Close
About
FAQ
Home
Collections
Login
USC Login
Register
0
Selected
Invert selection
Deselect all
Deselect all
Click here to refresh results
Click here to refresh results
USC
/
Digital Library
/
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
/
Teaching Operative Dental Technics Via Television: An Experimental Inquiry
(USC Thesis Other)
Teaching Operative Dental Technics Via Television: An Experimental Inquiry
PDF
Download
Share
Open document
Flip pages
Contact Us
Contact Us
Copy asset link
Request this asset
Transcript (if available)
Content
T h is d isse r ta tio n has been 65— 6538 m ic r o film e d e x a ctly a s r e c e iv e d BLOOM, Leon W illia m , 1 9 2 0 - TEACHING O PER ATIV E D EN TA L TECHNICS VIA TELEVISION: AN EX PER IM EN TA L INQUIRY. U n iv e r sity of Southern C a lifo rn ia , P h .D ., 1965 Sp eech— T h eater University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan TEACHING OPERATIVE DENTAL TECHNICS VIA TELEVISION: AN EXPERIMENTAL INQUIRY by Leon William Bloom A Dissertation Presented to the FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY (Speech) January 1965 UNIVERSITY O F S O U T H E R N CALIFORNIA TH E GRA DUATE SC H O O L U N IV ER SITY PARK LO S A N G ELES, C A L IFO R N IA 0 0 0 0 7 This dissertation, written by ...........Le.QR.W.ilUam.i&Qom........... under the direction of his Dissertation Com mittee, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Graduate School, in partial fulfillment of requirements for the degree of D O C TO R OF P H IL O S O P H Y Dean D a te..... Janu.a jry*. . . 1 . 9 . 6 . 5 . . ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I owe a debt to Milton Dickens, Chairman, Division of Communications, for his kindness in assuming the burden of my candidacy. He has helped me to plan my work, to formulate my ideas and to conduct this study. The clarity and focus of this report derives largely, I know, from his patient and careful application of the three R's. I want to thank the members of my dissertation committee--Victor Garwood, Kenneth Harwood and Robert Rutherford— for the care they devoted to their tasks. Arthur Morrison, Chairman, Department of Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, New York University, made the facilities of the department available for this study. The contributions of the teaching staff of Sophomore Opera tive Dentistry have been inscribed on many pages of this study. George B. Sargent II, Chairman, Department of Speech, University College, New York University, made it possible for me to conduct this study and carry on my regular University duties. During the course of this study, I received the assistance of a good many people whose knowledge and ex perience are greater than my own. Space does not allow me to mention all of them here. I wish to thank Roy Calogeras for his statistical guidance and James Davenport for assistance with the Teacher Rating Scale. Most of the calculation work was programmed for the IBM 1620 by Jeffrey Kulick. This study was assisted, in part, by a grant from the National Defense Education Act, 1958, Title VII, Grant number 7-42-0930-065. For M., after all, and for K. and T., now gone All gone Much Love TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ....................................... ii LIST OF T A B L E S ..........................................viii LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS................................. xii Chapter I. THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS .... 1 Origin of the Problem Statement of the Problem Significance of the Problem Definitions of Terms Organization of the Remainder of the Study II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE................... 9 III. SUBJECTS, MATERIALS AND PROCEDURES ......... 41 The Plan of the Course The Plan of the Experiment Subjects Written Examinations Practical Grading Criteria Construction of Attitude Measurements Teacher Rating Scale IV. PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA . . . 102 Achieved Written and Practical Grades Attitudes Toward the Teachers and the Teaching of the Course v Chapter Page Interaction between Predicted Grades and Attitudes Interaction between Achieved Grades and Attitudes Attitudes Toward TV as a Teaching Medium Correlations between Attitude Measurements V. SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS ......... 169 Summary Findings Discussion Implications APPENDIXES Appendix A: Televised Dental Lessons: Sophomore Operative Dentistry 1960-61 190 Appendix B: A Television Production Script: Sophomore Operative Dentistry 1960-61 194 Appendix C: Predicted Written and Predicted Practical Grades for CV and TV Students.............................. 197 Appendix D: Revised Sophomore Operative Dental Weighted Laboratory Grading Sheet 1960-61 202 Appendix E: Laboratory Lecturer Scale ........... 205 Appendix F: Laboratory Demonstrator Scale .... 209 Appendix G: Visual Materials Scale ................ 212 Appendix H: Pre-Expectancy Inventory .............. 215 vi Page Appendix I: Qualifications of Judges for Teacher Rating Scale................. 224 Appendix J: Achieved Written and Achieved Practical Grades for CV and TV Students............................ 227 Appendix K: Attitude Scores of CV Students . . . 232 Appendix L: Attitude Scores of TV Students . . . 238 BIBLIOGRAPHY ........................................... 239 vii LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Regression Coefficients of Ten Independent Variables for Two Predicted Grades: Sophomore Class 1959-60....... ................ 66 2. The Means, Standard Deviation and £'s for Two Predicted Composite Grades for Matched CV and TV Classes: Sophomore Class 1960-61 • 68 3. Coefficients of Concordance and Level of Significance for Ten Dental Preparations . . 76 4. The Means, Standard Deviations and N's for the Achieved Composite Written Grades and Achieved Composite Practical Grades for 1959-60 and 1960-61 77 5. Number of Positive and Negative Thurstone- Items According to Content Category .... 83 6. Thurstone-Item Summary: Item Content Classified by Scale Category and Positive and Negative F o r m a t ................... 84 7. Administration Time of Attitude Measurements for CV and TV Classes: Sophomore Class 1960-61 91 8. Significant Comparisons for the Teacher Rating Scale by Means of Fisher's Exact Probability T e s t ........................ 98 9. The Means and _t's for the Achieved Written and Achieved Practical Grades for CV and TV Classes: Trimesters I, II, and III . . . 106 viii Table Page 10. The Adjusted Means and Adjusted F's for Achieved Written and Achieved Practical Grades: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ......... 107 11. The Means, N's and t,'s for Top, Middle and Low Written-Aptitude Trichotomies for CV and TV Classes...................... 113 12. The Means, N's and t.' s on Achieved Written Grades for Each Written-Aptitude Tricho tomy: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ........... 114 13. The Adjusted Means and Adjusted F's for Achieved Written Grades for Each Written Aptitude Trichotomy: Trimesters I, II, and III ............................... 115 14. The Means, N's and t's for Top, Middle and Low Practical-Aptitude Trichotomies for CV and TV Classes ........................... 118 15. The Means, N's and t's on Achieved Practical Grades for Each Practical Aptitude Tri chotomy: Trimesters I, II, and III .... 119 16. The Adjusted Means and Adjusted F's for Achieved Practical Grades for Each Predicted Practical Aptitude Trichotomy: Trimesters I, II, and I I I .................. 120 17. The Kuder-Richardson 20 Reliability for Each Attitude Measurement in the CV and TV Classes: Trimesters I, II, and III . . . 124 18. The LL Scale: The Means and t,'s for the CV and TV Classes: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ...................................... 127 19. The LL Scale: The t's for Across-Time Comparisons within Each of the CV and TV ix Table Page Classes and for Across-Time and Across- Class Comparisons: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ...................................... 128 20. The LD Scale: The Means and .t's for the CV and TV Classes: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ...................................... 132 21. The LD Scale: The t's for Across-Time Comparisons within Each of the CV and TV Classes and for Across-Time and Across-Class Comparisons: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ............................... 133 22. The VM Scale: The Means and Across-Class t's for the CV and TV Classes: Trimes ters I, II, and I I I 138 23. The VM Scale: The t's for Across-Time Comparisons within Each of the CV and TV Classes and for Across-Time and Across-Class Comparisons: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ............................... 139 24. The CV Class: The Chi-Square Value for Both Predicted Composite Written and Practical Grades and Each Attitude Measure ment: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ............ 144 25. The TV Class: The Chi-Square Value for Both Predicted Composite Written and Practical Grades and Each Attitude Measure ment: Trimesters I, II, and I I I ............ 146 26. The CV Class: The Chi-Square Value for Achieved Written and Achieved Practical Grades and Each Attitude Measurement: Trimesters I, II, and I I I .................. 149 x Table 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. The TV Class: The Chi-Square Value for Achieved Written and Achieved Practical Grades and Each Attitude Measurement: Trimesters I, II, and III .................. The Pre- and Post-EX Inventories: The Means and t's for Across-Class and Within-Class Comparisons for the CV and TV Classes: Trimesters I, II, and III . The CV Class: Zero Order Correlations between Selected Attitude Measurements and .t's for Tests of Significance between Correlations: Trimesters I, II, and III . . The CV Class: First Order Partial Corre lation between Selected Attitude Measure ments and t's for Tests of Significance between Correlations: Trimesters I, II, and III ...................................... The TV Class: Zero Order Correlations between Selected Attitude Measurements and t.'s for Tests of Significance between Correlations: Trimesters I, II, and III . . The TV Class: First Order Partial Corre lation between Selected Attitude Measure ments and t.'s for Tests of Significance between Correlations: Trimesters I, II, and III ...................................... Page 150 155 16 0 161 164 165 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS Figure Page 1. Operative Technic Laboratory— Floor Plan— TV Group Student Identification Numbers...................................... 44 2. Operative Technic Laboratory— Floor Plan Front Wall Detail from Figure 1 , . . 45 3. Operative Technic Laboratory— Conventional Group— Student Identification Seating Numbers...................................... 46 4. Operative Technic Laboratory— Transverse Section between Rows G and H Viewing Toward Right Wall........................... 47 5. Operative Technic Laboratory— Front View-- Student D e s k ............................... 48 6 . Operative Technic Laboratory-Top View-- Student D e s k ............................... 49 7. TV Studio Floor P l a n ......................... 56 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND DEFINITIONS OF TERMS Origin of the Problem The potentialities of television as a teaching instrument have been explored by numerous investigators during recent years. A typical research approach has been to compare television teaching with conventional classroom teaching. In most of these studies, however, the materials taught were predominantly conceptual (e.g., history), and the teaching method was predominantly verbal (e.g., lec tures) , No major study was found which dealt with the teaching of manual or digital skills, the teaching of which normally requires heavy emphasis on "how-to-do-it" demon strations . This latter type of subject matter and its attendant teaching method appeared to be well illustrated by the course in Sophomore Operative Dentistry offered by the College of Dentistry at New York University. Theoretically, it seemed reasonable that closed- circuit television ought to be especially well adapted to the teaching-by-demonstration of operative dentistry techniques. This line of reasoning was explored by the investigator in discussions with members of the faculty and administration of the College of Dentistry. The result was that during the academic year of 1958-59 arrangements were made for a two-year series of experiments testing the effectiveness of television teaching in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. The school year of 1959-60 was devoted to the development of various grading systems, attitude scales, and other necessary experimental tools. The final experi ments were conducted throughout the three trimesters of the academic year of 1960-61. Statement of the Problem The general problem of this study was to compare the effectiveness of television teaching with conventional teaching of Sophomore Operative Dentistry. This general problem was subdivided into the following constituent null hypotheses: 1. There is no significant difference between the grades achieved in the conventional class and the grades achieved in the television class. This hypothesis was subdivided to permit comparisons between two different types of grades (the grades for written work and the grades for practical work), and also comparisons between high aptitude, middle aptitude, and low aptitude students. 2. There is no significant difference in attitudes toward the course: a. within each trimester, between the conven tional class and the television class, b. within each class, between any two tri mesters, and c. between any trimester for one class and any trimester for the other class. This hypothesis was further subdivided to permit comparisons of attitudes toward the Laboratory Lecturer, attitudes toward the Laboratory Demonstrators, and attitudes toward the Visual Materials used in teaching the course. 3. There is no significant interaction between predicted grades and measurements of attitudes toward the course. This hypothesis was subdivided to permit compari sons between two types of predicted grades (written and practical), and within the conventional and television classes. 4. There is no significant interaction between achieved grades and measurements of attitudes toward the course. This hypothesis was subdivided to permit compari sons between the written grades and the practical grades and, also, comparisons within each class (conventional and television). 5. There is no significant difference between students' attitudes toward television as a teaching medium when those attitudes are measured before the beginning of the course and when measurements are made at the close of each trimester. This hypothesis was subdivided to permit comparisons both within and between the two classes (con ventional and television). 6. There is no significant correlation within each class (conventional and television) between any of the several attitude measurements. This hypothesis was sub divided to permit comparisons both within and between tri mesters . In Chapter IV the above hypotheses are presented in greater detail in order to clarify the steps taken in the statistical processing of the data Significance of the Problem This study was thought to be significant for several reasons. In general, at the time of this study, many leading educators were intrigued by the potentialities and curious about the limitations of television as a new teach ing medium? they were especially interested because of the rapidly rising school enrollments. More specifically, however, this study originated from a desire to fill a research gap. Previous studies of teaching by television had focused on traditionally "lecture" subjects, such as history, general psychology, or English literature. Little experimental research had focused on the teaching of sub jects requiring manual skills, such as operative dentistry. A priori reasoning suggested that visual demonstration might be a uniquely common bond between the nature of the tele vision medium and the nature of the task of teaching manual skills. The above line of reasoning appealed not only to this experimenter but also to the Dean and to the Faculty of the College of Dentistry of New York University. There fore a research proposal was jointly evolved. Definitions of Terms Achieved grades.— The grades received by a student for work submitted (cf. definition below of "predicted grades") . Aptitude.— Those students in the top predicted third of each class are defined as "high-aptitude" third. Those in the bottom predicted third are defined as "low- aptitude" third. Those in the middle predicted third are said to be in the "middle aptitude" third. Conventional class.— A class in Sophomore Operative Dentistry that was taught without television (the control group). Expectancy inventory.--A series of twenty-five items in which students were asked to rate their expecta tions of television teaching in comparison with convention al teaching. Laboratory demonstrator scale.— A series of eight een items that focused on attitudes toward laboratory demonstration work in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. Laboratory lecturer scale.--A series of thirty-two items that focused on attitudes toward laboratory lecture work in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. Practical grades.— The grades received for practical dental preparations (i.e., laboratory projects) in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. Predicted grades.— On the basis of previous grades and on the basis of the American Dental Association apti tude test, each student's written and practical grade was estimated by means of two multiple correlation equations (cf. definition above of "achieved grades"). Television class.--The class in Sophomore Operative Dentistry that was taught to a large degree by means of television (the experimental group). Trimester.— At the time of this experiment, 1960-61, the academic year of thirty-two weeks at the College of Dentistry, New York University, was divided into thirds, or trimesters, of eleven, eleven and ten weeks each. Visual materials scale.— A series of eighteen items that focused on attitudes toward the visual materials used in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. Organization of the Remainder of the Study A review of the literature will be presented in Chapter II. This will be followed by a description of the subjects, materials, and procedures used in this study (Chapter III). The first section of this chapter will describe the organization and method of teaching in Sopho more Operative Dentistry. Then will come the plan of the experiment, a description of the students used in this experiment, and the procedures by which they were assigned to conventional or television classes. This will be suc ceeded by a description of the procedures used to construct the written examinations and the method used to grade practical work in the laboratory. After this, the proced ures by which attitude scales and inventories were con structed will be described. Chapter III will close with a description of a rating scale used by qualified judges to evaluate the similarity in lessons. Chapter IV will pre sent the data and interpret them. The last chapter, Chap ter V, will summarize, list the findings, and discuss the implications. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE In 1959 the Ford Foundation and the Fund for the Advancement of Education summarized the results of "teach ing by television" studies it had sponsored for the previ ous five years in twenty-five colleges and 100 school sys tems by saying that out of 110 studies in which legitimate comparisons could be made as a result of matching and pre testing between conventional and television groups, thirty- eight studies showed statistically significant differences in the achievement of conventional versus television classes and that twenty-nine of these differences were in favor of television teaching, with nine in favor of conventional teaching. ^ The two most extensive of this series of studies in higher education took place at Pennsylvania State Univer sity from 1954 to 1958. In the first of these studies ^Teaching by Television. A Report from the Ford Foundation and the Fund for the Advancement of Education (New York: Ford Foundation, 1959), p. 54. 9 10 courses taught over television were deliberately kept as o similar as possible to conventional teaching. In this study the courses used for experimental purposes were a lecture-demonstration section of General Chemistry, two full semesters of General Psychology and one semester of the Psychology of Marriage.^ The criteria used to evaluate the data from these courses were objective course examina tions, attitudes toward instruction, change in attitudes in relation to course objectives, and students' selection of 4 future courses. The attitudinal criteria toward instruc tion were measured by an informal check list containing open-ended questions, and a Guttman scale to examine per sonal relevance of the course.’ ’ Television students were also asked to estimate probable learning and interest in comparison with conventional instruction--at different 6 times during the year. This study used three groups of students. One group was made up of conventional classes. ^Ibid., p . 11. 3c. R. Carpenter and L. P. Greenhill, Instructional Television Research, Project No. 1, An Investigation of Closed Circuit Television Courses for Teaching University Courses (University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State Univer sity, 1955), pp. 16-19. 4Ibid., p. 39. 5Ibid.. p. 41ff. 6Ibid. . p. 48. 11 The second was made up of television classes that were held in the television production room and the third group was made up of television classes in the more familiar tele vision reception rooms. In General Chemistry the same series of lecturers taught students in both conventional and television classes so that each student received the same lectures and demon strations from the same instructors.^ The Psychology of Marriage classes did not have a control group and one instructor presented the lecture to the television classes. In General Psychology, however, two instructors each taught Q both control and experimental classes. The results of this study showed that, generally speaking, so far as several tests of academic achievement go, the differences among groups were not statistically significant.^ In terms of general attitudes toward tele vision, television was generally accepted. The authors of this study concluded that the degree to which their conclusions could be generalized to course's, methods and students other than those samples in their work ^Ibid., p. 21. ^Ibid., p. 18. ^Ibid., p. 48. ~^Ibid. , p. 54. 12 remained to be determined."^ In the second study at Pennsylvania State Univer sity from 1955 to 1957 some twenty undergraduate courses 1 P were examined. c on the basis of comparisons for seven of these courses with the same instructors teaching conven- 13 tional and television sections, the authors concluded that controlled experiments with the same teachers were unlikely to yield statistically significant differences between achievement scores.^ This study also examined the effects on achievement l s of distance from the source of instruction; the effect on achievement of varied class size in the television room; the significance of the variation in composition of the television classes in terms of varying sex, as well as different kinds and amounts of television class super- 16 vision. Further factors were as follows: rotation of 1J-Ibid. . p. 48. . r . Carpenter and L. P. Greenhill, Instruction al Television Research, Project No. 2, An Investigation of Closed Circuit Television for Teaching University Courses (University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University, 1958), p. 4ff. 13Ibid.. p. 10. 14Ibid.. p. 18. 15Ibid.. p. 18. 16Ibid.. p. 23. . 13 students through television and conventional instruction; different ways of providing opportunities for discussion and question-answer exchanges; variation in television * teaching methods; measurements of the effect of television on course-related attitudes toward social issues, careers, et cetera,^ Instead of using attitude scales, this study com pared individual verbal preferences for future classes— television or conventional— with students' behavioral 18 choices. Generally, there was little relation between verbally expressed choice and behavioral choice and little relation, as well, between achievement in courses and behavioral choice. Another technique used to assess student attitudes was to allow television classes to decide by majority vote whether to continue with television. These choices were made after rotating several classes through television and conventional instruction. Analysis of student choices showed that differences between television and conventional instruction were not great enough to result in very strong 17Ibid.. p. 36. 18Ibid.. pp. 73-74. 14 19 negative or positive preferences for either procedure. Another pair of studies, also sponsored by the Fund for the Advancement of Education, was conducted at Miami University, Oxford, Ohio. These studies included compari sons with large classes as well as conventional and tele vision instruction. In the first study at Miami, each 20 class used the teaching techniques best suited to it. The courses included most of the lower division curriculum. The hypotheses were concerned with several factors: (1) achievement and its interaction with ability and attitude, (2) student perception of instructor and course effective ness, (3) attitudes toward conventional instruction as well as toward large classes, and (4) influence of instructor . . 21 effectiveness and ability on attitudes toward television. The experimental and control groups at Miami were taught by the same instructor; the students in each of these groups were matched prior to the start of the study on several standardized achievement tests and grade point 19Ibid.. p. 82. 2°F. g . Macomber, Experimental Study in Instruc tional Procedures (Oxford, Ohio: Miami University, 1956), p . 3 . ^ Ibid. . pp. 16-17. average. The matching procedure yielded no statistically 22 significant differences. There were two general criteria final examination and three Thurstone-type attitude scales 23 to instructor, to course, and to television. This study presented the following findings: (1) television presentation did not affect achievement, gener ally, (2) level of ability did not interact with section assignment to determine achievement, (3) achievement re mained constant regardless of attitude, generally, (4) there were no significant differences between effectiveness ratings of an instructor on television as compared with the same instructor in the conventional classroom, (5) there was a pronounced tendency for conventional course content to be rated more favorably than television course content, (6) no consistent generalization could be made on -student attitudes toward television, (7) in choosing future types of instruction, students preferred conventional teaching, (8) the most disturbing aspect of television to students was lack of contact with the instructor, (9) attitudes toward television shifted negatively as the term went on, (10) there was an inverse relationship between academic ^^Ibid., p . 18. ^ Ibid. . pp. 18-20. ability and television attitude although this relation was overcome in courses taught by instructors receiving a high instructor rating, and (11) a preliminary bias about tele vision was kept during the term. In addition, this study asked whether or not the comparative effectiveness of television may not have been partially dependent upon the 24 type of subject matter taught. 25 The second study at Miami used twenty departments and stressed further improvement in the methods of tele- 26 vision teaching. The instructors were allowed to organize the courses as they wished so that no comparisons could be 27 made among courses. However, the conventional and tele- 28 vision instructor were the same. One new feature of this 29 . . study was a brief course content pretest. In addition, course related attitudes and such areas as critical think ing, synthesis, et cetera, were measured. The conventional and television classes were matched on several academic 24 Ibid.. pp. 41-42. q . Macomber, Experimental Study in Instruc tional Procedures. Report No. 2 (Oxford, Ohio: Miami Uni versity, 1957), p. 7. 26Ibid.. p. 6. ^7Ibid.. p. 8. ^8Ibid. 2^Ibid. 17 30 aptitude tests. This second Miami study showed that (1) students in television generally acquired about as much basic subject matter as did conventional students, (2) in general, there was no justification for selecting students for assignment to either conventional or television classes on the basis of their ability, (3) student attitudes toward the method of instruction did not influence achievement, (4) there was a pronounced tendency for instructors to be rated as more effective in conventional classes than on television, (5) generally, most students in television classes preferred to be in the conventional class, (6) the instructor was a major determinant of student attitudes toward television, (7) students became progressively disenchanted with tele vision as the year progressed, (8) attitudes toward tele vision were independent of the level of academic ability, and (9) preliminary biases toward television persisted 31 t h r o u g h o u t t h e y e a r . R o b e r t D r e h e r a n d W a l c o t t H . B e a t t y , i n a F u n d f o r t h e A d v a n c e m e n t o f E d u c a t i o n s t u d y a t S a n F r a n c i s c o S t a t e 3QIbid. 31Ibid.. pp. 2-4. 32 C o l l e g e , f o c u s e d o n a s o m e w h a t d i f f e r e n t p r o b l e m . T h e y set up three teaching groups: (1) a control group taking conventional instruction on the campus, (2) an on-campus 33 television class, and (3) an at-home television group. The same instructors were used for conventional and tele vision instruction. In this study four types of courses were used: three freshman classes in Psychology, Basic Communication, Creative Arts and one sophomore class in 34 Economics. The teaching procedure in each class made use of television's unique facilities. The authors say it is an open question, therefore, whether the courses are really comparable. The hypotheses focused on four areas: (1) increase i n k n o w l e d g e , ( 2 ) c o u r s e - r e l a t e d a t t i t u d e s , i . e . , i n c r e a s e in insight and.self acceptance, (3) attitudes toward learning and sociometric relations, and (4) student'suit- . 