than the PreM . 40.5 1.E control group on the post test in mathematics (P4'.0l) and general infor- Pre M 2 35.7 s . 12.0 s 2 10,1 mation (PC .05). fSee.Table c .. ; Post M . 39.9 Reading Post M 3 42,4 s 0 9.3 The changes, in cognitive behavior when comparing the two groups wis s 2 11.5 t-ratio4 5.297" t-ratio /' XI even more reveaiing. The change in behavior between pre and post tests for Conmrehens ion the change experienced by the change 6.7 : change : the pilot group was significantlporeater than , (P4; .05), reading recognition control, group in the areas of mathematics PreM 2 38.1 Pre M/2 30,1 (P< Al), reading comprehension (1)4 .01), general informatIon(N.01), arlid A 2 10.6 comosite measurement (P( .01)., This was not true in the areaof spelling; Post M . 39.7 , ,4 Spelling Post M 2 40.8 the changes experienced by the hio groups were notsignificantly different s . 9,5 s . 10.9 , (See Table I). 2.165* at. the .05 level of significance, t-ratio'1,980 / t-ratio change 1.6 , ,f . cham. 1.7 , The PVT results indicated the two groups were not significantlydifferent ,: PreM . 34.5 Pre M 3 35,8 Oen the pilot program began or when the program ended. However, the pilot s . 16,0 s : 11,9 increase in vocabulary test per- .group OkriOga A significantly greater Post 11.: 36.9 IC General Post M 43,2 forivice -than did the control group. (P(.01), The control group actually !s 2 1214 .S be sipificdntly scored lower on thu post tilst though' it was hot found to t-ratio 1.191 Infoncatiun t-ratio 5631". (P'). MS). (See Table I) 1.1 4.; loner change 87 change. .; Pre M 2 10.7 Pre M . 192.6 tile results uf the Praw.A-Person Test were SURWhill startlini.The s . 49.3 s 2 01.3 control group had a significantly higher perforhoce level(N,t1T) on the Post M . 191.0. Composite Post M . 220,1 pretest than di41!e pita group. The greupOwere also significantly di f ferent 14.0 s . 54,4 s : pilot group per- unon post tes t resul ts were Millard, but en the pus t test the 1.751 t-ratio 8,716" t-ratio The pilot group PIAT fotwed sjgni ficantly better than the control;group (P4.05). 4..4 6,C change 311,1 change had made significant gains frum pre test to post ;test(P<:,01) but the control . Pre M 2 70 Pre M . 18.4 .." Ihe result of tide differences in gaici (8,1vs1.2) also in- group had not, s . 9,1 s . WO dicated that the pilot groups' change in performance Was significantly better 1.! Post M : 11,0 . Vocabulary Post II . 80 ihauthe control groups:' 0)( .01). (See Table 0, 8.9 s 2 140 s : t-ratio 1,180 PPVT 1-ratio 31:426** -1.4 3,: change 6 tjeapge Pre M 2 23,4 El 32) PreM7-19 ;2 1 7E. i 6.6 s. 6 r S 3 Post M . 24.6 Draw-Oerson --, Post M 2 27.9 s . ; 4.9 S 2 6.6 . 1.000 ' t-ratio 6.010" 't-ratio I _. _ ,. 1.2._ . .. '.cionilo.. .. ,. ....Challio.........8i ., .. -... 1( signiti.611.6-- , sigfliTiciii611erocehettleen melg-d..05 level ' *-1-affd6S levet or siguiticance ' " indicates sulnificant di 1 ference betveen weansat .01 3Sif 492 491 - 13 - when the program began, but the pilot group scoredsignificantly better than Conclusion:The program or project has been effective in fostering change in EP-Ili-skills or performance levels in the areas of mathematics, reading the control group on the post test (P4.01), This also resulted in significant (See Table recognitiOn, reading comprehension, general information, composite achievement, differences in the groups'ains-which was previously pointed out, On the remaining three Tortlance lest means and also the Curiosity Test vocabulary, and developmental or artistic ability. 11), " means, the control group performed significantlybetter than the pilot group, at the time of the pretest. However, at the time the post tests were ad- ministered the pilot group performed significantly better thanthe control Recommendation: It is recournended that consideration be given to modifying the On two of the Torrance Tests and also the cognftive tang program for the new project year. Since the composite group In all four instances. achievement score on the P1AT and perhaps even the Draw-A-Person test scores composite score the Control group decreased in performance, however, this do not seem to add any additional or meaningful Information it would appear , decrease was not significant. (P'.05) (See Table II), that they could be deleted from the,future testing program. It is recommended , that efforts be exerted to expand measurements in the cognitive ,reas to include . such areas as science, mathematical..concepts, mathematical applications, and' TABLE 11 With the perhaps even measurements in logical thinking as a cognitive skill. , indicated socCess of the program in developing cognitive skills, efforts to CREATIVITY ME; COMPAAISONS OF determine just what cognitive skills can be improved by Ole activities and PILOT AND COhIROL,ANOUP TEST experiences provided by the program tad to be exerted. RESULTS ON TORRANCE 4ND CURIOSITY TESTS TEST PILOT GROUP (8 . 3j 'CONTROL GROUP (N . 29) t-RA110 Objective 4: Oy May 30, 1916, identified students participating in a pilot PreM . 70.5 / Pre M . 20,8 .123 - program will show an toprovenmnt In creativity as measured by pre - posttest s . 8.8/ s . 10.1 , resuits of creativity measures. TorranCe I Post M . 34.3 Post M . 21,3 3.677** .. Three Torrance Tests, the Cunnings Curiosity Test, and the Oraw-A-Persop Picture completion t-ratio 4.432** . t-ratio .200 Test '0AP) were administered on a pre - post basis for assessing changes in change 13.8 chanee .5 , 3.325** ere., Aity or giftedresesoiting from project or programparticipation. PreH . 56.9 Pre M . 11.0 ! 2.650". s . 23.0 s . 18.2 The Torrance Tests included picture completion (I), free form (11), and Torrance 11 Post M . 94:8 Post M . 67.0 3.931" lines and circles A total or composite score of these three tests was Free Form s . 32.3' s . 21.2 also analyzed. The Cummings Curiosity Test was found to be correlated with t-ratio 8.280" t.ratio 1.222 the Torrance Test. This test consists of a picture such as an apple or chanee 37.9 chapge .-1.0 1,311" several pictures which serve'as Aimuli. The student Is asked to indic,Ie Pre t M . 11.6 Pre M . 95.5 2.630" gUeslioos ratsed in his mind about the picture. The DAP Test was found to s . 34.4 s . 26.1 correlate with the Torrance Tests as well as achievement. Thus, this.e.as Torrance 111 Postfl .134.8 Post M . 88.6 3.931" also used as, an indicator of creativity or giftedness. Lines 8 Circles $ . 53,2 s . 35.6 t.ratio .969 . ; t-ratio 7.310" The DAP Tet results were presented under objective 3 and, as presented, chant. 60.2 chart_ -6,9 6.140" these test results indicate that the program was effective in producing changes Pre M =149.4 PreM .101.1 2.923"* in the pilot group which were significantly greater than control group changes,: s . 55,1 s . 44.9 (See Table I). Thus, these results sugeest that creativity is also fostered Torrance Total Post 11 .259.6 Post M .176.6 4.411" by. the program. No additional discussion.of the OAP Test results will be s. l50.0 1 + 11 + III s .