University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Administrative organization of student teaching.

(USC Thesis Other)

Administrative organization of student teaching.

PDF

Download

Open document

Flip pages

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION OF STUDENT TEACHING „ A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of the School of Education University of Southern California In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Arts In Education By Cora B* Vaughn May, 1931 UMI Number: EP56850 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if materia! had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Pubi :Nng UMI EP56850 Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code ProQuest LLC. 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106- 1346 T h is thesis, w ritte n u nd e r the d ire ctio n of the C h a irm a n o f the candidate’s G uidance C o m m ittee and a p p ro ve d by a ll m embers of the C o m m ittee, has been presented to and accepted by the F a c u lty o f the S cho ol o f E d u c a tio n in p a r tia l fu lfillm e n t of the requirem ents f o r the degree o f M a s te r o f A rts in E d u ca tio n . Dean Guidance Committee F. J. Weersirig Chairman W . S. Ford Fay Adams CONTENTS Chapter Page I. NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY. .... 1 * Importance of the subject.................... 1 Why student teaching is a problem. • • • • 8 Belated investigations............. 13 Method of procedure...................... 14 II. SELECTION OF STUDENT TEACHERS.......' ....... , 17 Nature and purpose of the chapter........ 17 Sources From Which Student Teachers Are Re c mi ted ........... 18 Universities and liberal arts colleges....... 18 Normal schools and teachers colleges......... 20 Land-grant colleges....................... 21 Social and Economic Factors of Selection....... 22 Early influences at work in selection........ 22 The typical young lady entering college to prepare for teaching.•••••••••••..... 25 The typical young man entering college to • prepare for teaching. •••••••••••••••• 25 Selective Factors At Work Within The Teacher-Preparing Institution...... 27 Classes from which student teachers are selected.• 2 7 Subject-matter, and professional work requirements as selective factors for student teaching....... 31 Chapter ' , ' :Page Fitness and promise of success as basis ' . for select i o n , ’ 35 Persons who approve the selection of the student teacher, 35 Some pertinent observations on selection... - 36 c" ' ... - - t . Summary of chapter. ...........>.... • / 42 III. • GENERAL ORGANIZATION OF STUDENT TEACHING. ... . 45 Nature and purpose of the chapter.......... 45 General Administrative Control......... 46 Direction of student teaching.............. 46 Plans of administrative organization....... 54 Length of the practice work period.......... 62 Number of departments in which practice teaching is d o n e • 67 Supervision of Student Teaching........ 69 Supervisory staff.................. 69 Who compose the ' staff . ••••••••••..••...•• - 70 Training of supervisors................... 75 ' Duties of supervisors...................... 75 Methods of supervision........ 80 Intro duct or y work ................ 80 Demonstration teaching.. • ............. • , 8}. Conference .......... 82 Lesson plans....... . . . • . , 8 7 Summary of the c h a p t e r • 90 IV. LABORATORY HIGH SCHOOLS FOR STUDENT TEACHING. . 94 Nature and purpose of the chapter.;........ , 94 iii Chapter . . Page Use of campus or "own" high schools as laboratory schools........... 95 Use of city high schools as laboratory schools...................... 102 • Use of both "own" and city high schools as"laboratory schools.••••••••••••••... 105 ' Summary of,the chapter...... 108 V. -RATING STUDENT TEACHERS..... .v---V........ }10 Nature and purpose of the chapter.. 110 Why Rate Student Teachers................ Ill Rating for purposes of diagnosis........... Ill Measuring in terms of improvement of pupils taught..................... 115 Rating for purposes of recommendation and placement ... w •*••••••■••••• • 120 Rating for purposes of giving a grade in student teaching...................... 122 What.Are We Attempting To Rate When We Rate Student Teachers?1 ......................... 124 Traits........ • 124 Qualities...... ................. .. •. How Shall The Rating of Student Teachers• Be Done?...... 129 Present tendencies..... ................. . Variations in method............ •.. . Recent scales and score cards............. Chapter. Page Who Shall Rate the Student Teacher? ....... 143 . Present tendencies•••••••••••••••«•••••*••••• Based on several - judgments.......... ......... * 146 Summary of the chapter............... 147 VI. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS; .* ., ...... .. ...... 149 Some general conclusions. .•••••••• • • • •....... Administration of selection....... •••••••••• 151 Selective factors ••••••••••••••••• 152 Some needed changes .... 153 Some'facts with regard to supervision........ 154 Practice of administrative control........... . 156 Laboratory schools..............*...... 158 Hating devices...••••••••••••••••••••........ 159 An important job..... * 161 BIBLIOGRAPHY.. ■ .... * 162 V ‘ LIST OF TABLES TABLE . Page I. Sources From Which Minnesota Drew Its V High School Teachers in 1923................ 23 II.- Who Has General Administrative Control of the Practice High Sehool........... 48. III. Quality of Student Teaching Done By Student Teachers .....•••••••••• •••• 66 IT. Preparation of Training Supervisors.......... 77 V. Distribution of Use of City High Schools as Laboratory Schools............. 104 TI. Traits of High School Teachers•••.••••••••••• 110 vi LIST OF BATING SCALES SCALE Page I. Check-List on Teaching Achievement............ 137 •II...Physic al Bducati on...... . ■ ...................... 138 III* ^ Qualities and- Skills.......................... 139 IV* Rating The Student Teacher.............. 144 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE Page I* AdministratiYe Control of Student Teaching * In a University-Owned High School............ 55 II. Administrative Control of Student Teaching When a City High School is The Laboratory School. 58 III. Bagley's Idea of the Administrative Control of the Laboratory High School for Student Teaching.. . . . • 61 CHAPTER I NATURE AND PURPOSE OF THE STUDY If we were to suppress our educational system for a •single generation, our vast material equipment would decay, most of our "'people would die of starvation,-.and intellectually and spiritually'we would slip back four thousand years in ; human progress. We could recover the loss of any other big, business in a few years— but not this one. , — Herbert Hoover. The purpose of this study is to make- a general investi gation of the administrative organization of student-teaching for secondary schools in teacher training institutions in various parts of the United States; to the end that some evaluation may be made of different types of. training, and some recommendation for improvement. Importance of the subject-. In the year 1900, Dr. Henry L. Taylor, of New York University, presented a report on pro fessional education in the United States, in which he dis cussed preparation for theology,. engineering, medicine, law, dentistry, and pharmacy, but did not even mention prepara tion for teaching. Ten years before, however, Teachers College had been founded in New York; and previous to 1890 professorships of pedagogy had.been established in several universities (his own, among others): University of Iowa, 1855; University of Michigan, 1879; John Hopkins University, 1881; Cornell University and Ohio University, 1886; Clark University, 1889; New York University and the University of 2 Illinois, 1890. And between 1890 and 1900 about twenty- more colleges and universities added professorships and chairs in pedagogy. So rapidly did the movement grow that by 1909 the Re port of The United States Commissioner of Education shows that 171 colleges and universities listed at least one pro fessor of pedagogy; and fourteen years later (1923), The* V Educational Directory contains the names of 514 colleges and universities (not including normal schools or teachers' colleges) in which there was at least one individual of fering courses in education, and 405 Normal Schools and Teachers' Colleges* Only five years later (1928), The Ed- uoational Directory lists 528 "Heads of Departments of Ed ucation," and 270 "Heads of Teachers' Colleges and Normal and Training Schools" (no overlapping with the previously stated "Heads of Departments of Education"). This edition of The Educational Directory does not list colleges and universities having "at least one professor of pedagogy," but it is significant that the 514 colleges and universities having "at least one individual offering courses in educa tion" is now (1928) overshadowed by the 528 having "Heads of Departments of Education." The 1930 directory is not available at this writing, but it is safe to assume that there have been some gains. At any rate, it appears unlikely that anyone presenting, today, a report similar to Dr. Taylor's, would be likely to omit mention of professional education for teaching, that "largest field for professional training for public service in our country."1 The importance of student-teaching as a part of the professional training of teachers is not, however, a matter of universal agreement. For the past twenty-five years leaders have been more or less divided in opinion. In an article published at Chicago University in 1904, Dewey spends much pains in urging the value to prospective teach ers of well-thought-out theory as opposed to "practice"; yet he owns: "I shall assume without argument that ade quate professional instruction of teachers is not exclusive ly theoretical, but involves a certain amount of practical work," and he proceeds to set up a theoretical scheme of student-teaching which is pretty much the plan used by most university schools of education today. (His plan will be referred to in a later chapter of this study.) Three years later, the report of the Committee of Seventeen recommended supervised student-teaching, although there was not a unan imous agreement among the members of the committee, some of them even expressing themselves as believing it impossible to establish such work. As an indication of the status 'of opinion ten years later (1917) we may take a page from a Carnegie Foundation For The Advancement of Teaching, Bulletin 14, 1920, preface, p. xvi. 2The Third Yearbook, N. S. S. E., 1904. 3 * Committee of Seventeen, on the Training of Secondary Teachers, National Education Association, July, 1907, . p. 547-647. . . 4 U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin of that y.ear:^ Last year a communication was addressed to all pro fessors and deans of departments and colleges of education in Ohio. One question included was as follows: ♦Would you retain practice teaching as a requirement for securing the State Certificate?* The replies were practically unan imous in favor of retaining it. • . . .Out of 16-replies, 14 favor the requirement of practice teaching, 1 "would make - it optional, and 1 is neutral* At the recent meeting of the Society of College Teachers of Education at Kansas City two votes were taken as to the requirement of practice teaching for secondary teachers. The group voting numbered about 500, of whom about 200 were su perintendents of public school systems. The question was first put to the teachers of education, . ’Do you favor practice teaching for secondary teachers?’ The vote was unanimous in favor of such requirement. Then the same question was put to the superintendents present, and again the vote was unan imous in favor of the requirement. It also appears that in the smaller cities, in villages, and rural communities, the opinion is not so unanimous. Some persons who are opposed fear that such work will injure the regular work of the school, and some few frankly say that they do not believe that practice teaching helps the prospective teacher. 5 Two years later (1919), Dr. F. J. Kelly sent out a question naire to teachers and administrators in Kansas high schools as to the value to them of various courses they had studied in Education. Although Kelly did not include student-teach- ing on his list, yet thirteen administrators added, as sug gestion for improvement of professional work, the giving of more work in student-teaching. Other,data collected in U. S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin Ho. 29, 1917, ’ ’ Practice Teaching for Teachers in Secondary Schools,” p. 77. , ^Educational Monograph No. IX, p. 9. Society of College Teachers of Education, 1920. . 5 another state that very same year, however, shows the opposite view. These data were gathered by Koos and Woody with regard to the judgments of teachers and superintendents of the State of Washington who were asked to rank the value of fifteen different courses in Education, student-teaching being one of the fifteen. Both teachers and superintendents ranked student-teaching as seventh in value in the list of - fifteen. In 1926, at the annual convention of the National Association of Supervisors of Student-Teaching, at Washington, 7 B. 0., the Research Committee of that organization reported: There are some superintendents of schools, and some deans of colleges of education who are advocating schemes of teacher preparation including no supervised student- teaching# In his book, Supervised Student-Teaching,8 published in 1950, Mead comments as follows on his opinion of the importance of student-teaching as a part of the professional training of teachers: It is fair to infer that superintendents and adminis trators do not unanimously favor student-teaching and related forms of training. In the last eleven years the writer has had many opportunities of meeting superintendents who were seeking candidates for teaching positions in their Eighteenth Yearbook, N.S.S.E, Part I, 1919, p. 253# 7 Supervisors of Student-Teaching, Sixth Annual Session, Washington, D. C., 1926. Report of the Research Committee. (Members of the committee: W. C. Bagley, A. R. Mead, E. I. F. Williams, K. Anthony. Q < ‘ Arthur Raymond Mead, Supervised Student-Teaching. Johnson Publishing Co., New York, 1930. 6 schools. During the period 1914-1918, very few superin tendents asked anything about the amount and quality of student-teaching done by the. candidate. The queiry was raised so seldom that such a request, though hoped for, caused surprise. Now it is very often one of the first questions superintendents ask about a candidate. 9 In a report of the "Committee on The Professional Training of Secondary School Teachers1 1 of the North Central Associa tion, made about the same time that Mead was writing, is found this comment on the -importance of student-teaching: In the old days colleges contented themselves with thoroughly teaching the subject-matter which the students later as teachers taught to their pupils. Now, teachers’ colleges take a second step and attempt to tell students how to teach subject-matter. But only when they all have taken the third step and provide adequate opportunity for participating in the teaching of subject-matter will they have instituted a scientific procedure comparable to that of the best organized schools preparing candidates for other professions. Observation of teaching and participating in appropriate phases of the process of teaching ought to form a large part of the work of teacher-training, at least upon the advance levels. Some suggestion of the present feeling with regard to the importance of student-teaching as a part of teacher-train* ing may be had from the fact that: the American Association of Teachers’ Colleges requires that its members shall pro vide student-teaching facilities, the National Society of College Teachers of Education (as previously noted) voted unanimously that student-teaching is a valuable part of teacher-training, and the Supervisors of Student Teaching is Q - North Central Association Quarterly, December, 1929, p.' 1533. 7 an organization of recognized national importance devoted to the expansion and improvement of student-teaching. An other indicator may be noted in the fact that three out of the seven articles in, the January* 1931, issue of Educational Administration and Supervision, and four out of the seven articles in the February, 1931, issue of the same magazine, •were devoted to some phase of the subject of student-teaching. It seems evident, then, that student-teaching is a factor of recognized and growing importance in the matter of training persons for the profession of teaching. The writer has heard the dean of the school of education of a certain state university1^ often remark that he expected the matter of student-teaching to finally assume the importance in the preparation of teachers which the matter of internship now occupies in the preparation of physicians. Our government considers it necessary that a flier who has finished thorough training in ground school shall have one hundred hours* prac tice, in the air before he may be allowed to take up a passen ger for even a few minutes* flight; yet some educators would permit a young high school teacher to attempt to pilot a hundred boys and girls on a year’s voyage without^ the teach-. *er having had a chance to "earn her wings." However that may be, the problem of student-teaching is undoubtedly a significant one for those engaged in helping others to prepare 10pean Schwegler of the University of Kansas, Depart ment of.Education. 8 for teaching, and a general investigation of its organiza tion and administration in colleges and universities of the United States to the end of evaluation and recommenda- tion should be of use to those interested in teacher-train ing. Why student-teaching is a problem. There is ever a gap to be bridged between theory and actual participation. One has only to review his own difficulties in making the span from mastered theory to successful accomplishment of an ac tivity involving even simple skills, to recognize the grave importance of this step. The halting response of one’s phy sical or mental powers in the initial executing of an ac tivity for which he has the required theoretical knowledge is a laborious and often a painful process, and when per sons other than the neophyte are concerned in the outcome, the step is likely to be as unsatisfactory for them as for him. Student-teaching is occupied with the bridging of this gap between the theory of and the actual participation .in-' the profession of teaching, and since many persons other than himself are concerned in the outcome, the period is fraught with grave responsibilities and beset with many sig nificant problems.- These problems involve the administra tion, the supervision, and the organization of student- ■ teaching. Says Dr. Strayer, in a recent publication:'1 ’ 1 ^layers and Harshman, Training Secondary School Teachers. {A manual of observation and participation.) American Book Company,-1929. 9 Professional training, if it is to be effective, must . always include the mastery of problems and the development of skills in the field in which service is to be rendered* Those responsible for the training of teachers recognize the importance of observation and of practice teaching in the training of men and women for the teaching profession* There has been a wide difference of opinion as to the best method of introducing the students in training to the actual work of the classroom* One group has proposed that through observation and through a theoretical approach to the problems of teaching the student could come to appre ciate the work in which he was later to be engaged. Another group has proposed that only as students were made respon sible for the teaching of a standard size class under care ful supervision could they develop the skills, which would be required in their later professional work. A point of view between these two extremes has suggested the possibil ity of placing a very small number of children under the control of a student teacher in order that skill in teach ing might be developed without the interference of the prob lems of discipline. No one of these answers has been entirely satisfactory. From the point of view of administration student-teach ing is a problem. There is the matter of the selection of those who should do student-teaching; in a profession which is becoming yearly more over-crowded this is no slight con sideration. There vis the need for provision of adequate facilities for the teaching to be done by.the student: classes of high school pupils studying the subject which the student- teacher is preparing to teach. Shall these classes be in a high sohool owned by the university, or shall they be in a public high school? If in a public school how much authority shall the university have in this school? There is the neces sity of safeguarding the educational welfare of the pupils in these "practice"classes. Says W. S. Gray:^2 - ^U.S.Bur.of Education Publications, Bull. No. 21, 1917, Part IX, p. 36. 10 This question is an important one, because the effic iency of instruction in training schools is seriously questioned in many centers where practice-teaching facil ities are desired. How shall the student-teacher be given the.opportunities needed for learning to teach, and, at the same time, the high school pupil be assured as good educational opportun ities as he would otherwise have had? There is the demand for planning the credit to be given for student teaching. There is the need for the rating of student teachers. How are we to know which are the superior, which the median, and which the poor members of our group? And there is the very matter of who shall decide about all these important ques tions— who shall compose the administrative staff and how shall it function? • From the point of view of supervision student teaching is a problem. It is necessary to decide how much supervi sion the student-teacher shall have, and what kind? It is needful to make sure that -the training-school staff is qual ified by training and experience to cooperate effectively with the college staff on their mutual problems in carrying out the training program of the school; and that it is well- grounded in present-day educational theory and able to direet student-teachers in its practical application in the class room. It is desirable to establish effective follow-up procedures so that instructors and supervisors may be checked up all along the line to insure reasonable progress. In his study of "The Technique of Supervising High School 11 13 Praotioe Teaching," w. S. Gray found that the fact of de- elding what should he the nature of the supervision was one of the most important problems connected with student-teach ing. The report of the committee on "Practice Teaching for 14 Teachers in Secondary' Schools" comments thus on this aspect of the problem of student-teaching: The lack of efficient supervision is probably the weakest point. When this is weak, the student-teacher is left entirely.to the process of 'trial and accidental suc cess.* The lack of supervision is due, in most cases, to lack of money. The organization of student*-teaching is a problem. A 15 statement made by Chicago University leaders may be taken as fairly representative of the general aims of the work in student-teaching: In the course of training every effort is made to broaden the student-teacher*s knowledge of education, to en rich experience with classroom situations, and to establish habits conducive to efficient class management and routine. However, the supervising teacher and the administrative officer of the practice-school do not regard their work ef fectively done unless the student-teacher, as a result of contacts with the school, has at least learned to feel at home.in the classroom, to regard the individual and not the class as the unit of instruction and administration, to as sume an open-minded attitude toward educational problems, and to feel a professional pride in and a wholesome respect for the work he has elected to undertake. School Review, Vol. 33, 1925, p. 512-522. 14. U. S. Bureau of Education Publications, Bulletin No. 29, 1917, p. 78. 15W. S. Gray, Ernest R. Breslich, Charles J. Pieper, and W. C. Reavis, The Administration of Practice Teaching. Symposium published, by University of Chicago Press, 19257 p. 12. ' IB The attainment of such aims calls for the working out of an organization of student-teaching entailing much careful consideration, planning, experimentation, cheeking of re- I S ' * ' suits, and readjusting, says Bead: The ethics of the situation and the almost insuperable social demands place upon our workers in teacher-preparing . institutions a heavy and increasing obligation to use our best knowledge and skills to produce master teachers* What, then, shall be the activities of the student-teacher? What shall be the nature of his participation? How shall he check upon his own activities and measure his own progress? How shall his work be organized In order that this important part of his teacfaer-preparation may be most effective? We who train teachers must never let up until every American boy and every American girl— red, yellow, black, or white— is in a good public school, taught by a well-trained efficient teacher* *A good public school for every American child, good enough for the bast of us or it is too poor for the rest of us* should be our slogan*1” The relative values of observation and participation are * ‘ mooted quest ions in the organization of the actual work of the student-teacher; while the very matter of what shall be the nature of the work of observation and of participation Is by no means agreed* The question of the manner of the student-teacher *e induction into the actual handling of the T~T^ ^ d 7 t t OlP» cit*, p* ?Q* 17Bobert H* Wright, The American Program in Education . FioxisV Mm 'E*' aT 'S^occidligs, volF’ W , ’ 1 Y&&T/ j J * ' - 13 class is also a. matter of difference of opinion; Shall there he a gradually increasing participation through an "apprentice" period following the observation period; shall the student-teacher begin as a member of the class he is to teach (doing regular assignments with the. other members) and by this means work up to leadership and .thus to the position . of teacher; shall the student observe systematically and then at once assume the position of teacher— these are some of the points at issue. Related investigations. Particularly since the publica- 18 tion of the U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin on practice teaching for teachers in secondary schools, in 1917, there have been numerous studies on the subject of teacher-train ing and student-teaching. In fact, the wide range of excel lent material on this subject is likely to be quite surpris ing to one who first sets about a systematic, study of student- teaching as part of the teacher-preparation for secondary schools of the United States. But most of this material is widely scattered and some of it is hard to get at (university 19 theses and various unpublished studies); and until Mead’s excellent book (Supervised Student-Teaching), already referred to, no attempt had been made to gather together the data 18U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin No. 29, 1917. 19 The writer has been able to borrow some of these, and reference will be made to' them from time to time; they will also be included in bibliography. 14 from these various monographs, theses, pamphlets, committee reports and magazine articles* Mead’s book is, in fact, the only book on the subject at the present date* In this introductory chapter, no attempt will be made to summarize or to analyze any of the studies* An annotated bibliography will, however, be given at the close of each chapter of the thesis, but since a study of the literature is to be an important part of this investigation it is not deemed ad visable to include any lengthy analysis of any of the separ ate studies at this point* The fact that— pessimists to the contrary notwithstand ing— the science of education is well upon its way, makes it evident that numerous valuable studies are almost sure to have been made on any subject in the field; and the gath^- ering together of such studies to make a general investiga- , tion of what has already been done should be of more real value toward the end of making some evaluations and recom mendations than would the making of many sorts of studies and experiments which it would be feasible for a master’s can didate to pursue* Method of procedure* This study is concerned with an investigation of student-teaching for secondary schools* To that end the following procedures were included: (1) A careful study was made of the literature, including pub lished and unpublished studies and investigations, govern ment bulletins, university bulletins, publications of various societies and foundations, masters’ and doctors’ 15 theses, education monographs, articles in education maga zines, published speeches, files of letters, committee re ports, and books* This literature, comprises ,a vast fund of material on practically every aspect of student-teaching, much of it voluminous in detail-— the unpublished studies made in connection with the Charters and Waples report, alone, for example, require four hundred eighty-two typewritten pa ges, much of it single spaced. As was before noted in this 20 Introduction, Mead is the only person who has published ' any work making .use of some of this, great quantity.of un organized material, and his work was published too soon to make use of some of the most recent and valuable studies-- : the detailed investigation made by theNorth Central Association, and some unpublished studies made at the Univer sity of Nebraska, for example. Hence, this literature was carefully "combed” for what it would yield of material show ing recent practice, indicating‘present problems, and sug gesting needed recommendations for possible improvement. ( ; 2) A catalogue and bulletin study of selected teacher-- training institutions was made in order to supplement material found in the literature. (3) Interviews were held with a number of supervisors of student-teaching, in Southern California* (4) An investigation was made of the files of 2Q0fficial Record, made in connection ?/ith the Common- Y/ealth Teather-Training Study. 1928-9, University of Chicago Bureau of Educational Research. 21 Mead, op. cit. 16 the Appointment Secretary at the University of Southern California, and recourse was had to several as yet unorgan ized studies made by various officials connected with student teaching at the same school. It was decided to organize these investigations under the following chapter headings: Chapter II, Selection of Student Teachers; Chapter III, General Administrative Organiz* ation; Chapter IT, Laboratory Schools, Chapter T, Rating Student Teachers; Chapter VI, Summary and Conclusions. They will be discussed in that order. 17 CHAPTER II SELECTION OE STUDENT TEACHERS Then, besides other qualities, let us seek for a well- proportioned and gracious mind, whose own,nature will move spontaneously toward the true being of everything.— Plato’s Republic . Nature and purpose of the chapter# "Selection” is a term which has appeared much- in educational literature.and been often upon the lips 'of those concerned with the matter. of education in the United States recently. It is an obvious fact that neither the high school nor the coliege is select ive in its erstwhile sense. When the present sure-moving tide of popularity and expansion of the high school reduced the selective significance of secondary education in America, the colleges and universities began to realize that the secondary school would no longer be the ”sifting"agency which it had been for them. The Learned-Judd controversy brought this fact into sharp relief. The colleges and universities are by no means agreed as to what they shall do with this in creasing throng v/hich stand before.their gates for admission each year, but one fact..seems fairly evident, and that.is that they will have to be more and more concerned with matters 4 of selective guidance of those who enter. Time was when those who came up from the secondary school were quite likely to be of the academically minded. That time is past. Even the college graduates, today, do not represent a very highly selected group. Someone has faceciously suggested'that the A.. B, degree he conferred on all American children at-birth. In order to determine what factors.had been'at work in the selection of the student teacher, the investigator made an analysis of the available literature, including- objective studies, subjective.observations, and catalogue and bulletin study,. supplemented by correspondence. Organization of the chapter. The findings will be pre sented according to the following plan of organization: (A) Sources from Which High School Teachers are Recruited, (B) Social and Economic Factors of Selection, (C) Selective Factors at Work Within the Teacher-Preparing Institution, (D) Some Pertinent Observations on Selection. A. SOURCES FROM WHICH HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS. ARE RECRUITED. • 1. Universities and liberal arts colleges. Historically the universities and the liberal arts colleges, have been the recognized agencies for preparing secondary school teachers. The secondary school turned naturally to these institutions ' to furnish them with leaders and instructors. College gradu-, ation was a fairly good measure of one’s qualification for -teaching. The emphasis in secondary schools’ was strongly, upon subject-matter, and the kind of college training received by those graduated from universities and liberal arts colleges tended -to give graduates the required command of subject matter. The college or university graduates represented a 19 highly selected group from a selected group of secondary school students and consequently represented a high degree of intelligence. They were being.asked to teach a.group of high average intelligence in the high schools, and since there was little known of a science of education, one college graduate could probably teach about as well as another. The average high school teacher was probably a person ?/ho took a college course for his own sake and as he chose. At, or near,, the close of his course he decided to go into teaching— tempor arily at least. In the case of women the temporarily probably represented the year or two before matrimony; in the case of men, the period before "getting into something else.” But, with the shift of secondary education from its position as an institution for the selected few to its posi tion as "the peoples1 college,” the old standard of an A.B. ^•References for this section on Historical Background were: W. C. Bagley, "Professional Education of High School Teachers,” Unpublished mns., Teachers College, Columbia, 1930. "Survey of Lang-Grant, Colleges, ”U. S. Dept, of Interior Bulletin Ho. 9,. 1930, (Vol. II on Teachertraining.) E. A.Fitzpatrick and P. W. Hutson, The Scholarship of . Teachers in Secondary Schools', Macmillan, 1927. A. L. Hall-Questj "Professional Secondary Education in Teachers Colleges,” Teachers College Contributions, 1925. ^ . W. S.. Learned, "The Quality of the Educational Process in the United States and Europe,” Bulletin No. 20, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, 1927. C. H. Judd, "Unique Character of American Secondary Education,” Inglis Lecture, 1928, Harvard U. Press. Educational Yearbook of the International Institute, Part II, 1928, T. C. Burr, -Pub. degree, with courses chosen as the student pleased, became inadequate# Secondary education began to desire other out comes than command' of subject matter. The secondary school population became less and less selected, and more and more diverse in its interests and abilities; thus requiring teach ers with greater teaching skill to achieve anything like equal results# So there came to'be developed special courses in education, and then departments and schools of education, to train in the professional methods and techniques required# Thus the universities and colleges oflliberal arts began to offer special teacher-training work to prepare its students for secondary school teaching# And this meant that students „ desiring to become teachers must pursue, a somewhat selected curriculum; hence teachers were recruited not from just any college graduates, but from college graduates having com pleted certain selected courses or curricula# Also, there were other types of schools that began to be recognized as institutions from which to obtain high school teachers; namely, the normal schools of teachers colleges and the’agricultural and mechanics arts colleges. 2# Normal schools and teachers colleges# Since the vast expansion of secondary education (from about 1890 on) the normal schools, especially in the Middle West, have become ..important. sources of recruits for the high school service. In his study,"A Decade of Progress in Teacher Training,” pub lished at Teachers College, Columbia University, in 1929, Ha11-Quest says: 21 The universities and liberal arts colleges continue to be the chief centers' for training’secondary school teachers. The normal schools also retain their programs for the education of high school teachers but under a new type'of organization , : (the teachers college) that combines the character of normal school and college, the result being an institution that is heir to the contributions made by its very evident prototypes,- and that gives promise of becoming a wholly unique kind of professional school* Bagley says in his 1930 syllabus for his course in education 291 at Teachers College, Columbia, that in Wisconsin, in 1923, there, were 51.4$ of the high school teachers who were products of colleges and universities, and there were" 41.7$ who were-' products of normal school and teachers colleges. In general, the normal schools and teachers colleges have met the needs of the smaller high schools. For example, in Wisconsin in 1923, Table I represents the distribution which Bagley notes in the syllabus just mentioned. It.will be seen that the larger the high school,, the greater the percentage of the teaching force who have been trained in universities and colleges; the high schools having more than fifteen teachers draw sixty-nine per cent of their teachers from universities and colleges. The smaller high scho.ols, on the other hand, turn to the normal schools for a considerable number of their teachers; the one to five-teacher high schools draw seventy-seven per cent of \ their teachers•from the normal schools. 