The purpose of this study was to assess the affective component of the secondary teacher preparation program at Ball State University. Three population groups enrolled during fall quarter, 1979, voluntarily took part: 1) university supervisors of secondary student teachers; 2) classroom supervisors of secondary student teachers; and 3) secondary student teachers.The assessment was conducted by means of an original instrument. The Inventory of Affective Teaching Skills measured three dimensions of responses for 21 affective teaching skills. The three response dimensions were: 1) To what extent is this skill important to effective teachers? (Valuing); 2) To what extent do you believe the skill was included in the BSU teacher training program? (Training); 3a) To what extent was the student teacher proficient in this skill? (Proficiency); and 3b) To what extent are you (the student teacher) proficient in this skill? (Proficiency). The response alternatives ranged from 1-NONE to 5-EXTENSIVE.The null hypotheses stated that there would be no differences between group responses on the three dimensions. The hypotheses were tested using the multi-variate analysis of variance F-test. Results indicated that there were significant differences between the responses of the three groups on the three dimensions. The three null hypotheses were rejected.Mean scores for each of the 21 variables (items or skills) were also examined and compared across groups and across dimensions. It was found that university supervisor group scores were highest for Valuing (3.8014, and lower for Proficiency (2.8652) and Training (2.8644). Classroom supervisor group scores were highest for Valuing (3.7165), lower for Training (3.0276) and lowest for Proficiency (2.9413). Student teacher group scores were highest for Valuing (4.0158), lower for Proficiency (3.5008), and lowest for Training (3.3436).Highest overall mean scores were from student teachers (3.6219), lower from classroom supervisors (3.2284), and lowest from university supervisors (3.1650). The overall mean scores resulted in the following rankings: lst, support pupil efforts; 2nd, motivate and involve pupils; 3rd, recognize pupil progress; 19th, use simulations and games; 20th, use objectives in disciplining; and 21st, use role-play and role-reversals.The researcher concluded that although the three groups valued the affective teaching skills, they perceived that the skills were not adequately included in the training program. Affective teaching skills which concerned general classroom interaction such as motivating, supporting, and involving pupils were ranked high. Specific affective techniques which combined affective with intellectual and analytical processes were ranked low.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:BSU/oai:cardinalscholar.bsu.edu:handle/180459 |
| Date | 03 June 2011 |
| Creators | Schafer, Sandra Rae |
| Contributors | Elsmere, Robert T. |
| Source Sets | Ball State University |
| Detected Language | English |
| Format | 3, ix, 214 leaves : graphs ; 28 cm. |
| Source | Virtual Press |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds