The purposes of this study were to ascertain the thinking styles of a selected sample group of cooperating teachers and university supervisors and to denote the differences between the thinking styles. The populations included 122 selected cooperating teachers and 31 selected university supervisors.Cooperating teachers and university supervisors completed the Level 1: Life Styles Inventory which contained 240 short phrases and words producing a twelve-dimension thinking style. Seventy-two cooperating teachers and twenty-five university supervisors were included in data analysis.Thinking style profiles of cooperating teachers and university supervisors were derived from mean and standard deviation scores on twelve thinking style scales.Twelve null hypotheses were tested to identify thinking style differences between cooperating teachers and university supervisors on twelve scales. Multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) followed by one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) were the statistical treatments utilized to analyze data at the .05 level. Analysis of data relevant to total Level 1: Life Style Inventory responses and to each hypothesis resulted in the following findings: 1. Mean responses of participating cooperating teachers and university supervisors indicated strong orientations toward humanistic-helpful, affiliative, achievement, and self-actualized dimensions of thinking style.2. No significant differences existed between cooperating teachers and university supervisors on the twelve thinking style scales considered collectively.3. Individual thinking style scales with no significant differences were:(a) humanistic-helpful, (b) affiliative, (c) approval, (d) dependent, (e) avoidance, (f) oppositional, (g) power, (h) competition, (i) competence, (j) achievement, and (f) self-actualization.4. A significant difference existed between cooperatingteachers and university supervisors on the thinking style scale classified as "conventional."

The primary purpose of the study was to determine whether there was a significant relationship among perceptions of university supervisors, cooperating teachers, student teachers, and building principals regarding characteristics required to become an effective university supervisor of student teachers.In order to examine the research questions, data were collected from each of the four population groups with a questionnaire consisting of twenty-three supervisory characteristics. Twenty-three null hypotheses were tested by using the Chi square test of independence. The .05 level of significance was established as the critical probability level for the rejection of hypotheses.Findings1. There was a statistically significant difference among university supervisors, cooperating teachers, student teachers, and building principals in their perceptions regarding nineteen of the supervisory characteristics.2. There was no significant difference among university supervisors, cooperating teachers, student teachers, and building principals in their perceptions regarding four of the supervisory characteristics.3. The average number of years teaching experience was 18.4 for university supervisors, 13.5 for cooperating teachers, and 17.6 for building principals.4. The average number of years of supervising student teachers was 9.9 for university supervisors, 5.2 for cooperating teachers, and 8.1 for building principals.5. There were 46.4 percent of university supervisors, 7.8 percent of cooperating teachers, and 22.2 percent of building principals who possessed supervisory training.6. Reflecting a positive professional attitude and a real liking and respect for teaching are the most important characteristics needed by university supervisors.7. There was an observable difference in the perceptions of practitioners regarding characteristics required to be an effective university supervisor of student teachers, when compared to reports in related literature.Conclusions1. Subjects tend to agree in their perceptions regarding the importance of personal qualities and professional skills.2. Subjects tend not to agree in their perceptions regarding the importance of managerial skills and general qualities.3. Cooperating teachers tend to have fewer years of teaching experience.4. Cooperating teachers have considerably less supervisory experience.5. A high percentage of the subjects was not properly trained in student teaching supervision.

published_or_final_version / Education / Master / Master of Education

No description available.

