University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Attitudinal Variables Among Teachers Of Exceptional And Non- Exceptional Children

(USC Thesis Other)

Attitudinal Variables Among Teachers Of Exceptional And Non- Exceptional Children

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content This dissertation has been ^ 9037
microfilmed exactly as received
PLATOW, Joseph A., 1929-
ATTITUDINAL VARIABLES AMONG TEACHERS
OF EXCEPTIONAL AND NON-EXCEPTIONAL
CHILDREN.
University of Southern California, Ph.D., 1969
Education, psychology
University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan
ATTITUDINAL VARIABLES A M O N G TEACHERS OF EXCEPTIONAL
A N D NON-EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
by
r fl'
Joseph Platow
A D is s e rta tio n P resented to th e
FACULTY OF THE G R A D U A T E SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY O F SO UTHERN CALIFORNIA
In P a r tia l F u lfillm e n t o f th e
Requirem ents fo r th e Degree
D O CTO R OF PHILOSOPHY
(E d u catio n al Psychology)
January 1969
UNIVERSITY O F SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
T H E GRADUATE SCHOOL
UNIV ERSITY PARK
LOS A N G ELE S. C A LIFORN IA 9 0 0 0 7
This dissertation, written by
Josep h P latow
under the direction of h.Dissertation Com
mittee, and approved by all its members, has
been presented to and accepted by The Gradu
ate School, in partial fulfillment of require
ments for the degree of
D O C T O R O F P H IL O S O P H Y
Dean
n„t, January, 1969
DISSERTATION^OMMITTEE
hairmdn
T A B L E O F C O N T E N T S
LIST O F TABLES .......................................................................
C hapter
I . STA TEM EN T O F THE PROBLEM....................................
In tro d u c tio n
Need f o r th e I n v e s tig a tio n
Statem ent o f th e Problem
Hypotheses
D elim ita tio n s
L im itatio n s
Procedure
D e fin itio n o f Terms
O rg an izatio n o f th e Remaining C hapters
I I . REVIEW OF TH E LITERATURE...................................
A ttitu d e s and C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers
in G eneral
A ttitu d e s and C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers
of E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
A ttitu d e s Toward E x cep tio n al C hildren
A ttitu d e Measurement
The Adorno "F" Scale
The Rokeach Dogmatism Scale
The Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
Summary
I I I . SO U RC E OF D A T A A N D METHODOLOGY.......................
The Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
D esc rip tio n o f th e Sample
R esearch Design
S t a t i s t i c a l Treatm ent o f Data
Summary
C hapter
IV. FINDINGS
Rage
158
P erso n al Data Inform ation
Comparison o f Teachers o f E xceptional
C hildren and R egular C lass Teachers
Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C hildren
Summary
V. FINDINGS, SU M M A R Y , CONCLUSIONS, A N D
RECOMMENDATIONS.............................................................. 231
F indings
Summary
C onclusions
Recommendations
APPENDIX A. Teacher A ttitu d e S u rv e y ................................ 262
APPENDIX B. Follow -up L e t t e r s ............................................. 279
BIBLIOGRAPHY.................................................................................... 282
i i i
LIST O F T A B L E S
Table Page
1. Rated P re stig e o f C e rta in S p ecial Education
Teaching S p e c ia ltie s and O ther O ccupational
Areas .............................................................. 62
2. R e lia b ility o f th e F S c a l e ................................ 97
3 . R e lia b ility o f th e Dogmatism S c a l e ............... 109
4 . School D is tr ic ts R eceiving A ttitu d e Surveys . . 143
5. R egular Class T eachers R eceiving and R eturning
Teacher A ttitu d e S u rv e y ................................... 144
6. Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C hildren Receiving and
R eturning Teacher A ttitu d e Survey ....................... 145
7. R egular Classroom T eachers in C a lifo rn ia . . . 148
8 . Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ildren in
C a l i f o r n i a .............................................................. 149
9 . Teachers o f E x ce p tio n al C h ild ren Used in
I n i t i a l Riase o f R e s e a r c h ............................... 151
10. Teachers o f E x ce p tio n al C hildren Used in
Second Riase o f R esearch . ............................... 153
11. Sex o f Teachers in Sample o f 200 161
12. Type o f C ollege A ttended by Teachers in
Sample o f 200 .............................................................. 163
iv
Table Rage
13. H ighest Degrees A tta in ed by Teachers In
Sample o f 200 ............................... . .............................. 165
14. G rants Obtained by T eachers in Sample o f
200 166
15. Teaching C re d e n tia ls ....................................................... 168
16. S p ecial C r e d e n t i a l s ........................................................... 169
17. A d m in istrativ e C r e d e n t i a l s ......................................... 171
18. P ro fe ssio n a l O r g a n i z a t i o n s .......................................... 172
19. Years o f E xperience—C urrent Assignment . . . . 173
20. Years o f E xperience—T o t a l ......................................... 175
21. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
T eachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —Means—
Rokeach Dogmatism S c a l e ............................................ 178
22. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
T eachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Rokeach Dogmatism Scale . . . . 178
23. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C hildren--M eans- -
Adorno F S c a l e .............................................................. 180
24. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
T eachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —A n aly sis
o f V ariance—Adorno F S c a l e .................................... 180
25. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —Means—
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—" S e l f " ............................... 182
26. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
T eachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A n aly sis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—" S e lf" . . 182
v
Table Rage
27. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means —
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—"Average S tudent" . . 184
28. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l- -
"Average S tudent" .......................................................... 184
29. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means —
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—"G ifted S tudent" . . . 186
30. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"G ifte d S tudent" .......................................................... 186
31. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—" T e a c h e rs " .................... 188
32. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
" T e a c h e r s " ................................... 188
33. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—"The Slow L earner" . . 190
34. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance--S em antic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The Slow L e a r n e r " ................................................... 190
35. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—"A d m in istrato rs" . . . 192
v i
Table Page
36. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if fe re n tia l- ”*
" A d m i n i s t r a t o r s " .............................................................. 192
37. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—"The Handicapped
C h i l d " ............................................................................... 194
38. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The Handicapped C hild" ............................................. 194
39. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means —
Semantic D if fe re n tia 1—" E ducation
P r o f e s s io n " ....................................................................... 196
40. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
T eachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"E ducation P ro fessio n " ............................................ 196
41. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means —
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—" D i s c i p l i n e " .................. 198
42. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—
" D i s c i p l i n e " .................................................................. 198
43. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means-**
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—" C u rric u lu m " .................. 200
44. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V arian c e-S e m an tic D if f e r e n tia l—
" C u r r ic u lu m " .................................................................. 200
v i i
Table Bage
45. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—" T o t a l " ........................... 202
46. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis
o f V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"T o ta l” ................................................................................ 202
47. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—Rokeach
Dogmatic S cale .............................................................. 206
48. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V ariance—Rokeach Dogmatic S c a l e ....................... 206
49. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—Adorno
F S c a l e ................................................................................ 207
50. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —A nalysis o f
V ariance—Adorno F S c a l e ........................................ 207
51. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means-“Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—" S e l f " ................................................. 209
52. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—" S e lf" . . . 209
53. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means “-Sem antic
D if f e r e n tia l—"The Average S tudent" ................. 210
54. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The Average S tudent" ................................................. 210
v l i i
Table Rage
55. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E xceptional C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—"The G ifted S t u d e n t " .................. 212
56. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The G ifted S t u d e n t " ................................................. 212
57. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E xceptional C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D i f f e r e n t i a l - - " T e a c h e r s " ........................................ 213
58. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
" T e a c h e r s " ....................................................................... 213
59. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E xceptional C h ild re n —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—"The Slow L e a r n e r " ...................... 215
60. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V ariance—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The Slow L e a r n e r " ..................................................... 215
61. Comparison of S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E xceptional C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—" A d m i n i s t r a t o r s " ........................... 216
62. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
" A d m i n i s t r a t o r s " .......................................................... 216
63. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—"The Handicapped C hild" . . . . 218
ix
Table Rage
64. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al Children**-A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The Handicapped C h i l d " ................................................. 218
65. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—"The E ducation P ro fessio n " . . 219
66. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
"The E ducation P r o f e s s i o n " .................................... 219
67. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—" D i s c i p l i n e " .................................... 220
68. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l—
" D is c ip lin e " ................................................................... 220
69. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—" C u r r ic u lu m " .................................... 222
70. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —A nalysis o f
V ariance--S em antic D if f e r e n tia l—
" C u r r ic u l u m " ................................................................... 222
71. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Means—Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—"T o ta l" ................................................. 224
72. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n —A nalysis o f
V arian ce—Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
" T o t a l " ................................................................................ 224
x
T able Rage
73. Comparison o f R egular C lass Teachers and
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —
Summary o f F in d in g s ......................................................... 227
74. Comparison o f Elem entary Teachers and
Secondary T eachers—Summary o f F indings . . . 229
75. Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren —Summary o f
F i n d i n g s ................................................................................ 230
x i
C H A P T E R I
STA TEM EN T OF TH E PRO BLEM
In tro d u c tio n
In th e l i t e r a t u r e o f s o c ia l psychology a re found
numerous d e f in itio n s o f a t t i t u d e . In a l a t e r s e c tio n o f
th is d is s e r ta ti o n th e d e f in itio n s o f E nglish and E n g lish
(3 7 :5 0 ), K retch and C ru tc h fie ld (79:177), Anderson and F ish -
b e in (5 ), A llp o rt (3 :4 5 ), Fuson (40:856), Campbell (23:31),
Edwards (3 4 :2 ), and Shaw and W right (131:3) a re examined.
A lthough each d e s c rip tio n has i t s own unique q u a l i t i e s —
s tr e s s in g th o se are a s o f p a r tic u la r concern to th e au th o r
o r au th o rs in v o lv ed —a l l th e in te r p r e ta tio n s d isc u sse d have
enough commonality to allo w us to propose a s in g u la r d e f i n i
tio n fo r u se throughout t h is stu d y . A ttitu d e , th e re fo re ,
w i ll r e f e r to a s t a t e o f re a d in e ss th a t e x e rts a d ir e c tiv e
in flu e n c e upon an in d iv id u a l to behave in a c e r ta in manner
toward p a r tic u la r s o c ia l o b je c ts in h is environm ent.
1
2
The a t titu d e s o f te a c h e rs have occupied th e concern
o f many re s e a rc h e rs in th e f i e l d o f ed u catio n , p a r tic u la r ly
w ith emphasis on th e in flu e n c e o f th e s e a t titu d e s on th e
b eh av io r o f te a c h e rs in d e a lin g w ith th e s o c ia l o b je c ts
th a t predom inate t h e i r environm ent ( i . e . , s tu d e n ts , adm inis
t r a t o r s , fe llo w te a c h e rs , e t c . ) . Wickman's (154) e a rly
stu d y in t h i s a re a focused on th e d i f f e r e n t i a l a t titu d e s o f
te a c h e rs and c lin ic ia n s tow ard c h ild re n . S to u ffe r (141:
271-285, 142:358-362) follow ed up Wickman's o r ig in a l s tu d ie s
and found some s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s (fa v o ra b le ) had tak en
p la ce over th e y e a rs . S im ila r in v e s tig a tio n s by H unter
(6 0 :3 -1 1 ), T olor (147:175-180), Horn (59:118-125), and
lin d g re n (85:80-85) a l l u n d erta k e to c o n c e n tra te on th e
te a c h e r 's a t titu d e s tow ard h is p a r tic u la r s e t o f " s o c ia l
o b je c ts " and how th is a t t i t u d e in flu e n c e s h is b eh av io r
tow ard them. Ryan (12) went even f u r th e r in in c lu d in g th e
p e rs o n a lity and c h a r a c te r is tic s o f te a c h e rs as w e ll as t h e ir
a t t i t u d e s .