3 5 ability for teaching media. D r e h e r a n d B e a t t y d i d n o t m a t c h s t u d e n t s b e c a u s e o f ■ ^ R o b e r t e . D r e h e r a n d W. H . B e a t t y , A n E x p e r i m e n t a l S t u d y o f C o l l e g e I n s t r u c t i o n U s i n g B r o a d c a s t T e l e v i s i o n (San Francisco, Calif.: San Francisco State College, 1958), 3^Ibid. . p. 9. 34jbid., p# ^.1. 35Ibid.. pp. 8-9. 19 administrative difficulties and, for the same reason, stu dents at San Francisco State College could not be random- 36 lzed. However, the following pretest comparisons were made: (1) Edwards' Personal Preference Schedule— to dis cover possible differences in motivational bias, (2) Auding Test, Form G, to examine possible differences in deriving meaning from spoken material, (3) standardized college entrance tests— the ACE and School and College Ability Test 37 (SCAT), and (4) previous grade point averages. Dreher a n d B e a t t y t r i c h o t o m i z e d t h e i r d a t a o n t h e b a s i s o f g r a d e p o i n t a v e r a g e , t h e ACE a n d SCAT i n o r d e r t o e x a m i n e a b i l i t y interaction.^ The San Francisco results demonstrated that (1) on the basis of pretest data, the various conventional and 39 television groups were comparable, (2) there were no d i f f e r e n c e s i n a c h i e v e m e n t b e t w e e n c o n v e n t i o n a l a n d t e l e - 40 vision classes, (3) the high grade point average students in Psychology did better in both television sections than in conventional classes, although this was not true for 36Ibid.. p. 10. 37Ibid.. pp. 12-13. 38Ibid.. p. 24. 39Ibid.. p. 20. 40Ibid., p. 22. 20 41 high grade point average students in Economics, (4) stu dents with low grade point average showed equal gains in achievement regardless of teaching media but this was not true, however, for on-campus television sections in Psychol- 42 ogy, (5) generally, with regard to gains in knowledge, high aptitude students taught by television tended to gain significantly more than those in the conventional classroom and low aptitude students showed comparable gains regard- 43 less of teaching media, (6) neither high nor low auding ability affected, differentially, the performance of stu- 44 dents in conventional or television classes, and (7) there was no clear-cut indication that the need to achieve, as measured by Edwards' Personal Preference Schedule, was related to performance of students in each of the media 45 groups. An informal questionnaire, limited in scope, yield ed a great many findings difficult to describe briefly. Generally speaking, though, at-home television students reacted favorably while on-campus television students were somewhat negative. So far as future choice of teaching 41Ibid.. p. 24. 42Ibid.. p. 24. 43Ibid.. p. 29. 44Ibid.. p. 30. 45Ibid.. p. 31. 21 46 media, most students chose regular instruction. Another Fund for the Advancement of Education study in the state of Oregon used simultaneous telecasts to three or four colleges throughout the state to first and second year students in History, Chemistry, English, and Educa- 47 tion. Most often, television teaching was supplemented by regular class instruction. In one course— History--the entire course was televised. Two of the purposes of the state-wide Oregon Study were to evaluate the effectiveness of television teaching as opposed to conventional teaching and to determine student 48 attitudes. In addition, problems relating to inter- institutional television were investigated as well as 49 faculty attitudes. The achievement criteria were final examinations. The ACE was used as a measure of "initial" academic ability in order to provide a basis for use of 50 covariance. The Oregon study also examined the inter action both of attitudes and aptitudes and of attitudes and 46Ibid.. p. 38. 4 ? G l e n n starlin and John E. Lallas, Inter-Institu tional Teaching by Television in the Oregon System of High er Education. Report No. 1 (Eugene, Oregon: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1960), p. 5. 4®Ibid., p . 4. 49Ibid. 50Ibid.. p. 12. grades. In order to investigate attitudes, questionnaires, Likert attitude scales, interviews and controlled observa- 52 tions were used. These were administered pre-, during and post-. When examining pre-experimental attitude, the Oregon study found that a large majority felt that they would learn as much or more from television, that the qual ity of television would be the same as or better than con ventional instruction, that the calibre of professors would be the same or better; and a majority felt, also, that attention in television classes would be the same as or better than in conventional classes. A majority were con cerned about the possibility of less personal contact and 53 about the lack of opportunity for asking questions. From a post-test point of view, the majority of students in Chemistry and Literature seemed to feel that televised instruction was equal to or better than conven tional instruction with respect to the following factors: quality of lecture, standards of student achievement, visual aids and degree of student satisfaction from 5^Ibid., p . 40. 53Ibid.. p. 25. 52Ibid.. p. 22. lectures. The results of this study were in line with the general trend of studies showing that television students did at least as well on grades.^ The Oregon study, in underscoring the weight of evidence that showed no statisti cally significant difference between grades on conventional and television instruction, noted that there was no justi fication for continuing comparative effectiveness studies except for unique elements.^ In examining the relation between pre-experimental attitudes and post-experimental attitudes to inter-institu tional television, three conclusions were reached: (1) at the end of the first term, student responses showed a sig nificant increase in approval of inter-institutional tele vision in Chemistry when compared with their pre-experimen- tal opinion, (2) in post-experimental responses, History students showed a slight difference from pre-experimental estimates, (3) in Education the post-experimental accept ance in two institutions showed a slight increase over pre-experimental acceptance while at another institution 54Ibid., p. 38. 55Ibid.. p. 21. 56Ibid. 24 there was a decrease.^ Apparently, pre-experimental attitudes toward inter-institutional television can be modified by partici pation in a television course; attitudes need not necessar ily undergo a "disenchantment’ 1 effect. What prompted the present study was a very narrow observation: at the time of the start of this study, no experiment had examined full-scale professional instruction for a graduate degree whose content was highly "visual" and largely concerned with imparting facility in manual manipu lation for a full academic year; no study had been made of the teaching of the technics of operative dentistry via television. It seemed reasonable to suppose that tele vision would be well adapted to the teaching of a course of this type. The most extensive series of experiments comparing conventional and television instruction, from the point of view of examining a variety of education problems and of designing research to answer immediate questions, was carried out by the Departments of the Army and of the Navy of the United States. Some of these studies examined the 57Ibid.. p. 39. 25 suitability of differing course content and, although there seem to be many advantages to teaching manual skills visu ally, only one study dealt with manual techniques. Runyon, Desiderato and Kanner concluded after three hours of training calling for manipulation of small parts: "Television instruction is particularly adaptable to training situations which require manipulation of small 58 equipment pieces by the trainees." They noted also that the applicability of military studies to advanced graduate work was unknown and raised the problem of the distinction 59 between civilian and military pedagogy. With the exception of the Oregon study, all of these studies were available in 1958. They were selected for review because they dealt with post-high school educa tion (some Fund for the Advancement of Education studies were concerned with elementary and high school), and be cause they focused on particular experimental methodologies in dealing with relationships between conventional and 58r . p. Runyon, O. L. Desiderato and J. H. Kanner, "Factors Leading to Effective Television Instruction," Audio-Visual Communication Review. Ill (Summer, 1955), 267- 268. 59 j. h . Kanner, R. P. Runyon and O. L. Desiderato, "Television as a Training and Educational Medium," Audio- Visual Communication Review. Ill (Summer, 1955), 164. 26 television teaching. Plans for the present study were completed during 1958 after examination of these studies. After these plans were completed and also after this study was underway additional studies appeared dealing with teaching by television. Some of these later studies having a particular relation in terms of methodology, findings, or subject matter are reported below. In a dissertation at Syracuse University completed in 1958 Bailey reported on the teaching of first semester general college physics via televisionMaximum use was made of visual material, and demonstration equipment was used in nearly every lecture. Film strips were also used. The same test was used as a pre-test measure and at the end of the term. Change from pre-test score was used as a gauge of student achievement. Examination of pre-test data showed no significant differences between conventional and television classes. The final examinations yielded no significant differences between the two types of instruc tion. Generally speaking, also, student attitudes were not favorable toward television at the end of the course. ^Herbert S. Bailey, "Teaching Physics in Closed- Circuit Television" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Syra cuse University, Syracuse, N. Y., 1958), Abstract, Disser tation Abstracts. 19:1947, No. 8, 1959. 27 In a Fund for the Advancement of Education study Honig, Seibert and Moses reported on the utilization of audiovisual aids in the teaching of general chemistry laboratory work at Purdue University during the Fall 1957 6 X semester. Students were divided into conventional and television sections. The television sections were taught as follows: at the start of the laboratory period a brief lecture was presented to all students for about ten to 62 fifteen minutes via television. After the lecture students were allowed to choose one of several special viewing rooms where detailed laboratory methods were pre sented either by means of slides, telecast films, or live 6 3 t e l e v i s i o n . H o w e v e r , t h e s e c h o i c e s w e r e o p t i o n a l a n d 64 students could omit this activity if they desired. The Purdue study concluded, using a variety of questionnaires, that experimental attitudes toward tele vision were significantly higher than conventional ^J. M. Honig, W. S. Seibert, and D. F. Moses, The Utilization of Audio-Visual Aids in the General Chemistry Laboratory Work at Purdue University (Lafayette, Indiana: Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, May, 1958), p . 1. 6^Ibid., p . 6. ^^Ibid., pp. 2, 4. k^Ibid.f p . 6. 28 6 5 attitudes, that both control and experimental attitudes became less favorable as the term progressed, and most 66 important, that there were no significant differences on laboratory grades and on final examination between conven- 67 tional and experimental students. In 1960 Seibert and Honig reported on a small scale 68 chemistry laboratory study at Purdue coverxng two lessons 69 and taking twenty to thirty minutes each. A part of each 70 lesson was televised film. The only important aspect of this report, from the point of view of this study, was the 71 very careful means used to evaluate laboratory work. A weighted scoring sheet was developed, listing the several steps needed to perform the laboratory work properly. The reliability of the laboratory scores was .89. A vocabulary test was used as a pre-test to check inter-group compara- 72 bility and to serve as a covariate. There were no signi- 73 ficant differences between the vocabulary scores. In 65Ibid., p. 22. 66Ibid. 67Ibid.. p. 38. 68W. F. Seibert and J. M . Honig, "A Brief Study of Televised Laboratory Instruction," Audio-Visual Communica tion Review. VIII (May-June, 1960), 117. 69Ibid., p. 118. 7QIbid.. p. 117. 71Ibid.. p. 117. 72Ibid.. p. 118. 73Ibid. 29 addition pre-tested, written, objective knowledge tests 74 w e r e g i v e n . S i e b e r t a n d H o n i g f e l t t h a t t h e k n o w l e d g e 75 test was not sufficiently discriminating; stating this differently, no significant differences were found on grades between classes. Also, no item in itself was 76 sufficiently discriminative between groups. The authors examined the step-by-step laboratory grading criteria in order to find specific strengths and weaknesses in the conventional and television classes. They found that some items did discriminate between groups but also that items that were poorly covered in class, according to teachers' 77 judgment, did discriminate between groups. Two United States Army studies appeared in 1960 and 1961— both dealing with a comparison of black-and-white versus color television. Three hundred and sixty-eight 78 enlisted men were involved in an eleven-lesson course in 79 e l e c t r o n i c s a n d p h o t o g r a p h y . T e s t i n g w a s c a r r i e d o u t 74Ibid.. p. 117. 75Ibid.. p. 120. 76Ibid.. p. 121. 77Ibid.. pp. 121-122. 7®J. H. Kanner and A. J. Rosenstein, "Television in Army Training: Color vs. Black and White," Audio-Visual Communication Review. VIII (November-December, 1960), 247. 79Ibid.. p. 245. 30 80 immediately after each lesson. The course content was not concerned with laboratory work. This study, and a second or follow-up Army color study which increased the 81 use of color sharply over their first study, came to the same conclusion; there were no significant differences in trainee learning between black-and-white and color class- 82, 83 es . McGuire and his associates at the University of Mississippi Medical School were also concerned with teach- 84 ing of demonstration work. They evaluated the conven tional and television teaching of one lesson— effects of pharmacological agents on contraction of a nictitating membrane. However, this did not involve manipulating learning and the immediate test was written. McGuire found 80Ibid.. p. 246. 8^A. J. Rosenstein and J. H. Kanner, "Television and Army Training: Color vs. Black and White," Audio-Visual Communications Review. IX (January-February, 1961), 47. 8^Ibid., p . 48. 88Kanner and Rosenstein, loc. cit.. p. 252. 84F. L. McGuire, F. J. Moore, C. A. Harrison and R. E. Riley, "The Efficiency of Television as Applied to the Use of Laboratory Demonstration in Teaching," Journal of Medical Education. XXXVI (June, 1961), 715-716. 31 no statistically significant difference between his two i 85 classes. Grossman and his associates used three successive classes of junior students in clinical endodontics and root 86 resection at the University of Pennsylvania Dental School. Each class was divided into four informally randomized groups of about thirty students each. Group I received chairside demonstrations. This group, in turn, was com posed of four subgroups--each receiving separate demonstra tions. Group II, as a unit, received demonstrations in the television studio. This group could either observe the screen or the demonstrator. Group III, also as a unit, was in a television reception room, however. Group IV received 87 neither chairside nor television demonstrations. Gross man's report was an informal one and did not clearly specify how many lessons were involved. It is further difficult to tell from the report how much practical work was involved and also how many students carried out 85Ibid., p. 716. 88L. I. Grossman, I. I. Ship, and M. T. Romano, "Evaluation of Teaching by Television versus Chairside Demonstration," Journal of Dental Education. XXV (December, 1961), 332. 87Ibid.. p. 331. 32 practical assignments. Pre-tests and written post-test examinations were given three to four weeks after each 88 89 demonstration. A final examination was also given. Grossman concluded that there were no significant differ ences among the sets of four groups, each successive junior 90 year. In an Office of Education sponsored study appearing in 1962, Myers examined the influence of experienced and 91 inexperienced television teachers. An experienced and an inexperienced teacher each taught a conventional as well as a television four-lesson class, Introduction to Television and Radio. Each of the four classes was rotated through 92 e a c h t r e a t m e n t . M y e r s c o n c l u d e d t h a t e x p e r i e n c e d a n d s u b s t i t u t e t e a c h e r s w e r e e q u a l l y e f f e c t i v e i n p r e s e n t i n g a l e c t u r e f o r i m m e d i a t e r e t e n t i o n b y e i t h e r c o n v e n t i o n a l o r t e l e v i s i o n m e a n s . In 1962 Neidt and French reported on the attitudes 88Ibid.. p. 332. 89Ibid.. p. 332. 90Ibid.. p. 334. 93-Lawrence Myers, Evaluation of Television as a Teaching Tool by Experienced Teachers (Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University, 1961) . 92Ibid., p. 9. 93Ibid.. p. 37. 33 94 of high school students toward television. An English and a geometry class were each taught by a conventional m e a n s a n d v i a a c o m b i n a t i o n o f c o r r e s p o n d e n c e - t e l e v i s i o n 95 m e a n s . B o t h t h e E n g l i s h a n d t h e g e o m e t r y t e a c h e r w e r e 96 used for each treatment. Neidt and French concluded that students preferred the conventional to the correspondence- television class and that the most influential factor contributing to unfavorable attitudes was the lack of 97 interpersonal communication between students and teacher. In 1962 Alexander reported in a doctoral disserta tion on an experiment in the teaching of college mathemat- 98 i c s b y t e l e v i s i o n a t G e o r g e P e a b o d y C o l l e g e f o r T e a c h e r s . In his experimental classes part of the class was taught via live television. Then one of the experimental classes was taught conventionally by television teacher, while the other experimental class was taught conventionally, also by 9^C. 0. Neidt and J. L. French, "Reaction of High School Students to Television Teachers," Journal of Genetic Psychology. C (March, 1962), 337-344. 95Ibid.. p. 337. 96Ibid. 97Ibid.. p. 343. 9®F. D. Alexander, "An Experiment in Teaching Math ematics at the College Level by Closed-Circuit Television" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1961); Abstract, Disserta tion Abstracts. XXII No. 8 (1962), 2805. 34 a new teacher. In his control class Alexander used the same pattern except that conventional classroom instruction was given in place of television. All classes lasted one academic quarter. Alexander concluded that a different teacher does not significantly alter the achievement in comparison with the class taught with the same teacher either in the conventional or television class. In 1962 Diamond reported on a study conducted at San Jose State College for a doctoral dissertation at the 99 School of Education, New York University. This study specified the use of television as a magnifier in the laboratory phase of a Functional Human Anatomy course. He compared a conventional and television class; his main c o n c e r n w a s c o m p a r a t i v e a c h i e v e m e n t T h e c r i t e r i o n f o r 101 grades was ability to identify parts. The course was one semester long and students performed demonstrations 102 along with the demonstrator where possible. The mater ial in the course offered varying opportunities for this form of student participation. An important aspect of this ^Robert Mach Diamond, "The Effect of Closed- Circuit Resource Television upon Achievement in the Labora tory Phase of a Functional Human Anatomy Course" (unpub lished Ph.D. dissertation, New York University, 1962). 10QIbid.. p. 64. 1Q^Ibid. ^°^Ibid.. p. 66. 35 study was that the teacher and the television equipment 103 were both in the laboratory. Diamond found that both classes achieved similar grades on three unit tests and on the final laboratory 104 examination. In the test on one unit— skeletal parts— that offered maximum opportunity for student participation, low television students had superior achievement to low conventional students.On the final laboratory examina tion the conventional high ability students did signifi- . . 106 cantly better than the television high ability students. Williams, also in a doctoral study at George Pea body College for Teachers, was concerned, as Alexander was previously, with examining a combination of different methods of combining television and conventional instruc- 107 tion. Williams used three groups of high school mathe matics students for three weeks of classwork. One group ^°3Ibid.. p. 65. 104Ibid., p. 67. IQSibid.. p. 69. Ibid.. p. 47. 1°7h. E. Williams, "A Study of the Effectiveness of Classroom Teaching Techniques Following a Closed-Circuit Television Presentation in Mathematics" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nash ville, Tennessee, 1962); Abstract, Dissertation Abstracts. 23:2160, No. 6, 1962. 36 was taught completely via television. A second group was taught partly via television but all questions were handled by a conventional classroom instructor after the television work was over. A third group had the same television in struction as the first and second group but conventional classroom instruction was concerned not only with answering questions but with providing supplementary material and giving new approaches. Alexander found no significant differences in achievement between his groups. He found no significant differences between the mean grades of high ability students among his groups and no significant differ ences between the mean grades of low ability students. Wohlgamuth, in a study sponsored by the Office of Education, focused on examining the differences between several kinds of student responses to five one-hour tele vision taught lessons— "student-teacher feedback," as it X 08 was called. Group I had no feedback. Group II was the vicarious feedback group. They observed a television studio-class that did use feedback. Group III used 108d . wohlgamuth, "A Comparative Study of Three Techniques of Student Feedback in Television Teaching," Abstract, Audio-Visual Communication Review, X A-100 (May- Junej 1962) . 37 feedback through a class microphone. Group IV used a push button feedback system that contained different pre recorded types of response. Wohlgamuth found no statisti cally significant differences in learning or retention by any feedback method. Nor did he find that different feed back systems significantly affected attitude toward tele vision instruction. In 1962 and after the present experiment was com pleted, Grant and his associates at the School of Dentistry at the University of California, San Francisco, under a grant from the Office of Education, compared the achieve ment between a conventional and television class for one 109 technic in Crown and Bridge Prosthetics. The conven tional class was taught via a classroom lecture with slides while the television class saw a demonstration. Grant was not interested in attitude or in written work. Thirty specially selected students were used for each class. They were ranked in each class on the basis of previous crown 109t . s . Grant, R. L. Blancheri, S. F. Lorencki, and I. R. Merrill, "Television in Health Sciences: I. Effectiveness of Television within the Dental Laboratory," Journal of Dental Education. XXVI (June, 1962), 146-151. l10Ibid., P. 147. 38 and bridge grades to give a top, middle and low ability t r i c h o t o m y . G r a d i n g w a s d o n e b y s c o r i n g t h e s t u d e n t s ' 112 practical preparation. A statistical test demonstrated 113 t h a t t h e s c o r i n g p r o c e d u r e i t s e l f w a s r e l i a b l e . T h e same instructor taught both classes and scored student 114 work. Because of difficulties during the experiment— the television demonstration was judged to be inferior to the conventional presentation— the conclusions cannot be 115 accepted at face value. But a statistical test showed that it was possible to accept the null hypothesis for a 116 difference between conventional and television teaching. In 1964 Crandell and Bryson reported on the teach ing of dental roentgenology at the University of North C a r o l i n a S c h o o l o f De n t i s t r y . A c l a s s o f f o u r t e e n 118 dental hygiene students was divided into two groups. 119 The classes were equated on previous scholastic average. 120 One group received television instruction exclusively. 11:LIbid. . p. 148. 112Ibid. 113Ibid. 114Ibid.. p. 147. 115Ibid. 116Ibid.. p. 151. 117C. E. Crandall and J. E. Bryson, "An Evaluation of Television as a Method of Teaching Dental Roentgenology," Journal of Dental Education. XXVIII (March, 1964), 37-42. H ^Ibid. ^ p_ 39 . l ^ ibid. ^ ^Ibid. . p. 40. 39 The other group received conventional instruction in the television studio itself but without use of television 121 e q u i p m e n t . B o t h g r o u p s r e c e i v e d o n e s e m e s t e r o f i n - 122 s t r u c t x o n w h i c h c o v e r e d t h e m a k i n g o f i n t r a - o r a l f i l m s . E v a l u a t i o n o f s t u d e n t l e a r n i n g w a s b a s e d o n a o n e - h o u r o b j e c t i v e w r i t t e n e x a m i n a t i o n , f i v e p r a c t i c a l p e r f o r m a n c e e x - 123 aminations, and the instructor's subjective evaluation. Crandell and Bryson concluded that the television class did better on lecture material while the conventional class (held in the television studio but without use of television equipment) did better on laboratory clinical 124 material, but that the differences were not significant. At the same time the final grades, combining the several measures of student achievement, were almost identical. Crandell and Bryson, in reviewing the literature, noted briefly that in 1956 Tannenbaum compared televised lecture- demonstration teaching of postgraduate periodontology to dentists in six states with conventional teaching that relied on a manual and found that television was highly effective in comparison with conventional teaching. 121Ibid.. p. 39. 12gIbid.. p. 40. 123Ibid. 124lbid., p. 41. 40 In sum, prior to the start of this experiment no study concerned itself with the teaching of difficult digi tal skills of increasing complexity for a full academic year via television. After plans for this study were underway, during the course of the experiment itself and afterwards, reports of several studies appeared that touched on various aspects of this experiment: color versus black-and-white film; different methods of student- teacher feedback; different combinations of television and conventional class instruction; television as a laboratory magnifier; televised undergraduate science laboratory in struction; in fact, one study concerned itself with the •teaching of one dental technic and used a very similar experimental form. But the essential focus and concern of this study— televised dental laboratory instruction for a full academic year--has not been examined in print prior to this study or concurrently with it. CHAPTER III SUBJECTS, MATERIALS AND PROCEDURES The Plan of the Course The content of the course Sophomore Operative Dentistry at the College of Dentistry, New York University, at the time of this study, was a pre-clinical course designed to prepare students for clinical operative dentistry--for work with patients— in their junior and senior years. This course, which ran for an entire academic year of three trimesters, was described in the 1959-1960 College of Dentistry Bulletin as follows: The course presents all types of odontoplastic operations which are performed by the student on a special manikin with removable jaws containing arti culated natural teeth. This system enables the stu dent to become familiar with the various operating positions, assume proper rests, guards, and finger positions, and to operate under conditions resembling those in the human mouth. The following subjects are taught: anatomical, histological, and physiological considerations in operative dentistry; introduction to the subject of dental caries and oral health; preventive measures; instruments and fundamental mechanical principles applied to instrumentation; special emphasis is laid 41 42 on supervised and systematized digitation; chair and operative positions, cavity preparation and the under lying engineering principles; study of the physio- chemical properties that govern the manipulation of filling materials. The most recent developments in operative dentistry, utilizing cooland devices auto matically controlled, higher speeds, and tungsten carbide burrs and diamond tools, are employed in manikin jaw procedures . . .1 Course schedule The course was scheduled as follows: 1. The entire class, 170 students, attended an operative lecture from 8:30 to 9:20 each Monday morning in order to introduce the class to the work for the week. This lecture, stressing theory and practical concepts, was given in a lecture hall. 2. Because the pre-clinical operative dental laboratory accommodated eighty-five students, this class of 170 sophomores was divided into two sections for laboratory purposes--each section meeting twice a week. Section A met Monday and Wednesday mornings from 9:30 to 12:15. Section B met Monday afternoon from 1:15 to 4:00 and Friday morning from 9:30 to 12:15. Normally, the day and hour schedule for both sections was constant for three trimesters. ^New York University Bulletin. LIX (June 1, 1959), 45 . 