1. - 5. The land grant colleges. Since the passage of the Smith-Hughes act in 1917, the "land-grant" colleges of agri culture and mechanic arts have been official agencies for training high school teachers of vocational subjects— and to some degree, of non-vocational subjects, especially the 22 natural sciences. High school teachers, then, are still being recruited chiefly from the universities and liberal arts colleges; but also.come from the normal schools and teachers colleges, and from the agricultural and, mechanic arts colleges. .‘But they are no longer being recruited from just any graduates, but rather from those who have been selected by means of some degree of special preparation. Ajrid we may well inquire as to who are the persons who have been so selected. B. SOCIAL AMD ECONOMIC FACTORS OF SELECTION 1. Early influences at work in selection. Up to the time of application to enroll in student-teaching, what factors have been at work in the selection of the student teacher? It would be interesting .to know. To what extent do home life and ideals, .liking for children and young people and desire to work with them, size of family, economic prosperity or lack of it, esteem .for the career of teaching, influence of teachers, parents, or others, distance from teacher-preparing institutions, preval ence of other possible remunerative professions or vocations, amount of remuneration, ease of preparation for admission to the profession, cose of securing training, and many other . factors, enter into-the choice of teaching as a profession?' Does the fact that teaching pays better at the start than do most other professions make it a profession more likely to be chosen as a stepping stone or a time-filler than are other 23 tnftiaTT?. T iiUDJUG J L SOURCES. FROM WHICH MINNESOTA DREW ITS HIGH SCHOOL TEACHERS IN 1923 Normal 'School Training College & University Training High School teachers in 1-5 teacher schools 21% High School teachers in 6-10 teacher schools 59% 40% High School teachers schools in 11-15 teacher 34% , 63 .6% High School teachers teacher schools in mo re-than-15 28% 69% The table should be read: In Minnesota, in 1923, the high schools having from one to live teachers obtained seventy- seven per cent of their teachers from Normal Schools, and twenty-one per cent from Colleges and Universities. professions? ‘ Probably those elusive factors that enter into the choice of teaching as a profession are no more numerous than are the factors entering into the choice of any other profession, yet one engaged in the work of preparing teachers cannot but yearn to know— as each new candidate presents himself— just what were the individual selective factors that operated to bring this student to this final step in initial teacher preparation. Could we have a true picture of such factors for each individual candidate it would probably fur- ^nish a much more hopeful beginning than the one we nowl have in the picture presented by the more easily recognized selective factors such as academic preparation, professional courses, etc. It was in the spirit of answering this ques tion of, "What are the social and economic factors of selec tion at work in the determining of teaching as a profession," that Stockdale only recently completed the study of the back ground of the future teacher in Nebraska.2 He asks: Who are these young men and women seeking to become our future teachers? From what social classes and from what kind of families do they come? What are their intellectual and aca demic accomplishments? What are the social and economic con ditions of the population from ?«rhich they come? and then proceeds by means of quqstionnaire-data and. by. %. T. Stockdale, "The Background of Nebraska’s Future Teacher," Unpublished, thesis, University of Nebraska Teachers College, 1928, pp. 15, 46. tm% typical person**' here tm the picture of the typical who. Is t# te a teacher in Hebraska. ig to prepare te . our colleger (tehraska) is slightly over nineteen years of age# She 'is native 'tern, of 'Batiks born ■ parent s , or she comes of Jiofdie Stock' and from a bom# 1b 'which both parents the English iamgmage* whan she starts Iter preparation iga both of bar parents are living and ter# tel a grade*-school or a Mgtescteol education*. Bor father is &&» gaged 1st.on# of three vocations? farming, meretendlsing ■ ■ ■ business, or ski 11 #1 labor ate* in the case of on® out of five;* is engaged in some profeasioml -work' and tea an annual income of 'approximately #5,000* She •cots##, from a family of 'three or four eMldrem* Ste is ettu&l or superior in Intellt* gone#.,, tteiigh 'not la social and economic, status, to ter not intend to teaete A# teaching t . s . as a highly respectable colling an*? more accessible with like competence th&u any other walk open to ter,, she; ................... ‘ ' L* ■ : - • ■ - ' -.■. ^fte typical young man entering .college to prepare as on# may act a description for a t w here is the picture of the typical young man who Is planning to he a teacher in Mebr&ska* .man that enters .upon the preparation; for in our colleges is approximately BO years of age# Be is- native tern of -native born parents or of Hor.die descent- fte English language is spoken by both parents,* His parents have ted a gra&e-seteol or a Sign school education, but rarely more,, and they are not as well trained a# parents of college, students who are expecting to enter- teaching# Sis fatter is engaged in skilled' labor* Be eoatea from a stances* having, an annual income of farming, business, or in moderate sir cum- 26 §3,000. His family is on a lower economic and social level than the family of his college chum who plans to go into a profession other than teaching. He comes from a family of four or five children, and has average intelligence. He feels the pressure, both'real and anticipated, to earn his own way. As the transfer from, the sehool-room as a student to the school room as a teacher is but a step, he decides to teach. His economic conditions are such that he cannot afford to postpone a moderate income even though .it come at a sacri fice of a later larger gain. So much for Nebraska--and perhaps for the northern group of Central States— as regards some of the elusive factors that have operated to select the "material" presented to teacher- training institutions for .student-teaching. Newmark's 3 study shows some of the reasons for selecting teaching as a profession given by 972 students at Philadelphia Normal School: 463 wanted to teach. No reason given. 83 had a fondness for children that led them to teaching. 40 felt teaching was an opportunity to render public service. 40 viewed the Normal School as means for more General Education. 38 were there by advice of relatives. 27 felt that teachers salaries were attractive. 12 came because friends were coming. 12 were there because they were unable to choose any other career. 9 came because members of their family were teachers. .7 came because of advice of former teachers. Only 71 5 came to please their parents. 4 followed the advice of friends. • 3 were attracted by the social prestige of teaching. Is there significance in the fact that more than a third gave no reason? Perhaps we shall.never know what cumulation of elusive factors operated to bring the candidate to his 3 * D. Newmark, "Student Body of. the Philadelphia Normal School,” Educational Administration and Supervision," Vol. XI 1925, p. 399. 27 choice of teaching as a career* C. SELECTIVE FACTORS AT WORK WITHIN THE TEACHER-PREPARING INSTITUTION# 1* Classes from which student teachers are selected. The prospective teacher--who-has not.of necessity as yet made up his mind that he i_s a prospective teacher— must first meet . the entrance requirements of his chosen school* Turner says^ that as a rule Normal schools have greater flexibility of subject-matter entrance requirements than have other colleges and the universities. But the students entering colleges other than teacher colleges and those entering universities must all meet the same entrance requirements whether they plan to enter teaching or not*. And, having successfully entered the school of his choice, the student desiring to become a high school teacher must usually successfully attain at least junior-class standing before he 5 becomes a candidate for student-teaching. Colebankis study shows the following distribution for classes from which student teachers are selected for high school teaching in the colleges and universities of the North Central I E. M. Turner, “Comparison'of Trend of Normal School and College Entrance Requirements,1 1 Educational Administra tion and Supervision, Vol. XII, 1926, p. 310* 5 George H. Colebank, “Practice Teaching in the Colleges of the North Central Association,“ North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. 3, p* 391. Association; State Universities: Junior class - 3 schools Senior class - 28 schools Fifth year class - 4 schools Graduate, class - - 7 schools. State Teachers Colleges: Junior class - 17 Senior class - 25 Fifth year class - 5 Graduate class - - 4 Non-State Schools: Junior class - 7 Senior class - 46 Fifth year class - 2 Graduate class - - 3 It will be noted that student-teachers are usually selected from the senior year in the schools of the North Central, and that fifth-year or graduate standing require ment is seldom used. Colebank comments: Various combinations of classes from which teachers are selected exist. Most of the cases reported for the Junior . year include selection for observation in the training school. The fifth-year, selection is made in most cases where students have decided late in their course to teach and hence are obliged to remain in college an additional year to meet the requirements for certification. However, the University of Cincinnati makes selection only from the fifth year and from graduates. A good portion of the fifth-year is used those in training for teaching in student teaching in the public schools. It is thus evident that the prevalent ten dency of the colleges of the North Central Association is to select student teachers from groups of students who have had three or more years of college training. In California the general practice is to make fifth- year standing a requirement for admission to student-teaching for secondary schools* The requirements set for obtaining state teaching credentials for secondary school teaching make it almost obligatory that the candidate for student- teaching shall be a fifth-year or a graduate student* Occasionally a senior may be admitted. In a study of 66 state teachers colleges, Rainey reports that eight require student teaching in the first year, nine teen require it in the second, sixteen in the third, and twenty-three in the fourth* Catalogue study of institutions in various other parts, of the country and reports from numerous investigations in dicate that at least junior-year standing is usually required of the candidate for student teaching. Brown University maintains that student teaching should be open only to graduates (those who hold a bachelor’s degree). , f This rule is inflexible and has never been broken.1 1 In the School of Education, Teachers College,’ Columbia University, the degree of A.B. or B.S. is prerequisite to supervised teaching; in the School of Practical Arts supervised student teaching is open only to seniors and graduates. At the University of Oregon student teaching is open to juniors, seniors, and graduates. Pittsburg University admits only juniors, seniors g— ; U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin No* 29, 1917, p. 42. 50 or graduates. Baker^ says that Of the Schools of Education that were reported on in ’Policies and Curricula of Education in State Universities1 the data indicate ‘ that 60 per cent of the schools require the work in the senior year, 10 per cent in the junior year, and 30 per cent have no definite ruling except ’required of all practice .teachers’. 9 Storm found that either senior year or graduate standing was usually required for admission to student teaching in the colleges of agriculture* Barringer’s study^ showed that in Agricultural colleges of the United States, the student teachers were selected from the following group: Seniors — 90.02 per cent Juniors — 3.28 per cent Graduate — 6.69 per cent 11 Clark reports that in West Virginia student teaching is done in the senior year except in a rare special case. Thus the principle of selection continues to operate,by requiring that the student must have attained, at the very least, junior standing, and usually.senior or fifth-year or " : 7 " B. K. Baker, MStudent Teaching.f f Unpublished study, University of Kansas School of Education, 1926, p. 11. ft ^Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. II, 1925,~ r i6§". ; ~ ~ * ^A. V. Storm, How To Teach Agriculture, 1920, p. 86. 10B. E. Barringer, Federal Board of Education, Bulletin No. 100, Agricultural Series, No. 23, May 1925, p. 25. -■^Robert Clark, Teacher Training Bulletin, No. 7, 1928, p. 56. 51 graduate standing, before lie may be admitted to student teaching* 2* Subject-matter and professional work requirements 12 as selective factors for student teaching. In the study recently published of student teaching for secondary schools in the colleges and universities of the North Central Association, the following comment is made relative to sub ject matter and profession work as requirements for candid ates for student teachings It is interesting to note the emphasis which is being placed upon familiarity with subject matter in the light of the emphasis which is being placed upon the importance of academic preparation of teachers,* There is a tendency in many training Institutions and in state departments of educa tion to reduce the requirement in professional courses and to increase the requirement in academic subjects* There is a general feeling that professional courses have been pursued out of proportion to academic studies. Student teachers, in a large proportion of the colleges represented in this study must give evidence before starting practice (student) teach ing that they have thorough training in at least two fields of academic subject matter* -'While we would not minimize the value of professional courses, yet we note that many of the best thinkers in the field of education are pointing out the need of teachers, being well trained in the academic subject matter of their particular field* Commenting further, on their data with regard to semester hours of credit in Education required before the student is allowed to do student teaching, the same report continues: "The minimum average number;of credits required .in Education _ before allowed to do practice teaching as reported for 90 institutions is 11*8 semester hours." — North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. 3, 1930, pp. 392-395* 1 3 In. his study of student teaching for teachers in secondary schools Mead found that: The amount of general college work required preliminary to entrance on practice-teaching varies from 10 semester hours to 134 semester hours. The general tendency is to re quire a minimum of 90 semester hours. The amount of work done in subjects to be taught varies as follows: (1) In one subject: from 12 to 26 semester hours, with an average of 18 semester hours. (2) In a second subject: from 12 to 18, with ah aver age of 15 semester hours.. (3) In a third subject: from 12 to 15 semester hours. The amount of work required in education before entrance on practice-teaching varies from 10 to 17 semester hours, with an average of 12 semester hours. In California, where student-teaching is ordinarily done in the fifth year, the student presents a major in some sub ject matter -field, and at least one minor in some subject matter field, and about 12 hours in education. (There is slight variation in the various schools but that is about the amount usually required). The University of California at Berkley and at Los Angeles, Occidental College, Pomona College, and perhaps some others, require that the candidate for student-teaching present a “clearance statement1 * from his major subject department-head saying that, his subject- matter work is sufficient to allow him to do student-teaching Those coming to the university from other schools, and be coming candidates for. student-teaching are required to take . r e :----- A. R. Mead, Practice Teaching for Teachers in Second ary Schools.w U.S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, No. 29. 1917, pp. 15-71^23-24. ; ----- See also: Eighth Yearbook, N.S.S.E., Part I, 1919, pp. 328-30. 33 "comprehensive examinations" in subject matter in the major subject.• 5, Fitness and promise of success as basis for selection. Besides the fact that he has attained upper- class or graduate standing and presents a sufficient number of hours credit in both academic and professional work, the prospective student-teacher is sometimes subjected to other selective devices. Some, of these special means are: 14 1. The comprehensive examination. 15 2. The physical examination. 16 3. Speech requirement. 17 4. Scholastic rank. (a) In general college work. (b) Xn subject to be taught. (c) Xn prerequisite courses in education. 5. Standardized tests and other tests. 18 6. Moral status. 7. Age requirements.^® 19 8. Pledges to enter teaching. T4 See Harvard University catalogue 1928, Also.U. of Calif* * E. Carrothers, "Physical Efficiency of Teachers." Teachers College Contributions, No. 155, 1924, p. 78. •^University of Southern California, Los Angeles. ^North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. 3, p. 392. R. Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, p. .340. 19 F. L. Whitney, Prediction of Teaching Success pp. 12-13. 20 9# Indentures to repay cost of training, 21 10. Pre-teaching observation. The University of Ohio has this year added a unique device which might be defined as a sort of self-administered aptitude-questionnaire* It is a-26-page bookled entitled 1 1 Do you Want To Teach?” and presents a series of questions with some pertinent facts to assist the student in deciding upon his personal answer. The booklet is given out to pros pective candidates for teacher-training in the hope that it will help the candidate to decide whether or not he should decide upon teaching as a profession and enter upon a period of teacher-training. As the introductory page indicates, the questions raised should serve >not only as a self-examina tion for aptitude, but should lead the underclassman con sidering teaching as a profession to seek the guidance of those in control of the training-program. The first page is here quoted in detail: Do You Want To Teach? In deciding whether to become a teacher or not, three vital factors should be considered. These are : knowledge of what teaching is, its advantages and disadvantages; individual fitness for this profession; capability of becoming a good teacher; and real personal satisfactions or annoyances which teaching may bring. — Zo E. M. Turner,"Comparison of Trend of Hormal School •Requirements," Educational Administration and Supervision, vol. xn, pp. iS<j;~3d4. ”' ; -------------- 21 Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. 12, p p. 332-3. 22 C. E. Holley, Unpublished study, Ohio Wesleyan, 1916. Out of these three main factors a host of questions arise, among them the following: Is my choice of teaching as a career well founded? What is enjoyable, or disagreeable, in the work? Have 1 a good "teaching personality"--what personal traits are required? What are; my prospects of securing a position? What teaching subjects are in greatest demand? What majors and minors should I choose? How can 1 best prepare myself? What salaries are paid? What are the chances of pro motion and advancement? How does teaching compare with other vocations in yielding life satisfactions? No Freshman in the College of Education who is intending to teach should continue the course without thinking over these questions thoroughly. It is for those embarking upon a teaching career that the facts and figures and suggestions in this bulletin have been prepared by the Head of the Ap pointments Division, to whom you.will come four year3 hence . for help in finding a job, and by the Junior'Dean, whose aim is to aid you in planning your college preparation. The bulletin discusses teaching in the public schools only. The office of the Junior Dean is in-Room 106, Education Building. This counselor will be glad to discuss with you questions raised in this bulletin, or suggested by it. The remaining 25 pages consider the questions raised by dividing each question into a series of subsidiary questions and by giving pertinent facts. The method suggests an attempt to get at a matter which university directors of student-teaching have long felt to be a weak spot; namely the fact that there was little if any chance to attempt to guide the student who thinks he wants to teach until he comes up for his actual student-teaching. 4. Persons who approve the selection of the student teacher. Mead made a survey of forty-nine colleges and “ 23 : . U.S. Bureau of Education Bulletin No. 29, 1917. - 56 universities including. institutions in all of the various sections of the United States and found that: The.following methods of selection occur frequently enough to make them noticeable: (1) By professor of education, (2) by professor of education and*superintendent of schools, (3) by professor of education and head of collegiate department concerned, (4) largely on the basis of membership in senior class# 24 Data gathered by the recent North Central Association study show.the following means for approving selection of student teachers and number of schools employing each means: By Head of Department of Education — ■ 62 schools . By Principal of Training School — 21 schools By Regular Instructor in Education Department v- -- 10 schools By Superintendent of Public Schools -- 9 schools By Head of Subject-Matter Department -- 25 schools By Director of Teacher Training -~ 7 schools It will be noted that there is a strong tendency for the department of education to be the controlling factor in the selection of student teachers# 5# Some pertinent observations on selection# The fact that the burden of selection of student teacher is placed rather definitely on the shoulders of the department of 25 education leads Mead to make some suggestions as to some ' \ * P - * ■ ' ' * ' • . things that need to be done# He suggests that: P2T .. ■ ■ North Central Association Quarterly# Vol# 3, 1930. pp. 3 9 1 - ‘ 25 A# R# Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, pp# 403-4# 37 The first great need is that’the workers in an institution (of teacher-training) should come to some agreement as to what is meant by the.terms good teaching and-good teachers. This does not now exist in any institution with which the writer is familiar.....A second practice should be the es tablishment and enforcement of quantitative and qualitative conditions of work and training prerequisite to student- teaching. What there are should be determined in relation to the goals sought and the suitability of the activities necessary for the successful attainment of the goals. These standards and prerequisites should then be enforced---a practice which is not now universal....A third very desir able practice is the collecting and recording of data on the student *s attainments.....Next there should be required from each student a formal written request or application for student teaching..•..Another useful procedure is the personal conference with the applicant for student teaching. There . are two of the staff who should hold such conferences— the director and the supervising teacher. That the number selected for student teaching should be 20 carefully limited is suggested by French in a recent speech before the North Central Associations The number of doctors which a medical school can graduate annually is largely determined by its clinic and hospital internship facilities. A hospital can take for training only a specified number of nurses in proportion to its opportun ities for their training. A teacher-training institution should be permitted to certificate annually only a given number of teachers, based largely upon its facilities for furnishing each potential teacher an opportunity for observa tion of good teaching and an opportunity of. participating in appropriate phases of the teaching.process.. That means of selection should -be employed to -sift out * all of less than average ability from becoming candidates 27 ‘ for student teaching is proposed by Hill: ~ Will French, Professional Training of Secondary School Teachers," reported in North Central Quarterly, p. 34. 27 Clyde Milton Hill, "A Decade Of Progress In Teacher Training," Doctor’s dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia, 1927, pp. 179-80. 38 To avoid an investment by the state in the training of students who will be unsuited to the teaching profession either because of constitutional unfitness, or because of training for work unsuited to their tastes or abilities, each college should maintain a bureau of vocational guidance to give students expert direction in the selection of curricula and colleges* - , After sufficient information has been obtained by the use of intelligence tests, teachers* marks, and expert opinion to justify the procedure, students who are of less than average ability should be dropped, on the grounds that people of less than average ability.should not prepare to teach. ■ 28 Kelly makes the suggestion that a system of honor points be employed to help in making the selection of those who should enter the teaching profession:- In order to prevent the graduation and certification of students who are indifferent or who' lack the attitudes or dinarily regarded as essential in the teacher1s equipment, a system of honor points in addition to hours of. credit should be required for graduation. 29 Thompson comments that: The University of Southern California requires fourteen hours of education and graduate standing. All of the present student teachers have met the requirements, with one possible exception where some transfer credits were in doubt. Personal recommendation is also required. Opinion as to prequisites varies greatly. Points given range from very abstract qualifications such as f f personality,*1 enthusiasm, etc., to very concrete ones such as major in education and minor in subject taught. All agree that knowledge of the subject matter is very necessary. Some would require ability to discipline, understanding of youth, etc. It seems to me that there is danger in such requisites of demanding the very thing that the, student teaching is de signed to give.- Many excellent disciplinarians have ffcome up out of much tribulation,1 1 and I am much more inclined to value conscientiousness and open-mindness as prerequisites. m - P. J. Kelly, The American Arts College, p. 120. 29 M. M. Thompson, Speech read before California Super visors of Student-Teaching Conference, 1929. 39 The best plan would, probably include graduate or senior standing, a major or minor in education with a minor or major in the subject taught, a special methods course previ ous to or in conjunction with practice teaching, and finally a personal rating which should catch attitudes and personal eccentricities* 30 Mead proposes that the matter of final selection for. student-teaching be turned over to an' expert who will have complete charge of the whole program for determining ad mission: The writer suggests that one person, with enough competent assistants to do the work, well trained in secondary and higher education with special emphasis on study, of selective factors, be given charge of admission with all power to do whatever experimentation, testing, study, etc., should be done. This function is now too often conceived as a purely clerical duty, attended to by untrained help. Mead also calls attention to the necessity for setting up a criterion of what constitutes good teaching before schools can select the proper material, to be the kind of teachers who can do this good teaching: Until there is a scientific criterion of-what constitutes good teaching, or until there is a basis found by some other means, to which a majority of students of the problem agree, there can be no universally acceptable scheme of selecting student teachers. The first need, then, is for the establish ment by the institution of such an agreement. After this is done, the next step would be to determine what qualities these students should possess; then all possible means should be used to select students with those qualities. 31 ■ Colebank suggests that teacher-preparing institutions should exercise greater care than they-now are in the selection of student-teachers: 30 A. R. Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, p. 399-400. 31 George H, Colebank, Report of a committee, North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. 3, pp. 393-94. 40 In consideration of the importance of obtaining teachers who have aptitude and training for successful teaching, the . practice of the colleges in exercising care in the selection should be continued with even greater consideration* Colebank also reports that 80 colleges and universities of the North Central Association require the student-teacher to-. discontinue after no fitness for teaching has been revealed . in practice teaching* The time taken to determine this 1 1 no fitness” varies from two to eighteen weeks* With regard to the selection of student-teachers in California, Mrs* Clement*^ says: Choice of Candidates for Teaching The discussion of placement problems revealed that one of the most important factors governing the placement of teachers is the type of candidate applying for positions. Thls question necessarily involves the selection of candidates for teacher training* Significant and far reacKing principles of selec- ' tion are being worked out in the teacher training institu tions* At the University of California, in virtue of the oversupply, a far better type candidate, is now being chosen* Higher scholarship for students is being demanded and a grade average of C plus is being demanded at the present time in the graduate year* By next August, a grade average of C. plus will be required for admittance to practice teaching. This is even higher than the C average standard set by the State Board of Education. Already thirty or forty of the poorest candidates have been eliminated upon this scholarship standard. The future will tell whether this standard of scholarship will eliminate too many candidates from the teaching field* At San Jose Teachers College, students1on entering are re quested to state their objective. If they already have decided to become teachers, they are admitted into the teachers college. If they have not as yet made up their minds as to.their objective in training, they are admitted to the Junior college. The professional training begins with the third year; during the first two years the candid ates for teacher training are carefully studied in order that 30 Evelyn Clement, From a report made before the Calif., Supervisors of Student Teaching convention, University of California at Los Angeles, April, 1951. 41 their aptitude may he determined. Their final admission into teacher training is determined by a committee on ad- - missions. ¥o student is accepted who has not made an average of C in his work. A question of S^oat importance arose as to the admittance of candidates to teacher training who have excellent scholar ship and outstanding personality qualifications, yet present physical handicaps. In the long run, a decision must be made in each individual case and it is difficult to make a gen eral statement to cover all situations. On the whole, while it does not seem wise to make a policy of denying the oppor tunity to teach to all who have handicaps, the situation should be made clear to each such applicant his chances for employment are .exceedingly small. The question of the personality quotient in selecting can didates for teacher, training and in recommending them for teaching positions was discussed.at considerable length. ; It was agreed by all that certain fundamental qualities are necessary in a successful teacher. So far, there has been no successful outcome in the effort to define the teaching personality. This study should begin in the high schools and in the junior colleges in relation to candidates for teacher train ing with the view of determining the criteria of teaching personality. Certain it is that the cultural background, sociai opportunity, family connections have much to do In determining the-view point of the teacher. Granting, how ever, that the candidate either has or has not those desir able qualities which have become engrained on account of social surroundings and inheritances, there is still the question of how to develop personality as an integral part of the training program. This cannot be overlooked by the teacher training■ institutions. It must be a part of the training. To this end there must be given opportunity, for , participation in a rich social life and the development of actuating motives of service, love of humanity and interest in children. Certain personality qualities may be analized and ascertained. The voice is of great importance. It should be trained for pleasing quality, correct pitch, and clear articulation. Posture is another characteristic which may not be overlooked and is of inestimable value to the teacher. Poise and ease of manner, frankness and sincerity and above all freedom from undue shyness, and friendliness may be cultivated. Appear- ' ance due to dress and careful grooming should be emphasized* These are often the determining factors in personality. There is need in the schools to set up standards.of personality development from the earliest years and to apply the technics in teacher training. Too often by the time 42. students graduate from college or university, they have developed feelings of inferiority due to unhappy experiences and lack of success in certain life situations. Careful guidance should be assured to each one of the young people who expect to teach in order that personality handicaps may be eliminated. 'Z'Z Says Bagley: The degree, of selection and training contemplated (he has been discussing the type of teacher needed to carry out the modern ideal- of secondary education), promises another sweep ing improvement of far-reaching importance. In the teacher of today, the slight preparation required and the casual way. in which the work may be picked up or dropped result in a person bred to routine and conformity, possessing little original insight for his work. He forms one of a secluded class, protected as well as repressed by the rigid machine of which he is a part. To correct this, we need to pick out men and women; of large ability and give them a long and thorough preparation aimed solely at their future task. By so doing we can entrust our schools to independent and self-possessed personalities who fairly represent the spirit of their time, who bring the schools into the vital current of events, and make them closely responsive to the criticisms and aspira tions of the people they serve. Thus only can we secure a sensitive and flexible education that moves intelligently and surely on its path. Summary of the chapter• The sources froni which high school teachers are selected are universities and liberal arts colleges, teachers colleges and normal schools, and agricultural and mechanic arts colleges— the percentages prob^ ably being in the order named. In all of these teacher- preparing institutions, the departments or schools of Educa tion have taken over the responsibility of the teacher- training program and are tending more and more to make student-teaching an important part of the program. 33 William C. Bagley, "Professional Preparation of Teachers,” Carnegie Foundation,. Bulletin Ho. 14, 1920. 