The b eh av io r o f te a c h e rs ed u catin g th e c h ild who is
m e n tally o r p h y s ic a lly handicapped has been judged to be
d if f e r e n t from th a t o f th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e r. That t h is
is so i s evidenced by th e d if f e r e n t e d u c a tio n a l background
re q u ire d o f th e te a c h e r o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and th e
s p e c ia l c re d e n tia ls needed in alm ost every s t a t e o f th e
U nited S ta te s . The e x iste n c e o f c h ild re n who d i f f e r p h y si
c a lly o r m e n tally from th o se in th e re g u la r classroom , as
w e ll as th e d if f e r e n t environm ental surroundings o f th e
s p e c ia l ed u catio n c la s s , provides f o r a d if f e r e n t " c la s s of
s o c ia l o b je c ts " th a t th e te a c h e r o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
must d e a l w ith during th e co u rse o f h is te ac h in g day.
Since d if f e r e n t b eh av io r i s re q u ire d from th e s p e c ia l edu
c a tio n te a c h e r th an is expected from th e re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e r, and sin c e a t titu d e s a r e a m ajor d eterm in an t o f b e
h a v io r, i t i s n o t s u rp ris in g th a t th e a t titu d e s and ch arac
t e r i s t i c s o f th e te a c h e r o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n have been
s c ru tin iz e d by a number o f in v e s tig a to r s . G o ttfrie d and
Jones (47:218-223), ftiox (77), and M eisgeier (95:229-235)
a re among th o se who have converged upon th e te a c h e r o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n as th e o b je c t o f t h e i r in v e s tig a tio n s .
Many o f th e se s tu d ie s in d ic a te d th a t th e fa c to rs
th a t m o tiv ate te a c h e rs to e n te r in to th e f i e l d o f te a ch in g
th e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild a re probably a s v a rie d as th e fa c e ts
o f t h e i r p e rs o n a lity , b u t th a t once in th e f i e l d t h e i r
reaso n s f o r leav in g o r s ta y in g d i f f e r l i t t l e from te a c h e rs
in g e n e ra l. P ersonal c h a r a c te r i s tic s , however, a r e an o th e r
m a tte r. For th e most p a r t th e s tu d ie s o f George (43) and
M attson (93) in d ic a te much hom ogeneity among s p e c ia l educa
tio n te a c h e rs w ith em phasis on such t r a i t s as h ig h m oral
purpose, o th e r-p e rso n co n scio u sn e ss, p a tie n c e , f r ie n d lin e s s ,
to le ra n c e , p e rso n a l warmth, and sympathy. In o th e r w ords,
th e te a c h e r o f p h y s ic a lly and m e n tally handicapped c h ild re n
appears to have th o se c h a r a c te r is tic s th a t would g e n e ra lly
be expected o f someone w orking in t h is f i e l d .
From th e above, i t would b e assumed th a t th e i n
v e s tig a tio n o f th e a t titu d e s o f th e s e s p e c ia l f i e l d te a c h e rs
would a ls o re v e a l s im ila r p o s itiv e fin d in g s . As an example,
th e s p e c ia l ed u c atio n te a c h e r m ight be expected to be le s s
dogm atic and a u th o r ita r ia n in h is fe e lin g s th an would th e
re g u la r c la s s te a c h e r. S tu d ies by Dandes (30) and Kramer
(78) have in d ic a te d th e im portance o f th e s e two a t t i t u d i n a l
a re a s as reg ard s t h e i r e f f e c t upon th e b eh av io r o f th e
te a c h e r in h is everyday work. Dandes (30) found a stro n g
r e la tio n s h ip between th e m en tal h e a lth o f te a c h e rs and
t h e i r d eg ree o f a u th o rita ria n is m and dogmatism. Psycho
lo g ic a lly h e a lth y te a c h e rs w ere le s s a u th o r ita r ia n , more
open minded, and more l i b e r a l in t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l
v ie w p o in ts. The stu d y concluded th a t p sy c h o lo g ic a lly
h e a lth y te a c h e rs would be b e t t e r a b le to encourage th e
growth o f s tu d e n ts in th e d ir e c tio n o f p sy c h o lo g ica l h e a lth ^
Kramer (78) found th a t "open-minded" te a c h e rs tended to be
more p erm issiv e and p ro g re ssiv e in t h e i r g e n e ra l a t titu d e s
and a ls o tended to be more c o n s is te n t in t h e i r e n t ir e edu
c a tio n a l a t t i t u d e s tr u c tu r e .
Need fo r th e In v e s tig a tio n
Many prom inent ed u cato rs hold th e p o in t o f view th a t
every c h ild is e x c e p tio n a l in th a t he is d if f e r e n t from
every o th e r c h ild . However, th e d e s ig n a tio n o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n i s u s u a lly lim ite d to th e s tu d e n ts who d i f f e r so
m arkedly from th e group t h a t th e y need s p e c ia l tr a in in g in
o rd er to develop t h e i r p o te n tia l. The d iffe re n c e may be
p h y sic a l, m en tal, m oral, s o c ia l, em o tio n al, o r any combina
tio n o f th e s e .
A com plete census o f th e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in
our p o p u la tio n has n ev er been ta k e n . Boag (8:21) in d ic a te s
th a t even w ith modern sc re en in g m ethods, th e re i s always
th e problem in b o rd e rlin e ca ses o f d e c id in g w hether th e
c h ild should b e c la sse d as norm al o r e x c e p tio n a l. In s p i t e
o f t h i s , fig u re s a s to th e in cid en ce o f th e se c h ild re n do
ap p ear. Abraham (1:5 0 -5 1 ) e s tim a te s th a t one c h ild in
e ig h t i s e x c e p tio n a l and, on th e av erag e, th e re i s one in
ev ery th ir d fam ily . This would in d ic a te approxim ately
seven m illio n sch o o l-ag e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in th e U nited
S ta te s . Boag (8 :2 1 ) c i t e s fig u re s from th e U nited S ta te s
O ffice o f E ducation e s tim a tin g th a t 12.7 p er c e n t o f a l l
school c h ild re n need s p e c ia l s e rv ic e s . O ther a u th o rs in d i
c a te th a t th e p ercen tag e o f in cid en ce may be even h ig h e r.
Whatever th e p a r tic u la r e s tim a te , i t i s in c re a s in g ly
ap p aren t th a t th e numbers o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in our
schools co n tin u e to grow each y e a r. This may be due to
com pulsory school a tten d a n ce and i t s c o r o lla ry o f a more
com plete census o f a l l sch o o l-ag e c h ild re n . This has
brought to lig h t a school-age group o f c h ild re n in th e men
t a l l y and p h y s ic a lly handicapped groups which, h e re to fo re ,
has been q u ie tly and alm ost s e c r e tly tak en c a re o f a t home. I
In a d d itio n th e d if f e r e n t c h ild h as, h e re to fo re , been
tak en o u t o f school a t an e a r l i e r age and kept a t home, on
th e farm, o r in th e fam ily-owned sm all b u sin e ss to h e lp
w ith in h is lim its . Now th e re a re few er and few er fa m ilie s
on farms o r w ith sm all b u sin e sse s where e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
can be placed so th a t th e y a re happy and a d ju s te d .
The a s p e c ts o f our modern economy have a ls o made
changes In our folkw ays th a t have led toward a la rg e r num
b er o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in our school system s. Hie
movement o f fa m ilie s has been from th e farm s, v ill a g e s , and
towns to th e la rg e r c i t i e s . With t h i s move, th e members o f
th e fa m ilie s go to work in f a c to r ie s and in d u s tr ie s . There
i s no p lace in t h i s changed mode o f liv in g fo r d if f e r e n t
c h ild re n . They now appear in g r e a te r number, coning in to
our sch o o ls e a r l i e r and sta y in g lo n g e r.
Modern m edicine and new drugs have a ls o c o n trib u te d
to th e in c re a s e in number o f school-age e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren . Fewer b a b ie s a re lo s t a t b i r t h from such cau ses as
prem ature d e liv e r ie s , p h y sic a l m alform ation, and th e lik e .
Many o f th e se a re saved and reach sch o o l age and a re o fte n
p o te n tia ls fo r th e fu tu re s p e c ia l s e rv ic e s . In fa n ts who
have c o n tra c te d m e n in g itis o r e n c e p h a litis and o th e r
s e rio u s illn e s s e s a re saved by modem d ru g s; y e t some o f
them a re s u ffe rin g from p a r t i a l o r even permanent b ra in
damage. These c h ild re n , to o , a re c a n d id a te s fo r s p e c ia l
serv ices*
As th e number o f c h ild re n c l a s s i f i e d a s e x c e p tio n a l
in c re a s e , so must th e s e rv ic e s and p erso n n el in th e p u b lic
sch o o ls In crease to m eet t h e i r n eeds. Reynolds (118:1-5)
estim a te s th a t in most s t a t e s , th e number o f te a c h e rs and
o th e r s p e c ia lis t s employed to se rv e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
has doubled and o fte n tr e b le d in j u s t th e p a s t decade. He
a ls o in d ic a te s th a t r e c r u itin g can d id ates f o r th e s e many
p o s itio n s and developing th e c o lle g e programs f o r p rep arin g
them have been d i f f i c u l t problems everyw here. In a d d itio n
th e problem o f s e ttin g up stan d ard s reg a rd in g th e s p e c if ic
com petencies re q u ire d o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n te a c h e rs s t i l l
co n fro n ts th e p ro fe s s io n as w e ll as tr a n s la tin g th e se
sta n d ard s f o r th e c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s t h a t w i l l t r a i n
such te a c h e rs . A c c re d ita tio n o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n te a c h e rs
i s a ls o l i s t e d as an im portant co n tin u in g problem . Reynolds
(1 1 8 :1 -5 ) in d ic a te s t h a t th i s i s so "because s p e c ia l edu
c a to rs them selves have n o t produced th e n e c e ssa ry s t a t e
m ents o f sta n d ard s and g u id e lin e s by w hich e v a lu a tio n and
a c c r e d ita tio n a c t i v i t i e s a r e o rg a n iz e d ." P o ssib le reaso n s
fo r t h i s c o n d itio n a r e th a t p ro fe s s io n a ls in th e f i e l d a re
s t i l l n o t agreed a s to what c o n s titu te s competency among
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , o r what k in d o f t r a i t s ,
c h a r a c te r i s tic s , o r e d u c a tio n a l backgrounds b e s t p rep are an
in d iv id u a l f o r th e jo b o f te a c h in g c h ild re n who d i f f e r
p h y s ic a lly o r m e n tally from th e accep ted norm.
In s p it e o f th e se problems th e numbers o f programs
f o r th e handicapped co n tin u e to in c re a s e . In 1963 acco rd
ing to fig u re s c ite d by Abraham (7 :5 0 -5 1 ), 5,600 p u b lic
sch o o l system s provided s p e c ia l o p p o rtu n itie s fo r h a n d i
capped c h ild re n as compared w ith only 1,400 in th e l a t e
1 9 4 0 's. Every s t a t e now o ffe rs some s p e c ia l h e lp , and
n e a rly a l l s t a t e departm ents o f ed u c atio n employ one o r
more s p e c ia lis t s in a s p e c if ic h andicap.