43 L a b o r a t o r y f a c i l i t i e s The physical arrangement of the laboratory and the dimensions of a student’s work space are shown in Figures 1 through 6. I n s t r u c t i o n a l s t a f f a n d m e t h o d o f t e a c h i n g Prior to the experimental year of 1960-61, the instructional staff for this course was composed of one Lecturer, the faculty member responsible for the course, who gave the Monday morning lecture as well as an addition al lecture in the laboratory, and four Laboratory Instruc tors. The Lecturer had been employed in the department for thirty-one years. The four Laboratory Instructors had been employed in the department for twenty-four, sixteen, eight and four years each. The laboratory sections were usually conducted in the following manner: at the start of the laboratory meet ing, a lecture was presented from the platform (Figure 2) by the Lecturer on the particular technic for the week. T h i s l e c t u r e i n t h e l a b o r a t o r y , i n c o n t r a d i s t i n c t i o n t o t h e M o n d a y m o r n i n g l e c t u r e , s t r e s s e d d e t a i l a n d p r a c t i c a l d e l i n e a t i o n . U s u a l l y , t h e L e c t u r e r u s e d a m i c r o p h o n e i n s t a l l e d a t h i s p l a t f o r m . T h e m i c r o p h o n e f e d i n t o e i g h t E 135 136 19 r 137 87 124 103 1 3 1 89 69 96 1 6 1 93fi91 156 138 5 TT 1 08 1 57 4 THT 129 1 5 1 127 162 92 99 133 1 1 2 1 5 ^ no 100 1 1 4 1 0 A 106 86 90 1 1 6 164 I2 C 105 I07ll2l 185 163 98 152 1 1 8 143 \4e 1 1 9 I3S 153 8 68 113 III 1 1 5 126 122 60 m 146 142 144 147 134 3 TT 63 97 102 95 132 145 M 9 160 88 128 140 1 0 1 1 4 1 -^48' i I 165 166 4 167 T _L ♦ 170 T® 168 6 • t ’ < 0 10 '.n . . 8 4 t - » —70^-*- K l FIG. I OPERA TIV E T E C H N IC L A B O R A T O R Y Floor plan - T.V. group student identification numbers • m ic ro p h o n e s ■ s p e a k e r s □ T.V. s e ts HJ posts + repeat and foreign students s c a l e : .12"= I foot L eft Half 1 Post 2 Sink 3 Sink 4 D oor 5 Display cabinet 6 Post 7 Blackboard 8 pesk and platform 9 Display cabinet 10 Post I I D oor 12 Metal .workbench 1 3 Sink 14 Vacuum pump support 15 W orkbench 16 Post 70 27 85 3l'6 Right Half -A PIPH FIG. 2 OPERATIVE TECHNIC LABORATORY - FLOOR PLAN Front wall detail from Fig. I Scale: = I foot • p Ul 17 16 I 65 14 N 37 56 78 42 79 7 70 73 80 74 40 10 77 5 © M L 44 59 75 60 69 1 1 68 49 62 64 63 © K J 58 38 57 5 1 54 47 55 48 1 2 19 53 41 52 71 I H FRONT 23 22 43 66 40 36 34 29 33 30 72 27 G F 20 6 18 46 45 31 4 24 25 2 1 5 E D © 3 . 32 8 67 26 50 28 61 76 35 f ♦ 85 C B ♦ 84 FIG. 3 O P E R A T IV E T E C H N IC LABORATORY Conventional group — Student identification seating numbers ♦ R ep eat and foreign students A - N R ow s © Judge lo c a tio n s 31* T .V . Sets 3 - 8 at this height at this height Poet - Microphone Fluor escenl lamp Blackboard 20 Student desks -leu desk podium 20'3 48 FIG. 4 O P E R A T I V E T E C H N IC LA B O R A TO R Y Transverse section b etw een rows G and H viewing toward right wall For full detoils se e Fig. I . S c a l e : ^ M = | foo t \ J 48 mannikin jaw a pon g o t, oir, and •loctricity for opposito sido g a t air 16 f O FIG. 5 OPERATIVE TE CHN IC L A B O R A T O R Y F r o n t View — S t u d e n t Desk S c a l e : ■ — * ' 8 8 * water pressure gas. air 39 mannikin jaw & pan OPERATIVE TECHNIC LABORATORY Top View - Student Desk S c a le : .16" = I inch 50 speakers (Figure 1). Following the laboratory lecture, each of the four Laboratory Instructors illustrated the technic on a manikin jaw to groups of about ten students at a student desk; each Laboratory Instructor, in sum, gave two demonstrations to a total of about twenty students. The Lecturer did not perform any manikin demonstrations, except in an emergency. Following the small-group demonstration, each stu dent repaired to his own desk and carried out his assign ment. Each technic was broken down into steps and, nor mally, each student had each step checked off (graded and approved) before continuing to the next step. There was no pattern of assignment of Laboratory Instructors to stu dents for checking off work. A student's work was checked off by any available Laboratory Instructor. In the normal course of events, each Laboratory Instructor performed instructional duties in addition to the initial demonstration and grading— answering questions, doing additional demonstrations either for an individual student or for small groups when necessary, et cetera. In sum, the teaching of the course was divided as follows: (1) Monday morning lecture, (2) laboratory lec ture, (3) laboratory demonstration, (4) additional 51 laboratory instructions, and (5) laboratory check-off. Seating Students were permitted to choose their own desks in the laboratory. This held for all students except for foreign and repeat students. The seating arrangement was kept for the entire academic year. The seats assigned foreign and repeat students are shown in Figures 1 and 3, pages 44 and 46. Grading Two types of grades were given: the written and the practical. The written grade was determined by means of a written examination— usually essay— given at the end of each trimester. The practical grade was determined in the manner previously described, i.e., a Laboratory In structor graded each practical preparation step-by-step as the student worked on the assigned project. A trimester practical grade was a weighted average of the grades for all of the practical preparations of that trimester. Each student received a trimester grade which was a composite of the trimester written and trimester practical grade. The final grade for the academic year was, in turn, a composite of these three trimester grades. The Plan of the Experiment Speaking broadly, the purpose of this study was to compare experimentally a conventional, or non-television, class and a television class in terms of grades and atti tudes . The detailed plan for accomplishing the above pur pose had to meet, of course, the criteria for sound experi mental design. One such criterion is that the experimental procedures should not themselves become an important inde pendent variable that biases the subjects' behavior. In the present study, for example, it was thought that the students would be interested and cooperative provided that the extra time required of them was not excessive, and provided that the experimental procedures did not interfere with their main objective, which was to learn about opera tive dentistry. Likewise, the opinions of the partici pating teachers had to be taken into account. The teachers objected to several details in the original research pro posal because of fears that the quality of instruction might be adversely affected. All of these objections were carefully discussed and several details were modified in order to insure the full cooperation of the teachers. There were no serious questions regarding the con ventional (control) class. That half of the 1960-61 class 53 was taught in the customary pre-television way which is described in the preceding section of this chapter. The procedures used in the television (experimental) class were planned so as to hold all non-relevant variables constant (i.e., the same as in the control class). The independent experimental variable--teaching by television— might have been manipulated in any of several possible ways. The final choice is described immediately below. Thus the first and second sections of this chapter permit direct comparisons between the techniques and procedures used in the conventional (control) class and those used in the television (experimental) class. The content of the course The content of the course in Sophomore Operative Dentistry, as taught in 1960-61, the year of the experi ment, was unchanged from that prior to television teaching, as described in the first section of this chapter. The purpose of the course also remained the same. Course schedule The over-all class schedule for pre-television teaching, as described in the first section, was maintained during the year of experimental inquiry, 1960-61. 54 The usual division of the Sophomore class into two laboratory sections corresponded with the research need for a control group— conventional (hereafter identified as "the CV class") and an experimental group— television (hereafter identified as "the TV class"); both sections were taught by the same staff. During Trimesters I and II, 1960-61, Laboratory Section A, meeting Monday morning and Wednesday morning, was the CV class and Laboratory Section B, meeting Monday afternoon and Friday morning, was the TV class. During Trimester III, 1960-61, the meeting times for Sections A and B were reversed, so that Section A (the CV class) now received instruction Monday afternoon and Friday morning and Section B, which previously received TV instruction Monday afternoon and Friday morning, now received TV in struction Monday morning and Wednesday morning. Laboratory facilities No basic change was made in the laboratory for TV teaching except for the installation of TV receivers and a talk-back circuit to the TV studio. This equipment is shown in Figures 1 and 4, pages 44 and 47. In fact, the speakers that were used by the Lecturer for his laboratory 55 lecture prior to the introduction of TV teaching in 196 0-61 also carried the audio circuit coming from the TV studio for TV teaching. The location of these eight speakers may be seen in Figures 1 and 4, pages 44 and 47. Figure 7 shows the plan of the TV studio. During the year of the experiment, then, both CV and TV classes heard the Lecturer over the same eight speakers. Instructional staff and method of teaching No changes were made for the purposes of this study from the teaching faculty as described in the first section of this chapter. The production staff for the TV programs was com posed of the teaching faculty. A television engineer was employed but his work was confined to equipment maintenance and operation of controls. An additional faculty member of the Department of Operative Dentistry, but not of the teaching staff for this particular course (Sophomore Opera tive Dentistry), served as Director in the control room when the teaching or, rather, teaching-production staff was short-handed. Monday morning lecture.— The Monday morning lecture ♦ / DENTAL 7 / C H A IR / □ 1 3 1,2,3 T V . R A C K S 4 S L ID E P R O JE C T O R 5 M O V IE P R O JE C T O R 6 T .V . P IC K U P 7 P R ISM 8 P L A T F O R M W IT H T .V . M O N IT O R B L A C K B O A R D O N EASEL IO JI T .V . C A M ER A S _ 1 2 Z O O M A R T .V . C A M E R A 13,14 SPO T L IG H T S O N STANDS Seal*: T A B L E □ I In ch P O S T 14 8 S T O R A G E C A B IN E T S W O R K TABLE SINK 17 8 1 m 07 m 9* « 0 * 1 0 FIG. 7 T.V. STUDIO FLOOR PLAN in ON 57 for 170 students, as described on page 42, could not be divided into halves with each half receiving a different type of instruction; it could not be manipulated for the purposes of this study. The effect of this combined non-television lecture on the results of this study is discussed later in the text. Laboratory lecture and laboratory demonstration.— 1. Conventional class: The CV class maintained the same type of laboratory lecture and laboratory demon stration instruction described in the first section of this chapter. Thus, for all three trimesters no laboratory demonstration work came over TV. 2. Television class: Each trimester, the experi mental class— the TV section— had a different television- teaching format. During Trimester I, the laboratory lec ture and the laboratory demonstration both came over tele vision. During Trimester II, the Lecturer delivered his lecture material from the platform in the laboratory (as in CV instruction— see Figure 2, p. 45) but the laboratory demonstration came over television. During Trimester III, half of the TV programs followed the format of Trimester I and half followed the format of Trimester II. For all three trimesters, however, all laboratory demonstration work came over TV. These formats are summarized as follows Trimester X X I X IX Laboratory Lecture TV Classroom 1/2 Classroom 1/2 TV Laboratory Demonstration TV TV TV All of the visual material that was used in the CV class— movies, slides, Vu-graph, blackboard--was used via TV. Color slides appeared as black-and-white over TV. On occasion, the Lecturer used oversize models in the CV class. But these, understandably, were not used over TV. The number of lessons televised differed from trimester to trimester. This is shown in the following figures: Trimester Number of TV Lessons I 16 II 10 III 7 The titles of these TV lessons are listed in Appendix A. One of the Laboratory Instructors was always present in the laboratory during a TV production. He served as a monitor; 59 in addition, he checked TV reception and voice level. During both CV and TV instruction, questions from the class were permitted only at designated times. At such times, in the TV section students went to the closest microphone (see Figure 1, p. 44) after receiving permission from the moni tor, and spoke with the Lecturer in the TV studio. The answer came back via TV. A script was prepared for each TV lesson. One of these scripts is reproduced in Appendix B. Laboratory check-off.— For the purposes of the study during 1960-61, each of the classes— CV and TV— was divided into quarters on the basis of seating arrangement. For any given practical preparation, an assigned Laboratory Instructor graded the practical work of that sub-group. These assignments of Laboratory Instructor to sub-groups rotated consecutively. Rows A, B, C and D were sub-group 1; et cetera. These rows are indicated in Figure 3, p. 46. Additional laboratory instruction--The additional instructional work of the Laboratory Instructors, after their small group demonstration work, as described in section one of this chapter, was the same in both CV and TV classes and was unchanged from the previous year, 1959-60, 60 except for the restriction on rotation of Laboratory In structors and sub-groups. In order to focus on the initial demonstration work of the Laboratory Instructors, for the purposes of the attitude scales (to be described under the heading "Teacher Rating Scale" in this chapter), and to separate this initial demonstration activity from all other instructional work of the Laboratory Instructors, the title Laboratory Demonstra tor was chosen for them. This term also served to set off the work of the Laboratory Lecturer. The term Laboratory. in turn, distinguished the foregoing teaching activities from the Monday morning lecture. Seating During the year of this study, 1960-61, no change was made in the system used in previous years allowing students to choose their own desks. Figures 1 and 3, pages 44 and 46, give the seating arrangement of the TV and CV classes, respectively; in the diagrams each student desk has the student identification number. Grading During the year of this study, 1960-61, the CV and TV students took the same written examinations. Likewise, 61 the practical work in both groups was graded in accordance with a single set of standards. Grading procedures for 1960-61 differed, however, from those of previous years. The section "Written Exami nations" will describe the construction of written examina tions used in 1960-61. The section "Practical Grading Criteria" will describe the revised system of practical grading instituted for 1960-61. Subjects In order to compare CV and TV teaching, two classes were created— one was taught via TV and the other was taught in the same way as in previous years (CV). The total enrollment of the course was 170. This was, also, the total Sophomore class enrollment for 1960-61. Eleven of these 170 students were either foreign or repeat students. They were automatically eliminated from data analysis, but not from data collection; they were not ad vised of this procedure. Figures 1 and 3, pages 44 and 46, show the desks of the repeat and foreign students. There were no women students. With the exception of the foreign and repeat stu dents, all sophomores came directly from undergraduate 62 school and entered as freshmen. For these 159 students this was the second dental school year. In order to create the control and experimental classes, data were collected from the sophomore class of 1959-60— the year prior to the one under study. These data covered grades and a variety of aptitude scores. The CV and TV classes for 1960-61 were created by use of these grades and scores for 1959-60. Seventy-seven students were selected for each class in 1960-61— a total of 154. The remainder of this section describes the procedures used in constructing classes. Using grades and aptitude scores for the 1959-60 class, two multiple correlation equations were developed to predict the following two dependent variables in Sophomore Operative Dentistry: 1. Composite written grade: This score was the sum of the final written objective examination for Tri mester II and that for Trimester III. The score for the 2 Trimester I examination was not used. 2. Composite practical grade: This was the sum of ^The written examination for Trimester I, 1959-60, had an essay format. 63 the practical grades for Trimesters II and III, 1959-60. During Trimester II, the following six practicals were used to create a composite practical grade: 1. " 6j amalgam insertion 2. *4] DO amalgam insertion 3. ] " 6 MOD amalgam insertion 4. _ 6j DOL amalgam insertion 5. Class I Gold Foil occ. 6 . Class III preparation _1] M. During Trimester III, 1959-60, the following five practicals were used to create a composite practical grade: 1. " 6] polish amalgam 2. 2] M 3. [1 M 4. Carious Molar 5. 6] M.O.D.B. The following set of ten independent variables was used to predict each of the two dependent variables (above). The independent variables were derived from two sources: previous grades, and scores on the American Dental Associa tion Aptitude Tests. Previous grades: 1. Undergraduate grade point average (UGPA) 2. Average of grades in two freshman practical dental courses: a. Denture Prosthesis b. Dental Anatomy— Technic 3 3. Dental Anatomy--Didactic 4. Composite of four freshman dental grades: a. Gross Anatomy b . Biochemistry c. Histology d. Microbiology American Dental Association Aptitude Tests: 5. ACE "Q" Reasoning 6. ACE "L" Reasoning 7 . ACE Mental Level— Reading Comprehension 8. Total Science Score . 9. Space Relations 10. Carving Dexterity The multiple correlations for the two dependent variables were: 1. Written Composite .53 ^Dental Anatomy--Technic and Dental Anatomy— Didac tic are two grades given in one course. These two grades represent, as the name implies, two different aspects of class work. 2. Practical Composite .56 The regression coefficients for the ten independent variables for each of the two equations are presented in Table 1. Inspection of the regression weightings shown in Table 1 indicated that several of the ten tests contributed little or nothing to the prediction of grades in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. The undergraduate grade point average (UGPA) was, not unexpectedly, the best predictor of the written grade; likewise, freshman practical grades were the most useful predictors of sophomore practical grades. The findings relative to "carving dexterity" were of interest because of the unusual nature of the test--subjects were requested to carve designated figures from bars of soap. This seemed to be an ingenious test for prospective den tists; but the grading of the soap carvings involved a large element of subjective judgment. Table 1 shows that carving dexterity was negatively related to written grades, yet it was a fairly good predictor of practical grades. Using these two regression equations, two scores were predicted for each student in Sophomore Operative Dentistry, 1960-61. The 1960-61 students were then divided into control (CV) and experimental (TV) classes. 66 TABLE 1 REGRESSION COEFFICIENTS OF TEN INDEPENDENT VARIABLES FOR TWO PREDICTED GRADES: SOPHOMORE CLASS 1959-60 Independent Variable Composite Written Grade Composite Practical Grade 1. UGPA 2.077 -.485 2 . Two Practical freshman grades . 920 1.881 3. Dental Anatomy— Didactic .419 .508 4. Four freshman dental grades .151 .093 American Dental Association Aptitude Tests 5. ACE MQ" . 118 -.304 6. ACE "L" .044 -.512 7. ACE mental level -.026 .269 8. Science score .204 -. 122 9. Space relations .002 . 144 10. Carving dexterity -.192 . 349 Constant -30.681 -65.141 R .53 . 56 67 Table 2 presents the means, standard deviations, and t/s for these two classes on the two predicted vari ables. Appendix C lists the predicted written and predicted practical grades for each student in the CV and TV classes. Examination of the t. test data for the difference between means for each of the two variables (Table 2) shows that the CV and TV classes were probably not distinguish able on practical work. However, the CV classes had a statistically significant lead over the TV class (p = < .05) for written work. This discrepancy necessitated use of analysis of covariance. Although the predicted efficiency of the regression equations was not as high as could have been hoped for (R = .53, .56), the predicted scores were used in the con struction of the control and experimental classes because they offered the best available information on student aptitudes. Written Examination The following pretesting procedure was followed in Trimesters II and III, 1959-60, in order to prepare the written objective examinations that were used in Trimesters II and III, 1960-61. 68 TABLE 2 THE MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATION AND t's FOR TWO PREDICTED COMPOSITE GRADES FOR MATCHED CV AND TV CLASSES: SOPHOMORE CLASS 1960-61 Class Predicted Composite Written Practical X CV 149.63 156.26 SD (N=77) 6.39 8.13 X TV 147.19 155.59 SD (N=77) 5.91 8.67 t. 2.47* .49 *05 = 1.99 t01= 2.64 df=152 ♦Significant at .05 level. 69 The teaching staff constructed an examination of X O O items in two parallel forms for each of the two tri- m e s t e r s . Each trimester's examination was predominantly T r u e - F a l s e , No attempt was made to validate these items by 4 a n external criterion. The assumption was made that these w e r e homogeneous items which measured a specific and limit e d segment of ability.^ The purpose of pre-testing was l i m i t e d to selection of the best item format— not best i t e m s 7 on an achievement test, item selection for content £ m a y not he as valuable as expert opinion. Sample parallel i t e m s , taken from the examinations, follow: T h e following statements are true: 1 . a) The larger the particles of cement powder the faster the set. h) The smaller the particles of cement powder the faster, the set. 2 . a) Cement has poor edge strength, but good tensile strength. h) Cement has good edge strength, but poor tensile strength. 3 . a) Non-cohesive Gold Foil is made cohesive by annealing. p, Guilford, Psychometric Methods (2nd ed.; N e w York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1954), p. 418. ^Robert L. Thorndike, Personnel Selection (New York: J o h n Wiley, 1949), p. 231. ^Guilford, op. cit. . p. 418. 70 b) Cohesive Gold Foil is made non-cohesive by gaseous adsorption. No correction for guessing was used although there were two choices for an item. However, there were no omissions and items did not differ from one another in the number of mis-leads. A simple direct ratio of item diffi culty was not used because this assumes a rectangular dis tribution of ability. The preferable assumption is one of a normally distributed variable. The Flanagan r makes two additional assumptions: (1) it assumes that there is a linear relation between item and test score— that percent age of success on an item increases as the total score increases; (2) it assumes also that the item dichotomy does not represent a real dichotomy as in the point bi-serial. Although the item dichotomy--r/w— is an efficient dichotomy, certainly those who pass or fail an item represent a range of ability with regard to an underlying function instead of two categorically distinct groups. A correction for over lap was not used. There are two disadvantages to the use of the Flanagan here: (1) the N's were small in the extreme groups; (2) since choice was limited to one of two items, a simpler test might have functioned as well. 71 From the point of view of computational ease the Flanagan r, as an item selection technique, is highly 7 8 recommended. * It is one form of internal consistency analysis— each item is evaluated in terms of total test score. This technique sacrifices the continuous nature of 9 the variable by using extreme groups. Although use of extreme groups sharpens discrimination, the loss of data decreases dependability of item indices. However, Kelley has shown that the most accurate arrangement of items in terms of discrimination, assuming a willingness to sacri fice data, results from using 27 per cent of each tail.^ Flanagan's tables provide estimates of the product-moment correlation between the item and test score— assuming both have a continuous and normal distribution--when 27 per cent of each tail is used. ^J. C. Flanagan, "General Considerations in the Selection of Test Items and a Short Method of Estimating the Product Moment Coefficient from the Data at the Tails of the Distribution," Journal of Educational Psychology. XXX (December, 1939), 674-680. ®Truman L. Kelley, "The Selection of Upper and Lower Groups for Validation of Test Items," Journal of Educational Psychology. XXX (January, 1939), 17-24. ^Thorndike, o p. cit.. p. 241. l^KeHey, loc. cit. . pp. 17-24. 72 After applying the Flanagan technique, the item with the higher correlation in each pair of parallel items was chosen for inclusion in the examinations to be used in 1960-61. The reliability of each of the two parallel forms of the written examinations in Trimesters II and III, 1959- 60, and the reliability of each of the final forms used in 1960-61, as determined by the Kuder-Richardson formula 2011 follows: Trimester II Trimester III Form A .61 Form A .59 Form B .70 Form B .73 Combined .78 Combined .83 In each trimester, use of item analysis produced a more homogeneous set of items. Practical Grading Criteria In order to provide a unified grading system for the four LD's, the teaching staff constructed weighted grading check lists for each practical preparation (i.e., laboratory project). These forms were used in 1959-60. 11Guilford, op. cit.. p. 380. 73 They were distributed to each student at the start of the class and turned in by him at the close, with the point score indicated for the various phases of work. As a result of use during 1959-6 0, these forms were revised by the teaching staff for use in 1960-61. A sample of one of these final forms is shown in Appendix D. The rotation system used by the four LD's in grading the practical work of each of the four quarters of the class has been described on page 59. In order to examine the similarity (concordance) among the LD's in assigning grades to practical prepara tions the following procedure was used: (1) several sam ples (six to ten) of student work for one dental prepara tion were presented to an LD for grading in terms of the revised set of criteria used for class grading. (2) In order to provide a range of ability, an attempt was made to select several samples of excellent work, several samples of poor work, and several samples of average work. The samples were chosen by the faculty member responsible for the course from work that was submitted by the class for their regular assignment. The measure of similarity- grading took place on the day that a given assignment was due. (3) Each sample was given a number by the experimenter and the LD graded the samples in sequence, from left to right, as they were lined up on the desk in front of him. One LD was present at a time. Prior to the next demonstrator's grading, the sequence of samples was randomized and grading took place again from left to right. The dental sample code numbers on the LD grading sheet corresponded with the sequence of numbers on the dental preparations from left to right. In sum, except for the necessities of experimental control, the measure of grading similarity on practical work imitated the regular classroom grading procedures. The grades were then transformed into ranks and each matrix was analyzed by the Kendall Co-efficient of Concordance, which provides a measure of the extent of 12 association of k sets of n objects. Kendall's W provides a test of the null hypothesis that there are no differ ences among the sums of the ranks of objects. When the variance among the sums of ranks is maximized, the null hypothesis is rejected and the probability is that the judges are in agreement in their ranking. ^Sidney siegel, Non-Parametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956), p. 229. 75 Table 3 lists the coefficients of concordance (Kendall's W) for each of the ten dental preparations, and the level at which each of the W's is significant. Table 3 indicates those W's for which the null hypothesis has been rejected. Out of these ten practical preparations, the judges agreed, at acceptable probability levels, in seven cases. Considerable assurance may be placed therefore in the similarity in the grading of the four LD's. Further protection was provided by the rotation system. The purpose of developing the new grading system for practical work was to increase the objectivity of this type of grading. The success of the new system could be judged only after the conclusion of the experimental year. At that time the means and the standard deviations for both written and practical grades in 196 0-61 were compared with those in 1959-60. The resulting data are presented in Table 4. The most striking aspect of these data was the remarkable reduction in the standard deviation for practi cal grades in 1960-61 in comparison with 1959-60. This improvement in the stability of the practical grades was interpreted as evidence of the success of the revised grading system. In addition, the teaching staff felt that 76 TABLE 3 COEFFICIENTS OF CONCORDANCE AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE FOR TEN DENTAL PREPARATIONS Dental Preparation Coefficient of Concordance Level of Significance I .67 .01 II .51 .05 III .72 .01 IV .86 .01 V .91 .01 VI .74 .01 VII .47 o H • VIII .33 .30 IX .72 .01 X .49 .10 77 TABLE 4 THE MEANS, STANDARD DEVIATIONS AND N's FOR THE ACHIEVED COMPOSITE WRITTEN GRADES AND ACHIEVED COMPOSITE PRACTICAL GRADES FOR 1959-60 AND 1960-61 Achieved Composite Grade 1959-60 1960-61 I960- CV -61 TV Written X 149.41 148.94 149.26 148.61 SD 9.99 10.27 11.20 9 .31 Practical X 157.04 158.99 160.05 157.94 SD 14.31 7 .96 7 .86 7 .97 N=158 N=154 N=77 N=77 78 the revised practical grading sheet improved the stability of the grades. Construction of Attitude Measurements Two types of attitude measurement were employed in this study: (1) a series of scales measuring -student atti tudes towards the teachers and the teaching of the course, and (2) a series of "expectancy" inventories measuring student attitudes towards the use of television as a teach ing device. Attitude scales Were student attitudes towards the work of the course in the TV class different from those in the CV class? Did student attitudes in the TV class change as the course progressed through the three trimesters? In order to answer questions of this nature three attitude scales were developed. One scale dealt with attitudes towards the Labora tory Lecturer (hereafter called the LL Scale); the second dealt with attitudes towards the Laboratory Demonstrators (the LD Scale), and the third with attitudes towards visual materials (the VM Scale). These three attitude scales were chosen on the basis of questionnaire and interview data 79 from juniors and seniors who had taken Sophomore Operative Dentistry. It was easy to see why these students would believe that attitudes toward the LL and LD were important. VM attitudes were considered important because of the extensive use of models and other visuals in the course, and because of the obvious visual element of the television medium. Two widely used methods of attitude scale construc tion were used— a combination of the Thurstone method of equal-appearing intervals and Likert's method of summated 13 ratxngs. In applying the Thurstone and Likert techniques the principal steps were: (1) in 1959-60 a large pool of attitude statements regarding the teaching of Sophomore Operative Dentistry was secured from students who were taking or had taken the course. (2) From this pool of statements, 291 were selected and administered to 100 seniors who rated each item on a "favorable-unfavorable" scale. (3) The resulting data were analyzed according to Thurstone's procedures and the "best" 160 items were 33Allen L. Edwards, Techniques of Attitude Scale Construction (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1957), p. 201. 