43 Tile candidates who come up for this work in student teaching are there partly as the result of certain elusive selective factors which have probably been at work from -rather early in the life of the candidate. Certain in fluence of the social classes from which they come, the^r families in which they have been reared, the economic status in which they have found themselves, the intellectual and , academic traditions and situations which have surrounded them, have helped to cause them to decide to become teachers. There is evidence to support the.fact that all too few of them have any clear reasons for wanting to teach or any de finite idea of making teaching a life work. In the main, candidates for the profession seem to come from middle-class families in which the father is usually engaged in farming, merchandising, or skilled labor, or— rarely— in the pro- ' fessions. The women candidates are likely to be of superior intelligence, the men are more likely to be of average intelligence. The candidate for student teaching in preparation for secondary school work is at least a Junior in college; probably a senior. In California and some other places, he is a fiftli-year student or a graduate, and the tendency is in that direction in other parts of the country. She has academic preparation amounting to a major in one academic field and about eleven semester hours in professional work. Sometimes she has special training in a second academic field. Besides the fact that she has attained upper-class or. graduate standing and presents a sufficient number of hours credit in both academic and professional work, the pros pective student teacher is sometimes subjected to other selective devices; such as, for example: a comprehensive examination; passing of standard tests, physical examination, etc,, or.completing a satisfactory period of pre-teaching ”observation,” She has also been passed upon by someone in authority in the Education department--probably by the dean or head of that department. Leaders in the field feel that much more care than is now exercised should be exercised in the selection of stud ent teachers. There is observed a tendency to feel that student teaching should represent an important last-step in a carefully pursued guidance program for the prospective teacher, who shall have been carefully selected- some con siderable time before this. 45 CHAPTER III THE GENERAL ORGANIZATION OF STUDENT' TEACHING- The organization of a machinery through the routine of . which adequate attention-will he'given to, the work of each . student obviously involves the danger lest routine become ;an end in itself. — Bagley Nature and purpose of the chapter. Since the publish ing. of the study Practical Teaching for Teachers in Secondary q Schools, in 1917, There has been evidenced considerable interest in the matter of the systems of general organization of student-teaching in various schools. Just how do teacher- training institutions go about it to organize the v/ork has been a question of great importance.to those concerned with making student-teaching programs. The office of Director of Student-Teaching has come into prominence, certain plans of administrative organization have come into rather general use, the length of the practice-work period has become some what standardized, definite stands have been taken with re gard to the number of departments in which practice work should be done, the supervision of the student teachers’ work has been more and more carefully planned. It will be the purpose of this chapter to discuss this matter of the general organization of student teaching. Recours has been had to a S.. Bureau of Education Bulletin, No. 29, 1917. rather large number of studies, both published and unpublished, and to catalogues and bulletins and descriptions of organiza tion from a considerable number of schools; and these data have been supplemented by correspondence and interviews* Organization of the chapter* The chapter will be divid ed into two main sections: (A), the General Administrative Control, and (B), the. Supervision -of Student Teaching. Divi sion (A) will include: (1) Direction of student teaching, {2) Plans of administrative organization (including three diagrams), (3) Length of the practice work period, (4) Number of departments- in which practice work should be done. Divi sion (B) will include: (1) The Supervisory staff, (2) Methods of supervision. A. GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL There is at present no great agreement in practice as to who shall have general administrative control of the work of the laboratory school for student-teaching. Part of this lack of agreement is doubtless due to the fact that no attempt has been made to standardize the procedure with regard to general administrative control, and part doubtless is due to the fact that either necessity or precedent has set up unique systems in many schools. / ’ 1. Direction of student teaching. In a recent study2 sGeorge H. Colebank, "Practice Teaching in the Colleges of the North Central Association," North Central Association Quarterly. Vol. 3, 1930, p. 378. of student-teaching for high schools' in the colleges and universities of The North Central Association, Colebank ob serves that the general administrative control of the train ing school owned exclusively by the college or university is exercised in most cases by the principal of the high school* His observation was based on questionnaire data from fifty- • ■ , . .5 eight colleges and universitiesthe tabulation of his data being shown in Table II. It'will be noted that— in the college or university- : owned high school— the persons most likely to have general' administrative control of the work of student teaching are: (1) the principal of the college or university high school, or (2) the director of the training school. Twenty-one of the fifty-eight institutions give the control to the princi pal; sixteen'give it to the director of the training school. The general tendency in the college-owned training school of the North Central Association, therefore, is for a staff member directly .connected with the laboratory school to exercise general administrative .control* As indicative of practice in parts of the country.not covered on Colebank's study, a few schools have been selected for investigation. Descriptions were chiefly obtained from recent catalogues and bulletins of the schools, or from correspondence with those in charge; other sources will be indicated in the foot-notes. ^The number of schools answering questionnaire was 112. Of these, 58 had college-owned training schools. ^See appendix for list of schools in North Central Association. TABLE II SHOWING WHO HAS GENERAL ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF THE PRACTICE HIGH SCHOOL IN THE COLLEGE OR . UNIVERSITY-OWNED HIGH SCHOOL Number of colleges in which the following exercise con trol State Univer sities State Teachers Colleges Non State Schools Totals 1. Principal 9 6 6 21 2. Director of training school 1 15 • • I 16 3. Dean of the college of education •o 1 2 3 4. Professor of secondary education 4 0 1 5 5. Head of department of education 6 2 2 10 6. President of college • • • 3 0 3 This table shows the condition with regard to general adminis trative control of student teaching in. college and university- owned high schools of fifty-eight teacher--preparing institu tions of the North Central Association. 49 1. At Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, the. Professor of the Theory and Practice of Education.is director of the training department in the Providence high schools. According to a formal written agreement5 between the univer sity and the School Committee of Providence, "The Director shall have authority to teach classes assigned to the student- teachers, and to confer with the principal of the school in cases of discipline arising under the work of the student- teachers." Thus the teacher-training work has the status of . a department, on a par with other departments. 2. At Jamaica Training School, a normal school in New York City, the Assistant-Principal of the Normal School has general administrative charge of student teaching, both in the.city high-schools used and in the model school owned by the normal. He acts directly under the Principal of the Normal School, and’the Director of the Model School acts di rectly under him in general administration of the Model School. The Director of the Model School has no control over £ • student-teaching done in the city high schools. 3.' Although the Michigan Stage Normal College at Ypsilanti,; Michigan, is in .the territory covered by Colebank’s study, it is not included in the list of schools from which replies were received. It is included here as an. example of another plan for 5W. D. Reeve, Student Teaching Bullet in, October,- 1925. 6W. B. Jacobs, "Student Teaching at Brown University," U. S. Bureau of Education Publication, Bulletin No. 29, 1917, pp. 42-43. 50 general administrative control. Tlie Superintendent of the Training School is part of the administrative staff of the College and has a rank equal to that of head of a subject- matter or theory department. He has general charge of the . Training School and also of student-teaching done in local schools. 1 4. At Southwestern University, Sreorgetown, Texas, the head of the department of Education has general administrative control of student teaching the work being done in a univers ity-owned high school which serves the community as a high- grade secondary school. 5. At Louisiana State Normal College, Natchitoches, the Director of the Training School is also a professor of Educa tion in the Normal. 6. At Utah State University, Salt Lake City, the Dean of the School of Education has general administrative control of the work of student-teaching, some of which is done in the University-owned school and some in the city high schools. 7. Afc“thelUniverAit^0fSouthern California, Los Angeles, the work of administrative control of laboratory-school teaching is shared by the Assistant to the Bean of the School of Education and the Director of Student-Teaching (each having clearly de fined powers and duties). Both of these persons are also pro fessors of education. 8. At Colorado State Teachers College the director of student teaching is also director of instruction for the en tire college. 51 Data secured by the Committee on.Teachers Colleges of the National-Education Association show that in twenty-three out of sixty-nine teachers colleges the general administra tive control of student-teaching is in the hands' of the head of the department of Education, who is also principal of the training.school.7 A few years later (1925), Evenden found that twenty-six out of seventy teachers colleges gave the general administrative control of student-teaching to the head of the department of education.8 Thus it would seem that there is no great agreement .in' J practice as to who shall have general administrative control of the work of the laboratory school for student teaching. Either the head of the department or school of Education, or some member of the education staff is apparently usually given this duty in addition to others he already has, and the direction of the laboratory school then becomes merely one of his added duties, or else it becomes his major duty and other former duties take a place secondary in importance as- to*time distribution, at least. No very■definite stand-' ■ards have been set as to what shall- be the qualifications for this Director. In most cases it is probably a matter, of expediency; some one of the Education faculty 7Year Book of the American Association of Teachers Colleges, 1922, p. 48. - ■ 81. S. Evenden,r t Cooperation of Teachers of Academic Subjects with the Training School, " Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1925, pp. 3-15. 52 is directly interested in the matter of student-teaching as part of the teacher-training program: he is put in charge of student-teaching. Statements selected from correspond ence and interview would bear out this theory: "Our profesSofofsecondary-education is in close touch with local secondary schools and hence was the logical per son to direct teacher-training for secondary field. We have no campus high school." ? T The Dean of the Department of Education does ail the administrative work for the. department." "The Director of our training-school is also professor of secondary education." ' "My work as director of student teaching and cadet teaching is my chief duty, but 1 also teach some courses in General Methods of Teaching." "In addition to my chief job as Principal of the College High School I teach some courses in Secondary Education." Some prominent leaders in the field have suggested what should be the qualifications for the Director of the labo- ratory-school work of teacher-training. In their discussion of the problems involved in standardizing state normal 9 schools, Judd and Parker recommend: V i The director of training should be the most important officer of the normal school, excepting the president. He should have broad training in education and be qualified to teach most of the courses in the department of education. He should have unusual administrative ability, including both force and tact, in order that he may ably assist the president in securing efficient cooperation by all members of the faculty in training prospective teachers for the real concrete detailed tasks which they will undertake when they begin to teach. %i rL. Wright, "The Training School," Educational Sur vey of Colorado State Teachers College, Bulletin No. 3, June, 1921. 55 JIf he is such a person as here described, he would be given full charge of the training school and of the de partment of education (including psychology), subject only to the supervision of the president*! ! * Bagley also suggests that^° the headship of the de partment of education and the duties of the director be united in one person. This might, or might not, give*him rank above that of a department head. Moleman thinks he should be a person in rank next to the dean of the school of education and recommends as qualifications that:^1 1 v He should be a person carefully trained in the scien tific study of education, with the equivalent in training of the earned degree of Doctor of Philosophy* He must have had practical and experimental experience in all phases of instruction, particularly in the administration of element ary and other types of schools. He should possess, in addi tion, administrative ability of a high degree. ' In the case of the university-owned high school, when the office of Director of Student-Teaching and Principal of the University High School are not united in the same per son, it is usually the case that the principal keeps the ad ministrative duties belonging to the laboratory-school as a high school while the director retains the administrative du ties connected with the work of student teaching. The two work together in such matters as assignment of student- teachers to critic (or supervising) teachers. In the case of the city owned high school used as a laboratory school the high-school principal is usually invited to cooperate in some 10 A. R. Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, p. 571 ^A. B* Moelman, "Survey of needs of Michigan State Normal Schools," 1922, p. 149. 54 aspects of the administration of the work: i.e., assigning student teachers, safeguarding welfare of pupils taught by student-teachers, etc. Sometimes, as in the case of Teach ers College,Kirksville, Missouri, the principal of the city high school is recommended for his position by the director of student teaching at Teachers College and is an active co- administrator of the whole work of student teaching. If the high school— whether campus or city— is a very large school the principal is likely to limit his administrative function, so far as student-teaching is concerned, pretty largely to the mere sanctioning of plans of administration* 2* Plans of administrative organization* Judging from published studies, and from catalogue and bulletin descrip tions, it would seem that plans of administrative organiza tions might best be explained on the basis of what type of school is used for a laboratory school: a campus high school; a city high school; both types of high school. The tendency seems to be for teachers colleges to use campus high schools, while both state universities and non-state universities and colleges tend to use city high schools. Some universities, some teachers colleges, and some non state universities and colleges, use both types of schools. This matter will be more fully discussed in a succeeding chapter, but is is suf ficient here merely to point out the factJn partial explana tion of the diagrams explaining administrative organization. The administrative organization of the work of student- teaching in a college or university owned high school may be 55 • iTeacher Placement Professional,! Courses Director of Student Teaching (Also a Professor of Education) Principal of High School y hiefly a Building-PrincipaX Supervisors Critic and i i Room Teachers \\ Student * Teachers Pupils in High School FIGURE I ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF STUDENT TEACHING IN A UNIVERSITY-OWNED HIGH SCHOOL 56 illustrated by Rigure I. As the diagram attempts to show, there are two major problems to be met in the university- owned high school: the education of high school pupils and the training of student teachers. The director of student- teaching- -who is practically always a professor of education, and sometimes also head of the department of education— is chiefly concerned with the administration of all the work which has to do with the training of teachers; the principal is chiefly concerned with the administration of the work which has to do with the high school as a place where high- school pupils are being educated,— in other words: a build ing principal. Ideally, the two work in close harmony to create a situation which shall accomplish both purposes with out either purpose interfering with the other. Such infor mation as the writer has been able to gather from inter views and correspondence, however, tends to indicate that there is sometimes a friction between the administrators which does not make for best results. The matter of teacher- placement is usually under direct administration of the di rector; frequently he acts at actual teacher-placement of ficer, particularly in smaller schools. Unless the direc tor is head of the department of education he has no ad ministrative function for professional courses. Sometimes the office of director and principal are united in one person. The administrative organization of the work of student teaching when a city high school is used as a laboratory school presents a somewhat different picture, as the writer attempts to show in F ivgu're II. The principals of the city high schools are primarily concerned with their schools as places to educate high school pupils. The matter of train ing student-teachers is an incidental matter with them. The - tendency is to permit student-teachers to work under regular highAschool teachers as critic teachers. So far as the regu lar teacher is a critic teacher she is somewhat under direc tion from the college or university director of student teaching; so far as she is a regular room-teacher she is en tirely under direction from the high school'principal. So far as the student-teacher is engaged in learning to teach she is under direction from the college or university di rector; so far as she is a teacher in the city system she must he directly subject to direction of the high school principal. The whole matter thus becomes a highly coopera tive affair. Sometimes more direct administrative control over the laboratory city-school comes to the university di rector because of the fact that the university hires (or at least recommends) the principal and the teachers who act as r critic teachers. The campus high school at Kirksville, Missouri, state teachers college .is a good example of this arrangement. ^ When both college or university-owned and city high ; schools are used as laboratory schools, the administrative organization represents a combination of the preceding meth ods, the university-owned school heing frequently kept as a. Student Teachers High School Pupils High School Principals ' Assistants Duties Chiefly Supervisory High School Teachers (as Critic Teachers) Cooperating Public High Schools Director— Probably Dean, Dept. Head • or Professor of Education FIGURE II ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF STUDENT TSACOTNG ’ WHEN A CITY HIGH SCHOOL IS THE LABORATORY SCHOOL 59 model-school for demonstration purposes and the urban schools used for actual student teaching, or vice versa. In his proposals resulting from the study of Missouri Teachers Colleges, made in 1927, Hill suggests with regard to 12 the administrative organization of the laboratory school:. , J 1. The director of practice teaching should be coor dinate with or actually■occupy the headship of the depart ment of education. !2. As the responsible officer of the training school he should be given full authority. He should be the chief coordinating officer among the supervisors, faculty of edu cation, and faculty of academic subjects. , f 5. Members of the teachers college faculty, who can render a distinct service in the work, should constitute an advisory council for the director of training schools. The director as chairman of the council should be the final au thority in the determination of the policies of the train ing school. ”4. The director and his staff of supervisors are di rectly responsible for conducting observation courses and doing demonstration teaching. p ? 5. Responsibility for all phases of the work of the training school should be definitely placed in order to avoid misunderstandings and neglect. f Evenden in his study made for the, National Association of Supervisors of Student Teaching gives the following rec ommendation for the administrative organization of the lab oratory work of student-teaching:^ lgClyde Merton Hill, ”A Decade of Progress in Teacher Training,” Teachers College Contributions, Columbia Univers ity, 1927, p. 147, ^Yearbook of the Supervisors of Student-Teaching. 1925, p. 5. 60 : ? An administrative organization should be provided which will keep the so-called theory and subject-matter teachers working in close harmony with the demonstration teachers* .This can probably best be secured by some or all of the following provisions: "{a}-'Have the director of practice coordinate in po sition, rank, and salary with the head of the department of education and serve as the chief coordinator between the subject-matter and theory teachers on the one hand and the demonstration teachers on the other* ’ r(b) Have all special demonstration lessons arranged for through the director of practice.” A composite of the ideas niiich Bagley has expressed, in several different connections,^ with regard to the ad ministrative organization of the laboratory, school work: of student teaching may perhaps be more clearly expressed by Figure; III. It will be noted that he would have the di rectory of the laboratory-school be the Head of the depart ment of Education. He would have the director act as chair man of a Training School Cabinet* which cabinet would be composed of principals of laboratory schools, supervising teachers in these schools, and subject matter and theory supervisors. It would be the work of this cabinet to make rules regarding matters in the Training school as a labo ratory and to discuss and pass upon the work of student teachers. The. high school principal would have administra tive control of his school as a high school but would be ^Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching* Bulletin Ho. 14, pp. 394-396; "Survey of Missouri Normal Schools,” 1914, Teachers College, Columbia; Mead, op. cit.» p. 548; Hill, op. cit.» p. 100. TRAINING S C H O O L CABINET' Supervising Teachers Principals of'Lab* School Subject Matter and Theory Supervision Director— Who is also Head of Education Dept LABORATORY SCHOOL High School Principal High School Teachers Student Teachers Room Teachers Supervising Teachers FIGURE III BAGLEY »S IDEA OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROL OF THE LABORATORY HIGH SCHOOL FOR STUDENT TEACHING 62 subject to the control of the director and his cabinet so far as concerns the administration of his school as a lab oratory school* Since the director is also head of the de partment of Education he would have direct control over the theory courses, and since subject-matter supervisors are made members of his Cabinet he would be able to secure their cooperation and to guide their activity* 5* Length of the practice-work period* The amount of student teaching required of the individual student teacher varies greatly in different institutions. To get something of a nation-wide picture, a catalogue-study was made of sixty-eight institutions selected from the five sections of the country: Hew England * Middle Atlantic, Middle Western, Western, and Southern. It was found that the periods re quired varied from 6 to 144* The Western institutions had the highest median requirement; 60 class periods* (See Table IV}* Data yielding somewhat similar results were obtained in the recent North Central Association study of student teach ing for secondary schools, as is shown by the following, IS quoted from their report: i f The median quantity of student teaching in all the institutions: Minimum requirement . . . 45 minutes Median class periods,60*2 Maximum obtained * . * • 45 n 1 1 9 9 n 70. Average obtained . . . 45 ,t t ” * * 54. l^North Central Association Quarterly, Vol* 3, p. 400 In his study made in 1919,16 Mead reports with regard to amount of student teaching required of the individual- student-teacher: "Frequencies of-periods other than forty-five or fifty minutes were small....The median is in no case above fifty periods." ■In discussing the quantity of student-teaching required as practice work' for' junior high school teachers, the com mittee on the Training of Junior High School Teachers recom mended at the meeting of the Association of Supervisors of Student Teaching in 1925:^ "Teaching an assigned class for whose progress one se mester the student shall be responsible." is Data gathered by Hall-Quest, in his study of the preparation of secondary school teachers in the teachers col leges of the United States, show the following with regard to number of periods of student-teaching required in teachers colleges: "The average course lasts 57.5 hours. In the ease of universities the average course lasts. 50 hours." Hall-Quest1s data were based on investigation of prac tice in 99 teachers colleges and 25 universities. "Directed 1618tli Yearbook N.S.S.E., 1919, p. 323. Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. 9, 1923, p. 266. 18Alfred Lawrence Hall-Quest, "Professional Secondary Education in Teachers Colleges," Teachers College, Columbia, dissertation, 1925, p. 115. 64 teaching” means "student teaching” as currently understood; that is: a period of observation, participation, and actual teaching. It does not include time given to other special "observation” courses. Studies made by Stona^ and by Barringer^ showed that, in colleges of agriculture, the number of teaching periods required for student-teaching varied from 10 to 90 periods. (45 minutes being the average length period}# Batterer and Smith*^ made a study of thirty-three col leges and universities, in 1926, and note the following with regard to number of hours required for practice- teaching: 'The number of consecutive lessons taught by a student- teacher varies from 5 to 90, the median being 27.5. It is interesting to note that all the schools giving 40 consecu tive teachings or over, are universities, and not state normal training colleges. 22 A recent study on the training of negro teachers in Louisiana says that, "The students do approximately one hour of student-teaching a day for a quarter of the school year.” y. Storm, "How Land Grant Colleges Are Preparing Teachers of Agriculture,” George Peabody Contributions to Education. No. 5, pp. 84-85. 20B. B. Barringer, "Student Teaching in Agriculture,” Federal Board of Vocational Education, Bulletin 100. Agri cultural Series 23, p. 77. ^Educational Administration and Supervision, vol. XII p. 577. ^JaneEllen McAllister, "The Training of Negro Teachers in Louisiana,"doctor#s dissertation, Teachers College, Columbia, 1929, p. 68. 65 Ohio23 sets as its standard for amount of time spent in student teaching, the following: t ? The student should do supervised student teaching one clock hour a day for one semester, or the equivalent* The student teaching on the nine-week or the semester basis* in which he gives full time to student teaching has certain advantages over a broken schedule of academic or practice work." This state recommends that high school student-teaching be done in the students senior year, and in more than one subject* The standard requirement that has been fixed by the American Association of state Teachers Colleges2^ for the requirement in student-teaching is 90 class periods. Measured by this standard, the majority of both teachers colleges and universities are below what they should be. This proposal of a greater number of hours spent in student teaching is probably looking forward to some such a reor ganization of work as that suggested by Bean Darcie of The University of California at Los Angeles, in which he would have the professional work preceding student-teaching re organized into courses dealing with technique or principles of teaching, growth of the child, social foundations of education, curriculum materials, and tests and measurements; these courses to be accompanied by parallel "observation" work; and, finally, the whole of the last semester devoted to student teaching, this teaching to include experience in 23ohio State Department of Education 3%ear Book of the American Association of Teachers Colleges. 1925. p* 112 ~ pr 66 TABLE III •Mirii-' Sections :mum . Maxi mum Median • New England : 16 •' • 144 30 • . Middle Atlantic : 12 • • 108 45 • Middle Western : 12 • 90 ; 36 * Western : 10 • • 100 60 Southern : 6 '* 50 30 QUANTITY OF STUDENT-TEACHING DONE BY EACH STUDENT-TEACHER The table should be read thus: The New England insti tutions investigated show a minimum requirement of 16 teach- ing-periods, a maximum of 144 teaching periods, and a median of 30 teaching-periods required of student teachers during the period of student-teaching. The length of the class pe riod could not be obtained in every case, but such data as were available indicated a median length of period to be 45 minutes. These data were obtained from catalogues and bulletins of the schools previously listed on page. 67 handling work in both major and minor subject,and in handl ing various sorts of classes (low ability,medium, and high ability, for example), and in contact with various sorts of extra curriculum activities* 4. Humber of departments in which student teaching should be done* In regard to the number of departments in which a student teacher should do work, C. 0* Davis25, conducted an investigation of 1,032 public high schools listed in the North-Central Association, 1917, to determine, among other things, in how many departments the teachers in North-Central high schools usually teach. He found that approximately four out of five high school teachers insuch schools are confining their teaching to subject matter lying within a single de partment. Since many small high schools do not belong to the North-Central Association, a study of the number of depart ments in which their teachers teach would undoubtedly reveal the fact that many teachers are employed in two or more de partments. In discussing the character and scope of student teaching courses for junior high school teachers, the Committee recom mended training in at least two subjects. "Training teachers in only one subject is over-specialization and, furthermore, 25Problems Involved in Practice Teaching: Seh. & Soe. Aug* 2, 1919 2$Keport of Committee on the Training of Junior High School Teachers: Ed. Ad. & Sup*, May, 1923, pp. 266-2.67 68 does not meet the conditions in the public schools." The Committee also recommends "home room supervision, vocational guidance, intelligence testing, social guidance, keeping va rious types of records, and library experience." Davis in his study of the North-Central high schools found further:27 That, basing a judgment upon the distribution of pupils among the four classes in the high school, if a teacher teaches only one age-group of pupils the chances are ap proximately 3:8 that she will teach Ist-year students; 2 1/4: 8 that she will teach 2nd-year students; 1 1/2:8 that she will teach 3rd-year students; 1 1/4:8 that she will teach 4th-year students. . v From the above findings he deduced that it would be well for student teachers to do supervised teaching in more than one subject of their chosen department. The results ascertained regarding the classes which teachers have to teach most often are, no doubt, more representative of the situation in all high schools than are his data revealing the ntimber of departments in which North-Central high school teachers are employed. Colebank’s North Central Association study found that there is as yet no strong tendency to provide student teach ing in different subjects, either contemporaneously or 27problems involved in Practice Teaching: Sch. & Soc. Aug. 2, 1919. 28 North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. 3, p. 401. 69 consecutively* It is noted that 41 institutions report a median of 75 per cent of student teaching in the first sub ject and 23 per cent of student teaching in the second sub ject. It is significant, however, that out of a total of 95 institutions reporting, 43, or about fifty per cent, pro vide student teaching in a second subject, although compara tively in a small amount. The portion done in a third sub ject is almost negligible. • B. SBHSBVISIOH OF STUDENT TEACHIHG One of the best known leaders in the field of supervi sion of student teaching says that from the standpoint both of the pupil’s progress in the practice school, and of the student teacher’s growth in skill, the amount and quality of supervision are matters of prime consideration. Along with adequate schools for demonstration and practice, and institu tion for training teachers needs a staff of well trained supervisors and critics and a carefully organized system of directing the work of its students in training. In consid ering the matter of supervision of student teaching, this section of Chapter IV will deal with: (1) the supervisory Staff, (II) the methods of supervision. 1. The Supervisory Staff. The statement of Bagley’s idea, noted at the beginning of this division, is indicative of the importance attached, by a prominent leader, to the . matter of the supervisory staff in the whole scheme of student 70 teaching* If true, as often said, that a teaching staff is as good as its supervision, then the effectiveness of stu dent teaching must be to a great extent dependent upon the supervisory staff* We shall consider: (1) Who compose the supervisory staff? (2) Training of supervisors, (3) Duties of supervisors. 1* Who compose the supervisory staff? It has already been noted that the Director of Student Teaching is in gen eral charge of all the work of student teaching, and that he is most likely to be either the dean or head of the school or department of education, or to be some one directly com missioned by the dean or head. It has also been noted that the principal of the city high school used for training or the principal of the campus training school will probably have some voice in the work of supervision, particularly as it regards the welfare of pupils taught. But the burden of the direct work of supervision is pretty sure to fall upon the shoulders of the subject-supervisor and the critic or room teacher. The former is probably a member of the college or university Education staff, and in the case of the college- owned school may be head of the training school subjeet- department. The subject-supervisor has general supervision of all the student-teachers in a particular subject-field (Mathematics, Social Science, etc.) and in addition, almost always, she does some teaching--either as a member of the college staff or as a teacher or department head in the . training school. The critic or. room teacher has daily 71 supervision of the student teachers assigned to her classes, and acts in cooperation with the subject supervisor. Thus the supervisory staff will probably be composed of: direc- tpr of student teaching, subject supervisors, room of critic supervisors. In the case of city schools, high school prin cipals or subject department heads will also assist to some extent. This is the'general picture one gets on a reading of catalogues and bulletins of teacher-preparing institu tions, and on interviews or correspondence with those in authority at such schools. The writer has found no study of this aspect of the supervision of student teaching, and for the probable reason that the composition of the staff varies so greatly from school to school and from year to year. To indicate the recent composition of.the staff in a few schools: At Teachers College, KArksville, Missouri, the super visory staff consists of Principal, Subject-supervisor, class room teacher, and Cooperating-teacher. This last is a per son who is in charge of the cooperating library, a place well stocked with books and reading material of all sorts related to the work being done by student teachers in their preparation for or actual participation in teaching; and is the person who helps the student teacher to select and or ganize materials* At the University of Chicago the supervisory staff is composed of the principal of the training school, super visory teachers (who are also room— -or critic— teachers) and— in a somewhat supplementary way— heads of subjeet- departments in the training school or members of either sub ject departments or education department at the university 72 (the latter being frequently the teacher of the methods course). Here, the chief burden is very definitely placed upon the supervising— teacher who is.the. critic or room teacher. At Emporia, Kansas, State Teachers College, the director of student teaching keeps rather close touch with the matter of supervision, and has as subject-supervisors for the prin- . cipal subjects members of the college faculty who teach part time in those subjects in regular college classes. The daily burden of the supervision, however, rests with the critic-» teacher who is also the room-teacher. At Hastings College the supervisory staff consists of the director of student-teaching, the heads of the college departments concerned, and the critic or room teachers. At Southwestern University (Texas) the supervisory staff consists of the director of student teaching, the principal of the training school (who devotes half his time to super vision) and the room or critic teachers. Several schools mention supervision by the superintend- \ ent of schools. Several colleges of agriculture have a system by which a high school "head” of agriculture supervises the student teaching of student teachers of agriculture, not only in his own building^-which is a cooperating school— but also in the college training school. Several universities report that fellows who have had some special training and some experience are employed as 73 subject supervisors to work in cooperation with directors and room or critic teachers. 