A d d itio n a l stim u la n ts to p ro g ress in s p e c ia l educa
tio n have been provided by f e d e r a l le g is la tio n . In a s in g le
y ear (1965-1966), 5,000 fello w sh ip s and tra in e e s h ip s in
n e a rly 200 c o lle g e s and u n iv e r s itie s were e s ta b lis h e d in
th e f i e l d o f s p e c ia l e d u c atio n . Government g ra n ts have
been made to en ab le h ig h e r-e d u c a tio n in s t i t u t i o n s to develop
te a c h e r-p re p a ra tio n program s.
By in c lu d in g th e handicapped among th e "educa
tio n a lly d e p riv e d ," R ib lie law 89-10 has brought a d d itio n a l
su p p o rt to s p e c ia l ed u c atio n . Hundreds o f sch o o l d i s t r i c t s
have used T itl e I funds to employ a d d itio n a l s p e c ia l edu
c a tio n te a c h e rs ; s e t up needed c la s s e s ; develop e a rly
id e n tif ic a tio n , enrichm ent, and in - s e r v ic e program s; and
10
to s e t up numerous o th e r f a c i l i t i e s and s e rv ic e s f o r excep
t io n a l c h ild re n .
The demanding need fo r f u r th e r developm ent, r e
s e a rc h , and p ro g re ss in th e a re a o f s p e c ia l ed u c atio n is
c o n c ise ly summarized by Connor:
S p ecial ed u c atio n has come o f age, b u t i t s m a tu rity
i s b e fo re u s.
Needed is a new page in th e h is to r y o f s p e c ia l edu
c a tio n . The moving f in g e r must w rite th e c u rre n t
c h a p te r in modern term s, to develop th e in d iv id u a l
p o t e n t i a l i t i e s o f each handicapped c h ild , to ach iev e
co n fid e n t s e l f - r e a l i z a t i o n f o r h is p a re n ts , and to h elp
th e p ro fe s s io n a l a tta in m e n ts o f h is te a c h e rs , and to
make e f f e c tiv e th e d e c isio n s o f h is a d m in is tra tio n .
(25:65-66)
The in v e s tig a tio n o f s e le c te d a t t i t u d e v a ria b le s
among te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n is in lin e w ith th e
p rev io u s sta te m e n t, e s p e c ia lly in th e a re a o f h e lp in g in
th e p ro fe s s io n a l a tta in m e n ts o f th e te a c h e rs as w e ll as to
make more e f f e c tiv e th e d e c isio n s o f th e a d m in is tra tio n
in v o lv ed .
Statem ent o f th e Problem
The purposes o f t h i s stu d y a r e as fo llo w s: (1 ) to
id e n tif y c r i t i c a l a re a s o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r ta in a t t i -
tu d in a l v a ria b le s among te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs in s e le c te d sch o o l d i s t r i c t s
11
in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia ; (2) to Id e n tify c r i t i c a l a re a s
o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r ta in a t t i t u d i n a l v a ria b le s among
te a c h e rs o f elem entary and secondary grade le v e ls ; and
(3) to id e n tif y c r i t i c a l a re a s o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r ta in
a t t i t u d i n a l v a ria b le s among d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in s e le c te d sch o o l d i s
t r i c t s in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia .
Hypotheses
The m ajor hypotheses in t h i s study a r e p rese n ted
below acco rd in g to th e fo llo w in g form at. A m ajor hypo
th e s is c a te g o ry is re p re se n te d by th e h y p o th e sis number
follow ed by a ze ro , e . g . , 1 .0 , 2 .0 , e tc . A subhypothesis
is re p re se n te d by i t s m ajor h y p o th esis number follow ed by
i t s own number, e .g ., 1 .1 , 1 .2 , e tc . These numbers a r e
a ls o used when fin d in g s r e la tin g to a s p e c if ic h y p o th esis
a re d isc u sse d in l a t e r c h a p te rs o f th i s d is s e r ta tio n .
1 .0 Dogmatism (As m easured by th e Dogmatism S cale of
Rokeach (122))
H q 1 .1 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e tendency to be
open-minded o r closed-m inded betw een te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H q 1.2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e tendency to be
open-minded o r closed-m inded betw een e l e
m entary (grades k in d e rg a rte n through s ix th )
te a c h e rs and secondary (grades seven through
tw elv e) te a c h e rs .
H Q 1.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e tendency to be
open-minded o r closed-m inded among th e v a ry
in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n (educable m e n tally re ta rd e d , t r a i n -
a b le m e n ta lly re ta rd e d , d ea f and h ard o f
h e a rin g , b lin d and p a r t i a l l y s ig h te d , o rth o -
p e d ic a lly handicapped, speech handicapped).
A u th o rita ria n ism (As m easured by th e Adorno "F" S cale)
H q 2 .1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o r ita r ia n
a t t i t u d e betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs .
H 0 2 .2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o r ita r ia n
a t t i t u d e betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and
secondary te a c h e rs .
H Q 2 .3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o r ita r ia n
a t t i t u d e among th e v ary in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s
13
o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
3 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward S e lf (As measured by Semantic D iffe r
e n t i a l )
H q 3 .1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
toward o n e s e lf betw een te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
HQ 3 .2 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
toward o n e s e lf betw een elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 3 .3 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
toward o n e s e lf among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia l
iz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
4 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward Average S tudents
H 0 4 .1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e av erag e stu d e n t between te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H q 4 .2 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e av erag e stu d e n t between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 4 .3 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e av erag e stu d e n t among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward th e G ifted S tudent
H 0 5 .1 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t between te a c h e rs of
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H 0 5 .2 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 5.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward Teachers
H q 6 .1 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard te a c h e rs between te a c h e rs o f excep
t io n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H Q 6 .2 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard te a c h e rs betw een elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs .
15
H q 6.3 There Is no d iffe re n c e In th e a t titu d e s
tow ard te a c h e rs among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia l
iz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
7 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward th e Slow L earner
H 0 7 .1 There Is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e slow le a rn e r between te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H q 7.2 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e slow le a rn e r between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 7.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e slow le a rn e r among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
8 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward A d m in istra to rs
H q 8 .1 There i s no d if fe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a d m in is tra to rs betw een te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
H 0 8 .2 There i s no d if fe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a d m in is tra to rs betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
16
H q 8.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e In th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a d m in is tra to rs among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
9 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward th e Handicapped C hild
H 0 9 .1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e handicapped c h ild between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs .
H q 9 .2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e handicapped c h ild betw een e l e
m entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 9 .3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e handicapped c h ild among th e
d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
10.0 The E ducation P ro fe ssio n
H 0 10.1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e ed u catio n p ro fe s s io n between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs .
H 0 10.2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e ed u c atio n p ro fe ssio n betw een
17
elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 10.3 There I s no d iffe re n c e In th e a t titu d e s
tow ard th e ed u catio n p ro fe s s io n among th e
d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
11.0 D is c ip lin e
H Q 11.1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a ttitu d e s
tow ard d is c ip lin e betw een te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e r s .
H q 11.2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard d is c ip lin e betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 11.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard d is c ip lin e among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
12.0 A ttitu d e s Toward C urriculum
H0 12.1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard cu rricu lu m between te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
18
HQ 12.2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard cu rricu lu m between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
H q 12.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard cu rricu lu m among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
13.0 A ttitu d e s Toward Ten Combined School R elated Concepts
H 0 13.1 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a com bination o f te n s c h o o l-re la te d
concepts a s m easured by th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs .
H0 13,2 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a com bination o f te n s c h o o l-re la te d
concepts as m easured by th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and
secondary te a c h e rs .
H 0 13.3 There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
tow ard a com bination o f te n s c h o o l-re la te d
co n cep ts as m easured by th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a
tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
D elim itations
1. This stu d y d e a lt w ith te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and te a c h e rs o f re g u la r classroom s in p u b lic
school d i s t r i c t s in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia .
2. This was a c r o s s - s e c tio n a l stu d y ; th e a t titu d e
m easures and supplem ental in fo rm atio n were o b tain ed upon
one o ccasio n d u rin g th e sch o o l y ear o f 1967-1968.
3 . The group o f re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs con
s is te d o f a random sample o f te a c h e rs drawn from schools
housing one o r more s p e c ia l ed u c atio n program s.
L im ita tio n s
1. The v a l i d i t y o f th e sem antic d i f f e r e n t i a l , th e
"F" S cale, and th e Rokeach Dogmatism Scale i s open to some
q u e stio n acco rd in g to th e a u th o rs c o n su lte d .
2. Any s in g le a t t i t u d e measure ad m in istered only
once to an in d iv id u a l e v a lu a te s th e way a person p erce iv es
o f h im se lf in h is environm ent a t th e p a r tic u la r moment.
3. A ll a t t i t u d e m easurements used in t h i s study
were s e lf-a d m in is te re d . No c o n tro l by th e exam iner was
e s ta b lis h e d over th e means by which each in d iv id u a l
responded to th e m easuring in stru m en ts used.
20
4 . As used in t h i s stu d y , th e la b e l o f a u th o r i
ta ria n is m a p p lie d to any group o f in d iv id u a ls is lim ite d to
th a t concept as m easured by th e Adorno "F" S cale.
5. As used in t h i s stu d y , th e la b e l o f dogmatism
a p p lie d to any group o f in d iv id u a ls i s lim ite d to th a t con
c e p t as m easured by th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale.
Procedure
The Adorno "F" S cale, th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale,
and a form o f th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l w ere ad m in istered
to groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l and n o n -ex ce p tio n a l
c h ild re n in c o o p e ra tin g sc h o o l d i s t r i c t s in th e S ta te o f
C a lifo rn ia . In a d d itio n , each te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n t com pleted
a p e rso n a l in fo rm atio n form . A t o t a l o f 508 te a c h e rs were
p e rso n a lly c o n tac ted and g iv en co p ies o f th e s c a le s and
forms m entioned. Of th is number, 385 re tu rn e d com pleted
forms to be used in t h i s stu d y , re p re s e n tin g a r e tu r n o f
76 p e r c e n t.
The "F" S cale was id e n tic a l to th e form designed by
Adorno (2:255) and c o n s is te d o f tw en ty -n in e g e n e ra l s t a t e
ments (see Appendix A) to which th e te ach e r-resp o n d e n ts
were to r e a c t on th e b a s is o f a se v e n -p o in t s c a le in d ic a tin g
21
d if f e r in g shades o f agreem ent and disag reem en t.
The Dogmatism S cale was th e Form E o f Rokeach
(122:71) and c o n s is te d o f f o r ty g e n e ra l sta tem en ts to which
th e te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n ts w ere to r e a c t on th e b a s is o f a
se v en -p o in t s c a le in d ic a tin g d if f e r in g shades o f agreem ent
and disagreem ent in a manner id e n tic a l to th e "F" S cale.
For th e purposes o f t h i s re s e a rc h stu d y th e "F"
S cale and th e Dogmatism S cale w ere combined in to one
s ix ty -n in e item s c a le .
The Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l form used in t h i s stu d y
c o n s is te d o f te n concepts to which th e te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n ts
in d ic a te d t h e i r judgm ents on th e b a s is o f te n b i- p o la r s e ts
o f a d je c tiv e s . The te n concepts w ere: Ify S e lf; The Average
S tu d en t; The G ifted S tu d en t; T eachers; The Slow L earn er;
A d m in istra to rs; The Handicapped C hild; The E ducation Pro
f e s s io n ; D is c ip lin e ; and C urriculum . The te n s e ts o f
b i- p o la r a d je c tiv e s w ere: good-bad; t a s t y - d i s t a s t e f u l ;
f a i r - u n f a i r ; v a lu a b le -w o rth le s s ; b e a u tifu l-u g ly ; p le a s a n t-
u n p le a sa n t; s w e e t- b itte r ; h o n e s t-d ish o n e st; happy-sad;
a w fu l-n ic e .