80 determined. (4) The 160 items were rearranged in Likert- format and administered to 100 juniors who rated each item on an "agree-disagree" scale. (5) The resulting data were analyzed according to Likert's procedures and the "best" sixty-eight items were chosen. These sixty-eight items comprised the three attitude scales that were used during the experiment the following year. Further details regard ing the above five steps will next be presented. The pool of items.— At the close of the 1959-60 year— the year prior to the start of controlled experimen tation— several free form, anonymous questionnaires were distributed to sophomore, junior and senior students asking for descriptions of concrete instances of good and bad dental teaching--specifically of Operative Dental Technics, and also asking students to imagine good and bad instances of dental television teaching. These questionnaires were also distributed to the Operative Dental Faculty. In addition, tape recorded interviews were held with small groups of students; these were also anonymous. Beyond asking for concreteness, the questionnaires and interviews made no attempt to pick out or stress particular areas or problems. 81 The original comments and descriptions were placed on index cards and revised and rephrased, when necessary, 14 into suitable item form according to Edwards' and Thur stone 1 s criteria.^ These items were then compared with items from other inventories to see if there were any 16 noticeable omissions. No questionnaire, regardless of the item selection technique, can be any better than the material originally placed in the pool. This study pro vided no external validity measure of these items. The pool was large, however, and 291 were finally selected for inclusion in the first step or Thurstone-style administra tion . Thurstone administration.— These 291 items were prepared according to Seashore and Hevner's modification 17 which simplified administration. A nine-point scale • ^ - ^Ibid. . p. 13. l^Louis Xj. Thurstone and E. J. Chave, The Measure ment of Attitude (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1929), p. 22. ^Dwight E. Beecher, The Evaluation of Teaching (Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1949). ^R. H. Seashore and Kate Hevner, "A Time Saving Device for Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Social Psychology. IV (August, 1933), 366-372. 82 appeared to the left of each item as follows: Fav N Unf 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 - This sequence of items was randomized and divided into halves in order to produce two booklets— 291 items are too many for one administration. Each of these two book lets was also prepared in reversed form by reversing the continuum of point headings in order to reduce bias. Table 5 summarizes the number of positive and negative items according to their content category. Analysis of Thurstone data.--The responses were tabulated for the Q value (the inter-quartile range) and instead of solving for the actual S value (the median) only the scale category was secured. Table 6 presents this information in summary form for the total of 291 items. On the basis of the Thurstone data, the set of 291 items was now reduced to 160 items for Likert administra tion. All items with S=1 and 9 were selected and all items with S=2, 3, 7 and 8 were also selected provided that the Q was below 2 except for: (1) items with similar content, (2) items with particularly important content, and (3) poorly edited items. 83 TABLE 5 NUMBER OF POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE THURSTONE-ITEMS ACCORDING TO CONTENT CATEGORY Positive Negative Uncertain Total 75 Laboratorv Lecturer 77 6 158 25 Laboratory Demonstrator 27 2 54 25 Visual Materials 27 1 53 10 Miscellaneous 14 2 26 135 Total 145 11 291 TABLE 6 THURSTONE-ITEM SUMMARY: ITEM CONTENT CLASSIFIED BY SCALE CATEGORY AND POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE FORMAT Content Category 1 2 3 Scale 4 Category 5 6 7 8 9 Total LL Positive 18 42 12 1 2 75 Negative 4 4 13 39 17 77 Uncertain 2 4 6 Total 18 42 12 3 10 4 13 39 17 158 LD Positive Negative Uncertain 5 19 1 1 1 5 21 1 25 27 2 Total 5 20 1 1 5 21 1 54 VM Positive Negative Uncertain 1 20 4 1 3 11 12 1 25 27 1 Total 1 20 4 1 3 11 12 1 53 Misc. Positive Negative Uncertain 4 5 1 2 1 3 7 3 10 14 2 Total 4 5 1 2 1 3 7 3 26 Totals 28 87 17 4 14 8 32 79 22 291 00 85 Items with S=4, 5 and 6 were not used. Likert administration.— The 160 items that were chosen from the Thurstone were now rearranged in Likert- format and administered. This procedure was as follows: (1) a six point scale was used with the following headings: Strongly Agree, Agree, Mildly Agree, Mildly Disagree, Dis agree, Strongly Disagree, (2) each Thurstone item, origin ally phrased in the present tense, was now prepared in the past tense, (3) in order to clarify scoring the negative items and to make control of students easier during test ing, a sample test-sheet containing several rejected Thurstone items was prepared and administered by means of group discussion-scoring, (4) the 160-item Likert was administered to 100 juniors who had had Sophomore Operative Dentistry in 1959-60, the year preceding formal experiment al control. The juniors, in contradistinction to the seniors, for scheduling reasons, met in several small groups. The following data were secured for each item: (1) mean, (2) standard deviation and, for purposes of internal consistency analysis needed to produce homogeneous sets of items, (3) the product-moment r_ for each of these items with the pool of 160 items as well as the correlation 86 of each VM and LD item with its own sub-pool. The Thur stone method provides no way of determining the value of an item for the particular scale being constructed. It offers 18 no way of selecting items within a given interval. Item- 19 total correlations are one type of item-analysis. The r. of each LL item with its own sub-pool was not determined because of the large number of LL items. The sub-pool of LL items was now reduced. All items with r over .56 were selected except borderline items having significant content and items with overlapping con tent. The final LL scale had thirty-two items. The cutting point for the r. of the LD items was .47 and the cutting point for the r. of the VM items was .38. The same general policy of making exceptions for items was followed for these two scales as for the LL scale. The final LD and VM scales each had eighteen items. The following figures compare the mean correlation and the standard deviation of the three sub-pools with the mean correlation and the standard deviation of the final L. Edwards and F. B. Kilpatrick, "A Technique for Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Applied Psychology. XXXII (August, 1948), 374-384. l^Guilford, op. cjt.. p. 458. 87 sets of thirty-two LL, eighteen LD and eighteen VM items. Sub-pool & Final Set LL X .44 81 .61 SD .21 .10 LD X .41 40 .56 SD .14 .05 VM X .44 27 .50 SD .09 .08 The final LL, LD and VM scales are in Appendixes E, F and G, respectively. Expectancy Inventory In order to provide an attitudinal baseline, an Expectancy Inventory asking students to indicate their expectations of the value of television teaching in com parison with conventional instruction, was administered to each of the two classes at their first laboratory meeting, Monday morning and Monday afternoon, respectively, Tri mester I, prior to the start of laboratory instruction. These items were made up, Likert-style, covering represen tative areas. Following are two sample items: 3. Amount of Studying. In comparison with regular instruction, I feel that in a televised class of operative technic I would study: 1. Much less. 88 2. Less. 3 . About: the same amount. 4. More. 5. Much more. 19. Demonstration Work. In comparison with regu lar instruction, I feel the demonstration work in a televised course of operative technic would be taught: 1. Very well. 2. Well. 3. In about the same way. 4. Poorly. 5. Very poorly. Neither of the classes was advised, at the time of the administration of the Expectancy Inventory, which class would receive which form of instruction. However, college scheduling did not allow the classes to be made up on the basis of the responses to the Expectancy items. This Expectancy Inventory with the tense of each item changed appropriately was then administered at the close of each of the three trimesters to the TV class only. Following are the two previous sample items with changed tense: 3. Amount of Studying. In comparison with regular instruction, I feel that in a televised class of operative technic I study: 1. Much less. 2. Less. 3. About the same amount. 4. More. 5 . Much more . 89 19. Demonstration Work. In comparison with regu lar instruction, I feel the demonstration work in a televised course of operative technic is taughti 1. Very well. 2. Well. 3. In about the same way. 4. Poorly. 5. Very poorly. These two inventories are referred to hereafter as Pre- Expectancy (Pre-EX) and Post-Expectancy (Post-EX). The complete inventory is reproduced in Appendix H. In summary, three attitude scales covering attitudes toward LL (thirty-two items), attitudes toward LD (eighteen items) and attitudes toward VM (eighteen items) were con structed by combining the Thurstone and Likert techniques in order to secure three homogeneous sets of items. This battery of three scales was administered to each class at the end of each trimester. An expectancy inventory (Pre-EX) of twenty-five Likert-style items covering representative areas was con structed in order to provide an attitude baseline and it was administered to each class prior to the start of in struction. Each item in this inventory asked students for their expectations of TV teaching in comparison with CV teaching. At the end of each trimester this inventory with 90 each item changed appropriately in tense was administered to the TV class (Post-EX). Table 7 gives the administration time of the atti tude measurements. Teacher Rating Scale Purpose The experiment called foi' the same dental technic to be taught twice. Each lesson was to be taught in the same way, by the same staff, with minimum modifications for each of the two classes (TV and CV). In all the studies that have been conducted comparing CV and TV teaching, using the instructor as his own control, one problem has been that the instructor for any number of reasons might have done a better job in the TV class than in the CV class (or vice versa). This difference in his teaching would not lead to a fair comparison between the two media. Another problem has also arisen: Did the LL do a better job in the afternoon because he had had a run- through with the same material in the morning? Or was he bored with his afternoon presentation because it was a repetition? In order to control these difficulties the five teachers were asked to teach their lessons as 91 TABLE 7 ADMINISTRATION TIME OF ATTITUDE MEASUREMENTS FOR CV AND TV CLASSES: SOPHOMORE CLASS 196 0-61 CV Class TV Class Start of Trimester I Pre-EX Inventory Pre-EX Inventory End of Trimester I LL Scale LL Scale LD Scale LD Scale VM Scale VM Scale Post-EX Inventory End of Trimester II LL Scale LL Scale LD Scale LD Scale VM Scale VM Scale Post-EX Inventory End of Trimester III LL Scale LL Scale LD Scale LD Scale VM Scale VM Scale Post-EX Inventory similarly as possible. A limited amount of television teaching took place before the year of controlled experi mentation. This factor of prior experience helped the teaching staff to judge their work. Also the televised lessons early in the academic year, 1960-61, tended to stabilize work later in the academic year. Despite these precautions there is no way of knowing what the relation ship was between the two lessons. For this reason a group of qualified judges was used to evaluate the work of the teaching staff in the two classes. A Teacher Rating Scale was constructed for use by the judges. This scale was a general purpose Teacher Rating Scale with adaptations for use in this particular study. Construction of the teaching rating scale 20 After a review of the literature and an examina tion of several rating scales a graphic rating scale cover ing nine categories of teaching performance along a nine point bi-polar continuum was designed to evaluate the LL and LD separately. Five of the points of the continuum were labelled as follows: 1. Poor 3. Below average ^Beecher, o p. cit. 93 5. Average 7. Above average 9. Excellent. The nine categories were: I General Appearance Physical Well Being Posture II Quality of Voice and Speech Communication Skill III Poise Personal Attitude Mental Well Being IV General Scholarship Grasp of Subject Content Accuracy V Student Comfort Routine Classroom Neatness Absence of Distraction Class Control Emergencies Met VI Short Range Objectives and Long Term Plans Planning Review Procedure Integration of Other Lessons and Areas VII Preparation and Use of Audio Visual Materials VIII Teaching Effectiveness IX Opportunity for Student Participation Skill in Questioning and Discussion Whole Class Involved Maintains Class Interest The judges Four judges were used in Trimester II. One of these four judges was a dentist. Another set of four judges was used in Trimester III. Due to the absence of one of the judges during one observation an additional 94 judge was used as a substitute. One of the judges from the second set was also a dentist. A list of the judges (iden tified by code number) and their qualifications comprises Appendix I. The qualifications of these judges made it possible to say that they were experienced both as teachers and as evaluators . ^ Application of the Teacher Rating Scale The judges met with the experimenter prior to using the scale and discussed each of the categories in order to clarify both the differences among categories and the con tent of each category. The judges were also requested to supplement their ratings with written explanatory comments. These written comments were clipped to the completed Rating Scale, making it possible to examine, in an informal way, variations in the use of criteria. A request for comments probably also serves to make the Rating Scale more depend- 22 able. The group of raters and the experimenter also dis cussed four of the constant errors found in rating scale work: error of leniency, error of central tendency, halo ^Guilford, op. cit. . p. 294. effect, and logical error. Authorities suggest that raters 23 do better when advised of these errors. After observing a lesson, the judges usually re assembled in order to hold further discussions and to write up their comments. Each judge agreed to be present for the entire day and each of the two lessons observed on any one day was in no case longer than an hour. This made it possible to say 24 that the judges did not feel rushed in doing their work. The judges were not told their purpose was to 25 evaluate the similarity of both presentations. They were simply asked to use the Teacher Rating Scale in order to evaluate two lessons on a set of criteria. Perfect control was not possible for these observa tions. On occasion judges did not rate categories. They were permitted to do this although they were requested to fill out the Rating Scale completely. On occasion particu lar teaching problems required deviations from the teaching schedule. The judges observed one lesson in Trimester II and three lessons in Trimester III. The judges observed 23Ibid.. p. 278. 25ibid.. p. 295. 24Ibid.. p. 294. 96 both the lectures and the demonstrations when taught CV and when taught via TV. When observing the TV lecture-demon stration, the judges were permitted to take any seat they wished. However, when they observed the CV lecture, the seating positions of the judges were rotated. Figure 3, p. 46, shows the seating positions of the judges. The judges also rotated their observation of the LD's. From the point of view of the purpose of the Teacher Rating Scale— a measure of similarity— some of the comparisons were not clear-cut. For example, the compari son between one TV demonstration and eight personal demon strations by four LD's made direct comparisons difficult. Another difficulty was with the category covering scholar ship. Actually, the only competent judgment could be made by the dentist-judge although all judges were asked--but not required— to complete all categories. Statistical treatment of the data 1. The judges were instructed to place their mark at any point along the continuum. These marks were then scored in terms of mid-points: 0.5 to 1.49=1; 1.5 to 2.49 =2; et cetera. 97 2. These scores of the four judges were averaged for each category for each observation by lecture and by each of the two demonstrations, separately. 3. Each category mean was then combined with the mean of its comparison observation to produce a grand mean. Each judge's rating for both observations by categories was then entered in a 2 x 2 contingency table carrying the following four headings: Observation I, Observation II, "Above Grand Mean," and "Below Grand Mean." These data were then analyzed by Fisher's exact 26 probability test. This test is a non-parametric method that examines discrete data. The assumption has been made that the Teacher Rating Scale is discrete. Fisher's test ‘is useful when the frequencies are small. Essentially, the test determines whether the two independent groups (or observations) differ in the proportion with which they fall into two classifications. Analysis of the data For the thirty-six category-comparisons on the four observations, Table 8 shows only those comparisons that were significantly different at the .05 level, for a 2&Siegel, op. cit.. p. 96. 98 TABLE 8 SIGNIFICANT COMPARISONS FOR THE TEACHER RATING SCALE BY MEANS OF FISHER'S EXACT PROBABILITY TEST Trimester III, Observation 2 Laboratorv Demonstration Work Catecrorv II Quality of Voice and Speech Communication Skill .05 level Trimester III, Observation 3 Laboratorv Lecture Work Catecrorv VII Preparation and Use of Audio-Visual Materials .05 level Trimester III, Observation 3 Laboratorv Demonstration Work Catecrorv IX Opportunity for Student Participation Skill in Questioning and Discussion Whole Class Involved Maintains Class Interest .02 level 99 two-tail test. Examination of this table shows that most of the thirty-six categoric comparisons were not signifi cantly at usually acceptable levels. Three comparisons, however, were significantly different. In Trimester III, the second observation showed one significant category--communication skills— in LD work. Here, the judges preferred the CV lesson. Examination of the judges' comments showed that one judge had no criticism to offer of the two classroom laboratory demonstrations but that the television demonstration speaker talked too fast, in a monotone, and that it was impossible for the students to take notes. The other judges made no specific comments about the basis of their preference for the classroom LD's. The third observation in Trimester III had one significant comparison for the LL: use of audio-visual materials. Three judges clearly felt that the CV LL was deficient, comparatively, because the VM could not be seen easily by all the students. One judge felt that the VM did not really contribute to the understanding of the lesson. Also in the third observation in Trimester III all four judges felt that there was more student participation (Category IX) in the personal small group demonstrations by the four LD's than in the TV lecture. 100 These three significant categories did not add up to any trend in any particular category or in a particular medium. On the basis of the data presented for four obser vations by these judges, there appeared to be no clear 27 pattern of differences between TV and CV teaching. Most of the calculation work described in this chapter and in Chapter IV was programmed for the IBM 650, 1620, or 7090. The multiple regression equations used for predic tive purposes were developed by the Service Bureau Corpora tion (New York City), a division of IBM. The particular SBC program used was MR-2. Chi-squares were solved by a program of Abacus Associates of New York City. Covariance was run on the BIMD series of the University of California, Los Angeles. Parts of several of these covariance runs were also programmed at New York University, as were all other calculations in this study with the exception of the Thurstone-Likert tabulation, Fisher's exact probability test, and Kendall's W. Several covariance runs were 27^11 of the raw data used in this chapter as well as in the next chapter will be retained by the experimenter for ten years. Inquiries should be addressed in care of the Department of Speech, University of Southern California, Los Angeles 90007. 101 checked by hand . T h e Tlrur stone-Likert tabulations were done by hand and s p o t — crlneclced. Fisher's exact probability test and Kendall * s W w e r e also solved by hand and spot- checked. The p r e d i c t e d scores were also spot-checked by hand. Several jt ' s w e r e checked by a second program. The chi-square t r i c h o t o m y w a s checked against the raw data. Several chi-squares w e r e done by hand. Whenever raw data were transferred f r o m orre set of forms to another, the columns were read. t>aolc - Card punching was verified. CHAPTER IV PRESENTATION AND INTERPRETATION OF DATA In Chapter I the problem was stated as a series of six null hypotheses. That these hypotheses would be sub divided and presented in greater detail in Chapter IV was also indicated. That plan was followed in organizing this chapter. The caption for each section of this chapter identifies the general topic to which the data refer. Two or more hypotheses are treated within each section. The internal organization of each section follows this se quence: (1) statement of hypotheses, (2) presentation of data, and (3) discussion. A null hypothesis is identified by the customary symbol H0. A c h i e v e d W r i t t e n a n d P r a c t i c a l G r a d e s S t a t e m e n t o f h y p o t h e s e s I n o r d e r t o c o m p a r e t h e a c h i e v e d g r a d e s o f t h e CV c l a s s w i t h t h o s e o f t h e TV c l a s s , f o u r n u l l h y p o t h e s e s w e r e t e s t e d . Two o f t h e s e h y p o t h e s e s d e a l t w i t h t h e m e a n s o f 102 103 each group as a whole (N=77 for each); one hypothesis was on written grades and the other on practical grades. Two additional hypotheses made possible more detailed compari sons of the written and practical grades of both classes divided into thirds— high, middle, and low aptitude stu dents. The four hypotheses were stated as follows: 1. Hc There is no significant difference between the written grades achieved in the CV class and the written grades achieved in the TV class, within each trimester. Statistical procedure: t test for uncorrelated samples (one-tailed). 2. Hc There is no significant difference between the practical grades achieved in the CV class and the practical grades achieved in the TV class, within each trimester. S t a t i s t i c a l p r o c e d u r e : t. t e s t f o r u n c o r r e l a t e d s a m p l e s ( t w o - t a i l e d ) . 3. H0 There is no significant difference between the written grades achieved by high, middle and low written-aptitude CV students and the written grades achieved by high, middle and low written- aptitude TV students, respectively, within each o 104 trimester. Statistical procedure: t test for uncorrelated samples (two-tailed). 4. Hq There is no significant difference between the practical grades achieved by high, middle and low practical-aptitude CV students and the practical grades achieved by high, middle and low practical-aptitude TV students, respective ly, within each trimester. Statistical procedure: t test for uncorrelated samples (two-tailed). P r e s e n t a t i o n o f d a t a Table 2, p. 68, presents the means and t ratios for CV and TV classes on both of the predicted variables used to create each of the classes— composite written grade and composite practical grade. The t test between the predict ed composite written means demonstrated that the two class es probably came from different populations (p=< .05). This necessitated covariance analysis of the achieved written grades. T h e t , ' s b e t w e e n t h e p r e d i c t e d c o m p o s i t e p r a c t i c a l m e a n s d e m o n s t r a t e d t h a t t h e t w o c l a s s e s p r o b a b l y c a m e f r o m 105 t h e s a m e p o p u l a t i o n . N e v e r t h e l e s s , c o v a r i a n c e w a s u s e d a s a m a t t e r o f r o u t i n e . Table 9 presents the means and t, ratios for both the achieved written and achieved practical grades, unad justed— prior to covariance analysis, for each of the CV and TV classes for each trimester. Appendix J lists the achieved written and the achieved practical grades for each student in the CV and TV classes. Table 10 presents the adjusted means and adjusted F's for achieved written and achieved practical grades, for each trimester. These were secured by analysis of covari ance . D i s c u s s i o n The i test, Table 9, demonstrated that any differ ences between the means of achieved written grades were improbable and the analysis of covariance, Table 10, demon strated that the similarity on achieved written work for these two classes, for each trimester, was not significant ly influenced by the disparity between predicted means. The t test for a difference between practical means demonstrated that differences were improbable for Trimes ters I and II. and that there probably was a difference 106 TABLE 9 THE MEANS AND t'S FOR THE ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND IIIa Mean Trimester CV TV t In Favor of Achieved Written Grades I 81.13 81.16 .036 TV II 71.88 71.61 .26 CV III 77.34 77 .01 .33 CV t ^ - 1.66 df=l50 Achieved Practical Grades I 79.00 80.13 .78 TV II 77 .87 77 .74 .18 CV III 82.18 80.04 3 .03b CV t =1.98 t__ =2.61 df=150 05 01 aIn constructing the predicted composite written grades, the sum of grades for Trimesters II and III, only, was used. However, in analyzing the results, written grades for Trimester I were examined, in order to use all available data. The examination for Trimester I, 196 0-61, was objective. ^Significant at .01 level. 107 TABLE 10 THE ADJUSTED MEANS AND ADJUSTED F's FOR ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Adjusted Mean CV TV „ , . In Ad} . F Favor of Written Grades I 80.91 81.38 .27 TV II 71.28 72.21 .98 TV III 76 .73 77.62 Practical Grades 1.05 TV I 78.80 80.33 1.65 TV II 77 .75 77.86 .03 TV III 82.10 80.12 10.10* CV F 05 3 .91 P01=6-81 df=l,150 ♦Significant at the .01 level. between the unadjusted scores in Trimester III on practical grades {p=<.01) in favor of CV students. The F ratio between the adjusted practical means, secured by covariance, demonstrated a probable difference (P =<,01) between means on practical grades in Trimester III in favor of CV students, and that the differences in Tri mesters I and II were not significant. The use of covariance did not disturb the general picture given by the t's for the written and practical grades, except that three of the non-significant differ ences shifted direction from "in favor of CV" to "in favor of TV." The finding that there was no significant differ ence on written grades between the CV and TV classes was consistent with many previous similar studies, several of which were reviewed in Chapter II. In the present study, however, the TV class did as well as the CV class, despite the fact that the latter group was favored at the start in terms of matching on predicted written grades. Thus it could be said that the TV class did better than expected on written work. This achievement, however, could scarcely be attributed to a superiority of the television medium. A more likely explanation appeared to be that the operation 109 of many factors (customary in studies of this type) tended to equate grades on written work, e.g., the Monday morning joint lectures, the use of a common text book, and the usual outside of class student activities, such as sharing notes, discussing class assignments, etc. The findings regarding practical grades were more difficult to interpret. During Trimesters I and II the practical grades for the two groups were highly similar. Why were the practical grades during Trimester III signifi cantly higher in the CV class than in the TV class? One possible reason was that the format and teach ing procedures were changed in Trimester III. Thus the meeting times of the CV and TV sections were reversed. But there was no reason to suppose that this change of times would disturb one group either more or less than the other group. Also, during the third trimester the lectures in the TV class were delivered alternately from the TV studio and from the platform. If this alternation confused the TV students, they did not seem to be aware of it. Their attitudes toward the Laboratory Lecturer were consistently more favorable than the CV attitudes and this difference was greatest in Trimester III, as is shown in Table 18 below. 