2. Training of supervisors. In considering the train- .ing of supervisors, the matter of the director has already been considered. When it comes to a consideration of other persons engaged in the supervision it is extremely difficult to get data because of the variable conditions -just noted. It is possible to get more data concerning the training of the critic or supervising room-teacher in normal school and teachers college training schools, since the condition of having these teachers is a fairly fixed procedure in these institutions. Careful studies on this matter have been made ^ 29 by the: Iowa State Teachers College, by the Carnegie jfounda- ti on Commit tee, by Whitney , Hill,32 Armentrout, 29"Report of the Inside Survey,” Bulletin, Iowa State Teachers College. Ho. 4, 1917, p. 95. 30 C arne gie Found a t.i on Hep or t, Bulletin Ho. 14. 1920, p.421. 3^F. Li Whitney, "Equipment of State Normal School , Critic Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VIII, pp. 479^85^ 1 ' 32Hill, op. cit.. p. 56. 33W. D. Armentrout, The Conduct of Student Teaching. pp. 66-80. 74 Taylor,^ McMullen,35 Y/est,35 Butcher,37 Williams,3** and Gar rison,39 The Iowa data concern only the one state teachers college; the Carnegie Foundation Committee’s data concern only the Missouri teacher-training institutions, Taylor’s data concern Pennsylvania teacher-training institutions; Williams’ data concerns teacher-training institutions in all sections of the United States; all of the others are .con cerned with large numbers of teachers colleges well dis tributed over the United States. Of this latter group, Harrison’s study, made in 1927, is the latest and most com plete. A digest of these studies furnishes the information as to amount of college training and experiences which is shown in Table JE V « Some other facts of interest obtained in making the digest of these studies are the following: S. Taylor, Development of Professional Education of Teachers in Pennsylvania, p. 274, OEK L. B. McMullen, Service Load in Teacher Training Institutions, p. 94. 35I. H. West, ”Status and Training of Critic Teachers,” Educational Administration and Supervision, vol. XIII, 1927, pp. 563-567. 57Thomas W. Butcher, ^Immediate Problems of the Teachers College of the United States.^''^American Association of Teachers Colleges Year Book. 1922, pp. 64-71. I. F. Williams, ’ ’Demonstration Teaching in the United States,” Educational Monograph KI, Society of College Teachers of Education, 1922, p. 108 39N. L. Garrison, "Status and Work of the Training Super visor,” Teachers College Contributions. No. 280, 1927,pp.9-13 . 1. Supervisors are mostly iso men. 2. The central tendency is toward the A. B. degree as preparation. 3.. However, the fact that the latest data (GarrisonTs) shows the highest percentage of M. A. degrees is significant. 4. Garrison finds that three-fourths of the supervisors have been students in professional colleges or universities within the last five years. '5. He also finds that she has had some definite prepa-. ration for’training supervision (.though he does not- state .just what). 6. The supervisor has had considerable experience before entering the training-school position. 5. Duties of the supervisor, $ven Bagley— that true patron-saint of student teaching— does not make any detailed analysis of the work of the supervision of student teaching. Probably the fact— already noted— that practice varies so widely in different schools because of the varied other part- time duties of the supervisor would make such analysis im possible and undesirable, for to be effective the program must be made to fit the situation and situations, even in a given school, will vary greatly from year to year. In his Missouri study,4® Bagley did indicate the following as the typical functions of the supervisor: (1) visitation of class ^Bulletin Ho. 14, Carnegie Foundation for the Advance ment of Teaching, pp. 213-220. 76 room to secure data on work done by student teachers; (2) conferences with student teachers; (3) demonstration . teaching; (4) directing to some extent, the training of the student teacher in making lesson plans; - (5) teaching in lab oratory schools; (6) making reports. The Iowa Survey4^ " found the duties that occupied the supervising teachers— -given in order of importance as to number of hours per week spent in the activity— were: (1) supervision, (2) prepara tion of work; (3) reading papers and lesson plans, (4) con ference, (5) assigning work to student teachers, (6) com mittee work, (7) teaching pupils, (8) demonstration teaching, (9) correcting work, (10) theory teaching, (11) records and reports, (12) settling matters of discipline. An analysis 42 of McMullen’s data (concerning 427 supervisors) shows that problems of Student Relations occupied the greatest number of hours in the supervisor’s weekly load (for service for* which she received pay); with Routine Work as second in amount of time required; Preparation third; and Glass Work fourth. Among the 427 supervisors from whom he collected data, we might set these as the typical duties of a mythical "average” supe rvi sor: ^Report of the Inside Survey. Iowa State College Teach ers College, 1917, pp. 107-109. B. McMullen, "Service Load of Critic Teacher,” Yearbook of the Supervisors of Student Teaching. 1926, p.14. TABLE IV PREPARATION 'OP- -TRAININQ^S.UPERVISORS ♦ • : Preparation : EXPERIENCE Data furnished by: : • • ' « • • 2 yr. or less \ : :Some :Pre. : :work :Tr. A.B.: A.M;above:School : :A.M. : In Tr. School • * Carnegie Foundation: data for men : 100% • • * • • • : * :not said not said Carneg i e Found at ion: data for women : rz% • * • 21% 1 :7% :17il4 yrs not said • Whitney-va- data : 50% " • • ' . 32% il&% iO• : • • Taylor * s data 62.25s ' # * ' * - 24.7%: 12.7%’ :0 : . • West’s data : 305b 51% 118.6$:. 3256:7.07 yrs 2.4 yrs • • McMullen’s data : 56% 4- • • ■ • 45% :18% : :not said not said • • Armentrout’s data : 39.85b • 4 • 47.4$:12.Q%': :7.70 yrs 6.3 yrs • ♦ Butcher’s data : 4.2% .4 4 ' • 58.9$:36.9$: inot said r r i i i i ji not said • • William’s data. ; 1.3% * " * * 85.755: 13$ 1 : • • Garrison’s data* : for men : 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 .4 4 80% : 25% : :not said not said Garris'on’s data** : for.women : 5.8% 4 4 4 64% : 19% : ; 12 yrs 3.3 jyrs *Men having some post graduate work® 32% ** Women " " ” « « « o j 0 The tahle should be read: Data furnished by West’s re port (line 5) show that 30% of the training supervisors had 2 years or less of training, 51% had A.B. degree, 18.6% had M.A. degree, .32% had some work above M.A. degree; the average pre-. Training School experience was 7.07 years, the average experi ence in Training School was 2.4 years. • I t • She spends 17.9 hours per week in work on Student Relations. This work involves; Coaching * . Chaperoning, etc. Group Conference Individual Conference Supervision of Teaching 10*5 ” She spends 9.6 hours per week on Routine Work. This involves .5 hours 1.6 " 1.6 ' " 3*9 ” Committee work . . . • 1.2 hours School Assemblies .5 Correcting Papers • 2*7 « Department Meetings • * 4 : w Marking Tests . . . • .6 n Faculty meetings • • • .6 n School letters . . . • .6 « Office relationship • 1.8 n Parent conference . « *4: n Records ..... « .5 t ? Making speeches . . .2 r t hours ner week on Preparation. This /owing time expenditure ♦ • For demonstration . . 1.0 hours For laboratory . . • • .5 « Of material • • . . • 1.5 * ? For observation • • • • 2 « For recitation .. . • 1.8 t i For supervision . . • 1.7 « For lecturing • • • .7 f t She spends 7.3 hours per week in the following kinds of class work, involving the following time expenditure Demonstration in teaching * . .2.1 hours Examination , . , .2 , T Field . trips • . «• . • • • • . * 1 " • Laboratory work .3 n Recitation • *•••••••• 3.2 " Supervision of study ..... .7 " Talking or lecturing ..... .7 " To further list the work of this mythical typical teacher the 4.S 4 4 writer used data from Garrison* and from Mead. These data disclosed the facts that:. 1. She teaches classes (of pupils) having an average size of 25 pupils per class. (No study known to the writer tells how many such classes this "average" supervisor teaches, but Garrison reports one who taught 105 pupils and had 28 student teachers per term). 2. She has twelve student teachers per semester for whom she is directly responsible.* ^N. L. Garrison,"Status and Work of the Training Teacher Teachers College, Columbia, dissertation, 1929, pp. 13, 14. 44^. b. Mead, "Selection and Supervision of Student Teach ers, " Eighteenth Yearbook N.S..S.E*. Part I, 1919, p. 321. *This is in accord with other data found by: F. J. Kelly, in Educational Administration and Supervision. Vol. I, 1915, p. 391; A. M. Santee, in School and Home Education. Sept. 1917 p. 8 ff.; George H. Colebank, in North Central Association Quarterly. Vol. 3, 1928, p. 416. 80 II. The Methods of supervision. If there is great varia tion in the composition of the supervisory staffs and in mat ters of their training and duties, there is probably yet more variation in the methods and techniques of supervision which are employed, This investigation will attempt, to show some thing of the practice with regard to: 1, Introductory Work, 2, Demonstration teaching, 3, Conference, 4, Lessons plans, 1, Introductory work. A study of the literature, an investigation of catalogues and bulletins, interviews with* directors and supervisors, and correspondence all confirm the statement that the tendency is strongly toward this arrange ment for student teaching as a preparation for secondary school teaching: Concentrating the work in a period of one-semester dura tion, during which: First, the student teacher observes— most for pur poses of becoming Hacclimated." Second, the student teacher begins a gradually in creasing amount of participation. Third. the student teacher takes over the actual teaching of the class, under supervision. (It wili be" recalled that this, was the plan.tentatively sug gested by Dewey in 1907— see Chapter 1). The work done by the supervisor during the first and second of these periods may be called— for want of a better term--Introductory Work— and will, of course, vary greatly— depending (one hopes) upon the needs of the student teacher and upon the ingenuity 81 and skill of the supervisor. Some of the methods employed during this period of Introductory Work were found to he: 1. Making explanation to the student teachers of the class work of the high school class for the coming semester. This explanation heing furnished through conferences, and by means of outlines and syllabi, and by assigned study in ref erences of academic and professional information bearing di rectly upon the work to be done. All of this work will be; for the purpose of giving the student teacher insight and perspective into the work before her. 2. Helping the student teacher to make her first obser vation work profitable by showing her what to observe and how. 3. Helping the student teacher learh to make lesson plans. 4* Helping the student teacher learn to collect and plan use of instructional materials. 5. Helping student teacher plan the first units of sub ject which she is to teach. 6. Helping the student teacher to learn to note individ^- ual differences in pupils; to diagnose work of the class; to measure results; etc. 7. (This method was seldom mentioned— let us hope be cause it was so common as to be taken for granted). Study of. the student teacher by the supervisor for the purpose of recognizing her or him as an individual. 8. (Likewise seldom mentioned). Building up morale. 2. Demonstration teaching. In view of the fact that demonstration teaching has lately been receiving decided em- 82 phasis as a desirable supervisory procedure for "in-service training of teachers" it is interesting to note what consid eration it is given as one of the supervisory methods for stu- 4 . R dent teaching. Colebank^ found that of 105 teacher-training institutions of the Borth Central Association, 39 institutions made use of demonstration teaching as a supervisory device. The variation in popularity of this method among the various kinds of schools represented--state universities, teachers colleges, and non-state schools is interesting. The distribu tion is: State universities 9 out of 29 institutions Hon-state schools 13 out of 54 ” w Teachers colleges 17 out of 31 ” " It would seem that demonstration teaching was more popular in teachers colleges than in other teacher-preparing institutions. 46 Garrison’s data are in line with those of Colebank. He found that 220 training supervisors, of the 450 that were con sulted in teachers colleges, used demonstration teaching as a supervisory device. 3. Conference. Conference as a supervisory device in connection .with student teaching apparently is considered the ..supervisor’s most effective opportunity. This conference is ^5Colebank, op* oit., p. 411. L. Garrison, Status and Work of the Training Teacher, Teachers College, Columbia, dissertation, 1929, pp. 20, 25. . 83 of two sorts; the individual conference of supervisor and student teacher, the group conference in which a supervisor meets a whole group of the student teachers under her charge* Wade and Fretz^7 found that in practically 100 percent of the 99 teachers colleges they studied, conference was the import- . ant supervisory method employed. This corresponds with hoth Mead’s^® and Garrison’s data. Colebank^ found that: 107 teacher-training institutions of the North Central Association use individual conferences as a sup ervisory method. 92 institutions use the general conference. 89 employ both methods. The same study also found' that 78 institutions provide for weekly conferences* 46 n " n « daily 5 " " « t t monthly n ” 30 ” 1 1 « n both daily and weekly conferences. A detailed account of?this study shows that the schools us ing the monthly conference plan used it as. a general 47N. A* Wade and R. M. Fretz, "Some Practices in the Administration and Supervision of Student Teaching,” Educa tional Administration and Supervision* ¥ol. 12, 1925, pp. 29-30 4®A. R. Mead, Eighteenth Yearbook of National Society for the Study of Education* 1919, Part I. 4.9 Colebank, op* cit.. p. 409 84 conference, and also used weekly or daily conference— or 50 both— for individual conference. 'Armentrout found that ap proximately 10 percent of the student teacher?s time spent in student-teaching activities was spent in individual and group conference. The question arises of what is done at these conference periods— how the time is employed. An analysis of the studies and of catalogue data discloses the following as activities of the conference period (probably no school makes use of all of them}*. The Individual Conference: 1. Establish understanding between supervisor and student teacher. 2. Discuss phases of teaching that affect the "personal equation”. 3. Discussion of student teacher's plans. a. As a pre-teaching conference. « h. As an after-teaching discussion of the success - of the plans. 4. Discussion of plans to measure the results of the effectiveness of the student teacher's teaching. a. Discussion of plans to be used. b. Discussion of results shown by use of plans agreed upon. 50 Armentrout. op. cit. , p. 105. 85 5. Discussion of pupils* reaction to student teacher’s personality and teaching. 6. Discussion of aims for the subjects or units' of work the student teacher is to teach. 7. Criticism and .suggestion of student teacher’s se lection, organization, and presentation of subject matter. ‘ 8. Discussion of student teacher’s score or rating card. 9. Discussion of the pupils. a. As to individual differences. b. As to progress being made. c. As to special needs* IQ. Study and criticism of assignments made by stu dent teacher. 11. Conference on student teacher’s self criticism. 12. Discussions on problems of control (specific cases). 13. Mutual considering of the problems of the class as a class taught by both student and critic teacher. 14. Consideration of subject matter. 15. Problems,of general guidance of student teacher’s work. 16. Questions of routine work. ' * ■ ’ THE GBOUP CONFERENCES 1. Round-table discussions of teaching problems: ' Establishing right relations. How to. plan lessons and write plans. 86 How to observe. How to analyze and criticise. How to secure good.classroom management. What are the chief factors involved in teaching. Aims and objectives of semester or shorter units of work. Supervised .study. Provision for individual differences. ’ -A * Study of materials of instruction. . Consideration of course of study and syllabi. Subject matter to be taught. Assigned readings on topics from the special field (English, Mathematics, etc.), or from the general field of education but relating particularly to student-teaching activities. Tests and measurements in the particular field. Curriculum organization in the particular field. Hew movements " " " " " Development of personality. Problems arising in the week’s work, etc. P j T . Bagley thinks the idea of the student teachers*attending regular faculty meetings is good.. He also recommends oc- 1 casional "inspirational" meetings featured by talks from leaders known to be able to give such inspiration. 52_ W. C. Bagley, Professional Preparation of Teachers. Carnegie foundation Bulletin No. 14, 1920, pp. 18-19. 87 5£ Armentrout suggests the need for occasional social meet ings, Evenden33 proposes that there he frequent group meet ings between the normal school instructors and the training school staff for discussion of methods of instruction, lesson plans, organization of materials, and other related subjects* 4. Lesson plAns* Armentrout points out the fact that a big task of the training school is to teach the student to regard lesson planning as essential to good teaching. Be thinks teaching in public schools will be greatiy improved if student teachers can be so impressed with the value and necessity of planning that they will continue to make some sort of plan for every lesson. The simpler the form of plan used in the train ing school, the greater the possibility of habituating students to such plan-writing as will be continued when they go into "regular*1 teaching. The student should gradually learn to carry the plans in memory excepting such few details as need 54 to be used for reference. Dr. Lois Mossman— looked upon as authority in lesson planning— has discussed her ideas and findings in numerous articles* An analysis of her study of 72 state teachers colleges yields the following summary: 32Armentrout, op. cit., p. 114# 33Evenden, op. cit., pp.3-15. 54. Lois Mossman, Changing Conceptions Relative to Lesson Planning, pp. 42-43. 88 1. At present there exists wide diversity in the form of plan used* The tendency is toward: a list of items indicating the proposed procedure; though other schemes often used are: (a) pivotal questions (h) written out details of subject matter and me thod (c) use of "the five formal steps1 1 (few use this) 2* As to how long before it is to be used a plan is handed in there is no great agreement* The tendency is toward a short time in advance. 3. As to whether plans shall be handed in through out the period of practice, there is strong tendency that they should be. 4. In 34.7 percent of the schools there is no requirement that plans to be handed in if the student teacher knows now to plan* 5. Some subjects require more detailed plans than do other subjects. Colebank's study55 shows that, in the North Central in stitutions which prepare for teaching: 84 percent of the.schools require plans throughout the’teaching period. 77 percent require practice in plan writing as a prerogative to student teaching. 55Colebank, op. cit.. pp. 407-8-9. 64 percent require plans for each lesson taught.- 33 percent require detailed lesson plans. 16 percent require plans of the courses. 28 percent require plans for units of work, . All institutions place great importance on this activity. 56 There, is a tendency to , f unit plans”. Wade and Fretz found that there is a tendency to teach student teachers to plan in large units, valid evidence of lesson planning with approval before the lesson or unit is taught, is required in approximately 100 percent of the 98 teachers colleges studied evidence of detailed preparation is required in the beginning with modification of length and elaborateness of plans as skill in planning is gained. From the point of view of the student teachers, lesson plans serve to give a comprehension of the main objectives which a subject or a course of study seeks to realize, and also to give a working basis for the particular aims that the individual lesson is seeking to obtain; in other words, helps him to see the whole picture and also the immediate details. Says Colvin:56 "The teacher, like every other doer of the world's work, is a hppeless idealist if he lives in a realm of these large values alone, if he does not try to make them function in the details of his daily task. While narrow aims 5^Colvin, op. cit* 90, without large objectives are blind, generous ideals without detailed ends that lead up to them are ineffectual." 7 Armentrout points out a needed caution when he ob- served that the student teacher must somehow be taught to deviate from his plans and when to do so* He must be sure to know that the most carefully-prepared plan must be for saken in the interests of the pupils. Summary of the chapter. First a summarization of. Division A: 1. The amount and quality of supervision are matters of prime importance in student teaching. 2. Director of student, teaching usually has general charge of supervision. He is frequently assisted by subject- supervisor s, who may be members of the education staff or mem bers of the subject staff. 3* The brunt of the work of supervision pi’obabiy falls on the training supervisors* 4. The tendency in the preparation of the training sup ervisors is for them to be women having at least an A*B. de gree, having had about 7 years experience in high school or grade school teaching, but having had little special prepa ration for, or experience in, supervision. 5. The training supervisor has many duties besides sup ervision of the work of student teaching, and these duties 57Armentrout, op. cit. are likely to be so heavy that she does not have a proper amount of time to devote to the supervision. 6. .Leaders differ in their opinion as to whether or not the supervisor should be a teacher of pupils. Bagley is leader of the group who think she should be; Evender of those who think she should not be. 7. Supervisors of student teaching employ to a greater or a less extent all of the commonly accepted supervisory de vices, Conference commonly being the chief. 8. Conference is of two sorts: individual and g;roup. The tendency is to employ both. The individual conference is likely to take care of the personal equation situations; the group conference to be a seminar or a round-table discussion period. Weaknesses of the individual conference are likely to be:, having no set time for the conference; hence slighting it lack of proper understanding between supervisor and student teacher; hence making the personal equation less evident. 9. Demonstration teaching and the making of lesson plans are also important supervisory devices. 10. Demonstration is more often U3ed in teachers colleges than in other teacher-training institutions. 'Next-a summarization of Division B: 1. There is, at present, no great agreement in practice as to who shall have general administrative control of the work of practice teaching. The tendency is to give this pow er to the dean of the school of education, or to some one specifically delegated by him. 92 2. The ideal appears to be to have a special office of Director, with rank probably next to the Dean, and who shall . be a person especially trained for the work and having ad ministrative ability of a high degree* 3. Plans of administrative control in an "own” high school used as laboratory school are likely to differ from those employed in the case of a city high school used as a laboratory school* 4* In an "own" high school the principal of the high school is likely to act as a "building" principal but to co operate closely with the director of training (who is prob ably the Dean of Education). 5. In a "city" high laboratory school the control of student teaching is likely to rest entirely with the director of student teaching (a college official) while, the principal1 of the high school exercises little control beyond taking measures to protect the welfare of pupils taught. 6. Bagley*s idea of placing control in the hands of an Administrative Cabinet composed of Director, Subject-Matter and Theory Supervisors, Principals of Laboratory Schools, and Supervising Teachers has had much favorable commendation. 7. With regard to quantity of student-teaching, the standard is set at 90 hours. Meausred by thie standard, the. majority of both teachers colleges, other colleges, and uni versities are below what they should be. The median for all institutions is probably about 50 hours. 8. The tendency is to do all the teaching in one subject, 93 and probably with one class; though much in the present situa tion with regard to regular teacher assignment suggests the need for practice in more than one subject, and more than one type of class, 9* An ideal being set by some leaders is a semester de voted entirely to student teaching, 10* In making lesson plans the tendency is toward simpler forms of plans using a list of items indicating the proposed procedure. 11. Though the central tendency still is toward having, detailed plans handed in throughout the period of practice, it is recognized as better procedure to teach the student- teacher how to shorten plans and how to deviate from plans when the interests of his pupils demand it. 12. The Introductory Period of the student teaching work calls for the use of numerous methods of supervision to take care of the individual needs of the student teacher. 13..The organizat ion of a machinery through the routine of which adequate attention will be given to the work of each student teacher obviously involves the danger lest routine become an end in itself. 94 CHAPTER IV LABORATORY HIGH SCHOOLS ' FOR STUDENT. TEACHING All education is a cooperative enterprise. All educa tional, institutions consist of groups of cooperative workers with common purposes, - ; — Mead Nature and- purpose of the chapter, - As was noted in Chapter I of this investigation, the high schools in which student teaching is done are designated as laboratory high schools. It has already been noted, in Chapter III, that three plans are used to provide laboratory-schools for stu dent teaching: Plan. 1--have a campus high school; Plan 2— use city high schools; Plan 3— have a campus high school and also use city high schools. To note something of practice with regard to use of these three plans, four methods of in vestigation were employed: (1) a catalogue and bulletin study of fifty-four Teachers* Colleges; (2) interviews with (a) officials, of laboratory-schools.in various parts of the United States (persons who happened to be in attendance at local and near-by universities), and (b).directors of the various universities and colleges of California offering work in student teaching (these directors being in attendance at the annual meeting of the California Directors and Super visors of Student Teaching for Secondary Schools):. (3) letters to 95 schools not publishing the information in their catalogues; and (4) careful investigation of other studies (both published and unpublished). Division of the chapter. In discussing the findings, the following three divisions will be used for the chapter: 1. use of own or,campus high schools as laboratory schools; 2* use of city high schools as laboratory schools; 3, use of both "own1 1 and city high schools as laboratory schools. 1. Use of campus or tyownw high schools as laboratory schools. A catalog-study*-of fifty-one Teacher1 Colleges, selected from the various parts of the country, and all of them engaged in some preparation of secondary teachers, reveals the condition indicated in Table II. The favored plan of the teachers1 . college— judging from this study--seems to be the use of campus or own high schools; thirty-three of the fifty-one in dicating the use of this type of lab oratory-school. Fifteen of the fifty-one used city-high schools, and seven used both campus and*city high schools. These findings are in accord with those of Colebank1s study, which shows that. in. 107 teachers1 colleges of the North Central Association the dis tribution with regard to kind of laboratory school used was 2 as follows: - — . — — Catalogues arid bulletins of 1928 were used, supplemented by some information obtained by interview and by letter. ^George H. Colebank, Practice Teaching in the North Cen- tral Association,'- State University of. Iowa Bulletin, 1930; also North Central Association Quarterly, Yol-. Ill, p. 378'. 96 Fifty-four used campus or own high schools. Thirty-four used city high schools. Nineteen used both own and city high schools. Dr* Romiet.Stevens comments^ that of the eighty-one small eolleges4--representihg all parts of the country--from which ■ information was gathered as to; type of laboratory school used, : forty-six used own high schools, and thirty-five used city high schools. The writer has found no study which attempted to find the reasons for this slight preference which teachers’ colleges and small colleges (chiefly liberal arts) seem to have for using own rather than city high schools. Whether it represents preferanee or circumstance is a matter for conjec ture. Possibly the fact that teachers1 colleges usually be gan as normal schools having T l modelT T schools in which to do "practice" teaching for elementary work may have something to do with the situation as regards teachers’ colleges; also the fact that teachers’ colleges are likely to be in smaller communities where public school systems did'not present good working conditions for; student teaching may have something to do with it. The. fact that it was, until comparatively re cently, customary for normal schools and small colleges to maintain "academies" for the offering of secondary work may also be part of the answer. However, such interviews and • correspondence as the writer has had with teachers’ college directors indicates that an important reason is the fact that S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, No. 29, 1917, p. 64. 4U. S Bureau of Education Bulletin, No. 29, 1917,.«.>pp. 13*-14. 97 the college wants to he assured of having direct and adequate control of the laboratory school. That the attempt is being made to secure this direct and adequate control of city schools used as laboratory schools is indicated by plans now being used by some of the teachers’ colleges. Kifksville, Missouri, State Teachers is a good example, arid a brief statement of their plan may serve to indicate the method:^ The junior high school is housed in a building on the college campus; the senior high school in a building off the campus. Each of these schools has a principal recommended by the college, elected by the city, and entirely paid by the college; Each of these schools has a faculty recommended by the college, elected by the city, and partially paid by the college. Both schools are regular city schools, functioning as other city schools, and having as their chief purpose the education of high school children,( The faculty are selected, however, not only with the idea of securing mas ter teachers, but also with the idea of securing teachers who understand the, needs and work of student teaching. -The super intendent of city schools is also chairman of the division of education at the college, and his salary is paid jointly by the college and the city. Supervision Is furnished by members of of the college faculty, whose entire salary is paid by the college. The Kirksville plan is an attempt to remedy the deficien cies and difficulties suggested in the Carnegie Foundation ^Data secured from interview with Bothchild, Director of Laboratory Schools at ICirksville. 98- survey of the Missouri teachers1 colleges. The feeling of the . leaders who made this report is indicated by this statement of their opinion:6 One reason for unsatisfactory conditions in training schools, both in Missouri and in the country at large,.is to be found in the small number of pupils commonly available for training purposes. Unlike the city training school, the state normal, school has usually no legal connection with the local elemen tary and high schools. As a consequence, it cannot commandeer a sufficient number of pupils to provide adequate practice facilities, and its training school must be built up by the adoption of measures that are likely to give it a pupil body that is both limited in numbers and unrepresentative of normal social conditions. In some cases it becomes a select school with a waiting list; or it may go to the opposite extreme and become a dumping ground for difficult pupils that local schools ; are glad to be rid of. The enrollment is likely to be small' and the practice classes so attenuated in numbers as to afford little opportunity for the necessary instruction of the student teacher. It is unfortunate that normal schools should ever be located in towns so small as to preclude an abundance of what may be termed the laboratory or clinical material of a teacher-train ing program- -namely, elementary and secondary pupils. Where schools have been thus located, their only salvation lies in an arrangement whereby all of the local public schools may be available for training-school purposes under the direct con trol of the training department of the normal school* Even where a good-sized independent training school is possible, it is extremely desirable for the local school system to be re lated to the normal school in such a manner as to afford oppor tunity for extensive observation, participation, and practice* under wholly normal conditions. In larger towns and cities, the training school may well be a ward or district school of the public school system. Care must be taken in organizing a training school under this plan, and infinite tact must ' characterize its administration. • • • This appropriation of local school facilities for training- school purposes has proceeded a pace during the past few years in various parts of the country, and where soundly organized .has proved successful. * Generally speaking, the policies of the school that is used for training purposes must be deter mined by the normal school authorities; a plan of dual control ^William S. Learned, 'William 0. Bagley, and others, r , The Professional Preparation of Teachers for American Public Schools, a Study based upon an Examination of Tax Supported Normal Schools in the State of Missouri;” Carnegie Foundation for.the Advancement of Teaching, Vol. 14, 1920, pp. 192-3.' 99 through which responsibility and authority are divided be tween the local superintendent or school board on the one hand and the normal school on the other hand is very hard to admin ister. Where difficulty is found in winning support for the. plan in a community, some financial inducement, such as the payment of teachers by the normal school, must be resorted to. Even in case of a state school, the character of the situation is of such delicacy that it would probably be wise to guarantee’ the community such facilities as it would not jpurchase for itself in return for complete educational control of its schools. It appearsj then, that the normal schools and teachers1 colleges are still using "own” more than city high schools as laboratory schools for teacher training; but that the tendency is toward the use of city high schools, the leaders of the teachers’ college work looking upon the use of city schools as the best means, to remedy marked weaknesses in the training program. • Turning now to a consideration of the universities, we find a different situation. Here, it appears that the use of city high schools is already the usually favored plan. With, regard to state and non-state universities' use of laboratory schools, Mead's study7shows the following: 11 state universities used city high schools 11 non-state universities used city high schools 8 state universities used own high schools 3 non-state universities used own high schools 7 A. R. Mead, ’ Practice Teaching for Teachers in Secondary Schools." U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, 1917/ pp. ti-iu* ' • • : 100 Dr. Hall-Quest found that of thirty-nine state universities,8 24 state universities used city high schools, . 