A p e rso n a l in fo rm atio n form preceded th e a t t i t u d e
s c a le s . This form asked th e te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n ts to in d ic a te
22
c e r ta in a s p e c ts o f t h e i r p e rso n a l and p ro fe s s io n a l back
grounds such as age, te a c h in g assignm ent, c r e d e n tia ls h e ld ,
y ears o f ex p e rien ce , d egrees earn ed , c o lle g e a tte n d e d , and
any p ro fe s s io n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s th a t th e y m ight belong to .
The e n t ir e p ack et o f a t t i t u d e survey forms and th e
p e rso n a l d a ta blank was a tta c h e d to g e th e r w ith in s tru c tio n s
to th e respondent and was e n t i t l e d "Teacher A ttitu d e Survey"
(see Appendix A).
During th e i n i t i a l phases o f th e stu d y th e p ro
cedure used was fo r th e exam iner to m eet w ith th e e n t ir e
f a c u lty o f a p a r tic u la r sch o o l d u rin g a r e g u la rly scheduled
fa c u lty m eeting. Arrangem ents had been p re v io u sly made
w ith th e c e n tr a l o f f ic e a d m in is tra tio n as w e ll as th e p r in
c ip a l o f th e sch o o l in v o lv ed . During th e p re s e n ta tio n a t
th e fa c u lty m eeting, th e exam iner ex p lain ed th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey form to th e members o f th e f a c u lty g ath ered
th e re . The purpose and need fo r th e stu d y w ere a ls o d i s
cu ssed . S p e c ific examples w ere g iv en as to how th e
resp o n d en ts were to mark th e v a rio u s s e c tio n s o f th e
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey Form. Q uestions w ere answered by
th e exam iner and o th e r p o in ts o f d is c u s s io n p e rta in in g to
th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey w ere an aly zed .
23
Each te a c h e r p re se n t a t th e fa c u lty m eeting was
g iv en a copy o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey form a tta c h e d
to a stamped envelope ad d ressed to th e exam iner. The
In s tru c tio n s g iv en to th e te a c h e rs were to f i l l out th e
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey a t t h e i r own le is u r e , and upon com
p le tio n to m a il th e form d i r e c t l y to th e exam iner.
A pproxim ately two weeks fo llo w in g th e f a c u lty m eet
ing d e scrib ed above, a fo llo w -u p l e t t e r was s e n t to each o f
th e te a c h e rs who had been g iv en a Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
form . The l e t t e r (see Appendix B) thanked th e resp o n d en t
f o r ta k in g tim e from h is o r h e r busy sch ed u le to com plete
th e form and r e tu r n i t to th e exam iner. I t a ls o asked th e
te a c h e r p le a se to r e tu r n th e form in case t h i s had n o t y e t
been done.
During th e l a t t e r p a r t o f th e stu d y when th e
exam iner was in te r e s te d in o b ta in in g survey forms from
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n only, th e f a c u lty m eeting
form at was dropped and m eetings w ere h eld w ith in d iv id u a l
te a c h e rs in t h e i r own sc h o o ls. The same in s tr u c tio n s w ere
g iv en to th e s e te a c h e rs as were g iv en to th e assem bled
te a c h e rs in th e f a c u lty m eetings and th e Teacher A ttitu d e
Survey form alo n g w ith th e stamped and ad d ressed envelope
24
was l e f t w ith them to com plete and forw ard to th e exam iner.
As th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey forms w ere re c e iv e d
from th e te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n ts, th ey w ere numbered consecu
tiv e ly In th e o rd e r In which th ey were re c e iv e d . When a l l
th e forms had been re c e iv e d , th e f i n a l sample used fo r th e
stu d y was drawn from th e t o t a l group by u sin g a ta b le o f
random numbers.
Each o f th e forms s e le c te d f o r th e re s e a rc h sample
was th en "sco red " by th e exam iner acco rd in g to a sta n d a rd
ized form ula a lre a d y e s ta b lis h e d f o r th e th re e a t t i t u d e
s c a le s th a t were used in th e stu d y . A num erical code was
e s ta b lis h e d f o r th e d a ta on th e p e rso n a l in fo rm atio n s h e e t,
and th e s e d a ta as w e ll as th e "sc o re s" from th e th re e a t t i
tu d e surveys w ere punched in to e le c tro n ic d a ta p ro cessin g
(IBM) c a rd s. Data from th e s e card s w ere s to re d on m agnetic
ta p e from which com putations were made by means o f com puter
program s.
D e fin itio n o f Terms
A ttit u d e .—A s t a t e o f re a d in e ss th a t e x e rts a d ir e c
tiv e in flu e n c e upon an in d iv id u a l to behave in a c e r ta in
manner tow ard p a r tic u la r s o c ia l o b je c ts in h is environm ent.
25
D e fin itio n was tak en and m o d ified from E nglish and E nglish
(3 7 :5 0 ), Kretch and C ru tc h fie ld (79:177), Anderson and
F ish b ein (5 ), A llp o rt (3 :4 5 ), Fuson (40:856), Campbell
(2 3 :3 1 ), Edwards (3 4 :2 ), and Shaw and W right (1 3 1 :3 ).
A u rally handicapped c h i l d . —A c h ild who has been
determ ined to be e i th e r d e a f o r h ard o f h e a rin g (22).
A u th o rita ria n c h a r a c te r .—A ccording to Adorno (2),
an in d iv id u a l p o ssessin g th e fo llo w in g c h a r a c te r i s tic s :
(1) co n v en tio n alism —r i g i d adherence to co n v en tio n s, middle**
c la s s v a lu e s ; (2) a u th o r ita r ia n subm ission—subm issive,
u n c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e tow ard id e a liz e d m oral a u th o r itie s o f
th e ingroup; (3) a u th o r ita r ia n a g g re s sio n —tendency to be
on th e lookout f o r, and to condemn, r e j e c t , and punish
people who v io la te co n v e n tio n a l v a lu e s ; (4) a n t i - i n t r e
c e p tio n —o p p o sitio n to th e s u b je c tiv e , th e im ag in ativ e, th e
tend er-m in d ed ; (5) s u p e r s titio n and s te re o ty p y —th e b e l i e f
in m y s tic a l d eterm in an ts o f th e in d iv id u a l's f a te ; th e
d is p o s itio n to th in k in r i g i d c a te g o rie s ; (6) power and
"to u g h n ess"—p reo ccu p atio n w ith th e dom inance-subm ission,
strong-w eak, le a d e r-fo llo w e r dim ension; id e n tif ic a tio n w ith
power f ig u r e s ; overem phasis on co n v e n tio n a liz ed a t t r i b u t e s
26
o f th e ego; exaggerated a s s e r tio n o f s tre n g th and tough
n e s s; (7) d e s tru c tiv e n e s s and cynicism —g e n e ra liz e d h o s
t i l i t y , v i l l i f i c a t i o n o f th e human; (8 ) p r o j e c t i v i t y —th e
d is p o s itio n to b e lie v e th a t w ild and dangerous th in g s go on
in th e w orld; th e p ro je c tio n outw ards o f unconscious emo
tio n a l im pulses; (9) se x —exag g erated concern w ith se x u al
"g o in g s-o n ."
A u th o rita ria n ism . —A p e rso n a l tendency to crav e o r
demand obedience and su b o rd in a tio n ; th e complex o f t r a i t s
s a id to be a s s o c ia te d w ith th e a u th o r ita r ia n c h a ra c te r
(3 7:53).
B lin d . —Com pletely s ig h t le s s , o r having im paired
v is io n such th a t one i s co n sid ered " le g a lly b lin d ." In th e
S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia le g a l b lin d n e ss is a v is u a l a c u ity in
th e b e t t e r eye o f 20/200 o r le s s w ith c o r r e c tiv e le n ses o r
trem endously Im paired p e rip h e ra l v is io n . V isu a l lo s s to
th e e x te n t th a t th e c h ild has to be educated th ro u g h th e
u se o f B r a ille (46:61) (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code, S ectio n
18060.2).
D ea f.—A s u f f i c i e n t l y se v ere im pairm ent o f h e a rin g ,
u s u a lly more th a n 75 d e c ib e ls in fre q u e n c ie s in th e speech
27
range such t h a t a c h ild must b e educated through th e u se
o f s p e c ia l tech n iq u es (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code, S ectio n
18060.2).
Dnflmaf-ic c h a r a c te r .—A sse rtin g o p in io n s in a doc**
trix m a ire o r a rro g a n t manner; acco rd in g to Rokeach (122:17)
a closed-m inded in d iv id u a l d if f e r in g from o th e r in d iv id u a ls
in t h e i r a b i l i t y to sy n th e siz e new b e l ie f s in to a new
system .
Dogmatism. —Unfounded p o s itiv e n e s s in m a tte rs o f
o p in io n ; a rro g a n t a s s e r tio n o f o p inions as t r u th ; having
c h a r a c te r is tic s o f th e dogm atic c h a ra c te r (139:423).
Dogmatism S c a le . —A s c a le d esigned by Rokeach
(122:71) to m easure a t titu d e s t h a t in d ic a te th e s u b je c t's
b e l ie f system along th e continuum "open-minded - c lo se d -
m inded." C o n sists o f f o r ty sta te m e n ts to be responded to
by th e s u b je c t.
Educable m e n tally re ta rd e d c h i ld . —A c h ild o f
b o rd e rlin e o r m oderately se v e re m ental r e ta r d a tio n who is
capable o f ac h iev in g only a v e ry lim ite d d eg ree o f p ro
fic ie n c y in th e b a s ic le a rn in g s k i l l s ; u s u a lly b e s t serv ed
in a s p e c ia l c la s s (4 6 :8 8 ).
28
E d u ca tio n ally h an d icap p ed .--A r e l a t i v e l y re c e n t
e d u c a tio n a l program in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia s e ttin g up
se p a ra te classroom s fo r th e c h ild whose m ental and p h y sic a l
developm ent i s a p p a re n tly w ith in norm al ranges b u t i s e x
p e rie n c in g a g re a t d e a l o f d i f f i c u l t y in a d ju s tin g to h is
academ ic work so th a t he i s c o n sid e ra b ly behind h is c l a s s
m ates; " e d u c a tio n a lly re ta rd e d " (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code,
S ectio n 6750).
Elem entary g r a d e s .—Those g rad es in th e p u b lic
sch o o ls ran g in g from k in d e rg a rte n through grade s ix in c lu
s iv e .
Elem entary sch o o l d i s t r i c t . —A school d i s t r i c t th a t
p ro v id es ed u catio n only through th e elem entary g ra d e s; may
v a rio u s ly be k in d e rg a rte n through grade s ix , o r k in d e r
g a rte n through grade e ig h t (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code,
S ectio n 17608).
E x cep tio n al c h i l d . —A lo o se term used to co v er
c h ild re n who have abnorm al p h y sic a l, m ental, o r s o c ia l
d iffe re n c e s (4 6 :8 9 ). In t h i s re se a rc h study i t w ill be
d e fin e d a s any c h ild re q u irin g a s p e c ia l program o u tsid e
o f th e re g u la r classroom because o f p h y sic a l o r m ental
29
handicaps (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code, S ectio n 19682).
"F" S c a le . —An a t t i t u d e s c a le d esigned by Adorno
(2:255) to m easure a u th o rita ria n is m ; c o n s is ts o f tw enty-
n in e sta tem en ts to be responded to by th e s u b je c t.