110 Another possible explanation was that television was adequate for the teaching of the earlier and easier laboratory projects but less adequate for the teaching of the later and more difficult assignments. But this was contradicted, at least indirectly, by the fact that the attitudes of the TV students toward the televised presenta tion of Laboratory Demonstrators and Visual Materials were significantly more favorable than were the attitudes of the CV class toward the non-televised demonstrations and visuals— as is shown in Tables 20 and 22. A more important objection to the above explanations was their assumption that the TV grades declined in the third trimester; Table 9 shows that this was not the case. The data show that the TV students' practical grades for the third trimester were almost the same as their own grades for the first trimester, and that their grades for the tfTird trimester were 2.3 points higher than for the second trimester. Meanwhile, the CV students* practical grades for the third trimester were 3.18 points higher than their own grades for the first trimester, and 4.31 points higher than for the second trimester. Thus the TV grades did not go down; rather, the CV grades went up sharply. The question became whether or not the practical grades in Ill a conventionally taught class customarily showed a signifi cant third trimester upturn. Therefore the practical grades for the previous class of 1959-60 were analyzed. No upturn was found. On the contrary, those grades dropped drastic ally from 80.5 for the second trimester to 76.6 for the third trimester. Apparently some unusual and unknown independent variable was at work in the CV class during the third trimester of 1960-61, a variable which was not opera tive in the TV class. These data give rise to a further question. What part does aptitude play in the results? For this reason, the interaction between predicted composite grades, or aptitude, and achieved grades were examined. This will be discussed next for written and for practical grades sepa rately . Written Grades Presentation of data Each class was trichotomized, producing a top, middle and low written ability third and a top, middle and low practical ability third. The N's for each third were 26, 25 and 26, respectively. The validity of this new comparison rested on the assumption of a prior similarity 112 between CV and TV trichotomies on both predicted composite written and predicted composite practical work. Table 11 shows the means and the t. ratios for the predicted composite written grades for the CV and TV classes, for each trichotomy. These .t's for the predicted composite written grades made it possible to reject the null hypothesis and to state that there was a probable difference between predicted means for the CV and TV classes on the top (p=<.01) and middle (p=<.01) thirds. However, the t for the low written trichotomy was not significant. The £'s between the means for the predicted composite written variable made analysis of covariance necessary for the top and middle thirds and advisable for the low third. Table 12 shows for each trimester the means, N's and the t,'s for the achieved written grades for each predicted composite written trichotomy. Table 13 presents the adjusted means and the adjusted F's on achieved written grades for the CV and TV predicted aptitude trichotomies for each trimester. D i s c u s s i o n T h e p r e d i c t e d w r i t t e n g r a d e s , o r a p t i t u d e s , o f t h e CV g r o u p a s a w h o l e w e r e s i g n i f i c a n t l y h i g h e r t h a n t h o s e o f 113 TABLE 11 THE MEANS, N's AND t's FOR TOP, MIDDLE AND LOW WRITTEN-APTITUDE TRICHOTOMIES FOR CV AND TV CLASSES Trichotomy N Predicted Composite Written Mean In t Favor of CV TV Top 26 156.58 153 .17 2.73* CV Mid 25 149.32 146.94 5.51* CV Low 26 142.97 141.46 1.86 CV t05=2.008 toi=2 .678 df=50 t05=2.01 df=48 *Significant at the .01 level. 114 TABLE 12 THE MEANS, N's AND i's ON ACHIEVED WRITTEN GRADES FOR EACH VJRITTEN-APTITUDE TRICHOTOMY: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester CV Mean TV In Favor of I II III I II III 81.81 75 .81 81.42 t05=1.68 81.40 70.72 77 .72 tQ5=i.68 T o p T r i c h o t o m y N=26 82.31 .38 74.62 .79 79.54 1.26 Middle Trichotomy N=25 81.36 .03 71.08 .2 76.32 .86 TV CV CV df=50 CV TV CV df=48 I II III 80.19 69 .08 72.89 tos=2.01 Low Trichotomy N=26 79.81 .25 CV 69.12 .02 TV 75.15 1.45 TV t -2.68 df=50 115 TABLE 13 THE ADJUSTED MEANS AND ADJUSTED F's FOR ACHIEVED WRITTEN GRADES FOR EACH WRITTEN APTITUDE TRICHOTOMY: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Adjusted Mean In Favor F CV TV Of T o p T r i c h o t o m y N=26 I 81.43 82.69 .81 TV II 74.96 75.47 .12 TV III 80.60 80.36 .03 CV Middle Trichotomy N-25 I 80.76 82.50 .21 TV II 70.31 71.49 .16 TV III 77.31 76.73 .15 CV Low Trichotomy N=26 I 79.99 80.01 .0001 TV II 68.63 69.57 .30 TV III 72.53 75.51 3.56 TV F05=4•03 FQ1=7.17 df=l.50 116 the TV group, as was reported in Chapter III. The further analysis of these data, shown in Table 11, p.113, indicated that most of the advantage of the CV group fell in the high and middle trichotomies. Roughly speaking, the brightest students in the TV class were not as bright as the bright est ones in the CV class. This analysis appeared to give additional weight to the previously reported conclusion that the TV class did better than could have been expected on written work. None of the nine t's in Table 12 and none of the F's in Table 13 are statistically significant. Therefore, the conservative conclusion would be that all differences in written grades among aptitude levels were null, and the aptitude data cast no new light upon achieved written grades. However, two features of the data in Tables 12 and 13 appeared to merit comment: (1) the non-significant t's in Table 12 were divided five to four in favor of CV; after adjustment by covariance analysis, the direction of the F's became seven to two in favor of TV. The latter comparison gave additional reinforcement to the conclusion that the TV class did better than could have been expected on written work. (2) Of the nine F's in Table 13, the only one that 117 a p p r o a c h e d s i g n i f i c a n c e w a s i n t h e l o w a p t i t u d e g r o u p . P e r h a p s TV i n s t r u c t i o n w a s s l i g h t l y m o r e a d v a n t a g e o u s f o r l o w a p t i t u d e s t u d e n t s t h a n f o r s t u d e n t s w i t h h i g h e r a p t i t u d e s . P r a c t i c a l G r a d e s P r e s e n t a t i o n o f d a t a The .t's for the predicted composite practical means, Table 2, p. 68, indicated closer matching on this variable than on written work. However, a significant difference between classes was found in the middle tri chotomy (p=<.05) in favor of the CV class, which necessita ted covariance analysis for that group (Table 14). Covari ance was also used for the other trichotomies as a matter of routine. Table 15 shows for each trimester the means and .t's for the achieved practical grades for each predict ed composite practical trichotomy. Table 16 presents the adjusted means and the ad justed F's after covariance analysis for the practical grades for each trichotomy in each trimester. D i s c u s s i o n The data presented in Tables 12, 15 and 16 118 TABLE 14 THE MEANS, N's AND t's FOR TOP, MIDDLE AND LOW PRACTICAL-APTITUDE TRICHOTOMIES FOR CV AND TV CLASSES T r i c h o t o m y N P r e d i c t e d C o m p o s i t e P r a c t i c a l M e a n t I n F a v o r o f CV TV Top 26 165.05 165.40 .24 TV Mid 25 155.90 154.85 2.01* CV Low 26 147.85 146.51 1.30 CV t =2.01 df=48 05 ♦Significant at the .05 level. 119 TABLE 15 THE MEANS, N's AND i's ON ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR EACH PRACTICAL APTITUDE TRICHOTOMY: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Mean CV t TV — In Favor of T o p T r i c h o t o m y N=26 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I Significant at the .05 level. ■^Significant at the .01 level. 84.58 85.29 .47 TV 80.42 81.92 1.39 TV 84.50 83.27 1.12 CV t =2.01 df=50 Middle Trichotomy N=25 79.88 81.66 .91 TV 78.68 76.56 1.97a CV 81.88 78.52 3.37b CV t =1.68 tQ1=2.40 df=48 Low Trichotomy N=26 72.58 73.50 .34 TV 74.54 74.69 .16 TV 80.15 78.27 1.62 CV t =2.01 df=50 120 TABLE 14 THE ADJUSTED MEANS AND ADJUSTED F's FOR ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR EACH PREDICTED PRACTICAL-APTITUDE TRICHOTOMY: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Adjusted Mean CV TV Adj . F In Favor of I 84.66 Tod Trichotomv N=26 85.21 .18 TV II 80.48 81.86 2.06 TV III 83 .21 84.55 1.7 TV I 79.70 Middle Trichotomv N=25 81.84 1.09 TV II 78.59 76 .65 2.96 CV III 81.65 78.75 8.10a CV I 71.97 Low Trichotomv N=26 74.11 .68 TV II 74.48 74.75 .09 TV III 80.14 78.28 2.58 CV F05=4 .03 F01=7-17 df=l.50 Significant at the .01 level. suggested a possible additional interpretation of why the CV class significantly outscored the TV class on practical grades during the third trimester. This difference could have been partially due to a vagary of the matching pro cess. The logic supporting the preceding statement pro ceeded as follows: (1) although the whole groups (N=77; N=77) were matched within the boundaries of chance on the variable of predicted practical aptitude, nevertheless (2) the middle third (N=25) of the CV class was significantly higher on predicted practical aptitude than the middle third of the TV class. (3) Most of the advantage in achieved practical grades in favor of the CV class was contributed by the middle third (Table 15). During the first trimester there was no significant difference between the middle thirds of the CV and TV groups. During the second trimester, however, the middle third of the CV sec tion moved ahead significantly. During the third trimester the CV middle third achieved a very significant lead (p= C.01). (4) Therefore, the unusually high CV practical grades of the third trimester could have been partially due to the fact that a relatively small number of students in the CV class had significantly higher practical aptitude than their counterparts in the TV class. 122 But why did not the TV students overcome this initial disadvantage on practical work, the same as they overcame an even greater disadvantage on written work? An answer has previously been suggested (pp. 108-109). Several major factors probably worked toward equating the written grades, e.g., the Monday morning joint lecture meeting, a common textbook, sharing notes out of class, et cetera. There appeared to be fewer similar factors working to equalize practical grades. Attitudes Toward the Teachers and the Teaching of the Course As previously reported in Chapter III, three scales were constructed for the purpose of measuring student atti tudes toward the teachers and the teaching of the course. These three scales were identified as LL (Laboratory Lec turer), LD (Laboratory Demonstrator), and VM (Visual Mater ials) . The internal consistency reliability was computed for each attitude measurement. The formula used was the Kuder-Richardson 20. This provides a measure of internal consistency reliability or homogeneity. The essential advantage of the Kuder-Richardson 20 formula is that it avoids the difficulties of arbitrary split-half methods. It assumes items of nearly equal difficulty and 123 intercorrelation. Reliability was defined as the propor tion of variance that is true variance.^" Table 17 lists these reliabilities identified by class and by attitude measurements. Examination of these figures showed that tine reliabilities were satisfactory. Not surprisingly, the LL scale, which has thirty-two items, had a somewhat higher reliability than the other scales which had fewer items . As previously reported in Chapter III, an inventory was also constructed to measure the students1 expectancy with regard to television as a teaching instrument. This was administered to both sections at the first class meet ing (the pre-EX inventory), and to the TV section only at the end of each trimester (post-EX inventory) . The expec tancy inventory findings are presented and discussed in the section "Attitudes Toward TV as a Teaching Medium" in this chapter. For convenience, however, the reliability esti mates for the expectancy inventory are presented here in Table 17. What is worthy of note is the following: the reliability of the scales that were constructed by means of the Thurstone-Likert procedure was about the same as the E X lj. P. Guilford, Fundamental Statistics in Psychol ogy and Education (3d ed.; New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co. Inc., 1954), p. 436. 124 TABLE 17 THE KUDER-RICHARDSON 20 RELIABILITY FOR EACH ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT IN THE CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III CV Attitude Measurement Class Reliability TV Attitude Measurement Class Reliability LL I .93 LL I .91 LL II .94 LL II .95 LL III .96 LL III .96 LD I .88 LD I .88 LD II .89 LD II .88 LD III .97 LD III .90 VM I .89 VM I .86 VM II .88 VM II .88 VM III .89 VM III .91 Pre-EX, .91 Pre-EX .93 Post-EX I Post-EX II Post-EX III .91 .93 .92 125 inventories that were "drawn free hand." Appendix K lists the attitude scores (sums across items) for each student in the CV class for each attitude administration. Appendix L lists the same data for the students in the TV class. Statement of hypotheses In order to examine student attitudes in each of the trimesters, to estimate changes in attitudes over a period of time, and to compare the classes on attitudes, three sets of null hypotheses were tested. These three hypotheses were further subdivided in terms of the LL (Laboratory Lecturer), LD (Laboratory Demonstrator) and VM (Visual Materials) scales. The three basic hypotheses were stated as follows: H There is no significant difference in attitudes, as determined by each of the attitude scales— LL, LD, and VM— taken singly: a. within each trimester, between the CV and TV classes. b. within each class, between any two tri mesters. c. between any trimester for one class and any trimester for the other class. 126 This statement of the null hypothesis provides for all possible comparisons within any one attitude scale-type. Statistical procedure; t test for correlated and uncorrelated samples (two-tailed). To facilitate examination of the data, the material is organized under the following headings: LL, LD and VM. Within each of these three headings, the data are presented first and then discussed. The LL Scale Presentation of data Table 18 compares the means and t,'s for the CV and TV classes within each trimester for the LL scale. Table 19 presents the t's, only, for the compari sons between means for the LL within the CV class across- time and also the .t's for the across-time comparisons for the LL within the TV class. This table also gives the t's for the across-time and across-class comparisons. D i s c u s s i o n In accordance with the experimental design, the teaching format for the faculty member responsible for the 127 TABLE 18 THE LL SCALE: THE MEANS AND t's FOR THE CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester CV Mean TV t I 142.09 148.65 1.68 II 134.25 142.45 1.88 III 133.90 143.66 2.32* \05=1'976 \ol=2-609 df=152 *Significant at the .05 level. 128 TABLE 19 THE LL SCALE: THE t's FOR ACROSS-TIME COMPARISONS WITHIN EACH OF THE CV AND TV CLASSES AND FOR ACROSS-TIME AND ACROSS-CLASS COMPARISONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Comparison t Within CV LL I x LL II 3.32a LL I x LL III 4.04a LL II x LL III .03 Within TV LL I x LL II 3 .46a LL I X LL III 1.81 LL II x LL III .50 Across-Time and Across-Classes LL I CV x LL II TV .09 LL I CV x LL III TV .39 LL II CV x LL I TV 3 .50a LL II CV x LL III TV 2.24b LL III CV x LL I TV 3 .78a LL III CV x LL II TV 1.96 t05= 1.992 t^-2.643 df=76 l l in 4? 1.976 t_oi=2.6°9 df=152 Significant at the .01 level. ^Significant at the .05 level. course herein identified as LL was as follows: (1) each Monday morning he gave a lecture on concepts to both groups, CV and TV, meeting jointly in an auditorium, (2) throughout the year he gave the Laboratory Lectures to the CV group from the platform in the laboratory room, (3) during Tri mester I he gave his duplicate Laboratory Lectures to the TV group from the control room and these were televised to the laboratory room, (4) during Trimester II he gave the duplicate lectures to the TV group from the platform in the laboratory room (same as for the CV group), (5) during Tri mester III he gave his duplicate lectures to the TV group alternately from the control room and from the platform. Thus the Monday morning lectures were each given only once; they were heard by all students in joint session. The weekly Laboratory Lectures were given in duplicate— once for the CV class and once for the TV class. Of course, these duplicate lectures were not precisely alike— the LL could only try to keep them as similar as possible. In all cases the subject of the lectures changed from week to week. Roughly speaking, the subject matter became more difficult as the year progressed. T h e f o r e g o i n g d e s i g n w a s c o n s t a n t l y k e p t i n m i n d w h i l e i n t e r p r e t i n g t h e d a t a d e r i v e d f r o m t h e L L a t t i t u d e 130 scale. It was anticipated that interpretation might be handicapped because of the rather complicated changes in the LL's role. Nevertheless, these changes were necessi tated by the nature of the course, plus the understandable reluctance of the faculty members to expose the experimental group to the possibility of inferior instruction which might result from the new and relatively untried medium of tele vision . Tables 17 and 18 reveal two main features of the LL data: (1) in general, the ratings by the TV class tended to be more favorable toward the LL than did the ratings by the CV class, and (2) the ratings by both the TV and CV classes were less favorable toward the LL by the end of the second trimester than they were at the end of the first trimester. The more favorable LL ratings by the TV students were considered to be a tendency or trend, rather than a decisive difference. This interpretation was based upon the significance levels: in Trimester I the difference was significant only at about the .10 level; in Trimester II, about the .07 level; but in Trimester III, almost the .02 level. A defensible explanation appeared to be as follows: (1) the CV ratings were based upon observations of platform 131 lectures only (plus probably hearsay regarding LL's tele vision abilities), and (2) the TV ratings were based upon direct observations of the LL's abilities through two media, and perhaps their respect for his versatility increased as the year progressed. The second main feature of the LL data was harder to evaluate. Why did the ratings drop between Trimester I and II in both the CV and TV classes? One possible explana tion was that the LL suffered a general let-down in his performance during this period of time. Another tenable explanation was that the students' ratings reflected an initial enthusiasm because of the novelty of television and other experimental procedures, an enthusiasm which declined when these procedures became routine. Other plausible explanations were possible. The LD Scale Presentation of data Table 20 presents the means and t/s for the CV and TV classes when comparisons are made within each trimester for the LD scale. Table 21 presents the t's for the comparisons be tween the means for the LD within the CV class across-time 132 TABLE 20 THE LD SCALE: THE MEANS AND t's FOR THE CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester CV Mean TV I 65 .58 82.38 8.04* II 56 .99 80.99 11.12* III 59.82 84.05 13 .97* t.05=1-976 t =2 .01 .6 09 df=152 ♦Significant at the .01 level. 133 TABLE 21 THE LD SCALE: THE t's FOR ACROSS-TIME COMPARISONS WITHIN EACH OF THE CV AND TV CLASSES AND FOR ACROSS-TIME AND ACROSS-CLASS COMPARISONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Comparison t Within CV LD I X LD II 4.59a LD I X LD III 4.02a LD II X LD III 2.47b Within TV LD I X LD II 1.21 LD I X LD III 1.41 LD II X LD III 3 .53a Across-time and Across-class LD I CV x LD II TV 7.43a LD I CV x LD III TV 9 .31a LD II CV x LD I TV 11.68a LD II CV x LD III TV 13.04a LD III CV x LD I TV 12.19a LD III CV x LD II TV 11.54a t o VI I I H .992 t0i=2.643 df =76 t '.05 ' 1.976 ‘.of2'609 df=152 Significant at the .01 level. ^Significant at the .05 level. 134 and also the t,'s for the across-time comparisons for the LD within the TV class. Table 21 also gives the t's for the across-time and across-class comparisons. I2i scussion In evaluating the LD data two important aspects of the experimental design were kept in mind. First, in the CV class all demonstration work was done in the laboratory, while in the TV class all demonstrations were done in the control room and thence televised into the laboratory. Second, in using the LD scale students were giving a com posite judgment of the work of four faculty members. Highlights of the data in Tables 20 and 21 were as follows: (1) the TV class rated the LD work more favorably than did the CV class— this was true whether comparisons were made within or between trimesters; (2) the LD ratings by the TV class did not show a drop from Trimester I to II paralleling the drop in the CV ratings for the same time interval, and (3) in both classes, CV and TV, the LD work was rated higher in Trimester III than in Trimester II. The Laboratory Demonstrators received very signifi cantly higher ratings from the TV class than from the CV class . Nine TV versus CV comparisons were made--three 135 within and six between trimesters— and all nine of the differences were in the same direction and were significant beyond the .001 level. Tables 20 and 21 show that the nine t ratios ranged from 7.43 to 13.97. These unambiguous findings contrasted sharply with the previously reported findings relative to the LL attitude data. These LL data indicated a tendency of the TV class to rate the lectures more favorably than the lectures were rated by the CV class. However, the LL significance levels were not strong enough to justify describing the differences as more than a "tendency" or "trend." When differences for the LD scale across-time and within the CV class were examined, a significant drop (p= C.01) in rating was observed from Trimester I to II and from I to III. These two drops paralleled the findings for the LL in the CV class although the LL was not involved in the LD work for the CV class. This drop was interesting because LD work introduced a new set of people. This drop indicated that a common factor may have been operating for both scales in the CV class. There was no way of deciding whether the parallel drop resulted from a halo emanating from either the LD or the LL or whether it may have been due to a change in the subject matter or the teaching or an 136 "initial effect," or other factor(s). When changes across-time were examined in the TV class, it was seen that whereas the TV LL declined signifi cantly (p=<.01) from Trimester I to II, along with the change in his teaching medium, the LD scores in the TV class did not show a significant drop from Trimester I to II or from Trimester I to III. The TV LD in Trimester III was, in fact, rated higher, but not significantly, than the TV LD in Trimester I. This stability of LD data was marked. When the TV LD was examined from Trimester II to III, a significant increase (p=<.01) was noted. This increase paralleled the LD's ratings over the same time interval in the CV class. This argued for a common factor across classes. The CV and TV LL did not change from Trimester II to III. This argued for a discrimination of the LL from the LD. As noted, the LL ratings in the TV class did not change from Trimester II to III, but it is impossible to tie this in with the other LD data because the experimental variable (TV instruction) was not constant within itself. The ratings for the LD work were clear-cut and they indicated a change from Trimester II to III that was independent of the teaching medium itself. 137 The VM Scale Presentation of data Table 22 presents the means and t's for the CV and TV classes when comparisons are made for the VM scale within each trimester. Table 23 presents the t's for the comparisons be tween means for the VM scale within the CV and TV classes across-time, and also the t's for the across-time and across-class comparisons. Discussion The VM scale called for judgments of inanimate objects as well as of faculty members, all five of whom used visual materials. Such materials were a necessary and integral part of the Laboratory Demonstrators' work; by contrast, visual materials were less important to the Laboratory Lecturer. Visual materials were the same for the CV and TV sections, the time and manner of using them were the same for both groups, and the frequency of usage was the same for both groups (a few minor exceptions were described in Chapter III, p. 58). However, the visual materials may have seemed more predominant in the TV class— even the bodily actions of the faculty members, when 138 TABLE 22 THE VM SCALE: THE MEANS AND ACROSS-CLASS t's FOR THE CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester CV Mean TV t I 73.65 81.55 3.98* II 71.73 81.49 5.05* III 73.00 83.90 6.03* t.05=1-976 t_oi=2.6°9 df=152 ♦Significant at the .01 level. 139 TABLE 23 THE VM SCALE: THE t's FOR ACROSS-TIME COMPARISONS WITHIN EACH OF THE CV AND TV CLASSES AND FOR ACROSS-TIME AND ACROSS-CLASS COMPARISONS TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Comparison t Within c v VM I X VM II 1 .3 9 VM I X VM III .49 VM II X VM III 1 .0 4 Within TV VM I X VM II .06 VM I X VM III 2 .0 1 * VM II X VM III 2 .3 8 * Across-■time and Across-class VM I CV x VM II TV 3.96 * VM I CV x VM III TV 5.18* VM II CV x VM I TV 5.06 * VM II CV x VM III TV 6 .30* VM III CV x VM I TV 4 .7 0 * VM III CV x VM II TV 4 .6 9 * t r —l I I in o .992 t 0i= 2 -643 d f =7 6 t .05 1.976 \ o r s -609 df=152 *Significant at the .01 level. 140 televised, may have seemed similar to the inanimate visual aids. Tables 22 and 23 show the following main character istics of the VM attitude data: (1) the TV class rated the VM more favorably than did the CV class— this was true whether comparisons were made within or between trimesters, (2) the CV class ratings on VM were practically the same for Trimesters I, II and III, and (3) the TV class ratings on VM were almost exactly the same for Trimesters I and II, but ratings were higher for Trimester III. The VM data paralleled the LD data with regard to the very significantly favorable attitudes of the TV class as compared with the CV. The only difference was that the VM confidence levels were not as high as the LD levels. On the nine parallel comparisons the VM Jt ratios ranged from 3.96 to 6.30— all of which were substantially beyond the .01 level. The CV class VM ratings did not drop across-time. This contrasted with the fact that the CV group ratings for both the LL and the LD were significantly less favorable in Trimesters II and III than they were in Trimester I. This appeared to suggest an independence for the VM in compari son with the LL and the LD. 141 The TV group showed one across-time significant change— they rated VM for the third trimester higher than for the previous trimesters. This increase paralleled that of the TV group ratings of the LD; these increases may have been connected because of the inherent relationship between visual materials and laboratory demonstrations. Perhaps the students thought that the LD's handled their visual materials on television more effectively during Trimester III than previously. Some of the correlation data, reported below in the section "Correlations Between Attitude Measurements," per tained directly to the discussion of TV class ratings in the preceding paragraph. The partial correlation for VM and LD in Trimester III, holding the LL constant, was .74 (Table 32), which was the highest partial correlation for all trimesters between the VM and LD. This indicated that the joint increase came from the same students. There was also little drop from the zero order correlation in Trimester III between the LD and VM to this same partial, indicating that the LL was not influencing student judgment. 142 Interaction between Predicted Grades and Attitudes Statement of hypotheses The first series of hypotheses dealt with the grades achieved by students. The next series of hypotheses dealt with their attitudes. In order to examine whether or not attitudes depended upon aptitude, four null hypotheses were tested. One dealt with CV and one with TV. Each of these was further divided for written and practical work. These hypotheses follow: 1. Hq There is no significant interaction between predicted written grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Pre-EX--in the CV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square 2. Hq There is no significant interaction between predicted practical grades and each atti tude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Pre-EX— in the CV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square 3. H There is no significant interaction between o predicted written grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM, Pre- and Post-EX— 143 in the TV class. Statistical procedure; Chi-square 4. Hq There is no significant interaction between predicted practical grades and each atti tude measurement— LL, LD, VM, Pre- and Post-EX— in the TV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square Presentation of data Chi-square casts data in the form of frequencies and measures the discrepancy between an obtained frequency and an expected frequency. Here the null hypothesis tests for the existence of independence between two variables. The continuous data in each variable for this study have been trichotomized. Table 24 presents the chi-square values for each test of independence between predicted written grade levels, when trichotomized, and each attitude measurement also in trichotomy in each trimester for the CV class. Table 24 also presents the chi-square value for each test of independence between predicted practical grades, when trichotomized, and each attitude measurement also in tri chotomy within each trimester— for the CV class. 