15 state universities used own high schools. Colebank’s study9 shows that: 49 state universities used city high schools, 24 state universities used b-oth own and city schools, 43 state universities used own high schools. His study also.shows that the non-state colleges and univer sities use public high schools about five times as often as they use own -schools. Teacher training programs in schools, other than state normals and teachers’ colleges, seem to favor the use of city rather than own laboratory schools. In universities--both state and not-state--and in small Colleges other than teachers’ colleges, Mead foundthat the preference for kind of labora- tory-school was slightly in favor of the public high school. His data, based on questionnaire returns, show the following for the 117 schools reporting: State universities: 11 used, public high schools, 8,used own high schools ^Alfred Lawrence Hall-Quest, Professional Secondary Education in Teachers’ Colleges, Doctor’s Dissertation, Teachers’ College, Columbia, 1925, p. 101. %orth Central .Association Quarterly, Voll III, p. 378. ioA. R. Mead, Report of a Study of Institutions with Teacher Training Departments for Secondary School Teachers, U.S. Bureau of Education Bulletin, Ho. 29, l"$17, pp. 8 and 13-14. Non-State universities: 11 used public high schools, 2 used own high schools. ♦ Small colleges: * 35 used public high schools, 46 used own high schools 1 State Agricultural Colleges: 3 used public high.schools, 1 used own high school. He comments that data regarding the use of both Vown" and public high schools by the same institutions are incomplete. Speaking generally, these institutions do not seem to appre ciate the value to them and their students of carrying on practice in both types of schools. The North Central Associa tion studyilreports that of the schools which prepare teachers for secondary school teaching, answering their questionnaire, forty-seven colleges have training high schools owned and con trolled exclusively by the colleges; seventy-five colleges have training high schools -which a re part of a public school system; seventeen colleges report that they have both types for training purposes. The high school owned and controlled exclusively by the college is found to be more frequent in state teachers* colleges than in the other two types of insti tutions. ITon-state colleges provide facilities for student teaching chiefly in cooperating public high schools. T’r ^•MsTorth~‘ Central Association Quarterly. Vol. Ill, 1930, p. 37 7. 102 The general tendency of all colleges is for student teaching to he done in public high schools. Facts gathered from this study— with regard to’ laboratory schools-— may, perhaps, be more clearly designated by arranging a simple table: TABLE III. Own High School City High School Both State Universities 16 19 7 State Teachers1 Colleges 22 13 7 Eon-state Schools 9 43 3 Totals 47 75 17 The committee making the study offer the comment that, due to the rapidly increasing enrollment in teacher-training institu tions in recent years, the problems of providing ample facili ties for observation and student teaching has been a pressing one. What seems to be the most practical solution is some plan of cooperative agreement with the local public schools whereby they may be made available for training school purposes. Studies of this situation reveal that facilities for student teaching in training schools which have no cooperative agreement with the public schools are in striking contrast to the facilities in training schools which have some form of cooperative agreement. e The ratio of student teachers to pupils in colleges maintaining public school facilities for training is, in most instances, much higher and hence more nearly approaches the standard fixed by national rating organizations. It is generally agreed by those who have given much study to the problems of teacher 103 training that student teachers should have experience in both types.of training schools* . * .Of those replying, about seventy per cent express a preference for training schools of their own attached to the college. The other thirty per cent prefer an outside training school. Many factors determine the type desired: (1) the number of student teachers, (2) the degree of control by the college,.(3) facilities for training in the public school, and (4) the function of the training school as desired by the college. In his study of universities and colleges other than teachers1 colleges, ^ Henderson found that, of the one hundred and fourteen replies to the questionnaire, forty reported that city school systems were not used, and seventy-four institu tions replied that they do make use of public schools in con nection with student teaching. He further suggests: A large majority of those expressing an opinion believe that city school systems should be opened to student-teachers and that, with the use of proper tact, administrative difficulties may be largely avoided. That the tendency to use city high schools as laboratory schools is not limited to any one section of the United States, but instead is a widely distributed tendency, may be indicated by listing some representative schools located in each section, as shotfrn; in:>,T a b . Joseph L. Henderson, nA Statistical Study of the Use of City School Systems by Student-Teachers in Colleges and Univer sities in the United States,n Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol.i XII, 1926, pp. 326, 337, 33B. . 104 TABLE V DISTRIBUTION OF CITY HIGH SCHOOLS AS LABORATORY SCHOOLS New England and Middle Atlantic 1# University of Maine 2. University.of.Vermont 3. University of Delaware 4. University of Maryland . 5# Massachusetts Agricultural College 6. Rhode Island State College 7. Swarthmore College 8* Hunter College 9. Simmonds College 10. Smith College Southern 1. University of Texas 2. University of West Virginia 3. Southwestern University 4. Washington and Lee Uni versity 5. Trinity University 6. Texas Christian University 11. 12. 13 • 14. I 15. 16. 17. 18. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11* 12. 13. Middle Western 1. Indiana University 6. 2. Northwestern University 7. 3. Ohio University 8. 4. Purdue University 9. 5. University of Cincinnati ' 10. Franklin and Marshall • College Boston University Harvard University George ?fashington University, / New York University Temple University University of Pittsburg Washington and Jefferson College Baylor University Clemson College Texas Industrial Arts William and Mary College Henderson-Brown College Simmonds College University of Chattanooga University of Minnesota University of Missouri University of South Dakota Western Reserve University Denison University 105 • . Middle Western (cont’d.) 14. Oberlin College 15. Michigan Agricultural 16* Mount Union College 9. Utah Agricultural College 10. Washington State College 11. Stanford University 12. University of Montana , 13. Montana State College 14. University of California (Berkeley) 15. University of California (Los Angeles) 16. University of Southern California Teachers’ colleges were not included in the lists for the reason that the catalogue-study already mentioned was felt to give an adequate picture of the situation with regard to these schools. It will be noted that the lists contain names of state and non-state universities--both large and small, and colleges of various types--all of them being classed among the ••V ' . larger colleges, however. 5*Use of both ’ ’own” and city high schools. It was noted in Table III. that seventeen--or slightly over twelve per cent of the one hundred and thirty nine schools of the North Central Association— used both own and city high schools as laboratory 11• Findlay Coliege 12. Hardin College 13. Kan sa s,Agr i cultural 1. University 2. University 3. University 4. University 5. University 6. University 7. University 8. University Western of Arizona of Colorado of Denver of Idaho of Nevada of Oregon of Washington of Utah 106 schools for those preparing to do high school teaching. It .would be interesting to know how many schools would prefer the use of both types of laboratory schools if they could have un restricted choice in the matter. The writer has been able to secure very little data on this matter, but such fragmentary evidence as is available wili be noted. Henderson-*-® reports / • • that an attempt was made to ascertain the opinions of differ ent institutions as to what they considered the best way for securing adequate facilities for handling student*teaehers-- whether by provision of a training school conducted under the auspices of the teacher-training institution, by the use of public school systems or by a combination of the two. The re plies do not lend themselves to formal tabulation. Quotations will better reflect the opinions received: The best provision is for a school system to be taken over by state institution. (Michigan Agricultural College). Using public school system under restrictions to be worked out by' actual experimentation, (Washington lee University) Using city or training schools with student teachers in charge of class from beginning but with fairly close supervision by well-trained, well-paid supervisors teaching part time. (University of Oregon) It depends upon size of town in which the state institution is located. I favor a combination of university experimental and demonstration school and the use of city schools. (University of Colorado) Where institutions are located in small towns, bothfpublie schools and training school) desirable and necessary. (State College of Washington) < — ------- Henderson, op. city, p. 339. 107 A school for demonstration and directed teaching owned by the institution* (West Virginia University) Demonstration best, I suspect, but too expensive. (George Washington University) In either case it will be necessary to give some institutional subsidy to the public schools, or to establish an institutional practice school which is very, expensive. (Indiana University) At a recent meeting of directors of student-teaching of 14 Southern California, the question,"What system of laboratory schools would you prefer if you could have unrestricted choice” was raised for discussion. Every school but one answered,"Both,n but the discussion stressed- the idea that unless conditions could be %uite ideally managed they would prefer use of city schools alone. Some of the arguments presented in favor of use of both types of school were: 1. The university-owned school could provide better demonstration teaching; the city schools would provide better situations for student-teaching. 2. The university needs at least one school over which it has full control. 3. "The university-owned school offers about the only chance for successful experimentation. 4. Special teaching, for purposes of observation of certain definite methods, theories, etc., can usually be arranged only in an "own” school. 14 Annual convention of California Directors of Student Teaching (Southern section) at University of California at Los Angeles, April 24, 1931. Minutes of the meeting in the hands of Mrs. Evelyn Clement, Chief of Division of Certifiea* tion, Sacramento, California. 108 With regard to use of own and city schools as laboratory schools, Bagley ^suggests that some of the desirable situations are: (a) To some extent controlling relations should be devel oped with local public school systems." ’ (b) A separate school should be provided for experimenta tion; and the training school should be limited to student teaching and demonstration teaching. (e) The teacher-training institution should control the school or principal school in which the student teaching is done, but this should not preclude the use of other schools. Armentrout remarks that:^ Perhaps the best results can be achieved under a plan whereby certain public schools are placed at the disposal of the college authorities, and the college pays all, or a part, of the current expenses and controls the faculty and policies. Summary of the chapter. Teacher-preparing institutions employ three systems to furnish laboratory student-teaching conditions for secondary school teachers; use of "own” or campus high schools; use of city high schools; use of both own and city high schools. The normal schools and teachers* colleges are still using "own” more than city high schools, though the leaders are looking upon the use of city high schools as the best means to remedy marked weaknesses.in the student- ----- yg .. ■ ' » ■ . ■ W. C. Bagley, Unpublished Syllabi used in His Course 227 MF, and in Bulletin Ho. 14, Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching. 16 W. D. Armentrout, The Conduct of Student Teaching In State Teachers* Colleges, p. 164. : ' — 109 teaching program. The chief argument in favor of an "own” school is that it can he under more adequate control by the teacher-training institutions; and a recent plan employed hy some institutions is a city high school controlled hy the teacherr-preparing institution. Universities tend to use the city high school as a laboratory school, the plans of affilia tion heing varied. Some colleges and some universities use hoth "own" and city high schools as laboratory schools. When this is done, the tendency is to use the "own" school more largely as a "demonstration" and an "experimental” school. • 110 GHAPTER V RATING STUDENT TEACHERS The fact is generally recognized that little has as yet been accomplished in the matter of measuring the ability of teachers-in-service; and Patterson1' remarks, "Even less pro gress has been made in rating student teachers than in meas uring the ability of teachers-in-service. ” For a considera tion of the measuring of teachers-in-service, the reader is recommenced to the annotated bibliography on Measuring Teaching Efficiency," published by the University of Illinois, In 1924, and containing fifty-nine titles. For articles deal ing with the measuring or rating of student teachers, the reader is referred to the list given in the bibliography of this thesis, and which the writer believes to be a complete up to date list of all articles dealing with this subject. In considering the matter of the rating of student teachers, three questions naturally arise: (1) Why should we rate student teachers? (the purposes we have In mind), (2) What are we rat Ing when we attempt to measure student teachers?, (3) How shall the rating be done? (the system or systems of rating to . be employed), (4) Who shali do the rating? This chapter will be concerned with a consideration of these questions. ^-Herbert Patterson, "How Can the Ability of Student Teachers be Measured?" A paper read at the Annual Meeting of Oklahoma Education Association, February 1920, Published in Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VI, p. 125. Ill A. WHY HATE STUDENT TEACHERS? The writer has not heen able to find an article which is' directly concerned with considering the question: Why should we rate student-teachers? It would seem to be an important first consideration, and may have been neglected because the reasons are so apparent as they are. Interviews and corres pondence with directors of student-teaching in California set up the following reasons: (1) Diagnosis of the student teach er’s weaknesses and strength for purposes of improvement; (2) Measuring success in terms of improvement of pupils taught by the student teachers; (3) Ranking end rating the teacher for purpose of recommendation and placement; (4) Rating for pur poses of giving a grade or credit for student teaching. The Why we are trying to rate student teachers will certainly have much to do with What we try to rate, How we try to rate it, and Who shall do the rating. 1. Rating for purposes of diagnosis. At least four persons will be directly interested in rating or measuring the student-teacher for purposes of diagnosis: the student teacher, herself (or himself), the critic or -room teacher, the supervisor* and the director of student teaching. Probably the head of the placement bureau would also find such records of value in that , a comparison of first-diagnosis records and final rating might show much as to the 'student-teacher1s "teaching ability" and adaptability. The times of rating will obviously be a first rating, early in the course of the student teaching, followed by at least a mid-semester or near mid-semester rating before 1X2 the final rating for purposes of determining the grade or credit the student-teacher is to receive. In her study on making a detailed, score-card for grading student-teachers, Miss Senska^ suggests that the persons who are to give the final rating should give an early rating and a last-of-the- terra rating and CTthe combination of the two be taken into con sideration in estimating the final grade.* It seems probable that the early rating she suggests would serve not only to help in determining the grade, but also as a diagnosis ,of the qualities in which the studentrteacher was deficient, the qualities in which she or he was strong, which qualities should be consciously developed, which ones suppressed, which showed promise of ease development, which would probably require care ful training to develop. Miss Senska’s score card lists ten characteristics: (1) character, (2) scholarship, (3) teaching skill, (4) daily preparation, (5) discipline, (6) attitude, (7) interest in pupil activities, (8) classroom management, (9) personality, (10) health. She defines each of these ten characteristics by several, points each, and then defines each point for a top-grade, a middle-grade, and a low-grade. Some of the points probably could not well be rated early in the student teaching work. Miss Senska's score card will be quoted in detail later in this chapter under the heading: How shall we rate student teachers? 2Hellie M. Senska, "Making a Detailed Score Card For Grading Student-Teachers,? Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. II, 1925, p. 199. ^ 1X5 The Cleveland School of Education makes use of a system of rating3 for diagnosis in the training of its kindergarten and primary teachers. The method is to have each student teacher rank herself, at the end of the first month of student teaching, hy means of the score card; and then have "both critic.. or room teacher and supervisor rank her, by means of the score card; and then have a conference to help her start on her im provement. This score card takes into consideration: Personal Characteristics (divisions and sub-divisions for purpose of explanation), Professional Attitudes (divisions and subdivisions), Professional Ability (divisions and subdivisions), General (divisions and subdivisions); and provides suggestions for the ranking into three groups. With certain modifications it would be equally useable for student teachers of secondary schools. This scale will also be quoted in the section of this chapter devoted to how the rating shall be made. . Self-rating must be recognized as an important phase of diagnosis of student teaching. Says Armentrout^: Professional training aims to give direction to one’s teach ing, helps one master the technique of teaching, and provides an instrument by which one can criticise his work and develop the stimulus to self-improvement. Therefore,• considerable weight should be attached to this factor of ability in self- criticism, in estimating the fitness of students to undertake independent teaching. In some/.'schools, student teachers are required to rate themselves on the score card as an encourage ment to self-criticism. ^Alice Temple, ’ ’Report of the Committee on Teacher- Training," International Kindergarten Union, Kew York, Practice Teaching--A Manual. D. Armentrout, Conduct of Student Teaching, , p. 186. 114 The desirable traits for junior-high-school teachers and for senior-high-school teachers recently formulated in the 5 Commonwealth Teacher-Training Study offer possibility for use in diagnosis of traits as a basis for future development. The compilers of this list suggest the use of dictionary defini tions to make exact the meanings of the trait names. Either such definition or a listing of subheading or divisions to explain and define the traits would be necessary* Since the judgments of school officials and. of parents and of pupils all went into the making of this list it should have considerable value. The list follows: Traits for Senior High School Teachers 1. Adaptability 14. * Good judgmeht 2. Appreeiativeness 15. Good taste 3. Attractive personal appearance 16. Health 4 . Breadth of interest 3.7. Honesty 5. Considerateness 18. Leadership 6.. Cooperation 19. Magnetism 7, Definiteness 20. Open-Mindedness 8. Dependability 21. Progressiveness 9. Diligence 22. promptness 10. Enthusiasm 23. Propriety 11. Exactness 24. Scholarship 12. Fluency 25. Self-possession 13. Forcefulness 26. Thri ft 5W. W. Charters and Douglas Waples, Commonwealth Teacher Training Study, 1929, pp. 67-68. 115 landsittel recommends6 that student teachers be frequently re quired to rate themselves according to a rather detailed score sheet, and that lists of desirable traits be posted so that . "its constituent items be as often as possible brought to the attention of the students." Thus it will be seen that rating may be used for purposes of diagnosis both by student teacher herself (or himself) and by those in charge of administration or supervision of the work of student teaching. And such diagnosis should be of great value in the training of the student teacher during the laboratory-school teaching period. 2. Measuring in terms of improvement of pupils taught. The method of measuring teachers in terms of improvement of pupils taught has lately been receiving considerable attention. Franzen7 proposed the A R Teaching Efficiency Formula to meas ure this improvement of pupils taught. His formula is: Teaching Efficiency = Final AR - Initial AR that is, pupils are measured at the beginning.and at the close of a definite period of time, and the gain or loss in their AEfs during this particular period is credited to the teacher in charge. It is felt that the Teacher-Efficiency Formula eliminates the disturbing factors of over or under-ageness and mental age, and the error due to the absence of initial test, in the matter of measuring pupil progress. The chief ■ ' g ......................• ' F. C. Landsittel, The Directing of Practice Teaching, Bureau of Educational Research, College of Education, Ohio State University, 1924, p. 82, 7R. Franzen, The Accomplishment Ration, Doctor1s Disser tation, Teachers1 College, columDia, xy2o. 116 virtue of this method lies in the fact that it focuses atten tion in education more definitely upon desirable changes made in children. Its main weakness lies in the fact.that as yet we cannot measure directly, and can only partially measure indirectly, many of the outcomes in the education, some of the measured outcomes being probably among the most important of all. The method of applying the Teaching Efficiency Formula to rate the work of student teachers presents obvious difficulties- In the first place,.the class has been taught by both critic or i _ room teacher and by student teacher, and it would be difficult* to determine just how much credit belonged to the student * c teacher; A second difficulty has just been suggested in the short discussion of the Teaching Efficiency Formula; namely, that we have, as yet, no means of measuring directly— and very scant means of measuring indirectly--some of the moat import ant outcomes of education. A third difficulty to the measuring of the student teacher on the basis of the success of the pupils taught is that we do not possess desirable tests,; f o r all the work of the secondary school. A fourth reason is one which suggests that if this means i£5 employed, some other should also be used, because teaching efficiency is not all we are attempt ing to develop in these Student teachers. However, as Armentrout® suggests: 8Armentrout, op. cit., p. 188. 117 We do not mean that the training teacher is to give no consid eration to pupil achievement, as shown by the results of standardized tests, in measuring the progress of the student teacher, but rather, that pupi1-achievement in the rating of the pre-service teacher must be recognized as a less constant factor than in measuring the efficiency , of the in-service teacher. Fupil achievement will always be a factor in estimat ing the ability of the student teacher and an important means of directing his attention to the importance of results as one factor in estimating teaching success. So much for the matter of measurement of teaching efficiency from the point of view of measuring the student teacher. It remains to consider this measurement from the point of view of safeguarding the welfare of pupils taught by the student teacher. That the educational welfare of pupils under the partial care of student teachers must be carefully guarded at all times is a matter of ever-present concern to administrators and super-- visors of student teaching. And in this case the use of edu- . 9 cational tests will be valuable. Says Baker, In certain communities there has prevailed a feeling, particu larly among parents, that student teaching is injurious to the pupils under instruction. In some localities this feeling has so crystallized that student teachers have been refused per mission to teach in public schools. In yet other localities the effect of student teaching under constant supervision is considered so advantageous that childrensT names are entered on waiting lists of the training school as much as three years in advance of the time students expect to enter, even though the school charges a tuition fee. Under either of these circumstances, the administering of standardized tests would probably prove highly; satisfactory in giving a dependable picture of the situation so far as class room subjects are concerned. — “ SbT K. Baker, Student Teaching, Unpublished Thesis, University of Kansas Department of Education, 1926, p. S3. 118 To determine something of the comparative -results of student-teaeher teaching as opposed to regular-teacher teach ing, Gray**^ made a study of 1500 high school freshmen— 430 of whom were from the training schools of four normal schools of Illinois and from the .University of Chicago training school, and 1070 of whom were from the public schools, and-found that student teaching was not injurious to the standings of pupils in the freshman year of high school. He concluded that no marked advantage accrued to either training or public high school, and that ”the claims of superiority made by either type of school lacks confirmation.” Grayfs technique could be employed in any situation in which there arose a doubt as to the efficiency of the teaching in a class in whieh a student teacher was in charge for a part of the time, Since standard testing is a regular part of procedure in most high schools whieh are likely to have student-teachers in training it is probable that general comparison of these classes with others is always possible. Studies made by Luderman^in Dakota; by Washburn^at Winnetka, Illinois; and by Heilmau^at Greeley, Colorado, all confirm Gray*s data that neither training-school 1UW. S• Gray, Results of-Practice Teaching Upon Pupils Taught, U. S. Department of Education Bulletin $o. 29, 191V, pp. 36-40. W. Luderman* ? T Do Pupils lose Under Practice Teachers?” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol.' ZIV, 1928, p p .- td tt:( J 4 T '" — — ------------------------ --------------------------- 12C. W. Washburn, and others, A Survey of Winnetka Public Schools, Macmillan Co., Chicago, 1927. 13 J. D. Heilman, "The Child's Loss Due to Student Teaching," School and Society, Vol. XXI, 1927, pp. 291-297. 119 nor public school has grounds for claiming superiority; that pupils do as well when a class is taught partly by a student teacher under supervision as when taught entirely by a regular room teacher* Only one study which the writer has found makes any suggestion of finding unfavorable results when measuring pupils taught partly by student teachers as compared to pupils taught entirely by regular teachers. That is Dearborn’s'1 ' 4 study, made in 1916, in which he gave standardized subject matter tests to pupils in the five training schools of the Missouri State Teachers’ Colleges and compared results with available norms; concluding as a result* of the comparison that f!the results in most of the training schools are poor*” It has already been noted in this chapter, however, that any such comparisons as this made by Dearborn are now recognized as.of littlervalue, since the testing of where pupils are at the end of the year does nothing to measure the efficiency of the teach ing unless we know where they were at the beginning of the year, and what menjal equipment they possess. Also, the Commenwealth study, made a few years later, shows that pupils of Missouri training schools--as perhaps of other training schools of the tinie--were not likely to be representative groups of high school pupils. At any rate, the weight of the evidence which 15 has been gathered is all on the1 other side. Says Armentrout: 14Walter F. Dearborn, and others, Standard Educational Tests in the Training Schools of Missouri, Harvard Monographs ih Edugatiw/ ’ sefie' s m i; " vei* /m, p. 8or/" 15 Armentrout, op. cit., p. 196. 120 More comparative studies involving larger numbers of training school pupils will have to be made before we can arrive at even a tentative Judgment. The evidence at the present time seems to show that the effects of student teaching, where properly supervised, are,, at least, not injurious to pupils. Where student teaching is done in city schoolsthe close supervision of the regular teacher and the added supervision of both city school and college supervisors seems to assure the necessary control to assure the safeguarding of the pupils’ welfare. 3. Rating for purposes of recommendation and placement. ’ ’The most important single factor considered in determining the 1 / * probable success of the teacher,” says Myers,' "is her rating in student teaching.” His contention seems Justified by studies in the prediction of teaching success, such as that made by Whitney17 and reported in his book, "The Prediction of Teaching, Success,” or that made by Thompson18 at the University of Southern California, in which he studied teachers placed by that university over a period of five years, and found that ^Practice teaching predicts success in the position better than 19 does the general scholarship average in college.” Mead recommends that the placement office should be careful to have ■^Alanzo F. Myers, "Successful Placement of Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XII, p. 596. 17F. L. Whitney, The Prediction of Teaching Success, Public School Publishing Co., 1924, p. BO. 1 18Merritt M. Thompson, study of the Work of Former Practice Teachers, Unpublished Study, School of Education, University of Southern California. 18A. R. Mead, Supervised Students Teaching, p. 505. 121 a kind of rating which will furnish an adequate "analysis" of the student teacher for the purpose of assisting the office in recommending certain teachers for certain places; and for the purpose of helping the superintendent to choose wisely in his .2Qj , , selection of teachers* Brogan found, in his study on the work of placement offices, that fiftyr*four placement managers had discovered that the. superintends they served considered the detailed rating made by the supervisor of student teaching of more importance, than the grades received by the student teachers. He recommends that provision be made for the secur ing of more complete records of the work of student teaching, and that such records be made in a form which will make them easily accessible to sup*erintendents. The North Central Associa tion study— already referred to— on student teaching for second ary schools recommends that ratings for placement purposes should be sufficiently detailed to answer the important ques tions which a prospective employer wants answered about a stu dent teacher whose application'he is considering. Brogan says, A placement office that has the advantage of expert vocational analysis of its candidates, together with careful periodic sur veys of demand for teachers, is in a position to operate on a much sounder basis than one which does not see the necessity for ■ such valuable information* Morris^*** found that placement bureaus considered rating-records ^Whit Brogan, "The Work of Placement Offices," Teachers College Contributions, Columbia University, 1930, pp. 36, 887 ^Elizabeth Hunt Morris, "Personal Traits and Success in Teaching," Teachers College Contributions, No. 342, Columbia University1929, p. ‘ 42. 122 of more value than either academic or student-teaching grades; she recommends a "personal traits” record and sets up a rather elaborate procedure for the securing of such records. It seems probable that the more placement bureaus do in attempting to be part of a successful guidance program, in which the prospective teacher is not only properly guided while pursuing the work of training, but also in the matter of being placed in the proper sort, of position and followed up to determine her success in this position, the more they will require in the way of-records which give an adequate "picture” of the individual. 4. Hating for purposes of giving a gradesfor student teaching. The present tendency is to use rating scales as a means for determining the grade of the student teacher. Some schools use rating scales for each lesson. At the other ex treme, some schools give only a final rating. The tendency is probably to rate twice--once near the mid^-period of the work of student teaching; once at the end of the period, combining these two works in some way to determine the final grade. It has al ready been pointed out that some workers in the field of student teaching are urging the use of diagnostic measuring of some sort early in the term of the practice teaching, with succeeding measurements to determine improvement, and final measure to assist in determining grade. Colebank^ found that, out of one hundred and fourteen colleges and universities of the North ^George H. Colebank, Practice Teaching in the North Central Association, State University of lowa .bulletin, xy&O; aiso North” Central Association Quarterly, Vol. Ill, pi 412. 123 Central Association, sixty-two institutions use rating scales to determine the final grade, and fifteen institutions use rat ing scales for each lesson. In his study of the training schools of the state normal schools:of the United States, O'* Wilson found that training-teachers rate the following seven . factors in determining the final grade of a student teacher: attitude toward work, attitude toward pupils, scholarship, class management, skill in conducting the recitation, results 24 in pupil-gain, personal traits. Mead suggests that the final rating for grade be put in a form most useable by the placement deparment and that the student teacher be furnished a copy of this rating. Many of the newer rating devices are in comformity with the present tendency to attempt to make grading a more objective matter. It would seem, then, that rating devices have value as means of diagnosis and that the importance of this phase of responsibility for student teaching programs is just beginning to be felt; that the right rating devices may be a help in. checking on the matter of the student teachers1 improvement; that the measuring of the efficiency of teaching done by the student teacher in terms of the improvement of pupils taught is one of the newer aspects of rating student teaching— and is an aspect to whieh a growing importance is being attached; that placement departments consider adequate rating schemes of ^Lester M. Wilson, The Training Departments in the State Uormal Schools of The United States, Illinois Eastern State Teachers College, kuiletin Ho. 66, 1919• ^4Mead, op. cit., p. 505. 124 importance; and that rating schemes of various sorts are com monly employed in determining the final grade of student teaching. Having considered these reasons for the rating of student teachers, it is important to know what we are trying to rate when we rate student teachers. B. WHAT ARE WE ATTEMPTING. TO RATE WHEN WE RATE'STUDENT-TEACHERS? To some extent--and in varying degrees--rating devices attempt to measure something of the traits, attitudes, abili ties, skills, knowledge or scholarship, and improvement in pupils taught.. They attempt to picture, for those interested, the personal qualities, the professional equipment, and the skill in school and classroom technique and procedure. This is, of course, an enormous undertaking, but the constant im provement of various techniques for measuring promise much. As often pointed out by McCall and others, as yet we cannot meas ure directly and can only partially measure indirectly many of the outcomes in education, some of the unmeasured outcomes being probably among the most important of all; but the various rating scales and devices are constantly being improved and even now offer improvement over the old general impression method. 1. Traits. One of the most interesting of the recent attempts to define and list traits desirable for high school teachers is the work done by Charters and Waples^^ in the — »p i ' W. W. Charters and Douglas Waples, The Commonwealth Teacher Training Study, pp. 52-67. 125 Commonwealth study. To obtain their list of traits they used,, two methods-of securing' Judgments: (1) a study of the litera ture; (2) the oral interview with school administrators, professors of education, teachers1 agencies, parents, teachers, and pupils. The traits were listed in the order determined by the number of persons by whom each trait was related to other traits. The resulting list of traits for high school teachers t is: . 1. * Adaptability 2. Appreciativeness 3. Attractive, personal appearance (cleanliness, neatness) 4. Breadth of interest (in pupils, community, profession) 5. Considerateness (courtesy, sympathy, kindliness) 6. Cooperation (helpfulness, loyalty) 7. Definiteness 8,. Dependability 9. Diligence (industry, patience) 10. Enthusiasm (alertness, inspirational) 11. Exactness (accuracy, thoroughness) 12. Fluency 13. Forcefulness (courage, purposefulness) 14.- Good Judgment 15. Good taste . 16. Health \ . . - - 17. Honesty (fairness, integrity) 18. leadership (initiative, resourcefulness) 19. Magnetism (approachability, cheerfulness, voice, affability) 126 20. Open-mindedness 21. Progressiveness (ambition) 22. Promptness (dispatch) 23. Propriety ’ • . 