The study had two purposes: (A) to examine the relationship between the ideal and the real roles associated with pre-student teaching experiences in the laboratory school as perceived by (1) pre-student teachers, (2) cooperating teachers, and (3) university supervisors and (B) to determine if the position of the respondent conditioned the agreement-disagreement in their perceptions of the ideal and real roles. The term "ideal'' role described the optimum in pre-student teaching experiences; the term "real" role related to the existing situation experienced by the respondents.An opinionnaire was developed specifically for this study; it was submitted to a panel of experts for refinement; it was pilot tested for validity; and it was administered during the Winter Quarter of 1977-1978. The total population which responded to the instrument included 168 student teachers, 38 cooperating laboratory school teachers, and 17 university supervisors.Contingency tables were constructed for fifteen discrete areas of concern, which were organized into the following categories: Purposes of the Program, Organization of Pre-Student Teaching Experiences, Classroom Management, Teaching Skills, and Evaluation. The chi-square statistical treatment was used to test a series of null hypotheses. The .05 level of significance was required for rejection of the null hypotheses.An extensive review of prior research and a study of professional literature was completed. Six generic areas were determined as a basis for the organization of the review.1. The Development of Role Concept2. The Importance of Pre-Student TeachingExperiences3. The Significance of the Laboratory School 4. The Salient Factors in the Role of the Pre-Student Teacher5. The Influential Role of the Cooperating Teacher6. The Functions of the University SupervisorIn addition to the forty-five tables which contained data regarding each area of concern studied, a series of summary tables was presented. In ten of the fifteen areas o concern there was found to be a relationship between the position of the respondents and the perception of the "ideal." In seven of the fifteen areas of concern there was shown to be a relationship between the Position of the respondents and the reported perception of the "real." In eight instances the null hypothesis was rejected when the position of the respondents was compared to the level of satisfaction expressed.Additional summary data were presented concerning the specific responses most frequently selected as "ideal" and as "real" by each of the respondent classifications. The levels of agreement were similarly reviewed and summarized for all areas of concern for each of the population classifications.Among the conclusions reported were:1. The student population was found to be moredissatisfied with the existing situation thaneither the cooperating teachers or the uni-versity supervisors.2. When identifying the "ideal" response, amajority of the respondents in all three population classifications agreed on one specific item (student teachers, nine times; cooperating teachers, ten times; and university supervisors, nine times). In the remaining instances, choice was sufficiently distributed to result in a lack of a majority in any one response item.The study concluded with a list of recommendations for action and for further study.

No description available.

M.Ed. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

This research sought to determine if a significant relationship existed between various levels of dogmatism of supervising teachers and student teachers and the degree of change in attitude of the student teachers during student teaching.

The literature in the field of teacher education has recognized the cooperating teacher as the most important member of the professional team which supervises the clinical laboratory experience of the student teacher. In fact, various educators have noted that no single individual has so direct an influence as the cooperating teacher in shaping the attitudes, skills, and ideas of a prospective teacher. In spite of the recognition given to the significant role the cooperating teacher plays in the daily supervision of the student teacher, information is still missing on the identification and validation of important tasks or competencies necessary for the cooperating teacher to perform. The purpose of this study was to identify specific competencies of secondary school cooperating teachers, to determine the degree of importance of these competencies, and to analyze the differences in perceptions regarding the most important competencies. Respondents in the study were cooperating teachers, student teachers, and university supervisors associated with student teaching programs at The University of Arizona during the 1978-79 academic year. The study was conducted in the following manner: (1) A search of the literature was completed to locate lists of existing cooperating teacher competencies. (2) A list of cooperating teacher competencies published in 1966, by the Association of Teacher Educators was adopted as a starting point for competency identification. (3) A jury of eleven experts critiqued the original 35 competencies for appropriateness and clarity. These experts also offered suggestions for additional competencies. (4) The list of competencies was then revised to include new competencies, strengthen each existing competency, eliminate duplication, and correct grammatical inconsistencies. (5) To insure content validity, the list was next critiqued by two research specialists, who examined the competencies for appropriateness, clarity, and completeness. (6) Revised once again, the final list served as the data gathering instrument for this study. All 32 competencies identified in this study were validated. The most crucial competency identified as necessary/most important for the cooperating teacher was a human relations competency, that of maintaining communication. In fact, those competencies considered to be more directly related to maintaining interpersonal human relations and those more closely related to classroom interactions were perceived by all groups as more important for the cooperating teacher than were other competencies. Consistently, cooperating teachers viewed competencies as more important than did student teachers. As a result of their perceptions, university supervisors placed themselves in a middle position with perceptions overlapping those of both cooperating teachers and student teachers. Experience in teaching and subject matter specialization had little effect on perceptual differences regarding competencies. Experience in supervision and amount of graduate study did not impact on perceptual differences at all. Integrating these competencies into teacher education inservice programs would necessitate determining the following: (1) perceived need for developing each competency; (2) current level of competency integration; (3) instructional methods for facilitating competency achievement; (4) criteria for assessing achievement of competencies. Data from this study will be useful to the extent that it provides an expanded base on which to make decisions regarding the professional development of the cooperating teacher.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--University of Washington, 1996. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves [110]-121).