144 TABLE 24 THE CV CLASS: THE CHI-SQUARE VALUE FOR BOTH PREDICTED COMPOSITE WRITTEN AND PRACTICAL GRADES AND EACH ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Attitude Written Chi-Square Practical Pre-EX 1.53 1.67 Trimester I LL .72 3.58 LD 3 .96 1.93 VM 3.02 .57 Trimester II LL .77 3.75 LD 6 .30 1.14 VM 1.61 1.15 Trimester III LL 2.05 2.59 LD 1.88 7.14 VM 1.05 4.52 Chi-square 00 I I i r c df=4 145 Table 25 presents the chi-square value for each test of independence between predicted written grade level, when trichotomized, and each attitude measurement also in trichotomy for each trimester for the TV class. Table 25 presents the chi-square value for each test of independence between predicted practical grade levels, when trichotomized, and each attitude measurement also in trichotomy for each trimester for the TV class. Discussion The data in Tables 24 and 25 provided a decisive answer to the question of whether predicted grades interact with attitudes— the answer was no. This answer was true of both the CV and TV classes during all trimesters; it was true of both written and practical aptitudes in relation to all four attitude measurements. Of the forty-six compari sons made, only one showed a significant difference. The experimental hypotheses were based on the possibility that a student with high aptitude for written work might tend to rate lectures highly, whereas a student with high aptitude for practical work might tend to rate the demonstrators or the visual materials highly; and vice versa. If this possibility had turned out to be true, then 146 TABLE 25 THE TV CLASS: THE CHI-SQUARE VALUE FOR BOTH PREDICTED COMPOSITE WRITTEN AND PRACTICAL GRADES AND EACH ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Attitude Chi-Square Written Practical Pre-EX .38 Trimester I 1.35 LL .67 1.39 LD .91 8.55 VM 1.14 4.78 Post-EX 1.49 Trimester II 8.45 LL 7 .20 2.09 LD 4.87 4.95 VM 7 .01 10.55* Post-EX 1.62 Trimester III 2.24 LL 4.19 2.07 LD 1.14 2.09 VM 8.21 1.83 Post-EX 4.87 2.06 Chi-square =9.48 df=4 Uo ♦Significant at the .05 level. 147 the interpretation of attitude differences in the present study would have become much more complicated. Fortunately, the experimental hypotheses could be rejected with confi dence; the null hypotheses were sustained. Predicted grades or aptitudes did not predetermine attitudes. Interaction between Achieved Grades and Attitudes Statement of hypotheses In order to examine the relation between achieved grades and attitude measurements four null hypotheses were tested. Two related to the written and practical work in the CV class and two related to the written and practical work in the TV class. 1. Hq There is no significant interaction between achieved written grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Pre-EX— in the CV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square 2. H There is no significant interaction between o achieved practical grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Pre-EX— in the CV class. 148 Statistical procedure: Chi-square 3. Hq There is no significant interaction between achieved written grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Post-EX— in the TV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square 4. Hq There is no significant interaction between achieved practical grades and each attitude measurement— LL, LD, VM and Post-EX— in the TV class. Statistical procedure: Chi-square Presentation of data Table 26 presents the chi-square value for each test of independence between written grades and each atti tude measurement in each trimester for the CV class. Table 26 also presents similar data for practical grades in the CV class. Table 27 presents the chi-square value for each test of independence between written grades and each atti tude measurement for each trimester in the TV class. Table 27 also presents similar data for practical grades in the TV class. 149 TABLE 26 THE CV CLASS: THE CHI-SQUARE VALUE FOR ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES AND EACH ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Attitude Written Chi-Square Practical Trimester■ I LL 4.85 1.02 LD 1.05 1.03 VM 3 .02 .31 Post-EX .01 .15 Trimester II LL 4.35 4.69 LD 2.53 8.38 VM 1.04 1.00 Post-EX 4.42 2.34 Trimester III LL 2.61 .31 LD .50 .72 VM .2.91 3.48 l n A Chi-square ^=9.48 df=4 150 TABLE 27 THE TV CLASS: THE CHI-SQUARE VALUE FOR ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES AND EACH ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Attitude Written Chi-Square Practical Trimester I LL 5.09 .67 LD 12.81a 3 .88 VM 11.14b 3 .50 Post-EX 7 .02 1.40 Trimester II LL 1.59 .43 LD .45 1.39 VM 4.58 10.76b Post-EX .92 4.21 Trimester III LL .21 11.29b LD .89 5.54 VM 3.06 2.54 Post-EX 5.35 1.36 Chi-square =9.48 Chi-square q2=11.67 Chi-square =13.28 df=4 Significant at the .02 level. Significant at the .05 level. 151 Discussion Tables 26 and 27 show that there was very little interaction between achieved grades and attitudes, and that little was erratic. Of the thirty-six comparisons made, only four were significant. This finding was somewhat unexpected. Theoretically it seemed logical to expect that more favorable attitudes toward a course should usually be coincident with higher grades, and vice versa. Therefore the question became: why were achieved grades independent from attitudes in this study? One possible explanation is that practically all of these students were highly motivated to learn because they had been screened through a highly selective admission policy before being permitted to enter the College of Den tistry. This uniformly high level of motivation could have resulted in maximum efforts to achieve high grades in every course regardless of whether they liked some professors better than others and regardless of whether they liked some courses better than others. Another possible explanation was suggested by the trend in all of the attitude data toward the favorable ends of the scales. Thus when a class was divided into thirds, 152 labeled "high," "middle," and "low," the labels might be deceptive--perhaps a more accurate description would be that all three categories were different degrees of "high." The data on the LL attitudes in Table 17 strongly supported this analysis. The LL scale had thirty-two items, each scored on a six-step continuum. Therefore, the theoretical scores on the LL scale are as follows: Perfect 192 Average 112 Worst 32 Table 18, p. 127, shows that the lowest mean score for LL was 133.9, which is far above the "average." From this viewpoint the sub-group labels (below left) might be more meaningful if changed to the new suggested labels (below right): High Even higher Middle Higher Low High The attitude data for the LD and VM reflected the same trend toward the favorable end, although not as marked, as did the LL data. Almost all of the means on all four of the attitude scales, regardless of group or sub-group, were above the theoretical "average." None was significantly below that average. The above analysis could logically account for the lack of interaction between achieved grades and attitudes because as the range of differences is narrowed, the possi- bility of significant differences is diminished. Attitudes toward Television as a Teaching Medium Statements of hypotheses In order to compare the expectations of the value of television teaching prior to the start of instruction for each of the two classes, a null hypothesis was tested; and in order to examine what happened to these expectations as the academic year progressed in the TV class, another null hypothesis was tested. An additional hypothesis made comparison possible between the CV expectations and the post-EX reactions in the TV class. Also, a further hypo thesis made comparison possible among the post-EX attitudes in the TV class. These four hypotheses were stated as follows: 1. Hq There is no significant difference between the pre-EX inventories for the CV and TV classes. 154 Statistical procedure: t. test for uncorre lated samples (two-tailed). 2. Hq Within the TV class, there is no signifi cant difference between attitudes, as determined by the pre-EX inventory and attitudes as determined by the post-Ex inventories for Trimesters I, II or III. Statistical procedure; t. test for corre lated samples (two-tailed). 3. There is no significant difference between attitude in the CV class as determined by the pre-EX inventory and any of the post-EX inventories in the TV class. Statistical procedure: t test for uncorre lated samples (two-tailed). 4. H Within the TV class there are no signifi- o cant differences among the post-EX inven tories among trimesters. Statistical procedure: t test for corre lated samples (two-tailed). Presentation of data Table 28 presents the means and the t.'s for the 155 TABLE 28 THE PRE- AND POST-EX INVENTORIES: THE MEANS AND t's FOR ACROSS-CLASS AND WITHIN-CLASS COMPARISONS FOR THE CV AND TV CLASSES: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III CV TV t Pre-EX Mean 64.60 70.34 2.13* Post-EX Mean Post-EX I 54.29 Post-EX II 53.52 .81 Post-EX I 54.30 Post-EX III 53.67 .63 Post-EX II 53.50 Post-EX III 53.72 .26 Pre-EX and Post-EX t's Pre-EX CV x Post-EX TV I 5 .79* Pre-EX CV x Post-EX TV II 5 .84* Pre-EX CV x Post-EX TV III 5.96* Pre-EX TV x Post-EX TV I 10.07* Pre-EX TV x Post-EX TV II 9 .43* Pre-EX TV x Post-EX TV III 10.25* t05 =1. 992 tQ1=2.643 df =76 t05 =1. 976 ^ i - 2-609 df=152 ♦Significant at the .01 level. 156 pre-EX inventory in the CV and in the TV classes. Also found in this table are the Scune data for the post-EX inventory administered to the TV class at the close of each trimester. Also found in this table are the t's for the comparisons between the pre-EX inventory in the CV class and the post-EX inventory in the TV class; also, the .t's secured by comparing means between the pre-EX inventory in the TV class and post-EX inventory in the TV class. In this series of inventories, as opposed to the scales discussed previously, scoring was reversed? there fore, here, lower score means a more favorable attitude. Discussion The TV and CV classes did not have equal attitudes prior to the start of the study. The CV class-to-be had a significantly higher expectation (p=<.01) of the value of TV than did the TV class-to-be. Neither class knew at the time of administration of this scale which class would receive which form of instruction. At first, this inequal ity appeared to be unfortunate. However, when the remain ing data for this inventory were examined this difference did not turn out to be a handicap. The .t's comparing the pre-EX inventory in the TV 157 class with the post-EX inventory in the TV class showed that the TV class found itself more satisfied with TV instruction than it had anticipated (p=<.01). And when the jt's between the pre-EX inventory of the CV class and the post-EX in the TV class were examined the same pattern was evident: the TV class found itself more satisfied with TV than the ex pectations for the CV class indicated. In this case, as noted previously, the lack of equivalence between the TV class and the CV class prior to the start of instruction was, fortunately, not a disadvantage. When the means for the TV class were examined at the end of each trimester, the t. test for the difference between means showed that the TV class was stable across- time . Correlations between Attitude Measurements Statement of hypotheses In order to examine the relationship between atti tude measurements two series of null hypotheses were tested. One set dealt with the content of the scales themselves. The second set dealt with correlations of attitude measure ments in adjacent trimesters. These hypotheses follow: 158 1. H Within each class and, further, within each o ' * trimester, the zero and first order partial correlation for any pair of attitude meas urements is not significantly different from the correlation of any other pair. Statistical procedure: Hotelling's t 2. H Within each class, the zero order and first o * order partial correlation of any given attitude measurements for adjacent trimes ters is not significantly different from the correlation for the same attitude meas urements for distant trimesters. Statistical procedure; Hotelling's t The CV Class Presentation of data We have scores for three variables on one popula tion. The problem was to determine whether one variable, X, was more highly correlated with Y than with Z. Hotel ling's t tests for the difference between r and r with- — yz xz out making any assumptions as to the form of the distribu tion of X or Y in the population. This test also assumed that Z has a normal distribution for each value of X and for each value of Y. Table 29 shows the zero order correlations between some of the attitude scales for the CV class. The third column of this table lists the t. for the difference between the two specified correlations on the assumption that r = X z r • This t test, developed by Hotelling, is used with 2 measures of three variables on one population. Table 30 lists the first order partial correlations for the set of correlations presented in Table 29 and the t's for the difference between the indicated pairs of par tial correlations according to Hotelling's method. Discussion Correlations between different attitude scales within a trimester.— The VM and LD correlation was not significantly different from the VM and LL correlation for each trimester. This held true for zero order r's and for partials. However, the VM and LD correlation was signifi cantly higher (p=<.05) than the LL and LD correlation in each trimester for the partials. There was a higher rela tion between the VM and LD scale than there was between the ^Helen Walker and Joseph Lev, Statistical Inference (New York: Rinehart and Winston, 1953), p. 257. 160 TABLE 29 THE CV CLASS: ZERO ORDER CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SELECTED ATTITUDE MEASUREMENTS AND t's FOR TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN CORRELATIONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Variable Correlation t I VM X LL .64 VM X LD .65 LL X LD .53 .13 1.63 II VM X LL .61 VM X LD .51 LL X LD .39 1.06 1.37 III VM x LL .67 t.05=1- " 2 VM x LD .72 LL x LD .51 * * * * * * * * * * * LL I X II .59 I X III .70 II X III .78 LD I X II .37 I X III .53 II X III .69 VM I X II .61 I X III .60 II X III \ o i =2-644 .65 .73 3.21a 2.01 1.38 2.06 .86 .14 .68 df=74 Significant at the .01 level. ^Significant at the .05 level. 161 TABLE 30 THE CV CLASS: FIRST ORDER PARTIAL CORRELATION BETWEEN SELECTED ATTITUDE MEASUREMENTS AND t's FOR TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN CORRELATIONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Variable Correlation t I VM x LL .458 .15 2.64a VM x LD .476 LL x LD .195 II VM x LL .519 1 o VM x LD .372 ± • d . 2 .44b LL x LD .115 III VM x LL .507 .82 6 .20a VM x LL x LD LD .592 .053 * * * * * * * * * * * LL I x II .098 4.51a 1.59 I X III .474 II X III .636 LD I X II .007 4.66a 1.99b I X III .408 II X III .626 VM I X II .361 .22 .97 I X III .337 II X III .448 t =1 992 .05 ‘ . o f 2 .644 df=74 aSignificant at the .01 level. ^Significant at the .05 level. 162 LL and LD. Probably the explanation was that in the CV class the LL did his work separately from the four LD's (see p. 42); at the same time that VM were linked to the work of the LD they were also linked to the work of the LL. The partials also show that the VM x LL correlation was higher than the LL x LD correlation. In some way, then, in the CV class the VM were linked to both the LL and the LD and the work of the LL and LD were separate. Correlations between trimesters within a scale type.— Examination of the partials for LD shows that the Trimester II x III correlation was significantly higher than the Trimester I x III correlation. It is not surpris ing to find adjacent trimesters more highly related. But what is surprising is that the Trimester I x III as well as the Trimester II x III correlations are significantly high er than the Trimester I x II correlation. Apparently there is no relation between student ranking from Trimesters I to II. What accounts for this strange shift, at the same time that the course organization was kept the same, is not known. Further, this inter-trimester partial correlation pattern was found, in almost identical fashion, for the LL. 163 Apparently, this unknown factor(s) influenced both the LL and LD. This lack of relation between Trimesters I and II for the LL and LD may be related in some way to the signi ficant drop in means for both the LL and LD from Trimesters I to II (Tables 19 and 21, pp. 128 and 133). Not only is student judgment becoming less favorable, but different people take over the "favorable" helm. Most striking of all, however, is that VM partials show stability across trimesters. Whatever may be held responsible for the LL and LD patterns, it does not obtain for the VM. The VM stability may be due to the fact that it was not part of a unified TV "production." The TV Class Presentation of data Table 31 shows the zero order correlations between some of the attitude measurements for the TV class. The third column of this table lists the t . for the difference between the two specified correlations. Table 32 lists the partial correlations for the set of correlations presented in Table 31 and the t's for the difference between the pairs of first order partial corre lations . TABLE 31 164 THE TV CLASS: ZERO ORDER CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SELECTED ATTITUDE MEASUREMENTS AND t' s FOR TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN CORRELATIONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Variable Correlation t 3.02a 2.28b II VM x LL .46 0 0_b 2.27 .48 III VM X LL .42 VM X LD .68 LL x LD .48 VM x LL .46 VM x LD .64 LL x LD .60 VM X LL .39 VM X LD .79 LL x LD .46 * * * * * * * * * * * LL I x II .83 I X III .61 II X III .72 LD I X II .59 I X III .52 II X III .74 VM I X II .65 I X III .51 II X III .63 EX I X II .72 I X III . 66 II X III .80 Significant at the .01 level. ^Significant at the .05 level. 5.41a 4.35a 4.54a 2.34b 1.05 3 .14a 1.87 1.61 1.20 2.74a t ^ =1.99 t =2.644 df=74 ■ U5 t ux TABLE 32 165 THE TV CLASS: FIRST ORDER PARTIAL CORRELATIONS BETWEEN SELECTED ATTITUDE MEASUREMENTS AND £'s FOR TESTS OF SIGNIFICANCE BETWEEN CORRELATIONS: TRIMESTERS I, II, AND III Trimester Variable Correlation II VM x LL .145 VM x LD .600 LL x LD .292 VM x LL .123 VM x LD .512 LL x LD .447 VM x LL .048 VM x LD .746 LL x LD .269 * ★ * * * * * * * * * LL I x II .710 I X III .032 II X III .483 LD I X II .357 I X III .153 II X III .628 VM I X II .492 I X III .170 II X III .456 EX I X II .425 I X III .201 II X III .622 4. lla 2.62b 3.74a .55 III VM x LL .048 _ coa / *fc>o 4.77a 9.43a 6 .74a 2.19b 4.65 3 .06a 2 .75a 2.46b 4.33a t =1.992 t =2.644 df=74 • V J • w A aSignificant at the .01 level. bSignificant at the .05 level. 166 Discussion Correlations between different attitude scales within a trimester.— 1. Examination of the partials shows that the VM x LD correlation was higher than the VM x LL relation and higher than the LL x LD relation. This appears to be a way of saying that in the TV class VM were closely linked to the LD and that the VM, in the TV class, were not as close ly identified with the LL as they were in the CV class. This is, of course, a reflection of the difference in teaching between the two classes. One other fact is worthy of note. In Trimester II the VM x LD partial is not higher than the LL x LD partial. This may very well have been tied to the fact that in Tri mester II the LL was teaching in the laboratory itself while the LD work was televised. The LL's influence, in this case, may have extended to the televised material. 2. Several additional observations were made. The VM and LD partial correlations dropped very little from their zero order .r's in comparison with the drop for the VM and LL correlations and for the LL and LD correlations from their own zero order r's. For these 167 latter two sets of correlations, then, the zero order r. was dependent in the first case upon a relationship with the LD, and in the second case upon a relation with VM. On the face of it, the VM and LL scales had little in common. This held also for the LL and LD scales. The highest par tial correlation between VM and LD was found in Trimester III— although no test of significance was available. In this trimester a parallel rise took place in the means for both the LD and VM scales over Trimester II. The rise in both these variables appeared to have been linked. Correlations between trimesters within a scale type.— Although observation of the zero order correlations in Table 31 showed the correlation between adjacent tri mesters to have been higher than trimesters distant in time, Hotelling's t for a difference between correlations showed that these differences were significant only for the LL scale (p=<.01) when Trimesters I and II were examined. This was striking. But when II and III were the adjacent trimesters, the following scales showed a significant difference: LL, Post-EX, LD. Examination of the jt's, Table 32, for the partials, changed this picture and made it possible to say without 168 qualification that the correlation of adjacent trimesters was significantly higher than the correlation for distant trimesters (p=<.05). This was not an unexpected finding. Since there was a change in the nature of the LL's teaching medium in Trimester II, it was interesting how relatively pure the correlation was between the LL for Trimester I and II— the partial dropped to .71 from a zero order of .83-- and how contaminated the LL correlation was between Tri mesters I and III--it dropped to .03 from .61. In some way the evaluation of the LL for Trimester III was "filtered through" Trimester II. This appeared to have been a way of saying that some students preferred the LL (Trimester I) strongly and a very similar group of stu dents liked the non-televised LL (Trimester II) almost as strongly. This may have been an estimate of the LL himself apart from the teaching medium. There is no answer, here, to the question of why the students in the TV class maintained, relatively, the same ranking on the LL scale from Trimester I to II although the LL's medium shifted while in the CV class students did not maintain the same ranking although the LL did not change his medium. CHAPTER V SUMMARY, FINDINGS AND IMPLICATIONS Summary The general problem of this study was to compare the grades and attitudes of students taking a course in operative dentistry, half of whom were taught convention ally and half of whom were taught to a large extent via closed circuit television. Twenty-one null hypotheses were tested in order to explore relationships within and between the control group and the experimental group, within and between trimesters, in terms of (1) predicted grades for written work and for practical work, (2) achieved grades for written work and for practical work, (3) attitudes toward the teachers and the teaching of the course, and (4) attitudes toward the use of television in the course. The problem was thought to be significant because most previous studies of instructional television dealt primarily with conceptual subject matter (e.g., history, general psychology, English literature). These studies 170 concluded, in the main, that there were no differences between CV and TV teaching so far as course examinations go. Some studies, though, dealt with the problems found in dental teaching. In 1955 an Army television study conclud ed, after three hours of small-parts manipulation training, that television was very useful for this work. In 1956 Tannenbaum compared televised lecture-demonstration teach ing of postgraduate periodontia with conventional teaching and found that there were no differences between groups. In 1960 Seibert and Honig prepared careful step-by-step laboratory grading check sheets in order to compare CV and TV teaching of two general college chemistry laboratory techniques. They found no differences between groups on laboratory skills. In 1962 Grant compared TV demonstration teaching of one technic in Crown and Bridge Prosthetics with a CV lecture that used slides. Grant used a reliable, pre-tested practical grading method and found no differ ences between CV and TV teaching. Although the place of visual exposition in the TV teaching of manual skills seems promising and in some ways secure, neither prior to the start of this study, concur rently with it, nor afterwards did any study examine full- scale instruction for a full academic year of a course 171 whose content was highly "visual" and largely concerned with imparting facility in manual manipulation. Also, no attempt has been made to relate written grades and attitudes to this same problem. The design of the study was planned jointly by the experimenter and the five faculty members who taught the course in Sophomore Operative Dentistry at New York Univer sity, College of Dentistry. Preliminary work was done during the academic year of 1959-6 0, and the experiment was conducted throughout the three trimesters of 1960-61. There were 170 students in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. Data from foreign and repeat students were not used in the study. One hundred fifty-four subjects— all males, all in their second year of dental school— were divided into two groups of seventy-seven each on the basis of two variables— predicted grades on written work and predicted grades on practical work, i.e., laboratory pro jects. The two multiple regression equations for predict ing these grades were based on data for students taking Sophomore Operative Dentistry in 1959-60. From the records of these students ten scores were selected--previous grades and aptitude scores on the American Dental Association tests— and correlated with their composite written and 172 composite practical grades in Sophomore Operative Dentistry. The same data on previous grades and aptitude scores were secured for the 154 subjects prior to the beginning of the 1960-61 course. By use of two multiple correlation equa tions the ten scores were used to predict the practical and written grades. The R was .56 for predicted practical grades and .53 for predicted written grades. In order to obtain a close matching of the experimental and control groups on predicted practical grades which was considered to be the more important variable, a sacrifice had to be made on the other variable. The result was that the con trol group had a significant advantage (p=<.05) on predict ed written grades. This difference was compensated for subsequently by use of covariance analysis. The control group is usually identified in this paper as the CV (or conventional) class, and the experimental group is termed the TV (or television) class. The customary schedule for Sophomore Operative Dentistry was well suited to experimental needs. Each Monday morning the whole class attended a lecture by the senior faculty member, stressing principles and theories. For their other meetings the class was divided into two sections because the laboratory room accommodated 173 eighty-five students. Each section had two three-hour laboratory sessions per week. In the CV class the teaching format of previous years was retained without change. Each lab session was opened by a lecture stressing practical application, delivered from a platform in the laboratory room by the senior faculty member. Next came demonstrations, showing how to do the day's laboratory project, by four instructors who worked at student desks. Each instructor demonstrated the task twice; thus each demonstration was observed by a semi-circle of about ten students. The students then went to their desks and started working. During the remainder of the session the instructors circulated about the labora tory, observing the students and occasionally answering questions. Each project was divided into a sequence of steps. When a student completed a step he signaled the nearest instructor, who graded and approved the work on a check-off sheet. In the TV class the following changes were made in the above teaching format. All of the laboratory demonstra tors 1 work was done in the control room and thence tele vised to the laboratory where eight television receivers were strategically located so as to permit convenient 174 viewing from any part of the room. During Trimester I all of the Laboratory Lectures were televised; during Trimester II all were delivered in the laboratory itself? and during Trimester III the lectures were delivered alternately from the control room and in the laboratory. During 1959-60 written examinations, objective in tyPe> were developed and pretested, using the Flanagan item-selection technique. Likewise the four laboratory demonstrators worked together to standardize their grading of practical work, developing a new set of check-off sheets. Apparently they were successful, because the standard deviation for practical grades in 1960-61 was 7.96 as compared with 14.31 for the previous year. Three scales were developed to measure student attitudes toward the teachers and the teaching of the course. These scales were identified as the LL (Laboratory Lecturer) scale, the LD (Laboratory Demonstrator) scale, and the VM (Visual Materials) scale. A combination of Thurstone and Likert techniques was used in constructing the scales. A fourth scale was constructed " free hand" to meas ure student expectations of the use of television in the course. The pre-EX (pre-expectations) inventory was 175 administered at the first class meeting of the year, and the same inventory (with appropriate modification of tense), called post-EX, was administered to the TV class at the end of each trimester. The average reliability (Kuder-Richardson 20) of all four scale-administrations was .91? the range was .88 to .97 . The faculty members endeavored, of course, to main tain maximum similarity in their teaching of the two groups. In order to test the success of these endeavors, four les sons were observed by four "expert" judges, using a graphic Teacher Rating Scale which included nine categories of teaching performance. These data were examined by means of Fisher's exact probability test. Of a total of thirty-six category-comparisons, three showed significant differences between CV and TV teaching. However, the differences were not all in the same direction and they did not indicate any trend or pattern. Findings Findings will be listed according to the statement of hypotheses in Chapter IV. I. A. 1. CV students had higher predicted written-ability than TV students. 