24. Scholarship 26. Self-possession (modesty., dignity, poise) 26. Thrift. Another carefully-made study.of traits is that made by Shannon2^. He used several procedures to secure valid data: a compilation of the lists of qualities upon which certifica tion and tenure are based, examination of codes of ethics for teachers, questionnaire to .supervisors, judgments of superin tendents, the interview. He secured a list of seventy-two traits and gives them weighted ranking. The entire list will not be quoted, here, for it seems more significant for our pur- * pose to note the seventeen traits which he concludes are the traits having most to do with success in teaching in secondary schools. (The first six he considers of prime importance and remarks that nthey will take care of eighty per cent of all attention that needs to be given to traits of high school 27 teachers.”) The seventeen traits are: 1. . Symp athy 4. En thus i am ; T , 2. Judgment 5.- Stimulative power 3. Self-control 6. Earnestness J. Shannon, Personal and Social Traits Requisite for High Grade Teaching in Secondary schools, pp. su-23. ^Ibid., p. 88. 127 7* Affability 13, Accuracy 8, Industriousness 14, Alertness 9. Voice 15. , Integrity 10. Adaptability 16.' Reliableness 11. Forcefulness 17. Attentiveness to one’s own 12. Cooperativeness use of English It will be noted that Earne stness and Attentiveness to one’s own use of English are the only traits in Shannon’s list that are not also given in the Commonwealth list. Both of the lists indicate the tendency to merge traits and attitudes. It should be noted that modern rating devices all include some rating of traits and - attitudes, and that the tendency is to give specific meanings to them. There is also a marked tendency to distinguish profession al equipment (such as academic preparation or scholarship, ability to plan and organize, grasp of educational problems, un derstanding of adolescent nature, professional attitude, ability in self-criticism, etc.) from school and classroom technique (handling of routine, equipment and materials; skill in select ing and directing, and in questioning and guidance of work, etc.) With regard to rating of student teachers as to the success of the pupils taught it has already been noted in this chapter that there are factors which make such rating extremely diffi cult, but that it is, nevertheless, a desirable means, and one that is being constantly developed. Armentrout^® comments: The earliest methods. • • .measured efficiency in terms of teacher’s traits and activities; whereas, the later methods. • . • ---------- Armentrout, op. cit., pp. 187-188 128 have emphasized pupil activity and achievement more than teacher activity* . . .The older method of Judging by traits and activities rather than by pupil achievement is, perhaps, better adapted for rating student teachers; at least until we have developed a more satisfactory and scientific method of measuring the progress of the pre-service teacher. 2. A Rating Scale. As a possibility of this "more satisfactory and scientific method," Mead^^ suggests the brief outlines of a plan by which a number of scales or check lists, measuring various desirable qualities, might be constructed and each of these used as a sort of portrait of a teacher and his work. These "portraits" could then be arranged in order of merit, and the result used as a measuring device somewhat similar to the Hillegas, Thorndike, Trabne Composition Scale. It can readily be seen that it has not yet been deter mined ;)ust what are the qualities of merit in a teacher; hence, we cannot say just what we - are attempting to measure when .we rate student teachers, but we do have a great deal better idea of what we are trying to measure than had the educators of only a few years ago, and with .the impetus already received the movement toward a more meaningful rating of student teachers should go forward a pace. We shall now consider some of the scales being used. *^Mead, op. cit., pp; 508-510 129 C. HOW SHALL THE RATING- OF STUDENT TEACHERS BE DONE? an When Mead made, his study, in 1917, only twenty-four out of one hundred and thirty-three teacher-training institutions used the analytical score card method of rating student teach ers, When Colebank^ made his study in 1929, there were seventy-seven out of one hundred and five teacher-training institutions employing the analytical:score card method. At the time Mead made his study.the favored, method for rating, student teachers appeared to be the simple letter-ranking— A, B, C, D, F, There seems little doubt that the analytical score card is now the favored type. Colebank^2 divides the , rating cards used by the schools he surveyed as being in one of two classes:' Type One, the more recent development, has the following distinct characteristics: !• Makes use of pupil achievement. 2. A decreasing number of qualities or traits to be measured. 3. Makes provisions for numerical ratings. 4. Specifies ability in self-criticism. 5. Some tendency to give specific meanings to traits or abilities. Type Two, representing the older tendencies, has the follow ing characteristics: 1. A large number of specific qualities or traits. 2. Omission of qualities 2, 3, 4, and 5 in Type One, 3. More subjective.than Type One. R. Mead, Teacher Training for Secondary Schools, U. S. Bureau of Education Bulletin No. 29, 19l7. ” ’ 31 Colebank, op. cit., pp. 412-415. 32Ibid 130 In his analysis of seven recent seore-eards, Armentrout'53 points out that the tendencies at present.are as follows: (1) a decrea.se in the number of items in the list, (2) a pro vision for numerical ratings, (3! ) a rather general agree ment as to the factors to he taken into consideration in . .measuring progress of student teachers, (4) a trend toward emphasis upon the results attained in pupil achievement. An examination of a considerable number of recent score cards or rating sheets used to rate student teachers seemed-- to the writer— to bring out several interesting tendencies other than those just- mentioned: (1) attempts to provide for better distribution in ratings, (2) attempts to organize the items listed under a smaller number of headings which, in turn, were defined by sub-headings or defining terms, (3) a tendency— conscious; or otherwise--to arrange score cards to fit a particu lar purpose: diagnosis (self or by others), rating for a par ticular subject (physical education, for example), final rat ing for grade, "portrait” rating for purpose of recommenda tion for placement. For this examination, rating cards were- used from the following institutions: University of Maine; Massachusetts, Agricultural College; Rhode Island State College; Pottsdam, New York, State normal; Harvard University; Hunter College; Swarthmore College; University of Texas; William and Mary College; Chicago University; Michigan Univer sity; Ohio University;- Nebraska University; Ohio State Univer sity; Greeley, Colorado, State Teachers College; Pittsburg, Kansas, -----33— ------ Armentrout, op. cit., p. 187. 131 State Teachers College; University of California at Los . Angeles; University of Southern .California; University of Utah. It will not he desirable to reproduce all these rating sheets, for no attempt will he made to fully analyze each. The three tendencies just mentioned will he discussed in the light of data obtained from these cards, and portions from various cards, and a few complete cards will he quoted. Several variations of attempts to provide for better dis tribution in ratings will be noted. (a) The simplest form (and apparently representing the earlier tendency) is to read over the list of traits or qualities given, and on this basis to record one general rating or grade for the student--grades being usually expressed by the letters A, B, C, D, F, or by the words: Excellent, Good, Medium, Poor, Very Poor. No attempt is made to designate which traits or qualities are stronger than other traits or qualities. (b) Another form is to grade each quality A, B, C, D, or F. Sometimes an average of these grades is made to give a general rating or grade. (c) A variation of the form (b) is that in which an explana tion or guide is given as to what shall constitute A, B, C, D, F for each trait or quality; for example: Quali ties . Points. A Grade C Grade F Grade Score Weight Daily Time Always ready with plans Prepared when told Frequently late Prepara tion Kind Fills the need and sometoi’ spare For the assignment only Poorly meets the assigned task 132 A grade of B would lie "between A and C; a grade of B would lie between C and F, (d) Another plan is to rate each of the various traits or qualities in the per cent basis, and then get either the mode or median for final rating, (e) Another plan suggests the number of points which shall be considered perfect score for a particular trait or quality and then directs that the grader: •Deduct from possible 10; very slight, 2; slight, 4; marked, 6; very marked, 7; extreme, g, (Possible 20, 40, 60, or 100 in same proportion.) A section from the scale will probably make the plan clearer: . ■ s u g - : Deter- Individual Efficiencies— 800 units gested Defici- mined values encies values I. Physical Efficiency— 80 units ' (SO) 1, . Impressions--general 10 2. Health (general) 20 3. Voice * 20 4. Habits--personal ” 10 5. Energy and endurance 20 34 ' . (f) Another plan seeks to make distinctions within the three classes. Poor, Medium, and G-ood. A portion of one of these scales is here quoted and narked to illustrate the means employed: ^ ^Examples of similar scales are also shown in the follow^ ing references: (a) Boyce Record of Teaching Efficiency, School of Education, University of.Chicago., (b) Herbert Paterson, f f How Can The Ability of Student Teacher Be Measured?", Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VI, p. 214, 3-33 Qualities of Merit V.P. Poor Medium ' Good Excellent General Appearance X Health • X Scholarship X • The crosses indicate that the teacher is Medium, bordering on Good, in general appearance; Good, bordering on -Excellent, in Health; Poor, bordering on Medium in scholarship. (g)®® Another plan provides a plan by which dots are placed in the proper squares to indicate whether a student teacher is Very Superior, Superior, Good, Inferior, Very Inferior in each of ten or twelve traits and qualities. A line may then be drawn connect ing the dots, and thus a sort of profile of the student- teaeher's abilities shown. (h) Still another plan is one similar to that used by psychologists. It may best be explained . by quoting a small portion of a scale: In her (or his) attitude toward pupils, the student teacher is: sympathe ticT understanding likes them intolerant The instruction is to place a check at that point on the line, . which, in the grader!s judgment, represents the student teacher1s present status with reference to the specified ability. ............■■■ > T 7 r — Armentrout illustrates a similar scale, in his Conduct of Student Teaching, p. ldO.. 134 All of these attempts to provide a letter distribution of ratings indicate the working of a desire to make the ranking of student teachers a more objective and a more exact matter. The methods show evidence of having been affected both by rating- scales for in-service teachers and by plans for various other ranking schemes. It is quite obvious that the recent scale's are making, attempts to organize the items listed under a smaller number of headings which' j in turn,:are usually defined by subheadings or defining words. The number of headings on the scales ex amined varied from four to twelve, but in many cases the sub headings, used to define the main heading, were as many as ten or fifteen. For example, one of the main headings on a scale is thus subdivided for explanation: VII. Personal Qualities: 1. Sympathy (Has common meaning) 2. Personal Appearance (Cleanliness, appearance of dress, posture, movement) . . . 3. Address (meeting people) (A "good mixer") 4. Sincerity * (Has common meaning) 5. Optimism (Has common meaning) 6. Enthusiasm (Has common meaning) 7. Initiative • • (Inventiveness, originality) 8. Fairness (Justice in treatment of others) 9. Reserve and dignity (Self-restraint) 10. Reliability (Dependability) 11. Clear pleasing voice 12. Industry . (Has common meaning) Et^ Cetera There' is much variation in the names given to main headings.; for example, one scale uses the following main headings: I. Personal Efficiency, II. Native Efficiency, III. Admin istrative Efficiency, IV. Dynamic Efficiency, V.- Projected Efficiency, VI. Achievement Efficiency; another scale uses: I. Personal Qualities, II* Academic and Professional Back ground, III. Classroom Management, IV. Teaching Skill;' another uses I.. Personal Qualities, II. Professional Equip ment, III. School and Classroom Technique and Procedure; another much-used scale has nine main headings. But, despite the variations in main headings, the sub-headings and defin ing terms usually make the lists cover pretty much the same points, so that after all there seems to be rather general agreement of factors whieh are taken into consideration in measuring the progress of student teachers. Although the writer made no particular attempt to'collect scales which are used for particular purposes--diagnosis,. periodic measurement of progress, a particular subject, for. final grade, to give "portraits for benefit of placement, etc* yet any considerable group of scales seems to suggest that many of the scales were designed for particular purposes. A 156 few sample scales will be entirely or partially quoted. As an example of a checking list for the student teacher to use in self-analysis is'quoted Scale I. This check-list is used by the student teacher after each period taught. Since it is in the student-teacherTs hands before she (or he) does the teaching, and since the consciousness is there that it must be checked after the teaching, it probably will also serve to condition the teaching--at least to some extent. Myers, in his Manual, suggests similar check lists for observation work • As an example of a scale to check a particular subject is quoted Scale II. This scale is also put in the hands of the student teacher before she begins her teaching and she knows it is to be used to check her work by; hence it may serve to act as something of a direction to her work, and as a means of self-diagnosis. As an example of an elaborate scale which has for its purposes to serve ; . As a guide to analysis of student's work during training As a guide to self analysis by student teachers As a basis for conference As a final report for use of appointment secretary is quoted Scale III. It is quite similar to the scale recent- rxn ly devised by Mead and in use in several schools. Both attempt .---- . "nt r— ----- Alanzo Myers and Floyd Harshman, Training Secondary School Teachers, American Book Co., 1929. 37A. R. Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, pp. 480-486. 157 S C A LE I Check-list on 'Peaching Achievement Evaluate your teaching performance by interrogating yourself by means of the following questions, after each period's work. Use three pos sible answers, - fully realized, not realized, did not apply. The Setting 1. Proper temperature? 2. Proper lighting? 5. Proper ventilation? 4. Tidy desk? 5. Clean blackboards? 6* Orderly seating? Clean floors? 8. Materials ready? Myself 9. Interested in lesson? 10. Full of life? 11. Look the part of a leader before the class? 12* Use good language? 13. Preparation adequate? 14. Speech distinct and pleasant? 15. Really interested in the members of the class? 16. Kind but firm? My Class 17.. Shows res pact? 18. Cooperate? 19. Are responsive? 20. Uses time profitably? 21. Orderly? 22. Behave because that is ethically right? 23. Likes me? 24. Respects me? 25. Has confidence in me? The Learning Period 26* Checked up pupil preparation? 27* Questions proved to be good? 28. Answers in good form? 29. Interest sustained? 30. Majority of pupils interested? 31* Entire class.participated? 32. Biscussion aroused? 33. Effort; and success of pupils rewarded 34. Pupils aid and criticize each other? 35. Lesson sold and delivered? 36. Majority of the class thinking? My Procedure 37. Connected with yesterday's work? 38. Beveloped a need for tomorrow's work? 39. Brought forth "why” questions from class? 40. Connected work with life experi ences of pupils? 41. Filled the period with learning activities? 42. Lost little time in routine? 43. Encouraged student's independence of thought? 44. Biscovered pupil weaknesses? 45. Encouraged student's independent activity? and 46. Bid you invite your supervisor? 47. Bid you talk over the lesson with your critic teacher? 48. Bid you prepare a lesson-plan? 49. Bid you make note of difficulties that developed? 50. Are you treasuring points of strength in yourself that were discovered? 138 SCALE I I TEACHING ABILITY PHYSICAL EDUCATION F D C B A_______ 1 2 5 4 5 Score 1. Has clear, well organized aims 2. Plans well to achieve aims 3. Selects subject matter, activities effectively 4. Adapts subject matter, activities skillfully to: a. Special group needs b. Individual differences c. Weather conditions d. Changes in school program 5. Enriches activities by drawing on materials and knowledge of other subjects 6* Thinks well before the class 7. Uses good English 8# Expresses self clearly 9. Organizes questions skillfully * V - 10. Stimulates critical thinking by pupils on a. Play skills b. Team play c. Behavior problems s 11. Is quick to take advantage of pupils* questions and suggestions 12. Demonstrates accurately and skillfully 13. Uses illustrative material effectively 14. Uses effectively devices for measuring a. Improvement in motor ability b. Character and citizenship growth 15. Draws clear line between skillful motivation of work and effective focussing of play impulses in satisfying play 16. Is skillful in making assignments 17* Is skillful in drill work a. Self-testing activities b. Muscle training 18* Analyzes skillfully pupils* difficulties and dissatisfactions 19. Is constructive in criticism and direction 20. Plays spontaneously with children 21. Uses democratic organization under pupil leaders 22. Secures enthusiastic cooperation 23. Insures continuity of play experience thru a. Analysis of her own teaching b. Teaching children to analyze their experi ence in the light of desirable outcomes. c. Teaching children how to conduct their free play activities 24. Insures correct seating and requires correct posture in room 25. Children show steady improvement in a. Play skills b. Cooperative play c. Posture d. Social behavior 26. Children experience daily satisfaction in a. Improvement, or in b. Play 139 SO ALE III QUALITIES AND SKILLS I* PERSONAL QUALITIES A. Physical Qualities: 1. General health, strength, vigor, vitality 2. Voice: timbre, pitch, articulation 3* Neatness and cleanliness, appropriateness of dress 4. General appearance and posture B. Mental and Temperamental Qualities: 1. General intelligence 2. Common sense, adaptability 3* Initiative, resourcefulness, self-reliance’ 4. Sense of humor 5. Enthusiasm and optimism 6v.Force without offensive aggressiveness C. Social Qualities: 1. Likableness— -attraction of people 2. Spirit of cooperation and teamwork, loyally 3. Response to constructive criticism and to opinion of others 4* Courtesy and tact in all relationships 5. Poise 6. Capacity for leadership D. Character Qualities: 1* Intellectual and moral honesty, sincerity 2. Sympathy 3. Promptness, regularity, dependability 4. Industry and perseverance Summary of Checks and Scores I II. ACADEMIC PROFESSIONAL BACKGROUND A. Professional insight and outlook. To what extent does the teacher have: 1. A real understanding of the accepted aims of education? 2. Command of the laws of child learning and growth? 3* Practical knowledge of approved standards of work? 140 B« Thoroughness of cultural and academic preparation* To what extent does the teacher have: 1* A satisfactory background of general culture? 2* Knowledge of subject-matter to betaugiht? 3* Mastery of the elementary skills ih: a. Heading? b. Arithmetic? c* Written English (incl* spelling)? d. Correct, adequate oral expression? C. Thoroughness of immediate preparation* To what extent does the teacher: . 1* Formulate aims clearly and plan adequately? 2* Provide necessary Illustrative and work materials? 3* Make continuous improvement in daily preparation? Summary of Checks and Scores IX III. CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT A* Management of external physical conditions* How well does the teacher care for: 1* Heat, light, ventilation, orderliness of room? . 2* The artistic arrangement of room? 3* Display of incentives— pupil work, graphs, charts, etc*? 4* Books, tools, materials and equipment? 5* Clerical duties, reports and records? B. Attention to physical and mental hygiene. To what extent does the teacher: 1* Establish good health habits, including posture? 2* Establish orderly and economical habits of work? 3* Maintain stable and consistent requirements? 4* Make adaptations for physical and mental disabilities? 5* Secure progressive control of impulses? C. Control of children* To what extent does the teacher: 1* Know the levels of control found in a democracy; (1) Co ercion; (2) Ridicule; (3) Training or habituation; (4) Pop ular disapproval; (5) Popular approval; (6) Reason; (7) Self-control? 141 2. Sense the level on which each child is living? 3* Use methods of control which raise the pupils* level of behavior? 4* Anticipate and forestall potential disciplinary problems? 5. Make good conduct satisfying and wrong conduct dissatisfying? Summary of Checks and Scores III 17. TEACHING SKILL A*' Skill in the use of the Lairs of Learning. "Readiness”— To what extent does the teacher: 1. Ascertain capacities, experience, interests and needs of children? 2. Make pupils feel the need of things to be learned? 3. Maintain in pupils a mind set toward purpose? 4. Aid pupils to state such purposes in some definite, clear way? "Exercise”— To what extent does the teacher: 1. Aid children in planning for carrying out of purposes? 2. Aid pupils in using economical procedures In executing purposes? 3. Maintain interest and effort throughout the necessary practice periods? "Effect"— To what extent does the teacher: 1. Get the pupil 8 to judge their own work well? 2. Get pupils to find satisfaction in accomplishment of purposes? 3. See that pupils find dissatisfaction in undesirable re sponses? 4. Constantly encourage and commend effort? B. Skill in the use of Purposeful Activity. To what extent does the teacher: 1. See that chosen purposes are gripping, challenging and worth while? 2. See that purposes are possible and feasible? 3. See that they are capable of enriching the lives of child ren— that they have "leading on" qualities? 4. See that each one differs enough from the preceding to give necessary variation and scope? 148 What degree of skill does the teacher possess in handling the technique of: 1« A lesson, where the child9s purpose is to embody an idea in concrete form? 2* An appreciation lesson— where children9s purpose is to enjoy some aesthetic experience? 3* A problem-solving lesson— where purpose is to solve , some intellectual difficulty? 4« A drill lesson— where purpose is to make automatic a skill or some specific bit of learning? 5. Questioning? C. Skill in Securing and Checking Results. To what extent has the teacher: !♦ Improved the pupils9 study habits? 2. Secured a gain in pupil self-direction and initiative? 3. Secured improvement in pupil participation, earnestness and industry? 4* Promoted progress by use of standard and informal tests? 5* Removed deficiencies by remedial measures? 6. Maintained a wholesome, happy working atmosphere? Summary of Checks and Scores IV 143 to make a thorough analysis of traits and qualities and both set up a quite elaborate marking scheme— Mead’s scheme is particularly involved. In the case of the scale quoted (Scale III),- the 'person doing the ranking is asked to "Rate the student teacher on each separate item for which sufficient data are available." giving ten per cent ’ ’Pass,” fifty per cent ’ ’Average, ” thirty per cent "Strong," and ten per cent "Superior." . As an-example of the more recent tendency to simplify the rating scale so that it will'be quite generally useable, and yet provide for numerical rating, ability in self-criticism, and pupil achievement, is quoted Scale IV. Results and tech nique are given decided importance in this scale. "Fitness to undertake independent teaching" is noted. - D. WHO SHALL RATE THE STUDENT TEACHER? Several persons are likely to be concerned in the matter of rating student teachers. Whatever the plan of organization of the work of studentoteaching,-the director is probably the one held responsible for the final grade of the student teacher.. He will no doubt depend upon the supervisor for her statement of the work done by the student teacher, and the supervisor will probably take the room or critic teacher’s judgment into, consideration. The amount of importance given to each rating 144 SCALE IY RATING THE STUDENT-TEACHER I.- The Mechanics of the'Teacher, 30 to 46 points 1. Application of the principles of method 2* Ability to test and grade the work of pupils 3. Definiteness in lesson planning 4. Skill in following the plan (ability to "put it over") 5. Ability to manage and discipline (a) proper standards of conduct (b) rational measures,of discipline 6. Pupil achievement (a) knowledge and skills (b) habits of study, attitudes, ideals, etc. 7. Ability in self-criticism (a) stimulus of self-improvement (b) fitness to undertake independent teaching II. The Individuality of the Teacher, 12 to 30 points 1. Scholarship 2. Use of English 3. Originality ■4. Breadth of viewpoint 5. Personal appearance 6. Voice 7. Cordial cooperation of pupils 8.. Judgment 145 III# The Teacher as a Social Worker, 12 to 24.points 1. Cooperation with the Organization 2. Professional habits 3. Sympathetic interpretation of pupils Total points--. 146 or grade probably depends somewhat upon the plan of organiza tion. If a supervisor has only a few student teachers under her.charge, and keeps very close supervision of their work, the mark given by the room dr critic teacher becomes less im portant; and vice versa. Based upon several judgments. The policy of having a joint judgment is probably the more common means of rating— at least for final or grade rating— and is perhaps the best method to use at present. It seems that such a method should 38 be more complete than -if one person made the rating. Mead thinks that If two or three persons, possessed of a common understanding of purposes, processes, and results in teacher preparation, confer— after seeing the same student teacher at work— each can contribute data needed for making the final judgment. The North Central study^^ recommends joint judgment. Armentrout4^ thinks that "The rating of student teachers will always be more reliable., if based upon several independent judgments." Kimball41 thinks rating is a too subjective matter to have much value anyway, but believes several should confer to determine it. Stuart^S points out that conference of several who have the K. Mead, Supervised Student Teaching, p* 470. 39 North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. Ill, p. '414.. 4^Armentrout, op. cit., p. 181. 41 - F* : A:; .Kimbal 1, Survey of Teacher Rating in The United States. 42 H. Stuart, "Training of Modern Foreign Language Teachers," Teachers College Contributions, Columbia University, p* 69. 147 necessary data should be employed to make the final rating. Summary of the chapter. It would appear that rating devices have value as a means of diagnosis and that the impor tance of this phase of responsibility for student teaching is Just beginning to be felt, that right rating devices may be a help in checking on the matter of student teachers’ improve ment, that . the. measuring of the efficiency of teaching done by the student teacher in terms of the progress of pupils taught is one of the newer aspects of measuring student teaching, that placement departments consider adequate rating schemes of importance, and that rating schemes of various sorts are com monly employed in determining the final grades of student teachers. To some extent— and in varying degrees--rating de vices attempt to picture the personal qualities, the profession al equipment, and the skill in school and classroom technique. Rating may be simply giving a single A, B, C, D, or F rank or grade; or it may be a matter of use of some sort of score card or rating sheet such as exists in great variety. The tendency of these rating sheets or score cards is to: make provision for numerical ratings, have a smaller number of qualities or traits to be measured but define the qualities or traits rather specifically, make use of pupil achievement, provide for a more complete distribution of rating's, furnish different sorts of rating sheets for different purposes. It is suggested that it may be possible to formulate a scale similar to the Hilegas- Thorndike-Trabne Composition Scale with which to measure the traits and qualities possessed by a student teacher. 148 _3!he tendency is to have the final rating depend upon the- joint judgment of several qualified persons, among them usually being the room or critic teacher and the supervisor. Sometimes the director also tales a hand in the final ranking. 149 CHAPTER VI. smmmf md conclusions So far as the state can provide education,, the teacher is the substance of it* In this day of elaborate building programs, carefully constructed courses of study, and well organised systems of administration, do we sometimes lose sight of the importance of this fact? fhe community1 a school build ings stand out to. speak for themselves— they are there in plain view to every passer-by; something to point out with pride to city visitors and to congratulate one?s self upon*, fhe courses of study, neatly typed or printed, are easily displayed evi dence of the up-to-dateness of a school system* fhe adminis trative organisation of the schools is frequently explained, in its various details, to. city groups and organisations, and gets local and extra-local publicity* And this is all as it should be; but does the class-room teacher come in for a pro portionate amount of consideration? If buildings are poor, the community is pretty likely to realise it; but it is more difficult to tell if the teaching force is poor— there are too many teachers* Tot the teachers are the real substance of the community's educational system; hence the importance of student teaching in fhe whole scheme of teacher training* If we can provide master teachers, we have provided the prime essential of a successful educational program* Mark Hopkins and his log are not out-of-point metaphors even in this modern age* A few years ago an English visitor to America commented— 150 through the columns of the press— that in The United States every town was dominated by an imposing high, school building, as the towns of Medieval times had been dominated by their cathedrals. His comparison suggests the idea that the teach ing profession needs to assume something of the guild atti tude toward its initiates into the profession: the attitude of the "arrived?1 master who is willing carefully to analyze the elements of his own success for the purpose of helping the beginner to attain those elements in a minimum of time* The comparison holds another importance in that however good the system of administrative organization there is ultimate importance in the consideration of the student-teacher as an individual. This suggests that student-teaching be an import ant phase of a careful guidance program which shall begin with an attempt at adequate selection and follow through to care ful placement and induction into the regular school system. Perhaps this might mean the establishment of a sort of "journeyman-period" in which the beginning-teacher served for a year, at moderate salary, as assistant to a master-teacher or teachers; such a system is already being tried out in a few school systems.Certainly it will mean a-yet longer and more carefully planned and executed period of student teaching. If the aviator must serve a journeyman period of one hundred hours of flight before being entrusted with .one individual, surely the student teacher might well be required to have spent an ^Notably in. St. Louis and in Salt Lake City. 151 equal amount of time before beint entrusted with, the educa tional success of a hundred or more individuals. If the recognition of the importance of the job of student-teaching becomes sufficiently clear, we may expect a more adequate administrative organization and a more effect ive program of procedure for the whole program of teacher training.- The matter will be looked upon as a-whole: theory and practice, subject-matter work and professional work, the liberalizing agencies which go to the development of the per sonality— all these will coordinate for the development of the individual who is to become a part of that most important substance of the education provided by the state. Such care ful arrangement of a training program for-its members will react favorably upon the better professionalization’ of teach ing. Administration of Selection. In selection, as in other phases of training teachers, a warning is to be sounded against any over-formalism of technique. In any situation in volving human beings as the material for substance it is to be remembered that factors are not found to be present in any scientific ratio in groups of individuals# A person who might be ruled out because pf a lack of certain qualifica tions might so richly make up in other more significant qual ifications as to be a-better teacher than a person having the first-noted qualifications in highly satisfactory degree. But this does not mean that an "accept all, let them sink or swim" policy should be adopted.. Such a course is productive of great and needless waste. Although there may be no common standard as to what constitutes a good teacher, yet if the persons responsible for teacher training in an institution come to agreement of the chief qualities necessary for a.good teacher, it will help them in the selection of student teachers It will mean that certain pre-requisites will be established. It will mean that every effort will be made to find out the real "picture" of a candidate— his weaknesses and his strengths* and that the activities planned will minister to these re- ' vealed needs* of the individual as well as 'to the general needs of the group. It will mean that the selection will not' be entirely on the basis of written objective evidence, but that meaning-ful personal conferences will be provided. It will mean that the candidate, as well as the instructional and supervisory force, will have a clear idea of the profession— its demands, requirements, difficulties, and rewards. Selective Factors. The factors at work in selection of student teachers are many; some of them are at work before he enters the training institution. These are probably to a marked degree indefinable, yet nevertheless important. They should be considered. Others are at work after he enters. These are discoverable: 1. Student teachers for secondary school are usually chosen from the senior year; frequently from status beyond the senior year. 2. The candidate has usually completed a minimum of ninety semester hours. 153 3. About twelve hours of this work is1 usually in' education, 4. A number of schools require courses in observation preliminay to the student teaching; teachers colleges leading in this tendency. ' • 5. There is no agreement as to scholastic attainment; however, it is usually considered to some extent and in some way. 6. Other considerations often taken into account in selection are: health, moral status, special courses for certain subjects, various tests--standard and otherwise, and approval by a committee. Any consideration of selective factors indicates the, urgent need for a better guidance program for those who would be teachers. Some needed changes. As Bagley-has pointed out: the organization of a machinery through the routine of which ade quate - attention will be given to the work of. each- student teacher obviously involves the danger lest routine become an end in itself, nevertheless, the question of organization of the machinery is important. Any study of this .phase of the planning for student teaching makes obvious two outstanding needs:, (1) better cooperation among the various departments, portions of the administrative machine, and individuals con cerned in the whole matter of student teaching. So long as 154 the subject-matter departments shut themselves up in little eases neatly marked with their scorn for, or indifference toward, the professional work; so long at the theory depart ments and the practice departments are at variance--or at least in ignorance as to whether or not they are at variance; so long as the various-administrative and supervisory offices fail to coordinate smoothly; Just so long will.the program of student teaching be inadequate* (2) Another outstanding need is (a) better definition of the duties of administrative 'and supervisory offices, and (b) better.training for these jobs* Particularly does it seem necessary that qualifications for supervision be recognized -as distinct from qualifications for teaching* Some facts with regard to supervision* It may be well to summarize the important facts with regard to present practice in the supervision of student teachings 1* The amount and quality of supervision are matters of prime importance in student teaching* 2• Director of student teaching usually has general charge of supervision* He is frequently assisted by subject- supervisors, who may be members of the education staff or -meiiibers of the subject staff* 3* The brunt of the work of supervision probably falls on the training supervisors. 4* The tendency in the preparation of the training supervisors is for them to be women having at least an A. B. degree, having had about seven years’ experience in high school 155 school or grade school teaching, but having had little special preparation for, or experience in, supervision. 