G ifted c h i l d . —A c h ild whose m easured i n t e l l e c t u a l
a b i l i t y is c o n sid e ra b ly h ig h e r th an th a t o f o th e r c h ild re n
o f h is age group; a c h ild who, through h is academ ic p e r
formance, has in d ic a te d th a t he i s f a r more educable th an
th e g e n e ra lity o f c h ild re n (46:89).
Hard o f h e a rin g c h i l d . —A c h ild whose Impairment o f
h earin g i s n o t s u f f i c i e n t enough to c la s s i f y him as d ea f
b u t s t i l l re q u ire s him to have s p e c ia l e d u c a tio n a l te c h
niques (135:21-24).
High sch o o l d i s t r i c t . —A d i s t r i c t in th e S ta te o f
C a lifo rn ia o rg an ized to p ro v id e ed u catio n on th e secondary
le v e l on ly ; many range from grades seven through tw elv e,
o th e rs from g rades n in e through tw elve (C a lifo rn ia Educa
tio n Code, S ectio n s 46, 1603, and 25435.5).
M entally r e ta r d e d .- - A ll m inors who because o f r e
ta rd e d i n t e l l e c t u a l developm ent as determ ined by in d iv id u a l
30
p sy c h o lo g ic a l exam ination a r e in cap ab le o f b ein g educated
e f f i c i e n t l y and p r o f ita b ly through o rd in a ry classroom
in s tr u c tio n (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code, S ectio n 6901).
Q rth o n ed ic allv handicapped. —A c h ild d esig n ate d as
having c e re b ra l p a lsy so se v e re th a t he i s p rev en ted from
a tte n d in g a re g u la r c la s s ; a c h ild diagnosed as d e lic a te
( e .g ., h e a rt c o n d itio n , b r i t t l e bones) o r having an o rth o
pedic c o n d itio n ( i . e . , c rip p le d ) so as to p rev en t him from
a tte n d in g a re g u la r c la s s . Most be m en tally and em o tio n ally
a b le to p r o f it from a s p e c ia l program. U sually re q u ire d to
have same i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p a c ity as th a t re q u ire d f o r reg u
l a r classroom s (135:29).
B a r tta lly sig h te d c h i l d . —Having im paired v is io n to
th e e x te n t th a t th e c h ild has to b e educated through th e
use o f en larg ed p r in t b u t n o t so se v e re th a t B r a ille is
needed (135:13).
R egular c la ssro o m .—A classroom housing c h ild re n
whose p h y s ic a l o r m en tal developm ent is such th a t th e y do
n o t re q u ire a s p e c ia liz e d e d u c a tio n a l program w ith in a
s p e c ia l c la s s where c h ild re n a r e seg re g ate d acco rd in g to
t h e i r m ental o r p h y sic a l h an d icap s.
31
Secondary g ra d e s . —Those g rad es ran g in g from grade
seven through tw elv e, in c lu s iv e .
Sem antic d i f f e r e n t i a l . —A method o rig in a te d by
Osgood (107) o f o b serv in g and m easuring th e p sy ch o lo g ica l
meaning o f th in g s , u s u a lly co n cep ts, by u se o f a g rap h ic
r a tin g s c a le ; c o n s is ts o f a number o f g ra p h ic , seven u n it
r a tin g s c a le s w ith opposing, o r b i- p o la r a d je c tiv e s a t each
end; th e s u b je c t i s asked to judge a concept a g a in s t a
s e rie s o f such s c a le s .
Slow le a rn in g c h i l d .—A c h ild who w i l l ach iev e a t
a much slow er r a t e and w ith le s s th a n av erag e e ffic ie n c y
alth o u g h can a t t a i n a m oderate degree o f academ ic su c ce ss;
can u s u a lly b e c a re d f o r in th e re g u la r classroom i f h is
lim ita tio n s a r e reco g n ized (4 6 :8 9 ).
Speech h an d icap p ed .—Any c h ild a f f l i c t e d w ith a
n o tic e a b le speech d e fe c t o r d is o rd e r; any im p e rfec tio n in
th e sounding o f w ords, p h rase s, and p a r ts o f w ords, in
clu d in g d i f f i c u l t i e s such as s t u t t e r i n g and m inor d i f f i
c u ltie s such as lis p in g and o th e r m isp ro n u n ciatio n s
(37:516-517).
32
T ra in ab le m e n tally re ta rd e d c h i l d . -"A c h ild in
ca p ab le o f ach iev in g any s ig n if ic a n t p ro fic ie n c y in a c a
demic s k i l l s b u t who may be tr a in e d to a t t a i n a lim ite d
d eg ree o f s o c ia l accep tan ce and to become more u s e fu l in
h is own home o r in a s h e lte re d workshop (4 6 :9 0 ).
U nified School d i s t r i c t . —A sc h o o l d i s t r i c t in th e
S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia p ro v id in g a sch o o l program from k in d e r
g a rte n through grade tw elve (C a lifo rn ia E ducation Code,
S e ctio n 3101).
V isu a lly h an d icap p e d .—A c h ild d e sig n a te d as e i th e r
b lin d o r p a r t i a l l y s ig h te d .
O rg an izatio n o f th e R emaining Chanters
C hapter I I p re s e n ts an overview o f th e re se a rc h
l i t e r a t u r e s p e c if ic a lly r e la te d to th e a t t it u d e s and c h a ra c
t e r i s t i c s o f te a c h e rs in g e n e ra l, th e a t t i t u d e s and ch a ra c
t e r i s t i c s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , and th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . R e p re se n ta tiv e
s tu d ie s w ere s e le c te d to i l l u s t r a t e th e fin d in g s and tre n d s
in re s e a rc h . The c h a p te r concludes w ith a d is c u s s io n o f
a t t i t u d e m easurem ents, w ith em phasis on th e Semantic
33
D if f e r e n tia l, th e Adorno "F" S cale, and th e Rokeach Dogma
tism S cale.
C hapter I I I c o n ta in s a d e s c r ip tio n o f th e so u rces
o f d a ta , th e sam ple used and th e p o p u la tio n from which i t
was drawn, th e m ethodology o f tre a tm e n t in c lu d in g th e
s t a t i s t i c a l h an d lin g o f th e d a ta , and an o u tlin e o f th e
re s e a rc h d esig n o f th e stu d y .
C hapter IV p re se n ts th e fin d in g s o f th e stu d y .
The d is c u s s io n o f th e fin d in g s , c o n c lu sio n s, recom
m endations and summary com prise C hapter V.
C H A PT E R II
R E V IE W O F T H E L IT ER A TU R E
This c h a p te r p re se n ts a summary o f th e re s e a rc h in
th e a re a o f a t t i t u d e in v e s tig a tio n a p p lic a b le to th e Imme
d ia te problem . The i n i t i a l s e c tio n d e a ls w ith re se a rc h
p e rta in in g to th e a t titu d e s and c h a r a c te r is tic s o f te a c h e rs
in g e n e ra l. The second s e c tio n o f th e c h a p te r concerns
i t s e l f more s p e c if ic a lly w ith th e l i t e r a t u r e reg a rd in g th e
a t titu d e s and c h a r a c te r is tic s of te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n . Inasmuch as t h i s stu d y is concerned in p a r t w ith
th e outcomes o f a t titu d e s and b e lie f-s y ste m s toward excep
tio n a l c h ild re n , a s e c tio n is included review ing th e r e
search p e rta in in g to a t ti t u d e s toward handicapped c h ild re n .
This is follow ed by a d is c u s s io n o f a t t i t u d e measurement
d e sc rib in g some o f th e background and e x is tin g te c h n iq u e s.
The Semantic D if f e r e n tia l p ro cess o r ig in a lly d escrib ed by
Osgood (107) is p rese n ted in term s o f i t s developm ent,
fu n c tio n in g , and e v a lu a tio n . The l a s t two s e c tio n s o f th is
c h a p te r concern them selves w ith th e re se a rc h and development
34
35
o f th e o th e r two in stru m en ts used in t h is re se a rc h , namely
th e "F" o r A u th o rita ria n ism S cale o f Adorno (2) and th e
Dogmatism S cale as developed by Rokeach (122).
A ttitu d e s and C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers
in G eneral
A ttitu d e s Toward C h ild ren and
C hildren*s Behavior
The c l a s s i c stu d y in th e e n tir e a re a o f te a c h e r
a t titu d e s was conducted by Wickman (154) and r e p lic a te d by
a number o f persons in re c e n t y e a rs . Wickman*s o r ig in a l
stu d y im plied th a t te a c h e rs and o th e rs who work w ith c h i l
dren d i r e c t l y a r e lik e ly to r a t e as more se rio u s th o se
symptoms a s s o c ia te d w ith n o s ie r, more r e b e llio u s , and o u t
going b eh av io r which th r e a te n th e o rd e rlin e s s o f t h e i r
agency, whereas m ental h y g ie n is ts c o n sid e r as more Im portant
th e le s s th re a te n in g symptoms, such as a n x ie ty o r w ith
draw al, which may in d ic a te more s e rio u s p e rs o n a lity d i s
o rd e rs .
S to u ffe r (141) in h is r e p lic a tio n o f Wickman*s stu d y
found th a t a ttitu d e s o f to d a y 's elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs
toward th e b eh av io r problems o f c h ild re n have changed sub
s t a n t i a l l y from th e a t titu d e s o f elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs
some tw e n ty -fiv e y ears e a r l i e r . More s p e c if ic a lly h is
stu d y in d ic a te s th a t th e elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs o f 1952
were more n e a rly in agreem ent w ith th e c h i Id -g u id an ce
c l i n i c , p s y c h ia tr is ts , p sy c h o lo g ists , and p s y c h ia tric
s o c ia l w orkers as to th e r e l a t i v e se rio u sn e ss o f c e r ta in
problems o f c h ild b eh av io r th a n were th e elem entary sch o o l
te a c h e rs o f tw e n ty -fiv e y ears p r io r to h is stu d y . Four
y ears l a t e r S to u ffe r (142:358-362) continued h is r e p l i c a
tio n o f Uickman*s stu d y w ith a c o n s id e ra tio n o f secondary
te a c h e rs . Secondary sch o o l te a c h e rs appeared to be le s s
involved w ith th e s tu d e n t's in d iv id u a l and unique problems
and hence tended to confirm Wickman*s o r ig in a l fin d in g s .
The elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs d id a g re e , however,
as to th e degree o f s e rio u s n e ss o f tw en ty -e ig h t o f th e
f i f t y b eh av io r problem s. Only one problem , "d e stro y in g
sch o o l m a te r ia l ," is ra te d more s e rio u s by th e secondary
te a c h e rs . The rem aining tw enty-one problems w ere ra te d as
le s s se rio u s by th e secondary te a c h e rs . Findings s im ila r
to th e 1952 stu d y o f elem entary te a c h e rs were shown in th a t
b o th th e elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs agreed th a t th e
problems th ey id e n tif ie d as more se rio u s th an th e m ental
h y g ie n is ts were r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f an o b je c tiv e ty p e o f
37
b e h av io r. S to u ffe r concluded th a t th e s e b eh av io rs a re
problems th a t o u trag e th e teach ers* m oral s e n s i t i v i t i e s and
a u th o rity o r th a t f r u s t r a t e t h e i r im m ediate te a c h in g p u r
poses . S to u ffe r co n jec tu re d th a t th e secondary sch o o l does
n o t o r d in a r ily p ro v id e th e te a c h e r w ith as prolonged an
exposure to any one c h ild as does th e elem entary sch o o l and
th a t co n seq u en tly th e s tu d e n t's b eh av io r problem s, w h ile
r e a l and f e l t , lo s e t h e i r s ig n ific a n c e as in d iv id u a l and
unique problem s. Secondary te a c h e rs , as was tr u e o f e l e
m entary te a c h e rs , co n tin u e to f e e l th a t th e more e x tro
v e rs iv e re a c tio n s a r e th e m ost s e rio u s and Im p o rtan t.