2. There was no significant difference in any trimester between the achieved written grades of the CV and TV classes. B. 1. CV students were probably not distin guishable from TV students on predicted practical-ability. 2. There was no significant difference in Trimesters I and II between the achieved practical grades of the CV and TV classes. 3. In Trimester III the achieved practical grades in the CV class were significantly higher (p=<.01) than in the TV class. C . 1. Each of the top and middle thirds of predicted written-ability CV students was significantly higher than each of the top and middle thirds of predicted written-ability TV students. The low CV predicted tricho tomy was not significantly different from the low TV tri chotomy . 2. There was no significant difference between the CV and TV classes on written grades for each trichotomy in each trimester. D. 1. Both the top and low thirds of predict ed practical-ability CV students were not significantly Ill different from the top and low predicted practical-ability thirds of TV students. 2. In both the top and low practical- ability trichotomies, both classes achieved similar grades each trimester. 3. The predicted middle practical-ability third favored the CV class. 4. The middle CV practical-ability tricho tomy did as well as the TV group in Trimesters I and II but exceeded them in Trimester III. II. A. Attitudes toward the LL tended to be more favorable in the TV class than in the CV class; signifi cance levels during the successive trimesters were .10, .07, and .02. B. Attitudes toward the LD's were very signi ficantly more favorable in the TV class than in the CV class; significance levels for all trimesters were beyond .001. C . Attitudes toward the VM used in the course were very significantly more favorable in the TV class than in the CV class; significance levels by trimesters were .01, .001, and .001. 178 III. Predicted grades, written or practical, did not interact with subsequent attitude measurements. IV. Achieved grades, written or practical, inter acted with only a few attitude measurements; there was no trend or pattern in these interactions. V. A. Pre-EX attitudes toward the use of TV in the course, measured at the beginning of the year before any student knew to which group he would be assigned, were very significantly more favorable (p=<.01) in the CV class- to-be than in the TV class-to-be. B. The initial expectancies of the TV class were very significantly exceeded (p=<.001) as the course progressed. The post-EX scores of the TV class for each trimester were very significantly more favorable (p=<.001) than the pre-EX scores of either group. C. Each trimester, post-EX attitudes in the TV class were significantly higher than pre-EX attitudes in the CV class. D. Post-EX attitudes in the TV class were constant from Trimester I through Trimester III. VI. A. 1. In the CV class, both the VM and LL correlation and the VM and LD correlations were signifi cantly higher than the LL and LD correlation each trimester. 179 2. In the TV class, the VM and LD correla- was significantly higher than the VM and LL correlation each trimester: TV students did not relate the work of the LL to the VM in the same way that CV students did. 3. Also in the TV class the VM and LD correlation was significantly higher than the LL and LD correlation in Trimesters I and III only. For these two trimesters CV and TV students were similar. For Trimester II, however, the VM and LD correlation for TV students was significantly higher than the LL and LD correlation. B. 1. In the CV class, the partial correla tion of the LD scale for Trimesters I x III (distant tri mesters) was significantly higher (p=<.01) than the partial correlation for Trimesters I x II. The partial correlation for Trimesters II x III was significantly higher (p=<.05) than the partial correlation for Trimesters I x III. 2. In the CV class, the pattern for inter trimester partial correlation for the LL scale was similar to the LD inter-trimester partial correlation except that the partial correlation for Trimesters II x III was higher than the Trimesters I x III partial correlation but not at the .05 level. 3. In the CV class, the inter-trimester » 180 partial correlations for the VM scale, between trimesters, were not differentiated from one another. 4. In the TV class, the partial correla tion between each of the three attitude scales— VM, LL, and LD— was significantly higher within its scale type in an adjacent trimester than with the same scale type in a distant trimester. Discussion The finding that there was no significant differ ence on written grades themselves between the CV and TV classes is consistent with many previous similar studies. However, in this case the TV class did as well as the CV class, despite the fact that the latter group was favored at the start in terms of matching on predicted written grades. Thus, in effect, the TV class did better than expected on written work. This achievement was probably due at least partly to the operation of many factors (customary in studies of this type) which tend to equate grades on written work, e.g., the joint lecture meetings, the use of a common textbook, and the usual out of class student activities such as sharing notes, discussing assignments, et cetera. 181 The findings regarding grades on practical work are more difficult to interpret. Why were the practical grades during Trimester III significantly higher in the CV class than in the TV class? One possible explanation is that television instruction was adequate for the earlier and easier projects but less adequate for the later and more difficult projects. Another possible explanation is that the TV class suffered some confusion due to the fact that during the third trimester the laboratory lectures were given alternately from the control room and the platform. Such explanations assume, however, that the TV grades declined in the third trimester; Table 9 shows that this was not the case. The data show that the TV grades for the third trimester were practically the same as for the first and 2.3 points higher than the second trimester, while the CV grades for the third trimester were 3.18 points higher than the first and 4.31 points higher than the second tri mester. Thus the TV grades did not go down; rather, the CV grades went up sharply. The question became whether or not the practical grades in a conventionally taught class customarily showed a significant third trimester upturn. Therefore, grades for the previous year were analyzed. No such customary third trimester upturn was found. In 1959-60 182 the mean for the secon trimester was 80.5, which fell to 76.6 in the third trimester. Apparently some unusual and unknown independent variable was at work in the CV class during the third trimester of 1960-61, a variable which was not operative in the TV class. Findings II, A, Band C show a remarkably consistent trend— in seven of the nine comparisons (Tables 18, 20, 22) the TV class attitudes were more favorable than the CV class attitudes toward the teachers and the teaching of the course. Two of these differences did not quite reach the .05 level of confidence; most of the others were beyond the .001 level. The two non-significant differences were on the LL scale. These two smaller differences appear to be partly a function of the fact that the laboratory lecturer was rated highly by both groups. The theoretical scores on the LL scale are as follows: Perfect 192 Average 112 Worst 32 Table 18 shows that the lowest score for LL was 133.9, which is far above the "average." Roughly speaking, the CV ratings of the lecturer were "high" and those of the TV students were "even higher." A wider range of attitude 183 means was provided on the LD and VM scales. The theoretical scores for both scales are as follows: Perfect 108 Average 63 Worst 18 Even so, only two of the twelve LD and VM means were "average"— the remaining ten being in the "good" to "very good" levels. These LL, LD, and VM attitude results appar ently suggest that both groups were well satisfied with the teachers (especially the senior lecturer) and the teaching of the course, and the TV students were significantly the happier of the two groups. Similar findings are shown in Table 28, where the data on attitudes toward the use of television in the course are presented. In reading this table it must be remembered that the scoring system is reversed, i.e., the lower the score the more favorable it is. The theoretical scores on these pre-EX and post-EX scales are as follows: Perfect 25 Average 75 Worst 124 No pre-experiment attempt to equate the two groups on their television expectancies was possible in this study. Table 184 28 shows that randomness did not prevail— the CV group was initially more favorable (p=<.01) toward television than was the TV group. This turned out to be a favorable im balance since it sharpened the contrast between the pre- and post-expectations of the TV class. Table 28 suggests that both groups began with above average expectations in favor of television; after one trimester of experience, the TV students indicated that instructional television had far exceeded their initial expectations (p=<.001) and had likewise exceeded the higher expectations of their col leagues in the CV section. Roughly speaking, the TV stu dents moved from an initial "cautiously above average" attitude to a "definitely far above average" attitude to ward the use of television in the operative dentistry course. The finding that predicted grades did not interact with attitude measurements was expected. There is no apparent reason why predicted grades should predetermine subsequent attitudes toward the way by which a course is taught. Fortunately, expectations were sustained. Had results been otherwise, the validity of the predictive grade tests and of the subsequent attitude tests would have been in serious question. 185 The finding that achieved grades did not interact with attitude measurements was not expected. It seems logical to expect that more favorable attitudes toward a course should usually be conincident with higher grades, and vice versa. The small amount of interaction in this experiment may have been due to the fact that range of grades and the range of attitudes were both limited. As pointed out above, both of the subject groups appear to have had quite favorable attitudes toward the course; both groups were perhaps strongly motivated. The difference between "strong" and "stronger" attitudes may not be great enough to provide a clear-cut distinction between the grades for two groups that have been matched on the latter variable. Implications Future studies should concern themselves with com paring different methods of teaching digital skills via TV. An attempt should be made to discover whether certain TV teaching methods are suited to specific dental technics. Of course, an attempt should be made to discover whether certain technics, or certain aspects of these technics, are more suitably handled without TV. Also, future studies 186 should examine the suitability of different teachers for TV teaching. The LL, LD and VM scales were constructed by com bining Thurstone and Likert techniques. The source of the first step Thurstone items were students who had little or no TV teaching experience. Although the final scales met usual reliability standards, there is no way of knowing how valid the original pool of items was for TV teaching. A similar pool of items secured from a group of students who had several years of TV teaching might have focused on different aspects. The present scales might well have omitted material of importance to a TV audience. Present findings must be viewed with this limitation in mind. The most important factor in determining choice of an item within each of the three arbitrary content cate gories was internal consistency. Future studies should attempt to secure items that examine specified problems of TV teaching. In addition, construction of scales via fac tor analysis would remove the arbitrariness in the three content categories used here. Examination of the multiple correlation equations shows, also, that some of the variables are not of much value as predictors. The multiple correlation equation may 187 well have been improved by dropping some of the independent variables. Further studies should attempt to improve predictive efficiency. So far as teaching "lecture material" via TV is concerned, this study offers no evidence against its use for any ability level. This is in accord with results of many other studies covering "lecture teaching" of other courses and at other grade levels. So far as the teaching of "visual materials" is concerned, the results of this study are ambiguous. For the first two trimesters no evi dence is offered against use of TV for any ability level. However, in Trimester III an ability interaction appeared for the middle trichotomy in favor of CV teaching. But there is no way of separating some of the variables that may be responsible for the production of this effect in Trimester III. For this reason, future studies should examine this variable again, and more carefully. Perhaps an across-college study would be helpful in this respect. A P P E N D I X E S A P P E N D I X A TELEVISED DENTAL LESSONS SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTISTRY 1960-61 APPENDIX A TELEVISED DENTAL LESSONS SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTISTRY 1960-61 Trimester I 1. Sectioning of Teeth: Drawings. Chapter reading from textbook. Discussion of Work-Card. 2. Tooth Morphology. Muscles of mastication; cavity classification. 3. Kit Distribution and set up of instrument case. 4. Levers— forces and stresses. Assign class I outline form on 3X plaster teeth and drawing book. 5. Mortise form— cavity nomenclature. 6. Discussion of enamel, rests, grasps and guard— carving class I on plaster teeth. 7. Laboratory table set up. Care of handpiece and contra angle. 8. Class I technique. Preparation of Class I natural teeth. Rotary. 9. Continue preparation Class I. 10. Instrumentation, Class I. Natural teeth. 11. Instrumentation, large Class I. 12. Class II theory— Class II carvings and preparation. 6l MO. 190 13. 14. 15. 16. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 1. *2. *3. 4. 191 Class II DO. Zinc phosphate cement— chem. and technic. Exclusion of moisture— rubber dam. Application of zinc phosphate cement— technic. Trimester II Instrument sharpening. Amalgam— trituration— insertion technic single surface. Continue with compound cavities and ivory matrix No. 1 ~6\ MO. Continue with various types of amalgam matrices. Class V preparation. Upper jaw instrumentation— rotary rectilinear. Seamless copper band matrix— festooning and appli cation . Disto— lingual step--upper molars. Gold foil armamentarium and technic— Class V. Continue technic Class I. Polishing Class I and V GF. Trimester III Class III— steps in cavity preparation. Class III Gold Foil Insertion— technic. Silicate mixing and insertion— technic. Preparation Class II G.I. of ~7] 3] . 192 5. Gold Inlay technic for wax pattern— direct. *6 . Gold Inlay technic for wax pattern— indirect. 7. Acrylic. Technic for mix and insertion— brush technic and matrix technic. ♦Laboratory lecture and laboratory demonstration both over television--see p. 58. A P P E N D I X B A TELEVISION PRODUCTION SCRIPT: SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTISTRY 196 0-61 APPENDIX B A TELEVISION PRODUCTION SCRIPT: SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTISTRY 1960-61 Rubber Dam Placement Trimester I C aimer a O p e n i n g 2 3" 1 . Laboratory Lecturer— Introduction 4 2 . Slides (3 slides rubber dam) 4 3. Rubber Dam Film (color) 4 4. Slides— Armamentarium 2 6" 5 . Turntable— Rubber Dam Clamps 1 1" 6 . Vu-Graph— Mctrking of Rubber Dam 2 6" 7 . At manikin jaw— cutting of dam 2 3" 8 . Working Table--Marking of Dam Laboratory Demonstrator A . Rubber Dam Punch 2 6" B. Inserting Clamp C . Placing on Tooth D. Frame 194 Camera Lens Opening E. Tension 6" F. Dental Floss 6" G. Correct Dam Placement H. Removal of Dam 1. Black's Knife 2. Interproximal 3. Forceps in holes of clamp or outside o holes 6" 4. Total removal 3" 9. Laboratory Lecturer— Summary Start: 2:45 P.M. Finish: 3:40 P.M. A P P E N D I X C PREDICTED WRITTEN AND PREDICTED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS PREDICTED WRITTEN AND PREDICTED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS 0 'O T J H S 3 < D 0 ) id ■ p ■ P C ■ P O c • O < U u •H 0 ) ■ P •H ■ p < u •H ■ P a > 'O C -p O T 3 3 Q ) •H m 0 ) id id ■ P 33 t V i V 4 p • U u u w H 0 4 2 c o 0 4 0 4 tD CV Students 1 1 4 0 .2 4 1 7 15 5 .5 2 5 5 ?--------1 4 * .9 3 57 1 5 8 . 1 080~ 3 1 4 1 .8 3 2 7 1 4 2 .9 9 1 0 -----------------------------------^---------1 4 6 . 9 2 9 4 --------1 5 2 • 0050~ 5 1 5 1 .9 5 6 0 1 5 5 .0235 -------------------------------- 6 1 5 3 .6 4 3 8 “ — 163.8615- 7 1 4 6 .4 9 2 6 1 4 8.0745 —----------------------------- 8--------- 1 3 6 .7 4 5 4 --------1 4 1 .9 3 1 0 “ 9 143.8311 150.0335 --------------------------------- i 1----------1 4 6 .0 1 7 0 --------1 5 4.8 725" 12 1 4 8 .3 5 9 5 1 5 2 .6 0 8 5 ---------------------------------17._^_157>821 ?------- L l 65 • 8 530 14 1 5 6 .1 8 9 0 1 6 9 .4 1 6 0 --------------- _ ------1 5 1 3 9 .8 3 56--------148 .9 1 3 0 ' 16 1 4 5 .4 9 5 8 1 4 8 .8 1 7 0 -------------------------------- j 7----------1a9# 1612--------144.3950- 19 1 5 0 .8 6 8 7 1 6 0 .5 8 4 0 --------------------------------20------- 1 5 4 .5 1 4 6 -------- 172.7225- 22 1 3 9 .2 6 3 9 1 4 3 .2 2 2 5 ----------------------- 23---------153# 1884--------1 53.7230' 24 1 5 2 .2 5 4 4 1 6 4 .1 5 1 0 -------------------------------- 2 5 --------- 1 6 1 .9 3 5 6 --------1 6 3 .3 1 3 0 26 1 5 7 .5 3 6 4 1 6 1 .3255 _ _------ ----------------------2 7 ----------1 4 8 .4 2 4 6 --------155.3625' 28 149.9481 1 5 7 .6 2 2 5 ------------------------2 9 — — 1 4 9 .2 8 9 4 ---------153.0670' 30 1 4 6 .7 4 4 6 152 2690 '31 1 5 8 .1 3 5 0 — 145 3665* 32 1 4 4 .6 1 3 6 156 3650 ----33------- 1 4 2 .5 0 3 6 155 8765 34 1 5 5 .7 0 1 6 171 5245 35--------1 5 5 .8 6 6 5 -----— 1 6 3 .2 1 8 5 36 150.1981 1 4 7 .8 8 0 0 “3 7------- 1 3 7 .7 7 1 5 ----------159. 0 9 9 ^ 38 1 5 0 .7 6 8 6 1 5 4 .2585 3 9------- 1 4 6 .7 4 4 7--------- T5 8 .“ 21 5 5 40 1 5 1 .8 7 4 9 1 6 0 .5 5 4 5 197 PREDICTED WRITTEN AND PREDICTED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS • 0 *0 r l & 0) ' tu t O ■p ■P a ■ p o c • O 0) u ■ H ' < . 0) -P •H +j © •H •P 0) TJ C ■ p TJ V TJ O d) < U •H 0) to to 4J T> P p p P P u 01 H CU s o (U 04 0 (TV Students 8511 5405- 1901 1830 2006 4297 IS O .' 3833 3325 6841 2918 153. 227 3 9680 7978 147. 6686 141. 4946 0378 149. 5055 3716 8470 7340 6893 150. 165. 2357 157. 6093 4855 9778 150. 1175 9950 152. 6788 6212 5487 154. 5371 9270 156.6150 1 5 3 .4 1 9 5 “ 150.8060 163. 3505“ 153.9540 14 5 .4075- 147.1620 152.8815- 172.1030 158.^515- 15& .1750 164.9500- 156.5980 160.0340- 14 9 .9170 "153.5160* 157.4905 1 4 6 .1 9 8 0 “ 148.6475 154.4255' 134.2575 146.0300- 154.3380 167.4355- 154.2625 147.0090- 159.5745 173.7300' 164.6705 156.8885- 162.1560 150.7705- 159.4185 15 6 .3 5 4 5 “ 178.5515 166.8925“ 156.8800 160.8950- 161.6120 1 3 6 .3 9 4 0 - 199 PREDICTED WRITTEN AND PREDICTED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS • o T3 • 5 2 3 0) t— t p P C < D fti c 1 U < U P u 0) P ■ H P < D 0 •H ■o c P T3 •H P 3 < D cu •H R l 33 U P Tt P P P 0 > R ) C O M 1 CM 5 O . p P Oi < 1 ) TV Students 86 - 8 7 88 — 89- 90 — - 91 92 -93 94 --95_ 96 — 97- 98 — 99 100 -102 103 104 106 — 107 108 - 1 0 9 110 — 111 112 —113“ 114 -115 116 - 1 1 7 - 118 — 119 120 - 121- 122 — 123- 124 1 4 5 .4587 “1 4 1.9746 1 4 0 .5734 ■139.5012“ 1 5 0 .5237 1 4 7 .0777 140.6425 -143.8626 145.6490 -136.1594- 148.5186 1 47.7925- 1 4 4 .4080 149.6094- 1 4 2 .9929 143.1118- 1 4 9 .6 2 0 8 132.6943- 149.1322 1 3 6 .6085 149.2720 -168.3504" 158.1952 "152. 1826“ 1 5 8.3506 -148.0770- 159.5511 -146.9693- 1 5 0 .2497 -1 3 9 .1 1 4 5 163.2826 -142.7042- 1 50.8694 -145.3430- 145.4975 -148.2845- 148.7632 156 — 151 158 — 16 7 166 — 155 149 — 142 164 ----144 158 “ 143 152 ----172 157 ----150 145 ----154 157 139 155 -174 1 73 "155 162 149 160 -145 153 -152 175 -144 153 -169 161 -151 160 .5370 .0 7 9 5 ' .2 325 .3790- .3 360 • 3440- .5785 • 5885- .9795 •5165- .4 985 •4625- .4 740 .2165- .0625 .0010- • 4020 .0780 .9580 •9575- .7945 .8810- .2220 .0915- .8930 .3975- • 8810 .6740- • 3415 .4425- .8785 .6650- .7585 .0760- .3770 • 9835- .7485 * PREDICTED WRITTEN AND PREDICTED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS 200 o T 3 * 0 < H a « v ( 0 ■P -PC -P *0 C • O <U O - H O -P -H p 4 ) -H p Q ) TJG TJ P T3 'OO'O 30) o)-Hrt (Ufdffl PT3 M P P P P P W H ■ (U ftp cu u _____________TV Students 125 151.5735 169.4210 -----------126------- 1 4 4 .4 7 6 9 ---------1 4 6 .1 5 4 5 “ 127 147.7112 162.9055 ----------- 128--------1 4 4 .6 7 0 2--------- 160.9265“ 129 1 3 6 .8 7 1 7 148.1850 ----------- 130-------1 5 0 .9 8 8 7--------- 15 6 .3905“ 131 147.1408 157.2110 ----------- 132-------142.0681----------1 5 0 .5 5 8 0 “ 133 149.9116 151.1880 — 134--------1 4 6 .7 0 9 7--------- r 5 4 .4 5 8 0 “ 135 155.4320 148.9060 ----------- 136------- 142. 1850---------15 0.6335- 137 141.9911 142.4850 -----------138--------1 4 7 .8586--------- 173.9770“ 139 150.3561 155.4085 ----------- 140--------147. 3210---------145 .4-720- 141 1 4 9 .9420 158.9990 ----------- 142--------1 4 2 .0 8 7 3--------- 15 5 .1 0 7 5 “ 143 1 4 3 .4 5 2 0 150.0150 -----------144--------149. 7246--------- 1 6 5 .1 1 2 0 “ 145 1 4 3 .9 2 3 0 143.8745 -----------146--------1 4 4 .6466--------- 14 5 .1325“ 147 145.4855 157.2375 ----------- 148------- 1 5 5 .9 0 9 0--------- 1 6 4 .6285“ 149 1 4 5 .5 0 7 6 147.6190 — ----1 5 0------- 1 4 6 .2 6 0 2 ---------1 5 0 .4 4 6 0 “ 151 147.5408 145.4950 — i5 2------- 1 5 0 .5 8 4 9 ---------1 6 2 .3 6 9 0 “ 153 154.2512 162.5745 ------------154-------145*2840--------- 15 7.8590- 155 144.3944 152.1280 ----------- 156--------1 5 0 .5 8 3 2----------161.0505- 157 1 4 9 .0266 159.7010 ------------158-------142.478 2----------154.7085' 159 146.4522 148.7785 : -----160------- 148. 8248----------1 5 4 .3 9 9 0 161 144.7035 142.7935 ------------162-------153.964 7----------1 7 0 .3 6 6 0 163 140.2268 160.0125 ------------164-------149.8042---------- 14-7.-3040- A P P E N D I X D REVISED SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTAL WEIGHTED LABORATORY GRADING SHEET 1960-61 APPENDIX D REVISED SOPHOMORE OPERATIVE DENTAL WEIGHTED LABORATORY GRADING SHEET 1960-61 L4 Class I Preparation. Plugging, and Polishing of Gold Foil Assigned Student Score Score Management 1. Cleanliness and Gown 1 2. Table and Instrument Arrangement 1 3. Kit 1 4. Set Up and Rubber Dam Placement 1 5. General Impression 1 5 Preparation 1. Outline Form 10 2. Retention Form 5 A. Line Angle B. Walls 3. Depth 5 A. Cement ___ 20 Plugging 1. Retention of Foil 5 2. Condensation 20 202 203 Assigned Score Student Score 3. Marginal Coverage 10 4. Contour 15 50 Polish 1. Contour 10 2. Cavo-Surface 5 3. Degree of Polish 10 A. Pitted B . Flaky 25 Total 100 A P P E N D I X E LABORATORY LECTURER SCALE APPENDIX E LABORATORY LECTURER SCALE 1. The laboratory lecturer's point of view in dentistry is limited. 2. The laboratory lecturer is vitally interested in his work. 3. The laboratory lecturer does not sound "canned" and he is spontaneous and lively. 4. The laboratory lecturer tries to bluff. 5. The laboratory lecturer undermines my self confidence. 6 . The laboratory lecturer is a good teacher. 7. I follow instructions of the laboratory instructor but I do not really understand him. 8. I imagine the laboratory lecturer is a good dentist. 9. The laboratory lecturer leaves ideas up in the air. 10. The laboratory lecturer teaches vividly. 11. The laboratory lecturer has a keen intellect. 12. The laboratory lecturer never gets to the heart of a topic. 205 13. 14. 15. 16 . 17 . 18. 19. 20. 21 . 22. 23. 24. 25 . 26 . 27 . 28. 206 T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r u s e s e x c e l l e n t l e c t u r e m a t e r i a l . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r c a n n o t p u t h i s m a t e r i a l o v e r . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r h a s a b r o a d k n o w l e d g e o f d e n t a l p r o b l e m s . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r a n s w e r s q u e s t i o n s s k i l l f u l l y . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r l a c k s r a p p o r t w i t h t h e c l a s s . I f e e l a t e a s e d u r i n g t h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e p e r i o d . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r d o e s n ' t m a k e y o u w a n t t o d o y o u r b e s t . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r t a l k s t o a m u c h . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r i s b e l l i g e r e n t . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r i s i n t e r e s t i n g . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r c o m p l i c a t e s s i m p l e t h i n g s . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r m a k e s d i f f i c u l t p r o b l e m s c l e a r . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r i s i n t e r e s t e d i n o u r p r o g r e s s . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r i s a h y p o c r i t e . Q u e s t i o n a n s w e r i n g p r o c e d u r e d u r i n g l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e w o r k s o u t w e l l . T h e l a b o r a t o r y l e c t u r e r m a k e s y o u f e e l h e w a n t s t o h e l p y o u . 29 . 30. 31. 32 . 207 The laboratory lecturer does a thorough job. The laboratory lecturer just draws his salary. The laboratory lecturer does not organize his material logically. The laboratory lecturer is patient with the class. A P P E N D I X F LABORATORY DEMONSTRATOR SCALE APPENDIX F LABORATORY DEMONSTRATOR SCALE 1. Demonstration clears up procedures that I am confused about during a verbal lecture. 2. I have a good set of notes on how to carry out a procedure. 3. Demonstrations of operative procedure do not go off smoothly. 4. The demonstrator is patient. 5. There is too much demonstration work to absorb at one time. 6. It is easy for me to observe demonstrations. 7. I can see fine detail during the demonstrator's work. 8. I have an exact idea of how to use my instruments for each step of a procedure before beginning my practical work. 9. I feel I can carry through my practical work success fully as I listen to the demonstrator. 10. The demonstrator points out intricate details easily. 209 210 11. We have sufficient demonstrations of operative pro cedure . 12. Because of my angle of vision when observing a demon stration, it is difficult for me to imagine myself carrying out the procedures. 13. I can not see each step in the demonstrations of operative procedure. 14. The demonstrator does not work slowly enough for me to follow. 15. The demonstrator has the right materials and necessary equipment handy. 16. I feel crowded while watching a demonstration. 17. The demonstrator does not set an example for us to follow. 18. I see large scale manipulations by the demonstrator clearly. APP EN D IX G VISUAL MATERIALS SCALE APPENDIX G VISUAL MATERIALS SCALE 1. I can not ask questions about the film. 2. Visual materials are in poor condition. 3. Visual materials are not explained; we simply see them. 4. The laboratory lecturer does nothing more than run the film; he does not discuss it. 5. Visual materials do not help me understand hand and finger positioning for various procedures. 6 . I can touch and examine physically various models and specimens. 7. Each step of a procedure is illustrated. 8. Something often goes wrong with the visual materials. 9. Visual materials are not carefully tied to the labora tory lecture. 10. The laboratory lecturer does not erase the blackboard of the vu-graph until we have copied the material. 11. I see models and specimens from many angles. 12. Sketching on the blackboard or vu-graph is not done well. 212 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 213 Different anatomical areas are not made clear by means of the visual material. I see large-scale illustrations of small details. I have enough time to study the various visual mater ials . Visual materials are not prepared ahead of time. I feel the visual materials are of value in explaining principles and procedures. I do not see large models clearly. APPENDIX H PRE-EXPECTANCY INVENTORY APPENDIX H PRE-EXPECTANCY INVENTORY 1. Paving Attention. In comparison with regular instruc tion, I expect paying attention in a televised class of operative technic would be: 1. Much more difficult. 2. Difficult. 3. About the same. 4. Easier. 5. Much easier. 2. Amount of Work. In comparison with regular instruc tion, I expect that in a televised class of operative technic I would do: 1. Much less work. 2. Less work. 3. Approximately the same amount of work. 4. More work. 5. Much more work. 3. Amount of Studying. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect that in a televised class of operative technic I would study: 1. Much less. 215 2. Less. 3. About the same amount. 4. More. 5. Much more. Personal Preference. The following best describes my personal preference about being placed in a televised class of operative technic: 1. I am very much opposed. 2. I am opposed. 3. It makes no difference to me. 4. I am in favor . 5. I am very much in favor. General Success. Teaching operative technic via tele vision, full-scale. is new at this school. In compar ison with regular instruction, I expect the television class would work out: 1. Very poorly. 2. Poorly. 3. About the same. 4. Well. 5. Very well. Principle and Theory. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect that in a televised class of oper ative technic I would learn: 1. Much less about principles and theory. 2. Less about principles and theory. 3. Approximately the same about principles and 217 theory. 4. More about principles and theory. 5. Much more about principles and theory. 7. Class Interest. In comparison with regular instruc tion, I expect a televised class of operative technic would be: 1 . Much less interesting. 2 . Less interesting. 3. About as interesting. 4. More interesting. 5. Much more interesting. 