5* fhe training supervisor has many duties besides super vision of the work of student teaching, and these duties are likely to be so heavy that she does not have a proper amount of time to devote to the supervision. 6. Leaders differ in their opinion as to whether or not - the supervisor should be a teacher of pupils. Bagley is leader of the group' who think she should be; Evendeh of those who think she should not be. 7. Supervisors of student teaching employ to a greater or a less extent all of the commonly accepted supervisory devices. Conference commonly being the chief. 8. Conference is of two sorts: individual and group. The tendency is. to employ both. The individual conference is likely to take care of the personal equation situations'; the . group conference to be a seminar or a round-table discussion period. Weaknesses of -the individual conference are likely to be: -having not set time for the conference; hence, slight ing it, lack of proper understanding between supervisor and student teacher; hence, making the personal equation less evident*.. * 9. Demonstration teaching and the making of lesson plans are also important supervisory devices. 10. Demonstration is more often used in teachers colleges than in other teacher-training institutions. 156 Practice with regard to administrative control* 1. There is, at present, no great agreement in practice as: to who shall have general administrative control of the work of practice teaching.' The tendency is to give this power - to the dean of the school of education, or to someone specifically delegated by him. . B. The ideal appears to be to have a special office of Director, with rank probably next to the Dean, and who shall be a.person especially trained for the work and having admin istrative ability of a high degree. 3. Plans of administrative control in an "own0 high school, used as laboratory school, are iikely to differ from those employed in the case of a city high school used as a laboratory school. 4. In an "own" high school the principal of the high ’ school is likely to act as a "building" principal but to cooperate closely with the director of training (who is probably the Dean of Education.) 5. In a "city" high laboratory school the control of student teaching is likely to rest entirely, with'the di rector of student teaching (a college official) while the principal of the high school exercises little control beyond taking measures to' protect the welfare of pupils taught. 6. Bagley* s idea of placing control in the hands of an Administrative Cabinet composed of Director, Subject-Matter and Theory Supervisors, Principals of Laboratory Schools, and Supervising Teachers has had much, favorable commendation. 157 7. With regard to quantity of student-teaching, the standard is set at ninety hours. Measured by this standard, the majority of both teachers colleges, other colleges, and universities are below what they should be. The median for all institutions is probably about fifty hours. 8. The tendency is to" do all the teaching in one sub ject, and probably with one class; though much in the-'present situation with regard to regular teacher assignment suggests the need for practice in more than one subject, and more than one type of class. 9. An ideal being set by, some leaders is a semester de voted entirely to student teaching. 10. In making lesson plans the tendency is toward simple forms of plans using a list of items indicating the proposed procedure. 11* Though the central tendency still is toward having detailed plans, handed in throughout the period of practice, it is recognized as better procedure to teach the student- teacher how to shorten plans and how to deviate^ from plans when the interests of his pupils demand it. 12. The Introductory Period of the student teaching work calls for the use of numerous methods of supervision to take care of the individual needs .of the student teacher. 13. The organization of a machinery through the routine of which adequate attention will be given to the work of each student teacher obviously involves the danger lest routine become an end in itself* Laboratory schools . The tendency toward the use of city high schools as laboratory schools calls for attention to several considerations. First, there is need for a situation in which the teacher-training’ institution can be assured of adequate .control; particularly of the work of supervision. •Second, there is need for a closer cooperation of.teacher : preparing institution and laboratory high school, particularly in agreement upon desirable outcomes of the work and upon principles of supervision. Third, there is need of a clear recognition of duties and powers of all officials to the end that the interests of both the high school and the teacher- training institution may be served. Fourth, there is need of a fair and clearly-understood agreement between the schools concerned. At present, teacher-preparing institutions employ three systems to furnish laboratory student-teaching conditi ons for secondary school teachers: use of "own” or campus high schools, use of city high schools, use of both own and city high schools. The normal schools and teachers colleges are still using "own" more than city high schools, though the leaders are looking upon the-use of city high schools as the best means to remedy marked weaknesses in the student-teach ing program-. The chief argument in favor of. am "own* school is that it can be under more adequate control by the teacher- training institution; and a recent plan employed by some-in stitutions is a city high school controlled by the teacher- preparing institution. Universities tend to use the city 159 high school as a laboratory school, the plans of affiliation being varied. Some colleges and some universities use both "own” and city high schools as laboratory schools.. When this is done, the tendency is to use 'the "own” school more' largely as a "demonstration" and an "experimental".school. . Rating- devices. The growing tendency to use rating . . scales as devices for measuring student teaching is in keeping with the general trend of the attempt to measure in education. As in all other phases of the administrative organization of student teaching, so here there is danger of a system which becomes elaborate for the sake of elaborateness. A scale so detailed and intricate that it furnishes a situation in which the ratei* cannot see.the forest for the trees, is, of course, quite useless. It seems probable that different sorts of scales are needed for diagnosis and check on success of vari-. ous phases of work than are needed for establishing a grade ranking. Any means.which will help administrators and super visors to take stock of the individual student teacher’s various strengths and weaknesses for the purpose of helping ■ her development are probably good to that extent. Self- evaluation is also a recognized means of assisting growth. A measurement of the teaching efficiency of the student teacher by means of the growth of pupils taught'is a procedure to which attention heeds to be given. It should also.be noted that rating— as any other grading or testing device— is sure to influence the program of work laid out. From a - study of present practice it appears that rating devices have value as a means of diagnosis and that the importance of this phase of responsibility for student teach ing is just beginning to be felt, that right rating devices may be a help in checking on the matter of student teachers* improvement, that the measuring of the efficiency of teaching done by the student teacher in terms of the progress of pupils taught'is one of the newer aspects of measuring student teach ing, that placement departments- consider adequate rating schemes of importance,• and that rating scheme's of vario.us sorts are commonly employed in determining the final grades of student teachers. To some extent--and in varying degrees— rating devices attempt to picture the.personal qualities, the professional equipment, and the skill in school and classroom technique. Rating may be simply giving a simple A, B, C, D, or Brank or grade; or it may be a matter of use of some sort of score card or rating sheet such as exists in great variety. The tendency of.these rating sheets or score cards is to: make provision for numerical ratings, have a smaller number of qualities or traits to be measured but define the qualities or traits rather specifically, make use of pupil achievement, provide for a more complete distribution, of ratings, furnish different sorts of rating sheets for different purposes. - It is suggested that it may be possible to formulate a scale similar to the Hilegas-Thorndike-Trabne Composition Scale with which to measure the traits and qualities possessed by a student teacher. The tendency is to have the final rating depend upon the joint judgment of several qualified persons, among them 161 usually being the room or critic teacher and the supervisor. Sometimes the director also takes a hand in the final ranking. . An important job. In closing his chapter on Bertrand Bussell,4:4 Will Durant falls naturally into a discussion of the possibilities in education as the means for bringing'about ' desired’changes in the world. He finishes ?/ith the words: There is nothing that man might not do if our splendid organ ization of schools and universities were properly developed and properly manned, and directed intelligently to the re construction of human character. ‘ This, and not violent revo lution, or paper legislation, is the way out of economic greed and international brutality. Man has come to control all other forms of life because he has teken more time in which to grow up; when he takes still more time, and spends that time more wisely, he may learn even to control and remake him self. Our schools are the open sesame to Utopia. If this be true, then the training of teachers becomes a matter of grave importance, and the fact that a constantly increasing attention is being* directed toward the selection and guid ance of those who would enter teaching is a hopeful indication that we are on the upward way toY/ard attainint that open sesame. ^4Will Durant, The Story of Philosophy. 162 BIBLIOGRAPHY Agnew, W. D., The Administration of Professional Schools for Teachers, Warwick and York, Inc. American Association of Teachers Colleges, Ninth Yearbook, 1950, 160 p. Armentrout ,W. D., Conduct of. Student -Teaching in Sta'te ■ Teachers- Colleges-. Tribune, Republican Publishing Company, Greeley, Colorado, 1927. . Theory, status,, and administration of student teaching in the state teachers colleges of this country. ______, "Four Major Problems in the Professional Training of Teachers,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. 10, 1924. Ashbaugh, E. J., "What Should We Guarantee in a Trained Teacher?” Educational Outlook, Vol. 4, pp. 81-88, 1930. Bagley, William C., "Teaching As a Fine Art,” Educational Method, Vol. IX, pp. 456-62, 1930. ‘ " Although the scientific attitude in teaching is important, qualities of appreciation, sympathy and devotion— insights, intuitions and inspirations— are more important than ma terials and techniques.' _____________________ "Preparing Teachers for Urban Service,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VIII. _________________, "The Status of the Critic Teacher," American School, Vol. V, 1919. Bagley, W. C. and Learned, W. L., Curricula Designed for the .. ' Preparation of Teachers, Bulletin of the Carnegie Founda tion for the Advancement of Teaching, 1917. Baldwin, Bird T.*, "Practice Schools in University Departments - of Education," Journal of ■ Educational Psychology, Vol. 2, 1911. Barr, A. S., Characteristic Differences of Good and Poor Teachers, Public School Publishing Co., Bloomington, 111. Barringer, B.E., Student Teaching in Agriculture, Bulletin No. 100, Agricultural Series 23, Federal Board of Vocational Education, 1925. 165 Bellows, Mabel H., "How Do You Evaluate Your Teaching?,” Normal Instructor, Vol. XXXVII, 1927. Gives list of standards by which some teachers judge their own* work. Bennett, Raymond D., "Standards for Certification of High School Teachers,” Ohio State Educational Research, Vol. VII, 1928. ~~~ : : : ” A study of the teaching-preparation of college gradu ates who teach in high schools. Blackhurst, J. Herbert, Directed Observation and Supervised Teaching, Ginn and Company, 1925, XII chapters, 420 p. ■ A textbook for student teachers, offering analysis of student teachers1 activity while observing and practic ing • Boyce, Arthur Clifton, Methods for Measuring Teachers* Efficiency, National Society for the Study of Education, Fourteenth Year-book, Part II, 1915.’ ; Bowden, A. 0., "Training of Critic Teachers in the United States," Journal of Educational.Research, Vol. XV, 1920. Boyden, Arthur' C., "Teaching As the Greatest Taught," Journal of Education, Vol. Ill, 1930. Published in six installments; general conclusions given in final article, pp. 534-36; stressing the personality of the teaeher. Breslich, E. R., and Gray,W. S., "The Supervision and Administration of Practice Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI, 1925. Brogan, Whit, The Work of Placement Offices in Teacher.Train ing Institutions, Coluiubla University, Contributions' to $duc at i on, .No. It34. Brown, John F., Training of Teachers for Secondary Schools in Germany and in the United States, Macmillan Company, 1911. Brueckner, F. J.,"Field Y/ork As a Means of Training Student Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. 8, 1922, Suggests use of cooperating schools for practical work. Buckingham, B. R., "Supply and Demand of Trained Teachers," Bureau of Educational Research Bulletin, Vol. 2, 1926. 164 . Buellesfield, H., "Causes of Failure Among Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. I. < Butcher, T. W . "Immediate Problems of the Teachers Colleges of the United States," Yearbook of the Amerlcal Associa tion of Teachers Colleges, 1922* Cahoqn, G. P., "The Rating of Student Teachers," University High School Journal, Vol. IX, 1930. •Carrothers, G. E., Physical Efficiency of Teachers, Teachers College, Columbia, Contributions to Education, No* 155, 19 24. • , Charters, W. D., and Waples, Douglas, The Commonwealth Teacher-Training Study. Universityof Chicago Press, Chicago, .1929* Childs, Hubert G., "Teacher .Training for Secondary Schools," High School Teacher. Vol. I, 1925* Study, based on questionnaire data, of practice at the t ime • Chittenden, M. D., "The Oswego Normal and Training School . Plan." Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI, 1925. Clem, Orlie M., "My Best Teacher," Educational Method, Vol. IX, pp. 473-76, 1930. Fifty public school teachers describe traits by which they recall best teachers; points to the influence of personality of the teacher upon the pupil. Clement, Stephen C., "Social-Backgrounds of Teachers* College Students," Journal of Educational Sociology, Vol. IV, pp. 34-37, 1930. -A study which attempts to picture the complex behavior which constitutes student life in.the State Teachers College at Buffalo, New York. Colebank, George H., "Practice Teaching in.the Colleges of The North Central Association," North Central Associa tion Quarterly, Vol. Ill,- 1930* Colvin, S. S., "Most Common Faults of Beginning High School Teachers, School and Society, Vol. VII, 1918. Connecticut Schools* Vol. VII, No. 6, 1926, Teacher- preparation number. Contains articles on the reorganization of normal school education in Connecticut; evaluation of teacher qualifi cations, experimental education, etc. 165 Cook, William A., "Some Aspects of the Success of the Critic Teacher," Educational Administration and Supervision. . . . Yol. XIY, 1928. “ “ ~ * "" Crabbs, L. M., Measuring Efficiency in Supervision and Teaching, Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 175, .1925. Creager, J. 0., "Joking Teaching a Profession by Professional izing the Training of Teachers." Educational Administra tion and Supervision, Vol. XYI, pp. 19-28, 1930. “ Davis, F. G., "Status' of Teacher Training.in Pennsylvania * Colleges," Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol..XII, 1925. De Yore, Emily, "Improvement of Practice Teaching as Sug- . gested by Graduates of One Year’s Teaching Experience," Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. XIII, 1927. Study based on interviews and questionnaire data. Dewey, John, "The Relation of Theory to Practice in Education," Third Year Book of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I, 1907. Proposes outline of the plan of observation and gradual participation which is now in common use. Dickson, Belle L., "Suggestions for the Improvement of Student Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision, January, 1931. Diemer, G. W., "A Program for the Professional Education of the Teacher in a Large City School System; the Kansas City Plan," Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. XYI, pp. 383-90, 1930.- ' Douglas, K. H., "The Assignment of Supervised Student Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. YIII, 1922. Educational Yearbook of the International Institute, Part II, 1928, T. C. Burr, Publishers. Eldridge, A. C., "The Selection of a Teacher," High School Teacher, Yol. YI, pp. 9-10, 1930, Elsea, A.F., "A Study of Student Teaching,” Peabody Journal of Education, Yol. YII, 1930. Discusses pupil achievement under student teaching, cost of student teaching, and value to student teacher. 166 Evenden, E. S. "Cooperation of Teachers of Academic Subjects With the Training School,” Supervisors of Student Teaelw ing, 1925. ■ Points out the urgent need of such cooperation and recom mends some means to attain it. Farrington, F. E., Practice Work in University ■Departments of Education, ■ Monograph of of Education, 1909. the Society of College Teachers Fitzpatrick, E.:A., and Hutson, P. W., The Scholarship of Teachers in Secondary Schools, Macmillan -and Co., Chicago, 1927. Flory, C. D., "Personality Rating of Prospective Teachers,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XVI,. • pp. 155-43, 1930. — ““ . Franzen, Carl G. F., Comparison of the Results Made on ■ Certain Standardized Tests by Pupils Taught by Regular Teachers and Those Taught by Student Teachers, Bulletin No. 4, School of Education, Indiana University, 1926. Frank, J. 0.,- "Fundamentals in Teacher-Training Curricula,” Journal of Education, Vol. 102, 1925. " Frazier, Benjamin W., Teacher Training, 1926-1928, U.S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin No. 17, 1929. Points out trends which indicate increased professional ization of teaching and of teacher training. - French,Will, "Professional Training, of Secondary School Teachers," North Central Association Quarterly, Vol. III. Fries, Charles C. , "The Training of Teachers,t r Education, Vol. XLVIII, 1927. . ■“ Discusses the problem of professionalized subject matter. Fuller, H. H., The Supervisor-Teacher Conference, School of Education Bulletin, University of Michigan Garrison, Noble Lee, Status and Work of The Training Supervisor, 1930. Teachers College, Columbia University, Contributions to. Education, No. 280, 1927. Gilchrist, Robert S., "The Educational Preparation of Secondary School*Teachers," School Review, Vol. XXXVIII, 1930. A list of books for the professional preparation of .teachers at this level, the joint compilation of several authorities. ■ .. 167 Gordy, J, P., Rise and Growth of the'Normal School Idea in the United States, United States' Bureau of Education. Circular of Information,'No* 8, 1891. Graves, J. W., "The.Amount of Time Student Teachers Spend in Practice Teaching,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI. Gaumnitz, W.H., "Provisions made by colleges and normal’ schools to give a special type of training to teachers of Junior high, schools,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI, 1925. An objective study related to curriculum making for the training of junior high school teachers. Gray, W. S., Technique of Supervising High School Practice ’ Teaching," School Review, Vol. XXVII, 1919. Haertter, Leonard D., and Smith,Dora V., "An/Investigation Into the Methods of Student Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XII, 1926. Study based on data obtained from thirty-two colleges and universities engaged in teacher training.. No, normal schools included. Haggerty, M. E., Relations of Departments of Education to 01her Pepartments of a Coliege or University, Educational Monographof the Society of College teachers of Education, 1922. Hall, Gecile B., "Studies in Student Observation of Teaching," Educational idminfstr at ion and Supervision, January ,1931. Hall-Quest, A. L., Professional- Secondary Education in Teachers Colleges, Teachers College, Columbia University Contribu tions to Education, No. 169, 1925* Harriman, P. L., "The Teacher’s Voice," North Carolina Teacher. Vol.’ IV, 1927. Discusses inprovement in tone quality, proper use of throat, enunciation, etc. Hartson, L. D.., Ah Experiment with Rating Scales, Educational Monograph of the Society of College Teachers of Education, 1925. Heckert, li. W., "Extra-Mural Practice Teaching at Miami University," Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1924. Heilman, J. D., "Child’s Loss Due to Student Teaching," School and Society, Vol. XXI, 1925. Helseth, Inga 011a, "Measuring Practice Teaching," Journal of Educational Method, Vol. VII, 1928. Lesson-plan forms given; also tables. Henderson, J. L., Distribution of a Student-Teacher^. Time. University of TexasBulletin, Wo. 1858, 1928. __________ , "Statistical Study of the Use of City School Systems by Student Teachers .in Colleges and Universities of the United States,f 1 Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1926. , • • . . , "Use of City School Systems by Student Teachers in Colleges and Universities," Supervisors of Student Teaching. 1926. - Hill, Clyde Milton,"A Decade of Progress in Teacher Training," Teachers College Columbia University Contributions to Education, No* 233, 1927. Discusses recent modifications in Missouri teachers college programs, and makes suggestions for improvement. Hill, L. B., Tentative Report on Score Card for Practice Teachers and Teachers in Service, Educational Monograph of the Society of College Teachers of Education, 1920. Hollis, A. P., "The Present Status of Practice Teaching in State Normal Schools, Pedagogical Seminary, Vol. VIII. Holmes, Henry W., "The Training of Teachers and the Making of The Nation." Harvard Alumni Bulletin, No. 30, 1927. I Address made before Harvard Graduate School of Education. Horn, J. L., "Educative Values of Practice Teaching," Journal of Educational Hesearch, Vol. VI, 1925. Hughes, J.: M., "A Study of Intelligence and of the Training of Teachers as Factors Conditioning the.Achievement of Pupils, School Review. Vol. XK3CIII, 1925. Accents the importance of selection and training in the making of good teachers. Inman, James Henry, "The Training of Iowa High School Teachers in Relation to the Subjects They Teach," University of Iowa Studies in Education. Vol. IV, No. 9, 1928. A study of 1048 graduates of 11 colleges, based on ques tionnaire data and interviews. Jacobs, W. B., "Practice Teaching for Secondary Schools at Brown University," School and Society, Vol. Ill, 1925. Johnson, Laura M., "Training School Buildings as a Factor in Teacher Training," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. TV, 1923* Judd, Charles'H., "A National Survey of Teacher Training," .Journal of National Educational Association, Vol. XIX, pp. 291-95, 1930. " “ Discusses problems which the National Survey of Teachers Training should study* . T ____________, "An Untrained Teacher— a Liability," Wisconsin Journal of Sducation» Vol. LXII, 1929. A plea for better training of teachers and for more general recognition of the necessity of expert teaching. : ___________ , Unique Character of American Secondary’ Education, Inglis Lecture, 1928, Harvard University Press Kennedy, Katherine M., "An Experiment in Directed Observation, Educational Administration and Supervision, March, 1931. Kimball, F. A., Survey of Teacher Bating in the United States, Augsburg Printing Company, Minneapolis, Minn., 1923. Kinder, J. S., "Hating Scales for Practice Teachers," Education, Vol. XLVI, October, 1925. King, Le Roy A., "The Present Status of Teacher Rating," American School Board Journal, Vol. LJDC, 1925. Klein, .Arthur J., Survey of Land-Grant Colleges, United States Office of Education, Bulletin No. 9, 19307 Knight, F. B., Qualities Related to Success in Teaching, - Teachers College Contributions to Education, 1920'. : ‘ Knight, Edgar W., "The Story of the Training of Teachers," High School Journal, Vol. X, 1927. Describes the early normal schools, the first article being concerned with those in New England for the most part, the second with those in the South, and the third with teacher training in colleges and universities. Koos, L. V., and Woody, C., "The Training of Teachers in the Accredited High Schools of the State of Washington," The Eighteenth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, Part I, 1919. Lancelot, W. H., "Developing Student Teachers in Traits of Personality," Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1929. Learned, W.. S., The Quality of the Educational Process in the United States and Europe. Bulletin Ho* BO, Carnegie Foundation for the. Advancement of Teaching, 1.927*' Lee, A. Scott, "Motives of High-School Graduates for Entering the Profession,” School Review. Vol. XXXVI, 1928. .Study based on a questionnaire sent to 826 students in Jamaica Training School for Teachers, Hew York City. Life, F. M., "Practice Teaching for High -School Teachers, > School Review, Vol* XXVI, Hov. 1918. • Ludeman, W. W., "Do Pupils Lose Under Practice Teachers?” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XIV, 1928. Tables of results are given, comparing children in prac tice schools and city schools. Madsen, I. N., "Prediction of Teaching Success," Educational Administration and Supervision. Vol. XIII, 1927. Manny, Frank, "Practice Teaching and Observation Work,” U. S. Bureau of Education, Bulletin Ho. 47, 1917. McCall, W* A., How to Measure in Education, The Macmillan Company, 1922. McCormick, Patrick J., "Trends in Teacher Training," Catholic Educational Review, Vol. XXVIII,' 1930 . A study and evaluation of facts presented in the United States Office of Education Bulletin No. 17, 1929.. McDonald, D. J., "Standards for Judging Demonstration Teaching," ■Industrial Arts Magazine, Vol. 12. McMullen, L. B., "Service Load of the Critic Teacher in State Teachers Colleges," Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1926. Mead, A. R., "Laboratory Schools for Teacher Preparation,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XIV, 1928. Report of the Research Committee of the Supervisors of Student Teaching for 1927-28. . ____ , Supervised Student Teaching, Johnson Publishing Co., Richmond, 1930, XXII' chapters, 891 p. Detailed treatment of principles, activities, administra tion. ___________, "Selection and Supervision of Practice .Teachers," The Eighteenth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 1919. 171 . V Practice Teaching for Teachers in Secondary Schools; Second Report, National Society for the Study of Education, Eighth Year-Book, Part I, 1919. , "Qualities of Merit on ’Good’and ’Poor’ Teachers," Journal of Educational Research, November 1929. Meader, J. L., "The Training School Curriculum," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XIV, 19^8. Discusses the curriculum from the standpoint of normal school training in Connecticut, Mersereau, Edward B.,-"Study of the Virtues-and Faults of Practice Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XIII, 1927, Study based on questionnaire data. Tables. Messenger, Helen Hobinson, "The Probability Table," Northern Illinois State Teacher Quarterly. Vol. XXV, No. 3, 1930, Discussion of means for better selection of student teachers. Miller, H. L., "Preparing Teachers through Participation," ' Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VIII, 1922. ^ ! ! Moehlman, Arthur B., "The Teacher; the School’s Envoy to the Public," Nation’s Schools. Vol. V, pp. 47-52, 1930. Moorehouse, Frances, Practice Teaching in the School of Education, University of Illinois Bulletin, No. 8, 1912. Morris, Elizabeth,Hunt, "Personal Traits and Success in Teaching," Teachers College, Columbia University Contri-. butions to Education, No..342, 1929. • Sets up a Trait Index for measuring probable success in teaching. Morrison, H. C., Practice of Teaching in the Secondary School, University of Chicago Press, 1926. layers, Alonzo,and Harshman, Floyd, Training Secondary School Teachers, American Book Co., Chicago, 1929. Nelson, Esther M., "Student Teaching in the Maryland'State Normal School," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XV, 1929. Newmark, D., "Student Body of Philadelphia Normal School," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI, 1925. 172 Nutt, H. W., "Fundamental Weaknesses in Teacher Training Courses," Educational Administration and Supervision. Yol. XII, 1926, pp. 200T203. Emphasizes importance of student teaching. ___________, "Essentials in the Supervision of Student Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision. Yol. Till, 1922, pp. 368-72. Stresses training a critic teacher and training super visors. Osburn, W. J., "Personal Characteristics of the Teacher," Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. YI, 1920. Patterson, Herbert,"Can the Ability of Student Teachers be. Measured?" Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. YI, 1920, pp. 215-19. Suggests an affirmative answer. ' __________’ ____, "The Place of Observation in Practice Teaching," Educational Administration*and Supervision, Yol. YII, I W T " : ‘ 1 Payne, G. E.., "Scholarship'and Success in Teaching," Journal of Educational Psychology. Yol. IX, 1918, pp. 217-19• Suggests importance of factors other than scholarship.* Payne, Bruce H., "Difficulties in the Integration of Subject Matter and Method in Training Teachers," School and Society, Yol. XXXI, 1930. Describes four theories in regard to training teachers in subject matter. Pechstein, L.. A., "The Cooperative Ideal in Teacher Training," School and Society, Yol. XYIII, 1923, pp. 271-77. Describes the Cincinnati plan. Peik, W. 33., The Professional Education of High School - Teachers, Minneapolis, The University Press, 1930, XYII Chapters, 184 p. Presents an extensive analysis of the content of certain courses, and evaluates each. Phillips, C. A., "The History of Teacher Training in the South," Peabody Journal of Education, Yol. II, 1925, pp. 313-25. With some predictions and implications for the future. 173 Pickett, Lalla H., "Student Teaching in the East Texas Teachers College,1 1 Educational Administration and Super - . vision, Yol. X, 19 24,‘"pp. 315-20. ! ' — Planzke, 0. H., and Doudra, Edgar G., The Training and Work of High School Teachers in Wisconsin, ' Madison, Wisconsin, State Department of Education, 1930. A.statistical study of new teachers in Wisconsin for the first semester of the year 1929-1930* Pryor, H. C., Graded Units In Student Teaching, Teachers College Contributions to Education, No. 202, 1926. Pulliam, Roscoe, Extra-Instructional Activities of the Teacher. Doubleday,Doran and Company, 1930, YI chapters, 459 p. Classroom management is the problem discussed, with special reference to discipline, directing extra-class activities, and professional growth for the teachers. .Reeve, W. D., Student Teaching Bulletin, University of Minnesota Fress, 1923• Richardson, W. L., "Suggestions for Teacher Training Obtained from a Study of Medical Internship," Educational Admin istration and Supervision, Yol. XI, 1925, pp. 373-393. Roberts, H.’D., "Observation and Practice at Michigan State Normal,Ypsilanti," Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1924* ______________, "Practice Teaching in Chicago,” Chicago Schools Journal, Yol. XII, 1929.- Brief study of present status in that city.. .Root, R., "The Outcomes of Supervised Student-Teaching,” T ' - Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1926. Rugg, Earle U,”YThat Educational Terminology Should a Begin ning Teacher Know,” Educational Administration and Supervision, Yol. XYI, pp. 187-95, 1930. An attempt to discover by analysis of five general- introductory” textbooks in education and a sampling of eleven educational periodicals what educational terms or concepts are most frequently mentioned. • Russell, Charles, "Laboratory Technique for Practice Teaching,” Teachers-College Record. Yol. XXIY, 1923, pp. 263-71. , "The T/estfield Conferences for Young Teachers," Elementary School Journal, Yol. XXXYIII, pp. 53-58, 1930. 174 Russell, James E., "Thirty Years of Progress in Professional Education," Virginia Teacher, Yol. VIII, 1927. A report by the dean of Teachers College, Columbia University, upon retiring from the office, after thirty years*, service. - Salvatore, Paul G., "Training Teachers for Service in the Secondary Schools," Bulletin of High Points, Vol., XII, 1930. ' ' Constructive criticism is desired in the training of the type of teachers referred to. • Santee, C. M., "Organization of Practice Teaching.in State . Normal Schools," School and Home Education, November 1917. Sauvin, Edward, "The Pittsburg Plan of High School Practice Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XI, 1924, pp. 363-67. Seamster,Frederick C., "The Efficiency of Training School and Public School Pupils," Educational Administration and Supervi si on, March, 1931. Sears, J. B., "Measurement of Teaching Efficiency," Journal off .Educational Research, Vol. IV,, Public SchooT Pub- lishing Co., Bloomington, Illinois, 1921. Schmitz, Sylvester, "The Adjustment of Teacher Training to Modern Educational Needs," Thesis (Ph.D.), Catholic University of America, Washington, D. C., 1927. Comparative.study of professional preparation of teachers in public and in Catholic, elementary and secondary schools. Seerley, Homer H., and Stone, Cliff, W., "Cooperation Between . Normal Schools and City School Systems in Teacher Train ing," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. IV, 1918, pp. 116-17. Shannon, J. R., "An Analysis of High School Supervisory Notes,” Educational Administration and Supervision,Vol. XIV, 1928. Shoninger, Yetta S., "Eunctions and Responsibilities of the Critic Teacher," Educational Administration and Super vision, Vol. VI, 1920. Shurie, Ambrose , Evenden, ‘ 1.. S., and others, "How Can We Regulate the Supply and at the Same Time Improve, the Quality of Candidates for Teaching," National Educational. Proceedings, Vol. LXVIII, 1930, pp. 820-40. A symposium of five addresses bearing upon the matter of selection of student teachers. Somers, G. T., Pedagogical Prognosis, Teachers College, . Columbia University, Contributions■to Education,' No. 140, 1924. Spaulding, F. T., ’ ’ Perplexities in Teacher Training,” Elementary School Journal, Vol. XXXVIII, pp. 270-90, 1930. Writer attempts to weigh the implications of certain proposals for the development of teacher training curriculums embodied in the Commonwealth Teacher Train ing Study, by Charters,and Waples. Sprague, H. A. , "Student Teachers’Problems and the Curriculum • Supervisors of Student Teaching, 1926. Stewart,W. F., "Ohio Plan for Training of Teachers and the Improvement of Teachers in Service," Higher Educati on Circular, Ho. IS, U. S..Bureau of Education, 1919. Stockdale, W. T. , The Background of Nebraska’s Future Teacher Unpublidti ed * thes is , University of Nebraska Teachers College,. 1928. Stockton, J. Lewis, "Making Secondary-Teaching a Profession," BllLLfiMfl. QtUSlgb. PolnlLS-, Vol. X, 1928. Storm, A. V., "How the Land-Grant Colleges are Preparing Special Teachers of Agriculture," Peabody College Con tributions. to Education,' No. 5. Turner," E. M., "Comparison of Trend of Normal School and College Entrance Requirements " Educational Administra tion and Supervision, Vol. XIi, 1926. Wade, N. A., and Fretz, R. M., "Some Practices in the Administration and Supervision of Student Teaching7 ," Educational Administration and Supervision. Vol. XII, 1926.. Says there seems tobe a conscious effort to adjust lesson plans to the needs and interests of children. Walk, G. S., "Practice Teaching and Observation'in Normal Schools," Education, Vol. XXXVIII, 1917. Welborn, E. L., "Cooperation-with Local Schools in Student Teaching," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VI, 1920. West, Joe H., "The Status and Training of Critic Teachers," Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. XIII, 1927. ■ * Based on catalogue study and questionnaire data.. 176 West, Poscoe L., "Teacher Training Through a Demonstration School," Elementary School Journal, Vol.XXV, 19-25. Describes practice and results in Trenton, New Jersey. Whitney, P. L., "Equipment of State Normal School Critic Teachers, Educational Administration and Supervision, Vol. VIII. ■ ___________ , Prediction of Teaching Success. Public School Publishing Company, Bloomington, 111. Williams, E. I. F., Demonstration Teaching and Observation in the Teacher Training Institutions of the United St at es, Educ ationaI Monograph No. XI, So c i e t'y of College Teachers of Education, 1922* _________________, "Methods of Selection and Supervision of Practice Teachers," Eighteenth Yearbook of the National Society ibr the Study of Education, 1919., Wood, Claude Rodolphus, "Does Personality Have a Definite and Consistent Use in Education?" George Peabody College Contributions to EducationT No. 56, 1929. Study based on interviews and questionnaire data from superintendents, principals, teachers, and pupils, with regard to personality traits of teachers. Yenell, Gladstone H., "A Brief Survey of Practice Teaching," High School Quarterly, Vol. XVII, pp. 184-87, 1929. Study based on questionnaire data of observation and participation in the secondary field at some state universities.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

