Teacher Education, Educational Leadership & Policy ETDs

Publication Date

5-28-1971

Abstract

The purpose of the study was to generate a heuristic Educational Attitudinal Synthetic Plane Placement (EASPP) Instrument composed of six major components: (1) the X Coordinate, (2) the Y Coordinate, (3) the eight apexes, (4) the eight octants, (5) the two diagonals, and (6) the clusterings. A quasi-experimental ex post facto design was employed. Thus, the EASPP was created by using a proven, abstract and conceptual attitudinal rating scale--the Kerlinger and Kaya Education Scale and an unproven, experiential and conceptual instrument--a questionnaire developed by this investigator. The intent was to marry a general conceptual and abstract attitudinal response to an educational attitudinal response identifiable with a student's experience as related to selected themes and his identified portion of the faculty based on maximal consonance or maximal dissonance with these themes. Four Progressivism Subscale and four Traditional Subscale themes were extracted from the Education Scale. A perspective jury participated in the development of a jury constant to determine the relative weight to be given to each theme. The perspective jury, however, did not contribute any effect when compared with other numerical constants. A diamond-shaped plot grid was used to plot interactions by converting medians from the Education Scale into teacher and student scores in the form of horizontal and vertical plotting points by means of algorithms developed by John P. Grillo specifically for this study. The Education Scale used to identify the education attitudes was administered to 139 twelfth grade honor society students and 115 high school teachers who volunteered for the study from three high schools in the same public school system. The questionnaire was used to reveal maximal consonance and dissonance associated with a social attitudinal situation (theme) and a social attitudinal object (teacher). The questionnaire was administered to the students only. Traditional statistical tools (i.e., ANOVAS, F ratio, correlation coefficients, factor analysis, ranges of answers, frequencies, means, standard deviations, variances, etc.) were not used. The reasons for this decision were: (1) that a small amount of data collected defeats any worth­while traditional statistical evaluation, and (2) that an educational attitudinal interaction can be used in an EASPP model and make possible a new set of statistical tools. An EASPP statistical system was differentiated from the existing analytical statistical system. The traditional system is used to study (1) significant differences between two or more groups, (2) relationships between two or more variables, and (3) confidence on one or more variables. The end result is a number. This number is a constant used as an end to describe a system. The EASPP system can be used to study (1) a setting in the form of a synthesis termed interaction through a dialectal process such as the one found in a Likert scale, (2) continuous variation, dichotomies, and polychotomies, etc., and (3) an interaction in terms of contributory counterparts or contrastive parts. The end result is a pair of numbers (an ordered pair): a synthesis. This ordered pair number becomes a synthetic means to describe a system. The basic functions of the six major components of the EASPP were used to describe a few consonant or dissonant interactions. Counterclockwise perspective and directionality were emphasized. The contributory amounts of intensity of the student and his identified portion of the faculty were considered in each interaction. The basic functions were as follows:

1. Interactions with an equal amount of intensity between the two subscales were classified as contrastive parts and plotted on the X Coordinate.

2. Interactions with an equal amount of intensity in one or the other subscale were classified as counterparts and plotted on the Y Coordinate.

3. Interactions with an equal amount and highest degree of intensity between and in two subscales were classified as Apex 0° and Apex 180° and in one or the other subscale as Apex 90° and 270°. Interactions with total contributory amount by the student were classified as Apex 45° (Progressivism Subscale) and Apex 225° (Traditionalism Subscale). Interactions with total contributory amount by his identified portion of the faculty were classified as Apex 135° (Progressivism Subscale) and Apex 315° (Traditionalism Subscale).

4. Interactions with more and less contributory amounts by the student and his identified portion of the faculty fell somewhere within the octants.

5. Interactions with total contributory amount by the student were classified along the 45°-225° Diagonal or along the 135°- 315° Diagonal.

6. Interactions with a constant were classified in a vertical, horizontal or diagonal manner. Different techniques were used for these classifications.

Statistical data are available for analysis. John P. Grillo was responsible for programming the steps necessary to generate the EASPP. The computerized program is available with special permission.

Document Type

Dissertation

Language

English

Degree Name

Secondary Education

Level of Degree

Doctoral

Department Name

Teacher Education, Educational Leadership & Policy

First Committee Member (Chair)

George Hirshfield

Second Committee Member

Robert Harold White

Third Committee Member

Miles Vernon Zintz

Fourth Committee Member

Sabine R. Ulibarrí

Download

Share

COinS