8. Question-Answering Procedure. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect the procedure for asking and answering questions in a televised class of oper ative technic would be: 1. Very poor. 2. Poor . 3. About the same. 4. Better. 5 . Much better. 9. Observing Demonstrations. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect I would be able to observe dem onstrations of operative technic in a televised class: 1. Very poorly. 2. Poorly. 3. In about the same way. 4. Well. 218 5 . Very well. 10. Personal Contact with Instructor. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect the change in personal contact with the instructor in a televised class of operative technic would be: 1. Very unsatisfactory. 2. Unsatisfactory. 3. Of no importance. 4. Satisfactory. 5. Very satisfactory. 11. Speed of Class. In comparison with regular instruc tion, I expect a televised class in operative technic would move: 1. Very slowly. 2. Slowly. 3. At about the same speed. 4. Quickly. 5. Very quickly. 12. Technical TV Difficulties. In a televised class of operative technic, I expect technical difficulties arising from use of television equipment itself would be: 1. A great disturbance. 2. A disturbance. 3. Of no practical significance. 4. There would be no technical difficulties. 219 13. Educational TV. So far as education, in general, via television is concerned: 1 . I am strongly opposed. 2 . I am opposed. 3. I have no feelings one way or the other. 4. I sun in favor. 5 . I am strongly in favor. 14. Ease of Jj«?^rninq. In comparison with regular instruc tion, I expect that in a televised class of operative technic I would learn: 1. With great difficulty. 2 . With difficulty. 3 . In about the same way. 4. More easily. 5. Much more easily. 15. Note Taking. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect the notes I would take in a televised course would be: 1 . Very poor. 2 . Poor . 3. About the same. 4. Better. 5 . Much better. 16. Course Organization. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect a televised class of operative technic would be organized: 1. Very poorly. 220 2. Poorly. 3. About the same. 4. Well. 5. Very well. 17. Novelty. So far as the novelty factor is concerned, the following best describes how I would feel about being in a televised class of operative technic: 1. I am very much opposed. 2. I am opposed. 3. It makes no difference to me. 4. I am in favor. 5. I am very much in favor. 18. Verbal Instruction. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect the verbal lecture material in a televised class of operative technic would be taught: 1. Very poorly. 2. Poorly. 3. In about the same way. 4. Well. 5. Very well. 19. Demonstration Work. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect the demonstration work in a tele vised course of operative technic would be taught: 1. Very poorly. 2. Poorly. 3. In about the same way. 4. Well. 221 5. Very well. 20. Adjusting to TV Class. To be a student in a television class would be new to me. I expect I would take to it: 1. Very badly. 2. Badly. 3. About the same way I do a regular class. 4. Well. 5. Very well. 21. TV Impact. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect the impact, or impression, of a televised class of operative technic would be: 1. Much weaker. 2. Weaker. 3. About the same. 4. Stronger. 5. Much stronger. 22. Being in an Experiment. The following best describes my personal feeling about being part of an experiment in the teaching of operative technic: 1. I am very much opposed. 2. I am opposed. 3. It makes no difference to me. 4. I am in favor. 5. I am very much in favor. 23. Faculty Preparation. In comparison with regular in struction, I expect that in a televised class of 222 operative technic the faculty would be: 1. Very poorly prepared. 2. Poorly prepared. 3. Prepared in about the same way. 4. Well prepared. 5. Very well prepared. 24. Quality of Practical Work. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect that in a televised class of operative technic the quality of my practical work would be: 1. Much poorer. 2. Poorer. 3. Approximately the same. 4. Better. 5. Much better. 25. Use of Visual Materials. In comparison with regular instruction, I expect visual materials— charts, movies, specimens, slides, models, etc.--in a tele vised class of operative technic would be used: 1. Much less effectively. 2. Less effectively. 3. In about the same way. 4. More effectively. 5. Much more effectively. A P P E N D I X I QUALIFICATIONS OF JUDGES FOR TEACHER RATING SCALE APPENDIX I QUALIFICATIONS OF JUDGES FOR TEACHER RATING SCALE Trimester II First set of four judges Assistant Professor in Education at a university. Supervised practice teaching in the elementary schools. Lecturer in Education at a local college, teaching a course in the methods of teaching in the elementary school. Supervised teachers as a principal in several elementary schools. Served as a teaching assistant in a graduate course in Supervision and Methods. Formerly Assistant Professor of Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, New York University. Presently Director, Guggenheim Dental Clinic, New York City. Fellow, American College of Dentists. Trimester III Second set of four judges Assistant Professor of Education at a local college and Supervisor of Student Teachers in Science. Professor in the New York State Department of Education Industrial Teacher Training Program— concerned with teaching trade and technical subjects. Professor of Education in a local college. Supervisor of Student Teaching. Professor of Education specializing in higher education. (Substitute judge.) Formerly Instructor, Operative Dentistry, College of Dentistry, New York University. Instructor in Post- Graduate courses at the First District Dental Society. A P P E N D I X J ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS Student Achieved Achieved Ident. Written Practical Np. Grade Grade - < I . II III I II III CV Students 01 76 69 -02------ 81-------67 0? 84 66 0 4 -------86-------75 05 81 73 0 6-------8 4 — 81 07 87 66 0 8---80----68 09 75 67 1 1-------80------- 65 12 74 83 13 14 15 16 17 19 90 66 2 0------ 76------- 75 22 77 66 23— 8 0 -------72 24 75 64 -25---86----83 26 80 71 -27— 76------74 28 87 77 2 9 ------ 84------- 79 30 77 71 ”31------ 84--------77 32 82 71 3 3------ 83-------66 34 85 73 3 5------ 80--------83 36 87 82 -37------77--------57 38 77 72 -39------ 85--------70 40 83 74 4 1-------80--------69 42 87 67 -43-------76 77.5 6 8 .5 7 8 .5 8 3 .5 88.0 86.0 7 3 .0 7 7 .0 8 7 .5 8 5.0 7 1.0 7 8 .0 5 4.5 88.0 8 2 .0 6 0 .0 7 2.5 8 0 .0 0 6 .0 8 1 .0 8 7 .5 8 2 .0 5 7 .0 - 9 1 .5 9 4 .0 8 9 .0 5 1 .2 8 2 .0 8 8 .5 8 9 .0 70.5 227 ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS 228 Student Achieved Achieved Ident. Written , Practical No. Grade Grade I , II III - I II III _______ CV Students________ 44 83 65 80 92*5 77 86 ---------------------------------4 5 ---------- 76 ------7 4 -------------77 ------- ™ 73.0--------81-----------84“ 46 89 77 77 85.0 75 83 -----------47 84-70---- 81---77.5---74--- 83 48 75 66 74 84.5 74 85 -----------49 fl2--81— 91-... 75."0---85----89- 50 81 58 86 72.0 72 83 -----------51----- 70--66----79---74 . 9---76----7T 52 87 77 83 87.0 83 83 ----------- 53-----83--72----79---83.5---74----78- 54 75 72 84 84.0 82 90 -----------55---- 78---7 9---=8 0---r6 8 • 0--7 2----74 56 85 73 72 64.0 73 72 ----------- 57---- 85--73----84---80.0---82----83- 58 84 67 69 79.5 75 82 -----------59-----84--64---- 65---73.5---74----75' 60 76 68 73 79.0 73 79 -----------61----8 0--61---- 79----68 . 5--72----8 8- 62 88 76 80 64.5 77 77 -----------63----82--75----84----77.5--77----78 64 80 86 81 90.5 79 86 -----------65-----75--67----84---86.0---80----8? 66 78 78 84 61.0 74 85 — --------6 7 — — a 2— 7 3--- 68-----8 0 • 5--7 3----7 5 68 88 85 92 92.5 84 90 -----------a9— — 73--81----8 3--- 86.5---78----84 70 85 71 83 71.5 82 84 — — 71--— 8 0--5 8----79----9 0 .5---8 5 8 8 72 86 76 81 84.0 74 79 ----------- 73---- 86--74----80---78.5---82----83 74 84 74 85 82.5 86 83 ----------- 75----79--79----85----84.0--81— 05 76 80 68 61 02.0 82 05 ----------- 7 7----7 5--76---- 81---82 .5---83----82 78 91* 84 . 85 77.5 72 79 ----------- 79— --69--68---- 80----75.0--75----76 00 81 67 73 84.5 77 83 229 ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS Student Achieved * ■ Achieved Ident. Written Practical No. Grade Grade I • II III I II III TV Students 086 86 69 65 69.5 85 82 087-----81---68--- 73--- 88.fr--73— — 73- 088 84 70 78 81.5 74 82 0 8 9----72----73---7 3----8 5 .5--- 8 0---8 5“ 090 87 70 71 90.5 80 83 0 91--- 8 0--- 7 0---7 3----74 .5--- 76---82 092 75 57 64 80.5 73 76 093-----5 8---49----80----6 7.5--7 3— 7 8' 094 80 67 83 83.0 84 84 095--- ?9----56---75----67.0--- 76---82- 096 81 66 77 80.5 78 75 097---81----57---77----80.5--- 75---82“ 098 82 75 70 68.0 76 83 099---- 84---66----74----89.5--9>--- 84" 100 81 65 75 90.0 7V 77 -----102----82----77---74----81.0--- 80---83' 103 87 66 75 79.0 79 75 i 04--- 83--- 65---69----71. 5----80---73- 106 84 75 75 91.0 79 80 10 7---8 0--- 7 4---7 5----5 6 . 5--- 71---8 2- 108 75 80 77 82.5 76 69 109----8 -5---78---88----84.5“— “86----86" 110 86 80 79 79.5 82 84 111-----8 0---77----8 0----86 . 0--71----73' 112 86 73 86 81.0 81 89 113----8 5---79--- 7 5----79 . 0--79--- 81 114 84 79 80 78.5 80 84 115-----81---76--- 79--— 74.5--77----ST- 116 72 80 87 90.5 79 79 117---- 7 9---73--- 7 5----8 3 .0--73----78- 118 87 79 85 92.0 83 87 119---- 8 5---6 8--- 7 7----7 5 . 0--79----75~ 120 81 75 77 86.5 80 78 -----1 2 1-----79---54----7-7----77.5--79----84- 122 72 75 72 80.0 80 82 -----12 3---- 84---68--- 7-9----8 3 • 0--77----79- 124 78 68 64 93.0 87 85 -----12 5---- 8 9---7 5----8 2----94. 0--84--- 8 5 126 89 67 75 84.5 73 80 -----127-----77---65----75----96.0--82----77- 230 ACHIEVED WRITTEN AND ACHIEVED PRACTICAL GRADES FOR CV AND TV STUDENTS Student Achieved ; ^Achieved I4ent. Written Practical ■ No. Grade Grade I II III I II III TV Students 128 87 77 79 89,0 83 92 1 2 9 --------0 1----6 8 -------7 g -------8 2 ^ Q----J T — 130 79 74 80 81.5 78 82 ------- 131---- 89--74----74----80.5--78----80" 132 85 72 79 68.5 71 74 ------- 133---- 91--- 73--81 — 79.5---76----8i~ 134 86 72 80 80.0 76 79 135 ----77----70--81------89.5--74----80- 136 80 67 72 70.0 74 73 „--- 1 3 7-----7 5--65-----74----79. 5--7-7----75~ 138 83 77 80 86.0 83 81 ---------------j 39--------- 79----------------82--------- 8 6 .t)-----72------- 82" 140 79 71 77 66.0 67 70 --------14 j ----7 ^----70---72--- 7 9,-5---78----7 7' 142 72 71 82 88.0 77 76 --------14 3---- 8 6--- 67---70-----7 5 . 0--67----75' 144 84 79 74 88.0 80 77 --------14 5---- 8 2----7 6---7 3-----60 .-5--73----77 146 80 76 70 66.5 79 78 ---------------147--------- 76-------70------7 1---------8 7 . O----72--------8 3 148 82 76 70 90.5 85 88 ------- 149---- 6 7----71---8 0-----62 , 0--76---^81" 150 82 74 77 81.5 70 79 ------- 15 1---- 94--- 80---78--- 71. 5---72----76~ 152 84 71 91 84,0 80 83 — - — -153-----81---82---86---- 88.5--85----85 154 82 73 79 81.5 76 76 --------15 5---- 81--- 71---8 0-----7 3 . 5--7 5----77 156 74 72 80 75.0 85 82 --------157---- 83--- 79---82-----80.5--74----80 158 75 77 82 83.5 80 79 --------159---- 83--- 74---83-----81.0--77----81 160 83 79 71 75.0 76 80 --------161-----83----71---80--- 71.0---78----84 162 84 70 78 85.0 82 85 --------163-----81--- 73---82--- 8 6 , 5---78----81 164 84 76 77 61.5 75 74 A P P E N D I X K ATTITUDE SCORES OF CV STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) ATTITUDE SCORES OF CV STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student Ident. Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 01 121 71 69 *J36 68 70 J26 64 83 66 oz J58 90 95 Jl3 62 59 J47 66 81 to 03 J54 62 53 J 36 38 48 J34 53 61 62 04' JOB' 66 '78' 094 55 74 J04 5 2' 67 66 n * ; J6 7 97 07 J6A 9ft 97 J66 96 99 79 Oft, J57 77 on J4? 68 77 J52 80 83 58 07 J77 AT 75 J?? 61 85 J74 63 92 67 Oft .123 6? 74 J 3 5 . 83 75 J23 65 78 57 09 J16 60 66 J49 69 87 J37 62 65 57 11 J52 48 72 082 31 49 096 59 69 68 12 J56 70 81 J36 72 78 J58 70 84 59 1 3 J49 87 91 J30 60 /2"-J29 /4 T4 f5 14 J49 80 86 J41 47 63 J32 52 5 7 76 15 J45 61 75 J 3 7 40 66 J48 51 71 60 1 4 J35 45 81 J00 37 67 J1 2 49 68 70 1 7 J7 f t A 7 97 J75 60 95 J71 64 88 64 1 9 J3 8 • 84 90 J7 o 43 92 J4 3 52 8 1 75 p.n J8? 81 78 J80 67 84 J f t 9 79 87 58 ?? 77 J47 5? 68 J47 47 70 8P 23 J3A 40 58 J67 61 80 J69 60 78 65 24 J35 72 73 J46 66 72 J29 58 63 53 25 J38 59' 67 J48 45 72 J27 52 61 77 26 J14 80 55 096 46 35 J00 66 63 88 2 f Jl 8' 5 3' /o' J05 66 91 J02 44 61 52 28 099 50 43 J02 33 49 074 30 45 39 29 J36 60 79 J63 37 66 J33 38 57 52 30 092 41 45 J19 74 52 093 55 55 68 31 J37 70 88 J46 41 77 J?6 61 84 89 3? J77 81 69 JO 7 62 46 Jl 7 64 67 60 77 J1 5 54 65 J09 68 66 Jl 5 56 61 63 34 J4 7 7? 65 J 3 5 62 68 J45 61 65 64 35 J68 57 71 J48 6 3 66 J4 7 48 63 59 36 J55 65 86' J32 52 90 J39 72 86 61 37 J57 5? 69 J56 63 72 J59 60 75 66 38 Jl 3 42 62 J40 40. 53 J14 49 55 66 *J=1; therefore J36 is to be read as 136, etc. 232 233 ATTITUDE SCORES OF CV STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student Ident. Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 * 10 39 J37 39 74 J61 83 91 J53 84 90 49 40 J60 66 75 J56 65 77 J51 60 81 62 41 J56 86 80 J55 92 90 J59 73 90 73 42 J1 3 66 49 J16 74 62 Jl 6 69 59 46 43 J64 75 83 J64 60 83 J40 53 55 68 44 J04 64 56 096 50 67 095 53 68 55 45 J55 92 84 J 3 5 66 78 J57 71 84 46 J56 78 93 J59 53 82 JS1 62 77 55 47 J36 53 88 J30 85 J31 72 72 57 4 8 J60 70 82 J56 92 J36 54 64 49 fc9 J47 65 83 J0<* 37 5? JOl 38 61 63 50 094 60 73 096 64 60 J04 67 74 78 51 J35 57 73 J54 53 60 J38 64 76 79 52 J79 91 00 J81 78 94 J79 74 93 45 53 J42 80 74 J35 65 80 J31 62 75 53 54 J53 89 79 097 52 60 J09 51 62 63 55 J26 43 56 J24 56 73 J14 48 67 55 56 J1 7 33 38 077 29 45 072 41 60 44 57 J45 76 66 J28 58 70 J65 74 89 69 5 8 J39 53 59 J40 59 54 J?9 62 67 59 J44 66 61 J70 6? 61 J02 6 1 50 68 60 J6? 69 69 J 6 1 86 87 JT 1 71 90 66 61 J87 74 90 J76 40 87 J74 70 96 67 6 7 J52 77 90 J 5 9 70 76 J 6 3 82 81 86 63 J49 64 77 J58 78 74 J5 6 60 82 68 64 J69 76 89 J43 58 85 J42 61 76 58 65 J20 61 82 JOS 45 71 J57 57 85 68 66 J44 75 76 J49 63 68 J50 69 79 55 67 J82 91 98 J54 41 79 J52 62 84 60 68 J39 45 63 J 36 37 62 J44 37 73 53 69 J44 74 86 J1 7 51 81 J 3 4 61 86 73 70 J46 47 70 J42 40 64 J4 7 48 51 62 71 J44 68 69 J25 4 7 62 J"* 8 68 67 73 7? J60 80 97 J50 72 78 J43 70 85 72 73 J36 50 58 ' J 37 34 78 J26 47 76 59 74 J52 71 73 J46 75 81 J37 60 75 80 75 J01 55 52 082 47 63 089 57 62 77 76 J38 66 79 J19 59 79 J24 70 83 60 77 J28 75 63 J 38 48 72 J28 51 75 64 78 J23 51 46 J22 35 57 J33 48 60 67 79 J32 50 58 J16 35 58 Jl 8 45 61 01 80 J61 75 80 J66 67 84 J54 67 83 52 Legend: 1=LL I; 2=LD I; 3=VM I; 4=LL II; 5=LD II; 6=VM II 7=LL III? 8=LD III? 9=VM III: 10=Pre-EX. APP EN D IX L ATTITUDE SCORES OF TV STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) ATTITUDE SCORES OF TY STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student - Ident. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Number 086 159 049 094 *J62 081 088 J54 087 J60 J03 092 J33 085 080 J30 088 J. 6 3_ . 090 091__ J45 P8JL 080 J55 089 J71 084 082 J55 084 087 J62 090 J68 084 091 J50 . 077 087 J6? 091 J45 076 083 J51 082 083 J58 09? J63 088 095 _ Jll 073 071 JO 8 093 J44 060 061 J06 069 075 J39 094 J71 •093 092 J68 089 092 J77 095 J73 088 081 J82 J03 085 095 096 J46 067 071 J40 084 062 J42 097 J66 083 073 J79 087 087 J51 098 J81 092 099 J 78 082 086 J73 099 J46 087 086 J38 088 072 J47 J00 J62 092 090 J53 088 087 J31 JO 2 J60 081 087 J53 063 077 J72 ' JO3 J55 085 079 J28 081 075 Jl 6 J04 J60 0 79 080 J60 083 084 J56 J06 J55 083 084 J 5 9 084 082 J60 JO 7 J41 076 074 J30 064 ' 074 J64 J08 J67 090 087 J37 080 083 J35 J09 J41 084 065 J44 0a0 086 J46 J10 J 30 067 071 J 3 2 0 74 075 J29 Jll J 59 066 059 J 22 058 065 J09 J12 J50 079 090 J34 085 069 J 3 7 J 1 3 J61 081 077 J51 082 073 J44 J 14 J52 082 078 J46 081 077 J47 J15 J73 081 085 J74 084 090 J60 J 1 6 . J02_ 088 072 JO 2 05Q 0.68 JO? J 1 7 J61 082 085 J62 083 084 J57 J18 J70 J01 095 J70 093 091 J76 J 19 J 34 074 081 J1 7 077 084 J47 J20 J76 J07 096 J82 J08 J04 J72 J21 J62 088 086 J58 089 087 J55 J22 J54 062 078 J 18 064 063 J48 tjaj.— therefore J62—is- to be read as—162,— etc --------------------------------2^5----------------------- 236 ATTITUDE SCORES OF TY STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student Ident. 1 2 3 Number J2.3 Jie 071 067 J 1 3 069 073 J 1 9 . J24 J46 089 087 Jl 1 069 072 J09 J25 J67 087 087 J63 074^. 082 J71 J26 J56 081 061 J42 078 069 J56 J27 J58 089 095 __J 6 2 089 088 J68 J28 J61 088 091 J62 087 091 J62 J29 J46 081 076 J60 094 081 J57 J30 J38 074 065 J 1 7 069 072 J35 J31 J61 089 080 J60 088 086 J63 J32 J61 083 081 J53 089 091 J80 J33 J54 081 084 J60 083 087 J58 J 34 J01 087 074 J75 092 068 093 J35 J29 077 065 _ .098 059 059 Jl 0 J36 J21 070 078 J1R 068 078 J21 J37 J58 090 08 1 J59 090 088 J73 J38 J4 3 085 086 J49 087 087 J56 J39 J51 071 072 J44 057 067 J50 J40 J58 086 087 J60 087 087 090 J41 083 090 077 076 079 088 084 J42 083 072 085 083 086 082 084 J43 066 071 073 070 079 070 068 J44 096 094 082 088 083 088 099 J45 061 067 085 066 063 087 073 J46 075 072 072 071 066 087 J36 J47 J38 061 058 J36 067 050 J50 J48 J81 084 076 J88 077 094 J83 J49 J02 059 054 J52 082 082 J59 J50 J42 075 077 J73 J07 087 J92 J51 J58 081 081 J67 088 088 J63 J52 J 7 3 094 085 J56 091 090 J65 J53 J 36 098 J00 J23 J01 092 J21 J54 J20 081 065 J35 070 070 J 19 J55 J59 090 089 J60 087 093 J55 J56 J02 068 068 J 1 9 067 0 70 J26 J57 J57 098 091 J58 090 090 J51 J5 0 J 7 5 088 087 J5o 089 093 J48 J59 J64 092 082 J54 075 089 J60 J60 J83 J02 J02 J66 085 J02 J70 J61 J66 099 096 J7 1 092 097 J78 J62 J62 085 082 J21 ,073 C 66 J48 J63 J84 J02 098 J92 J01 J01 J90 J64 J62 094 087 J49 084 080 J52 Leaend i 1 E =LL I? =VM" IT'i 2=LD I 7-X.L ; 3=VM f H ----- I; 4= H H J J 5=LD II ATTITUDE SCORES OP TY STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student Ident. Number 8 9 10 11 12 13 086 090 076 73 75 74 71 087 008 09 3 089 087 087 56 75 49 52 46 55 65 46 59 089 090 093 085 082 090 59 76 44 54 42 50 091 087“ 097 59 50 32 54 092 069 083 57 44 54 48 093 083 0 74 61 61 60 58 094 094 091 77 70 59 61 095 J03 J04 88 61 43 47 096 077 072 86 59 56 67 097 086 085 65 46 44 41 098 087. 088 45 44 39 43 099 081 075 58 43 43 58 * J00 081 080 57 53 50 47 jo 2 088 095 60 55 61 56 JO 3 . 073 075 82 54 57 57 J04 080 078 59 53 55 53 J06 090 086 64 42 41 42 JO 7 "086 089 90 78 63 43 J08 085 079 62 51 60 57 J09 083 083 70 58 59 59 J10 073 073 93 61 54 58 Jll 065 068 84 78 69 71 J12 086 090 87 52 63 59 j n 081 083 72 57 53 58 J 14 084 079 75 59 63 64 J1 5 080 084 58 57 51 47 J16 066 078 65 62 59 54 J17 084 090 60 46 46 50 J 18 J00 098 62 48 44 46 .....J19 081 087 74 63 67 68 J20 099 J02 41 37 32 32 J21 081 086 43 42 39 37 J22 076 076 84 63 63 63 *j=l* therefore J00 is to be read as 100, etc. 237 238 ATTITUDE SCORES OP TY STUDENTS (Legend Identifying Scales Follows Data) Student Ident. Number 8 9 10 11 12 13 ------- J2T “ OPT" ■061 94 40 60 71 JZ4 075 054 ” 66 65 61 59 J25 089 094 8 1 39 48 40 J26 078 07 2 8 1 52” 50 56 J27 090 090 81 57 64 J 28 090 087 " 77 45 46 47 J29 087 087 89 40 30 29 J30 074 072 42 54 60 J 3 1 091 098 57 42 44 46 J32 096 092 66 53 51 43 J33 090 087 64 48 44 49 J 34 J04 096 77 61 57 54 J35 069 069 75 54 68 62 J 36 079 088 64 "'50" 57 51 J 3 7 092 083 82 61 46 48 ” J38 089 090 62 59 61 J 39 066 071 79 94 01 94 J40 080 090 / 4 56 25 54 J41 078 085 70 59 60 56 J42 080 " 087 54 61 72 J43 093 075 84 59 55 62 J44 087 097 74 64 61 6? J45 063 075 95 61 7 73 J46 070 067 56 70 68 J47 069 070 75 74 64 59 J48 097 096 82 52 46 51 J49 091 087 63 52 54 J50 096 J00 65 57 58 53 J51 084 073 62 54 43 45 J52 081 087 60 61 58 55 J53 091 080 36 39 50 . 43 J54 069 067 49 53 62 66 J55 085 08 7 83 51 51 35 J56 075 075 97 61 50 48 J 5? 009 090 90 48 49 48 J58 082 081 64 56 60 64 J59 087 089 52 52 49 45 J60 J00 J03 80 40 37 42 J61 099 098 62 39 44 33 J62 069 071 59 58 48 J63 J04 J03 74 43 38 44 J64 086 086 47 45 51 52 Legend: 8=LD III; 9=VM III? 10=Pre-EX; ll=Post- __________EX I? 12=Bo»t-F.X II.;. . 13=EflatTEX III____ BI BL I OG R AP H Y BIBLIOGRAPHY Books Edwards, Allen L. Techniques of Attitude Scale Construc tion . New York: Appleton-Century-Croft, Inc., 1957. Fisher, Ronald A. Statistical Methods for Research Workers. 6th ed. Edinburgh and London: Oliver Boyd, 1936. Guilford, J. P. Fundamental Statistics in Psychology and Education. 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956. ________ . Psychometric Methods. 2nd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1954. Lindquist, E. F. (ed.). Educational Measurement. Menasha, Wisconsin: George Banta Publishing Co., 1951. Lindzey, Gardner (ed.). Handbook of Social Psychology. Cambridge, Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., 1954. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavior al Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., 1956. Thorndike, Robert L. Personnel Selection. New York: John Wiley, 1949. Torgerson, Warren S. Theory and Methods of Scaling. New York: John Wiley, 1958. Walker, Helen, and Lev, Joseph. Statistical Inference. New York: Rinehart and Winston, 1953. 240 241 Pamphlets Beecher, Dwight E. The Evaluation of Teaching. Syracuse: Syracuse University Press, 1949. Carpenter, C. R. and Greenhill, L. P. Instructional Tele vision Research Report No. 1, An Investigation of Closed-Circuit Television for Teaching University Courses. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University, 1955. _________. Instructional Television Research Report No. 2. An Investigation of Closed-Circuit Television for Teachincr University Courses. University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University, 1958. Dreher, Robert E., and Beatty, W. H. An Experimental Study of College Instruction Using Broadcast Television. San Francisco, Calif.: San Francisco State College, 1958. Honig, J. J., Seibert, W. S., and Moses, D. F. The Utili zation of Audio-Visual Aids in the General Chemistry Laboratory Work at Purdue University. Lafayette, Indi ana: Department of Chemistry, Purdue University, May 1958. Kanner, J. H., Runyon, R. P., and Desiderato, 0. Tele vision in Army Training: Evaluation of Television in Armv Basic Training. Technical Report No. 14. Wash ington, D. C.: Human Resources Research Office, George Washington University, 1954. Macomber, F . G . Experimental Study in Instructional Pro cedures . Oxford, Ohio: Miami University, 1956. _________. Experimental Study in Instructional Procedures. Report No. 2. Oxford, Ohio: Miami University, 1957. Myers, Lawrence. Evaluation of Television as a Teaching Tool by Experienced Teachers. Syracuse, N. Y.: Syra cuse University, 1961. New York University Bulletin. New York: June 6, 1960, 60, No. 23. 242 Starlin, Glenn, and Lallas, John E. Inter-Institutional Teaching by Television in the Oregon System of Higher Education. Report No. 1. Eugene, Oregon: Oregon State System of Higher Education, 1960. Teaching bv Television. A Report from the Ford Foundation and the Fund for the Advancement of Education. New York: Ford Foundation, 1959. Thurstone, Louis L., and Chave, E. J. The Measurement of Attitude. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1929. Periodicals Alexander, F. D. "An Experiment in Teaching Mathematics at the College Level by Closed-Circuit Television." Un published Ph.D. dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers, Nashville, Tennessee, 1961. Abstract. Dissertation Abstracts. XXII, No. 8 (1962), 2805. Bailey, Herbert S. "Teaching Physics in Closed-Circuit Television." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Syracuse University, Syracuse, N. Y., 1958. Abstract. Disser tation Abstracts. XIX, No. 8 (1959), 1947. Crandell, C. E., and Bryson, J. E. "An Evaluation of Tele vision as a Method of Teaching Dental Roentgenology," Journal of Dental Education. XXVIII (March, 1964), 37- 42. Fehrer, Elizabeth. "Shifts in Scale Values of Attitude Statements as a Function of the Composition of the Scale," Journal of Experimental Psychology. XLIV (Sep tember, 1952), 179-188. Flanagan, J. C. "General Considerations in the Selection of Test Items and a Short Method of Estimating the Product-Moment Coefficient from the Data at the Tails of the Distribution," Journal of Educational Psycholo gy . XXX (December, 1939), 674-680. 243 Grant, T. S., Blancheri, R. L., Lorencki, S. F., and Merrill, I. R. "Television in Health Sciences: I. Effectiveness of Television within the Dental Labora tory," Journal of Dental Education. XXVI (June, 1962), 146-151. Grossman, L. I., Ship, I. I., and Romano, M. T. "Evalua tion of Teaching by Television versus Chairside Demon stration," Journal of Dental Education. XXV (December, 1961), 330-337. Kanner, J. H., and Rosenstein, A. J. "Television in Army Training: Color vs. Black and White," Audio-Visual Communication Review. VIII (November-December, 1960), 243-252. Kanner, J.-H., Runyon, R. P., and Desiderato, O. "Tele vision as a Training and Educational Medium," Audio- Visual Communication Review. Ill (Summer, 1955), 163- 171. Kelley, Truman L. "The Selection of Upper and Lower Groups for the Validation of Test Items," Journal of Educa tional Psychology. XXX (January, 1939), 17-24. McGuire, F. L., Moore, F. J., Harrison, C. A., and Riley, R. E. "The Efficiency of Television as Applied to the Use of Laboratory Demonstration in Teaching," Journal of Medical Education. XXXVI (June, 1961), 715-716. Neidt, C. 0., and French, J. L. "Reaction of High School Students to Television Teachers," Journal of Genetic Psychology. C (March, 1962), 337-344. Rosenstein, A. J., and Kanner, J. H. "Television and Army Training: Color vs. Black and White," Audio-Visual Communications Review. VIII (November-December, 1960), 243-252. Runyon, R. P., Desiderato, 0. L., and Kanner, J. H. "Fac tors Leading to Effective Television Instruction," Audio-Visual Communication Review. Ill (Summer, 1955), 264-273 . 244 Seashore, R. H., and Hevner, Kate. " A Time-Saving Device for the Construction of Attitude Scales," Journal of Social Psychology. IV (August, 1933), 366-372. Seibert, W. F., and Honig, J. M. "A Brief Study of T e l e vised Laboratory Instruction," Auclio-Visual C o m m u n i c a tion Review. VIII (May-June, 196 0) , 115-123. Williams, H. E. "A Study of the Effectiveness of Classroom Teaching Techniques Following a Closed-Circuit T e l e vision Presentation in Mathematics ." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, George Peabody College for Teachers , Nashville, Tennessee, 1962. Abstract. Dissertation Abstracts. XXIII (December, 1962) , 2160. Wohlgamuth, D. "A Comparative Study o f Three Techniques of Student Feedback in Television Teaching," Abstract, Audio-Visual Communication Review. X (May-June, 1962), A-100. Unpublished Materials Diamond, Robert Mach. "The Effect of Closed-Circuit R e source Television upon Achievement in the Laboratory Phase of a Functional Human Anatomy Course ." U n p u b lished Ph.D. dissertation, New Y o r k University, N. Y., 1962.
Linked assets
University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses
Conceptually similar
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Intelligibility Thresholds Of Hypacusic Adults Using Forced-Choice And Yes-No Techniques
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Influence Of Subliminal Cue Words On Audience Responses To A Filmed Speaker'S Sincerity, Effectiveness, And Subject Matter
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Several Methods Of Teaching Basic College Speechcourses With Emphasis On Conservation Of Teachers' Time And Varying Class Size
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Effects Of Interest And Authority Upon Understanding Of Broadcast Information
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Factors Influencing The Perception Of Auditory Flutter
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Relationships Between Self-Concepts Of Fourth And Eighth Grade Stuttering And Non-Stuttering Boys
PDF
An Experimental Application Of 'Cloze' Procedure As A Diagnostic Test Of Listening Comprehension Among Foreign Students
PDF
An Experimental Study Of An Application Of Game Theory To The Selection Of Arguments By College Debaters
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Effect Of Listener Feedback On Speaker Attitude
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Accuracy Of Experienced And Inexperienced Speakers In Identifying Audience Behavior As Indicative Of Feelings Of Agreement, Indecision, Or Disagreement
PDF
An Empirical Study Of The Behavioral Characteristics Of Sincere And Insincere Speakers
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Effects Of Interaural Temporal Delays And Intensity Differences On Intracranial Localization Of Spondee Words
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Ability Of Lay Judges To Distinguish Betweentypescripts Of Individual Idea Development And Group Idea Development
PDF
An Experimental Study Of Auditory Thresholds Of Adults For Warble Tone, Pure Tone, And Recorded Speech
PDF
Effects Of An Audience On Serial Association
PDF
An Experimental Investigation Of Repression Of The Auditory Perception Ofdisturbing Words As Indicated By Verbal And Electrodermal Responses
PDF
Critical Study Of The Nominating Speeches At The Democratic And Republican National Conventions Of 1960
PDF
An Experimental Study Of The Retention And Comprehension Of Poetry Resulting From Silent Reading And From Oral Interpretation
PDF
An Empirical Study Of Classroom Teaching Of Ethics In Beginning College Public Speaking Courses
PDF
An Investigation Of The Spoken Language Of Chronic Schizophrenics As A Function Of Behavioral Adjustment
Asset Metadata
Creator
Bloom, Leon William
(author)
Core Title
Teaching Operative Dental Technics Via Television: An Experimental Inquiry
Degree
Doctor of Philosophy
Degree Program
Speech
Publisher
University of Southern California
(original),
University of Southern California. Libraries
(digital)
Tag
OAI-PMH Harvest,Theater
Language
English
Contributor
Digitized by ProQuest
(provenance)
Advisor
Dickens, Milton (
committee chair
), Garwood, Victor P. (
committee member
), Harwood, Kenneth A. (
committee member
), Rutherford, Robert B., Jr. (
committee member
)
Permanent Link (DOI)
https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-362983
Unique identifier
UC11359121
Identifier
6506538.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-362983 (legacy record id)
Legacy Identifier
6506538.pdf
Dmrecord
362983
Document Type
Dissertation
Rights
Bloom, Leon William
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