A survey of ninth grade general science in Los Angeles County.

PDF

The teaching of vocational civics in the junior and senior high schools of the United States.

PDF

The development of occupational courses in the Los Angeles Junior College.

PDF

A study of curriculum development at the junior college level in relation to modern social and educational change

PDF

A comparison of junior and senior high school courses of study in home economics

PDF

A survey of the present status of adult education in the United States.

PDF

Comparative selective devices for shipyard apprentices

PDF

A study of the attitudes of high school teachers of vocational subjects toward vocational education and its social values

PDF

The control and prevention of dishonesty in schools

PDF

A philosophy of vocational education.

PDF

A survey of the English courses offered by the junior colleges of Southern California

PDF

The educational contribution of certain secular and religious private schools.

PDF

The status of physiology as a high school subject

PDF

A survey of the present educational situation in the Irish Free State

PDF

A study of United States support of civic action in Colombia.

PDF

The organization of thought as an aim in teaching English composition.

PDF

A study of vocational guidance in twenty non-state supported colleges and universities.

PDF

A study of gifted Negro children in the Los Angeles City Schools

PDF

The development of education in Mexico

PDF

The relationship between cultural-value orientation and achievement in three learning environments: Lecture, small-group, and self-study

Asset Metadata

Creator Vaughn, Cora B. (author)

Core Title Administrative organization of student teaching.

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

School School of Education

Degree Master of Arts

Degree Program Education

Degree Conferral Date 1931-05

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag education, administration,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Advisor Weersing, F.J. (committee chair), Adams, Fay (committee member), Ford, W.S. (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c30-67152

Unique identifier UC11220301

Identifier usctheses-c30-67152 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier EP56850.pdf

Dmrecord 67152

Document Type Thesis

Rights Vaughn, Cora B.

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the au...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus, Los Angeles, California 90089, USA