These r e a c tio n s , however, were n o t f e l t to be o f s e rio u s
s ig n ific a n c e in a f f e c tin g th e c h i l d 's fu tu re developm ent by
c lin ic ia n s . W ithdrawing ten d en cies were ra te d a s r e l a t i v e l y
unim portant by secondary te a c h e rs .
H unter (60) in an o th er fo llo w -u p o f Wickman's stu d y
came to th e c o n c lu sio n th a t " te a c h e rs today a r e d e a lin g
more e f f e c tiv e ly w ith th e whole c h ild now and over th e long
sp a n ." This was so in s p it e o f th e f a c t th a t th e fin d in g s
in H u n ter's stu d y in d ic a te d th a t th e te n most s e rio u s ly
ra te d problem s w ere r a te d e q u a lly s e rio u s by th e Wickman
te a c h e rs in 1926. Both th e 1926 group and th e 1955 group
38
o f te a c h e rs co n tin u e to be concerned by th e annoying,
a g g re s siv e , and ir re s p o n s ib le b eh av io r on th e p a r t o f c h i l
d ren .
S im ilar fin d in g s w ere r e la te d by T olor (147:175-180)
in a stu d y u sin g th e S ta te n Isla n d B ehavior S cale. This _
S cale was a d m in istered to 118 elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs
and tw e n ty -th re e c l i n i c a l p sy c h o lo g ists . The two groups
were asked to r a t e each o f 295 b e h a v io ra l item s as in d i
c a tin g e ith e r norm al o r abnorm al b eh a v io r. Teachers were
found to d i f f e r from p sy c h o lo g ists in t h e i r a t titu d e s
toward c h ild b eh av io r on a s ig n if ic a n t 22 p er cen t o f th e
item s. Most o f th e s e item s f e l l in th e c a te g o rie s o f
a g g re ssiv e b eh av io r, r e g re s s iv e b eh av io r, and a f f e c t ex
p re s s io n . The te a c h e rs tended to reg a rd alm ost a l l o f th e
d if f e r e n tia tin g b e h a v io ra l d e s c rip tio n s abnorm al whereas
th e p sy c h o lo g ists p erceiv ed them to be norm al. Teacher
ex p erien ce was found to be a s ig n if ic a n t v a r ia b le w ith i n
experienced te a c h e rs d if f e r i n g more from th e p s y c h o lo g is ts ,
and a s c rib in g more pathology to a v a r ie ty o f c h ild b e h a v io r,
th an experienced te a c h e rs .
Dimensions o f te a c h e r a t titu d e s tow ard c h ild r e n . —
Horn (59:118-125) employed a f a c to r - a n a ly tic stu d y o f th e
39
M innesota Teacher A ttitu d e In v en to ry . Using th e responses
o f 305 c o lle g e s tu d e n ts e n ro lle d in ed u c atio n c o u rse s, Horn
found th a t th e evidence suggested th e e x is te n c e o f f iv e
covarying p a tte rn s o f item s. F acto r I appeared to r e f l e c t
a "modern" a t t i t u d e toward classroom c o n tro l as c o n tra s te d
w ith a " t r a d i t i o n a l i s t i c " a t t i t u d e . F acto r I I suggested an
optim ism *'favorable v ersu s pessim ism -unfavorable dim ension
o f opinions about p u p ils . F a cto r I I I seemed to re p re s e n t
a p erm issiv e la ck o f concern as opposed to a p u n itiv e con
c e rn about " re b e llio u s " b e h av io r. F acto r IV r e f le c te d
r e je c tio n o f p u p ils , b u t a r e je c tio n steam ing from b ew ild er
ment r a th e r th a n from d is l ik e o r p u n itiv e n e s s . F ac to r V
seemed to in d ic a te a d e s ire to m a in ta in c o n tro l over c h i l
d ren v e rsu s an in c lin a tio n to l e t them "run f r e e ."
Teacher and p u p II n eed s. —The in flu e n c e o f te a c h e r-
p u p il in te r a c tio n was th e focus o f a stu d y by Nelson
(98:81-83). In p a r tic u la r Nelson p o s ite d th e h y p o th esis
th a t te a c h e rs and stu d e n ts have b o th c o g n itiv e and a f f e c
t i v e a ttitu d e s and t h a t th e e x iste n c e o f th e s e a t titu d e s on
e ith e r th e s tu d e n t's p a r t o r th e te a c h e r 's p a r t w i l l in
flu en ce th e s tr u c tu r e o f th e classroom s it u a ti o n . The
fin d in g s o f th e stu d y su g g est th a t te a c h e rs ten d to r e j e c t
A O
th o se s tu d e n ts who a r e n o t c o g n itiv e ly d isp o sed In th e
classroom , and to a c c e p t th o se who a r e . P upils who a re
a f f e c t iv e ly o rie n te d can n o t, th e re fo re , expect to o b ta in
em otional su p p o rt w ith in th e group and may be expected to
w ith h o ld need s a t i s f a c ti o n from th e te a c h e r s in c e th e y do
n o t respond c o g n itiv e ly to th e te a c h e r. Nelson concludes
th a t th e te a c h e r can o b ta in most e f f e c tiv e group a c tio n
through th e te a c h e r 's re c o g n itio n o f th e a f f e c tiv e o r ie n ta
tio n o f s tu d e n ts , accep tan ce o f th a t a t t i t u d e , and use o f
i t to ach iev e c o g n itiv e g o a ls . I f th e te a c h e r can make
p o s s ib le th e s a t is f a c t i o n o f th e p u p il's a f f e c tiv e needs
w ith in th e classroom , th e n th e p u p il w i l l be more lik e ly to
respond c o g n itiv e ly . This w i l l p ro v id e s a t i s f a c t io n o f
te a c h e r needs and th e classroom w i l l become an e f f e c tiv e
group.
E d u catio n al Methodology and E d u catio n al Values
A ttitu d e s o f te a c h e rs tow ard c u rre n t e d u c a tio n a l
m ethodology w ere m easured in a stu d y o f L indgren (85:80-85),
u sin g a f if ty - ite m q u e s tio n n a ire . The co n clu sio n s suggested
th a t h ig h sch o o l te a c h e rs and m ale te a c h e rs had le s s fa v o r
a b le a t t i t u d e s .
41
A more encompassing stu d y o f d if f e r e n t a s p e c ts o f
a te a c h e r 's work was und ertak en by R ichards (120) a s p a rt
o f a d o c to ra l re s e a rc h p r o je c t. The c h a r a c te r is tic s o f
te a c h e rs and t h e i r a ttitu d e s toward t h e i r work formed th e
emphasis o f t h i s re s e a rc h w ith s p e c ia l a tte n tio n to th e
a re a s o f th e jo b , s u p e rv is io n , th e p u b lic , o p p o rtu n itie s ,
and com pensation. A p e rso n a l c h a r a c te r is tic s form was
c o n stru c te d alo n g w ith an a t t i t u d e q u e s tio n n a ire co n ta in in g
th e f iv e a re a s p re v io u sly m entioned. The resp o n d en ts were
te a c h e rs in th e S ta te o f Nebraska, and th e m a jo rity in d i
ca ted rea so n ab le s a tis f a c tio n w ith many c o n d itio n s e x is tin g
on t h e i r jo b s . A c o n sid e ra b le number, however, evidenced
d is s a tis f a c tio n and discouragem ent. The g r e a te s t degree o f
d is s a tis f a c ti o n occu rred in th e a re a o f com pensation, a l
though no te a c h e r in d ic a te d com plete s a t i s f a c ti o n in a l l
a re a s .
A d o c to ra l stu d y by Kramer (78) in th e a re a o f edu
c a tio n a l a t t i t u d e s and b e lie f s s p e c if ic a lly attem p ted to
m easure i f th e v a lu e s and a t titu d e s h e ld by te a c h e rs were
r e la te d in some way to t h e i r b e l ie f system s. The b e l i e f
system s were id e n tif ie d as "open-minded” and "closed-m inded"
(dogm atic) on th e b a s is o f R okeach's Dogmatism S cale. The
fin d in g s in d ic a te d th a t th o se te a c h e rs who were id e n tif ie d
42
as "closed-m inded" were much le s s c o n s is te n t in t h e i r edu
c a tio n a l a t t i t u d e s th a n were th e group o f te a c h e rs i d e n t i
f ie d a s "open-m inded." The more open-minded a te a c h e r 's
b e l i f s system , th e g r e a te r th e lik e lih o o d f o r in te r n a l
c o n siste n c y o f e d u c a tio n a l a t t i t u d e s tr u c tu r e in a p ro g re s
s iv e d ir e c tio n .
A ttitu d e s tow ard a u th o rity on th e p a r t o f American
and Canadian te a c h e rs (86:51-54) were in v e s tig a te d w ith
th e r e s u l t s in d ic a tin g th a t Canadians gave s ig n if ic a n tly
more h o s t i l e a t t i t u d e s in t h e i r resp o n ses tow ard a u th o rity .
Item a n a ly s is showed th a t th o se item s which evoked a c c e p t
ing resp o n ses from Canadians w ere more concerned w ith
fig u re s th a t a r e t r a d i t i o n a l l y p re s tig e -la d e n . More h o s ti le
resp o n ses from Canadian te a c h e rs were evoked by item s con
cerned w ith fig u re s in a u th o rity in th e b u sin e ss w orld and
w ith in te r a c tio n w ith a u th o rity on an in te rp e rs o n a l le v e l.
These l a t t e r two c a te g o rie s a ls o tended to evoke more
anxious re a c tio n s from Canadians r a th e r th a n from A m ericans.
L indgren (8 7 :3 -7 ) was a ls o involved in a n o th e r stu d y
th a t c o n tra s te d th e a t titu d e s o f American te a c h e rs w ith
th o se o f te a c h e rs from an o th er co u n try . In t h i s case th e
c o n tra s tin g group w ere B ra z ilia n te a c h e rs . The e d u c a tio n a l
a t t i tu d e s o f b o th groups were s tu d ie d , w ith th e B ra z ilia n
te a c h e rs being ad m in istered a Portuguese v e rs io n o f th e
same q u e s tio n n a ire w hich was a s c a le o f a t titu d e s r e la te d
to independence o f judgm ent and th e "F" S cale. The r e s u l t s
confirm ed th e fin d in g s o f p rev io u s re s e a rc h , in th a t c h ild -
c e n te re d a t titu d e s w ere p o s itiv e ly c o r r e la te d w ith in d e
pendence o f judgm ent, and th a t b o th th e s e v a r ia b le s were
n e g a tiv e ly c o r r e la te d w ith th e "F" S cale.
