The purpose of this study was to determine if andragogy (adult education) and pedagogy (youth education) are separate disciplines demanding specialized training as many educators contend. Feedback from 12 of the largest school districts in the United States and 12 Fortune 500 industries concerning their educational philosophies, purposes, teaching methodologies and evaluation techniques was used as the basis for comparison. The study addressed three major questions: Question 1. Can a model be developed to determine if there are differences between andragogy and pedagogy? Response. A parallel pairs model can facilitate comparisons between the categories of andragogy and pedagogy and among the variables of philosophy, purpose, teaching methodology and evaluation technique. Question 2. Do "training" (business) and "education" (public school) programs use different philosophical biases, purposes, teaching methodologies and evaluation techniques? Response. It appears from the data collected that there is a great deal of similarity between schools and businesses concerning philosophy, purpose, methodology and evaluation. The conditions that authors contend separate adult students and children, such as experience, discipline, and application of learning, may exist but apparently have little impact on the actual teaching process as practiced by schools and businesses today. Question 3. What are the implications of the findings on teacher training and education program development? Response. The data indicate that a teacher could make the transition from public school teaching to industry and vice versa as both of these institutions share the same basic philosophies, purposes, teaching methodologies and evaluation techniques. The differences are greater within the institution itself, depending on the type of educational program in which the student is engaged, rather than between the institutions. Therefore, public school educators and industrial trainers should be encouraged to work more closely together, sharing their expertise for the benefit of both institutions.

The purposes of the study were: (1) to operationalize Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching (Engineering, Apprenticeship, Developmental, Nurturing and Social Reform), (2) to predict conception of teaching scores, (3) to determine the existence of dominant conceptions of teaching, and (4) to determine the extent to which personal, socio— cultural/educational and program variables predict dominant conceptions of teaching. A 75-item instrument, Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS) was developed to operationalize Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching. A pilot study revealed that the instrument had good face, content, and convergent validities as well as acceptable test-retest reliability and internal consistency. A sample of 471 Vancouver School Board and New Westminster School Board adult education instructors responded to a mailed questionnaire survey conducted in the Fall of 1993. Responses to the CTS were evaluated to determine whether Pratt’s five conceptions were operationalized successfully. Factor analysis was employed to determine whether the items in the CTS were representative of Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching. Results revealed that 63 out of 75 original items in the CTS successfully operationalized five conceptions of teaching, with Pratt’s Apprenticeship conception split into Apprenticeship-Practice and Apprenticeship-Modelling. Further refinement streamlined this number to a six—scale 50—item Revised Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS—R). Personal, socio—cultural/educational and program variables were used as predictors in multiple regressions to explain variance in six conception scores. There was no single common predictor of conceptions. On the average, the significant predictors in the six regression equations accounted for 14.5% of variance in the conception scores. The only prominent predictor which accounted for most variance (2R = 17%) in the Nurturing conception was personality—nurturance measure. An instructor’s dominant conceptions were predicted by nine independent variables, namely, gender, ethnicity, personality— dominance, personality—nurturance, years of teaching adults, content upgrade, living arrangement, level of education and class size. These variables were collapsed into three significant discriminant functions which correctly classified 34.7% of the 288 eligible cases into one of the six dominant conception groups. The study concluded that: (1) Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching could be operationalized and that a Revised Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS-R) was a valid and reliable instrument to assess people’s conceptions of teaching, (2) conceptions of teaching were independent concepts having their own existence, (3) most instructors held at least one single most dominant conception of teaching, and (4) dominant conceptions of teaching were predicted by four personal variables (gender, ethnicity, personality—dominance and personality—nurturance), four socio— cultural/educational variables (living arrangement, level of education, years of teaching adults and content upgrade effort) and one program variable (class size).

The purposes of the study were: (1) to operationalize Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching (Engineering, Apprenticeship, Developmental, Nurturing and Social Reform), (2) to predict conception of teaching scores, (3) to determine the existence of dominant conceptions of teaching, and (4) to determine the extent to which personal, socio— cultural/educational and program variables predict dominant conceptions of teaching. A 75-item instrument, Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS) was developed to operationalize Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching. A pilot study revealed that the instrument had good face, content, and convergent validities as well as acceptable test-retest reliability and internal consistency. A sample of 471 Vancouver School Board and New Westminster School Board adult education instructors responded to a mailed questionnaire survey conducted in the Fall of 1993. Responses to the CTS were evaluated to determine whether Pratt’s five conceptions were operationalized successfully. Factor analysis was employed to determine whether the items in the CTS were representative of Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching. Results revealed that 63 out of 75 original items in the CTS successfully operationalized five conceptions of teaching, with Pratt’s Apprenticeship conception split into Apprenticeship-Practice and Apprenticeship-Modelling. Further refinement streamlined this number to a six—scale 50—item Revised Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS—R). Personal, socio—cultural/educational and program variables were used as predictors in multiple regressions to explain variance in six conception scores. There was no single common predictor of conceptions. On the average, the significant predictors in the six regression equations accounted for 14.5% of variance in the conception scores. The only prominent predictor which accounted for most variance (2R = 17%) in the Nurturing conception was personality—nurturance measure. An instructor’s dominant conceptions were predicted by nine independent variables, namely, gender, ethnicity, personality— dominance, personality—nurturance, years of teaching adults, content upgrade, living arrangement, level of education and class size. These variables were collapsed into three significant discriminant functions which correctly classified 34.7% of the 288 eligible cases into one of the six dominant conception groups. The study concluded that: (1) Pratt’s five conceptions of teaching could be operationalized and that a Revised Conception of Teaching Scales (CTS-R) was a valid and reliable instrument to assess people’s conceptions of teaching, (2) conceptions of teaching were independent concepts having their own existence, (3) most instructors held at least one single most dominant conception of teaching, and (4) dominant conceptions of teaching were predicted by four personal variables (gender, ethnicity, personality—dominance and personality—nurturance), four socio— cultural/educational variables (living arrangement, level of education, years of teaching adults and content upgrade effort) and one program variable (class size). / Education, Faculty of / Educational Studies (EDST), Department of / Graduate