S ubject —S p e c ific s u b je c t m a tte r ta u g h t in
th e classroom and i t s r e la tio n s h ip to th e a t titu d e s o f
te a c h e rs was th e a re a in v e s tig a te d by two s tu d ie s c ite d
h e re . Conway (26) was s p e c if ic a lly in te r e s te d in th e su b
j e c t m a tte r o f re a d in g in grades one, two, and th r e e , and
how th e te a c h e rs o f th e s e th r e e g rad e le v e ls w ere d isp o sed
toward i t s te a c h in g . I t was found th a t th e f i r s t grade
te a c h e rs have d if f e r e n t a t titu d e s toward th e te a c h in g o f
re a d in g th a n do second and th i r d grade te a c h e rs . O ther
g e n e ra l fin d in g s in t h i s stu d y were th a t th e more modem
p r a c tic e s o f th e te a c h in g o f read in g a r e p re fe rre d by th e
f i r s t grade te a c h e rs , younger te a c h e rs , c i ty te a c h e rs ,
re c e n tly tr a in e d te a c h e rs , and le s s experienced te a c h e rs .
The more t r a d i t i o n a l p r a c tic e s a r e p re fe rre d by second and
44
t h ir d g rad e te a c h e rs , o ld e r te a c h e rs , town and r u r a l
te a c h e rs , le s s re c e n tly tr a in e d te a c h e rs , and more e x p e ri
enced te a c h e rs .
" S p e c ia l s u b je c ts " v ersu s s e lf-c o n ta in e d classroom s
was th e em phasis o f th e in v e s tig a tio n conducted by Kearney
(71:358-360). He found th a t th e te a c h e rs o f s o -c a lle d
" s p e c ia l s u b je c ts " th in k more in term s o f s u b je c t m a tte r to
be covered r a th e r th a n th e development o f a s e lf - d ir e c tin g
p e rs o n a lity in t h e i r p u p ils . In t h i s stu d y s p e c ia l s u b je c ts
were d e fin e d as a r t , home econom ics, i n d u s t r i a l a r t s , m usic,
and p h y s ic a l ed u c atio n . Teachers o f s e lf-c o n ta in e d c l a s s
rooms tended to be in te r e s te d n o t only in t h e i r p u p ils '
a c q u is itio n s o f s u b je c t m a tte r, b u t a ls o in th e p u p il's
whole p e rs o n a lity which demanded knowledge o f th e p u p il's
home background, h is p h y sic a l and m en tal h e a lth , and h is
o u tsid e a c t i v i t i e s . Most elem entary te a c h e rs fu n c tio n
w ith in th e co n fin e s o f th e s e lf-c o n ta in e d classroom , and,
th e re fo re , th e co n c lu sio n th a t could be drawn from th e l a s t
stu d y is t h a t th e elem entary te a c h e r ten d s to have more
fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s tow ard ed u catio n in g e n e ra l th a n does
th e secondary te a c h e r. This co n c lu sio n tended to be con
firm ed by Wandt (150:418-422), who made a com parison o f
45
th e a ttitu d e s o f c o n tra s tin g groups o f te a c h e rs . His m ajor
co n clu sio n i s th a t elem entary te a c h e rs express more fa v o r
a b le a t titu d e s in g e n e ra l th a n d id secondary te a c h e rs .
Teacher T rain in g
The r e la tio n s h ip betw een th e ty p e o f te a c h e r educa
tio n i n s t i t u t i o n a tte n d e d by elem entary te a c h e rs and t h e i r
a b i l i t y to m a in ta in a harm onious r e la tio n s h ip w ith c h ild re n
was s tu d ie d by Kearney (72:703-708) u sin g th e M innesota
Teacher A ttitu d e In v en to ry . Teachers who had a tte n d e d a
u n iv e rs ity sco red h ig h e r th a n th o se who had a tte n d e d a
l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e . Using th e same in stru m en t (MTAI),
Cook, Leeds, and C a llis (27:274-279) summarized th a t th e
ty p e o f te a c h e r ed u catio n i n s t i t u t i o n a tte n d e d i s s tro n g ly
r e la te d to te a c h e r-p u p il a t t i t u d e s . The low est sc o re s were
o b tain ed by g rad u ates o f l i b e r a l a r t s c o lle g e s . High
sch o o l te a c h e rs were found to sc o re low er th an elem entary
te a c h e rs . Cook a d d itio n a lly found t h a t secondary te a c h e rs
w ith low MTAI sc o re s c o n s is te n tly tended to have h ig h r a te s
o f p u p il f a i l u r e s . The co n clu sio n drawn from t h i s stu d y
by Cook and h is a s s o c ia te s was th a t th e a t titu d e s o f
te a c h e rs tow ard c h ild re n r e f l e c t a lack o f u n d erstan d in g
o f th e p r in c ip le s o f c h ild b e h a v io r.
Student te a c h e rs . The a t t i t u d e o f stu d e n t te a c h e rs
tow ard c h ild re n , ed u catio n , o th e r te a c h e rs , e t c . , has been
th e focus o f a tte n tio n in a number o f s tu d ie s . Three such
s tu d ie s a r e review ed h e re . In th e f i r s t o f th e s e th e
em phasis was on a "b efo re" and " a f te r " type stu d y by
Rabinow itz (113:313-319). The in v en to ry (MTAI) was ad
m in iste re d to a group o f 343 w h ile th ey were stu d e n t
te a c h e rs and th e n th r e e y ears l a t e r a f t e r t h e i r employment
a s re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs . A c o n s is te n t d e c lin e in
sc o re s seemed to in d ic a te a d e te r io r a tio n in te a c h e r a t t i
tu d e s.
A s im ila r stu d y was conducted by Lipscomb (89) who,
in a d d itio n , attem p ted to a s c e r ta in w hether th e d ir e c tio n
o f th e a t t i t u d i n a l change was toward th e expressed a t t i
tu d es o f th e tr a in in g te a c h e rs . A th ir d a s p e c t o f t h i s
stu d y was to a s c e r ta in w hether te a c h e rs who were judged as
s u p e rio r tr a in in g te a c h e rs brought more o r le s s a t t i t u d i n a l
change th an tr a in in g te a c h e rs who were judged to be below
av erag e. The fin d in g s showed a s ig n if ic a n t change o ccu r
rin g in th e exp ressed a t titu d e s o f stu d e n t te a c h e rs d u rin g
t h e i r stu d e n t te a c h in g ex p e rien c e . The c lo s e a s s o c ia tio n
o f stu d e n t te a c h e rs w ith tr a in in g te a c h e rs ten d s to produce
47
a s im ila r it y o f expressed a t t i t u d e s . The s u p e rio r o r above
average tr a in in g te a c h e r has more in flu e n c e on th e expressed
a ttitu d e s o f stu d e n t te a c h e rs th an a below av erag e tr a in in g
te a c h e r.
A B r itis h stu d y by B utcher (11) in v e s tig a te d th e
a t titu d e s o f stu d e n t te a c h e rs to ed u catio n and compared
them w ith th e a t titu d e s o f experienced te a c h e rs a s w e ll as
m easuring th e changes in a t titu d e s o f th e s tu d e n ts d u rin g
a tr a in in g c o u rse . S ig n ific a n t d iffe re n c e s between p ra c
tic in g te a c h e rs and stu d e n t te a c h e rs in a t t i t u d e s were
found. Changes in e d u c a tio n a l a t titu d e s d u rin g th e co u rse
o f p ro fe s s io n a l tr a in in g w ere a ls o found w ith th e same
d ir e c tio n in a t titu d e s as d isco v ered in prev io u s s tu d ie s .
The r e s u lts su g g ested th a t th e p o s itiv e changes in a t t i t u d e
r e s u ltin g from tr a in in g co u rses a r e re v erse d a f t e r e x p e ri
ence o f f u ll- tim e te a c h in g .
P e rso n a lity and C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers
The most o u tsta n d in g re s e a rc h in th e a re a o f te a c h e r
c h a r a c te r i s tic s was conducted by Ryan (125). In h is work
he c o n tra s te d th e a t t i t u d e s o f te a c h e rs and found th e f o l
low ing: (1) elem entary te a c h e rs were more fa v o ra b le in
t h e i r a t titu d e s tow ard p u p ils , a d m in is tra to rs , and fe llo w
48
te a c h e rs th a n were secondary te a c h e rs ; (2 ) te a c h e rs judged
s u p e rio r by p rin c ip a ls tended to have fa v o ra b le a ttitu d e s
tow ard te a c h e rs , s tu d e n ts , and a d m in is tra to rs ; (3 ) te a c h e r
a t t i t u d e was n o t a s s o c ia te d w ith age o r te ach in g ex p erien ce;
(4 ) sex d iffe re n c e s were observed in th a t women secondary
te a c h e rs p ossessed more fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s toward p u p ils
and elem entary men te a c h e r s ' a t titu d e s were more fa v o ra b le
th a n women; (5) p u p il b eh av io r d id n o t appear to be r e la te d
to te a c h e r s ' a t t i t u d e s .
A ttitu d e s and p e rs o n a lity v a r ia b le s were co n sid ered
in a d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n by P h illip s (111). He attem pted
to c o n sid e r th e r e la tio n s h ip between th e much used M innesota
Teacher A ttitu d e Inventory and o th e r f a c to rs such as th e
Gordon P erso n al P ro f ile , Teachers C ollege v ersu s L ib e ra l
A rts b a c c a la u re a te tr a in in g , le v e l o f te a c h in g ex p erien ce,
sex o f th e te a c h e r, m a r ita l and fam ily s ta tu s , age, c la s s
o f sch o o l d i s t r i c t , amount o f academ ic tr a in in g , and y ears
o f te a c h in g ex p e rien ce . The fin d in g s in d ic a te d once a g a in
th e fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s o f elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs
tow ard t h e i r s tu d e n ts when c o n tra s te d w ith secondary
te a c h e rs . In a n o th e r co n firm atio n o f p revious s tu d ie s ,
P h illip s found th a t th e MTAI y ie ld e d more fa v o ra b le r a tin g s
49
to te a c h e rs w ith L ib e ra l A rts th a n w ith Teachers C ollege
tr a in in g a t th e b a c c a la u re a te le v e l. No s ig n if ic a n t d i f
fe re n c e s were found between M TAI sc o re s and th e age, sex,
o r s iz e o f sch o o l d i s t r i c t in w hich th e te a c h e r w orks.
MTAI r e s u l t s were more fa v o ra b le to (a ) unm arried te a c h e rs ,
(b) te a c h e rs w ith lo n g er ex p erien ce th a n te a c h e rs w ith le s s
ex p e rien ce , and (c ) te a c h e rs w ith more e x te n siv e tr a in in g .
R e su lts from th e Gordon P ersonal P ro f ile d id n o t show any
s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e between th e te a c h in g groups re p r e
se n ted by t h i s stu d y , n o r were th e re any s ig n if ic a n t r e l a
tio n s h ip s between MIAI sc o re s and any o f th e fo u r v a ria b le s
m easured by th e Gordon.
The v a lu e - a ttitu d e s tr u c tu r e o f te a c h e rs was th e
focus o f a stu d y by Hartmann in 1937. A fo llow -up o f t h i s
stu d y was conducted as p a r t o f a d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n by
K uipers (8 0 ). In c o n tra s tin g th e 1937 and 1961 groups o f
te a c h e rs she found th a t th e 1961 group was s ig n if ic a n tly
d if f e r e n t from th e o r ig in a l 1937 group. The a re a s o f s i g
n if ic a n c e Included th e f a c t th a t th e 1961 urban te a c h e r i s
more c o n s e rv a tiv e th a n th e 1937 urb an te a c h e rs . The 1961
te a c h e rs formed a more homogeneous group th a n d id th e 1937
urban group. The l a s t fin d in g in d ic a te d th a t urban te a c h e rs
50
w ith ap proxim ately th e same v a lu e - a ttitu d e s tr u c tu r e s w ith
re g a rd to s o c ia l, p o l i t i c a l , and economic v alu es w i l l hold
r e l a t i v e l y th e same e d u c a tio n a l v a lu e s .
The r e la tio n s h ip o f in te llig e n c e to te a c h e r a t t i
tu d es and p e rs o n a lity v a ria b le s was th e in te r e s tin g a re a o f
c o n c e n tra tio n in a study by J o s h i (70:95-103). In te llig e n c e
was found to have a high d eg ree o f p o s itiv e c o r r e la tio n
w ith te a c h in g a t t i t u d e as w e ll as w ith th e o rie s o f educa
tio n and p rin c ip le s o f modern approaches to te a c h in g .
Classroom v a ria b le s and te a c h e r c h a r a c te r i s t ic s . —
The r e l a t i v e a s s o c ia tio n o f th e v a lu e s o f te a c h e rs and t h e i r
s tu d e n ts was in v e s tig a te d by S p r in th a ll (137:193-196). The
s u p e rio r s tu d e n ts were found to have v a lu e system s most
s im ila r to t h e i r te a c h e rs , w h ile b o th a c h ie v e rs and u n d er
a c h ie v e rs were found to be lumped to g e th e r.
Previous s tu d ie s m entioned in t h i s c h a p te r have
in d ic a te d some d iffe re n c e s in v a lu e s , a t t i t u d e s , and p e r
s o n a lity v a ria b le s th a t e x is t betw een elem entary and second
a ry sc h o o l te a c h e rs . Segal (129) h y p o th esized th a t th e
ch o ice o f le v e ls was due to p a r tic u la r p e rs o n a lity c h a ra c
t e r i s t i c s p re se n t p r io r to th e begin n in g o f a te ach in g
c a re e r and th e re fo re th e d iffe re n c e s th a t e x is t between
th e two groups o f te a c h e rs may be one o f an In h eren t p e r
s o n a lity d iffe re n c e . Working w ith in d iv id u a ls who were
a s p irin g fo r e i th e r elem entary o r secondary sch o o l te a c h in g
p o s itio n s , Segal d id fin d some s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s
e x is tin g between th e s e two groups p r io r to t h e i r beg in n in g
a p r a c tic e te a c h in g e x p erien ce . Some o f th e fin d in g s were
as fo llo w s: (1) a s p ira n ts to secondary sch o o l te a ch in g
appeared to be more m ature th a n a s p ira n ts to elem entary
sch o o l te a c h in g ; (2) a s p ira n ts to secondary sch o o l te a c h
ing showed g r e a te r c o n f lic t in th e a re a o f m a s c u lin ity -
fe m in in ity th an d id elem entary sch o o l te a c h e rs ; (3 ) a s p i
r a n ts to e a rly elem entary sch o o l te ach in g showed a g r e a te r
need to assume an a u th o r ita r ia n r o le th a n d id a s p ira n ts to
secondary sch o o l te a c h in g ; (4) a s p ira n ts to elem entary
sch o o l te a c h in g showed a g r e a te r c u r io s ity in g e n e ra l s i t u
a tio n s th an d id a s p ira n ts to secondary te a c h in g ; and
(5) th e re were s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s between th e two
groups in socioeconom ic c la s s and in te llig e n c e , w ith th e
elem entary sch o o l a s p ira n ts b ein g o f h ig h e r socioeconom ic
c la s s and low er in te llig e n c e . The s o c ia l c la s s d iffe re n c e
was n o t e x is te n t among th e a s p ira n ts from a la rg e u n iv e r
s i t y sam ple.
S o c ia l and fam ily background.--T eaching s ty l e ,
b i r t h o rd e r, and fam ily com position were in v e s tig a te d by
Solomon (134:871-879). He r e la te d b i r t h o rd e r in th e
fam ily o f th e te a c h e r to " c r itic is m , d isa p p ro v a l, h o s t i l i t y
v e rsu s to le ra n c e " and found th a t th e f i r s t b o m s were more
c r i t i c a l , and th e l a t e r b o ras more to le r a n t. The sex o f
th e m a jo rity o f th e teach ers* c h ild re n r e la te d to a p e r
sonalism f a c to r , w ith th o se having m ostly m ale c h ild re n
ten d in g to te a c h "im p erso n ally "; th o se w ith m ostly fem ale
c h ild re n tended to te a c h w ith "p e rso n a l e x p re s s io n ."
That th e re i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e between
te a c h e rs ' a t titu d e s and v alu es and th e socioeconom ic le v e l
from which th e y came was th e fin d in g o f N oll (102:108-114).
His r e s u lts in d ic a te d th a t p o te n tia l te a c h e rs come from a l l
le v e ls o f s o c ie ty .
A u th o ritaria n ism .
S tudies in th e a re a o f te a c h e r a u th o rita ria n is m a r e
somewhat la c k in g in t h e i r unanim ity o f co n clu sio n s about
th i s t r a i t and i t s e f f e c t on v a rio u s e d u c a tio n a l v a r ia b le s .
H e rs (112:245-249) found a c o r r e la tio n o f -.3 8 between th e
M innesota Teacher A ttitu d e In v en to ry and th e "F" S cale
which he concluded would confirm h is o r ig in a l h y p o th esis
53
th a t " a u th o rita r ia n te n d e n c ie s in te a c h e r-p u p il r e l a t i o n
sh ip s a r e r e la te d to th e s o - c a lle d *an ti-d e m o cratic* o r
'a u th o r ita r ia n * p e rs o n a lity ty p e in g e n e ra l, and t h a t more
p erm issiv e te n d en cies a r e r e la te d to th e more l i b e r a l o r
'dem ocratic* p e rs o n a lity ty p e s ."
Remmers (116:427-431) su p p o rts t h is fin d in g a ls o
w ith th e u se o f th e "F" S cale where he found c o r r e la tio n
w ith e ig h t d if f e r e n t v a r ia b le s .
Using classroom o b se rv a tio n s and "F" S cale sc o re s
f o r 150 te a c h e rs , McGee (91:89-146) concluded th a t te a c h e r s '
classroom b eh av io r on A u th o rita ria n -E q u a lita ria n dim ensions
can be p re d ic te d w ith f a i r accu racy from sc o re s on th e "F"
S cale. Classroom b eh av io r and a u th o rita ria n is m w ere lin k e d
to g e th e r by Gold (45:77-80) w ith p a r tic u la r em phasis on
s tu d e n t b eh av io r p a tte r n s . He focused h is stu d y on th e
i s o l a t e and found th a t th e p ercen tag e o f stu d e n t is o la te s
to c o r r e la te s ig n i f ic a n t ly w ith th e "F" S cale sc o re s fo r
a u th o rita ria n is m in th e te a c h e rs .
A re c e n t stu d y by Ends (36) d isa g re ed w ith th e
above fin d in g s . In a d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n in v e s tig a tin g
v a rio u s a s p e c ts o f te a c h e r b e h a v io r v a r ia b le s , Ends found
no s ig n if ic a n t r e la tio n s h ip e x is tin g between a u th o r ita r ia n
54
p e rs o n a lity and o n e 's b eh av io r as observed w ith in th e c l a s s
room.
Doflmftfcism
The m a jo rity o f s tu d ie s in v o lv in g an in v e s tig a tio n
o f th e dogm atic q u a l i t i e s o f te a c h e rs have made use o f th e
c o n c e p tu a liz a tio n o f th e dogm atic p e rs o n a lity drawn from
Rokeach (122) in d e s c r ip tio n o f th e open- and closed-m inded
b e l i e f system . Rokeach*s s c a le f o r th e measurement o f
dogmatism was used a s th e b a s is f o r a s c e r ta in in g th e
p resence o f t h i s t r a i t in th e te a c h e rs under in v e s tig a tio n .
As was tr u e in th e s tu d ie s r e la te d to a u th o rita ria n is m men
tio n e d above, th e co n clu sio n s reached were n o t always in
agreem ent even in c a se s where th e re appeared to be a com
p le te r e p lic a tio n o f re s e a rc h d esig n .
P e te r Soderbergh (133:245-251) e n te re d in to th e
c o n tro v e rs ia l a re a o f te a c h e r dogmatism by is s u in g an
a r t i c l e s ta tin g t h a t some v e te ra n te a c h e rs a r e e x c e ss iv e ly
dogm atic. As a r e s u l t o f t h i s dogm atic q u a lity th e s e
v e te ra n te a c h e rs a r e q u ite r e s i s t a n t to change and te n d to
com partm entalize r ig i d l y t h e i r id eas and a t t i t u d e s . Ttoo
y ears l a t e r Robkin (121:47-49) issu ed a re p ly to Soderbergh
by p u b lish in g an a r t i c l e in th e same jo u r n a l. Using th e
55
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale as h is m easuring in stru m e n t, Robkin
ch allen g ed S oderbergh's o r ig in a l fin d in g s . The l a t t e r
stu d y appeared to in d ic a te th a t th e tendency tow ard e x c e s
s i v e dogmatism is n o t a g e n e ra l c h a r a c te r i s tic o f th i s
group o f p re se n t-d a y e d u c a to rs. C onversely, th e r e s u lts
in d ic a te a c o n sid e ra b ly low er d eg ree o f th is r ig id ty p e o f
th in k in g a s compared w ith v a rio u s o th e r c o lle g e and non
c o lle g e g ro u p s. Robkin f e l t q u ite s tro n g ly th a t some o f
th e c r iti c is m le v e le d a t te a c h e rs fo r t h e i r co n serv atism
and in te n s e d ev o tio n to th e s ta tu s quo was d e s p e ra te ly in
need o f a good b i t o f tem pering.
In h is in v e s tig a tio n o f s tu d e n t te a c h e rs Brumbaugh
(9:332-335) fin d s th a t in some a re a s such as m ath, sc ie n c e ,
and s o c ia l s tu d ie s , th e te a c h e r is i n i t i a l l y more lik e ly
to be closed-m inded th an te a c h e rs in o th e r s u b je c t a r e a s .
That t h i s does n o t c a rry on in v e te ra n te a c h e rs appears to
be in d ic a te d by th e fin d in g s in th e same stu d y th a t s u p e r
v is in g te a c h e rs showed no such d if fe re n c e s . This l a t t e r
fin d in g ten d s to su p p o rt R obkin's sta te m e n ts as m entioned
above. A lso te n d in g to confirm t h i s i s an o th er stu d y o f
s tu d e n t te a c h e rs perform ed by Johnson (65). He found th a t
th e d eg ree o f open- and closed-m indedness a s in d ic a te d
56
by sco res on th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale cannot be used as
a p r e d ic to r o f su ccess in stu d e n t te a ch in g i f th e r a tin g s
o f c o lle g e su p e rv is o rs and co o p eratin g sch o o l su p e rv isin g
te a c h e rs a r e used as th e c r i t e r i a .
The r a tin g c r i t e r i a became an is s u e in B en tzen 's
stu d y (7) where th e r e la tio n s h ip between a te a c h e r 's dog
m atism and a p r i n c i p a l 's dogmatism were c o r r e la te d w ith th e
r a tin g g iv en to th e te a c h e r by th e p r in c ip a l. Bentzen
found th a t th e re was no c le a r - c u t r e la tio n s h ip h e re , b u t
r a th e r , th a t th e dogm atic q u a lity o f p r in c ip a l and te a c h e r
became more o r le s s im portant depending upon th e atm osphere
o f th e p a r tic u la r sc h o o l. In sch o o ls r a te d "happy" and
"tro u b le d " she found v ary in g degrees o f dogm atic q u a l it i e s ,
w ith th e "tro u b le d " sch o o ls a p p a re n tly needing more form al
s ta tu s d is tin c tio n s to c r e a te c o n d itio n s n e c e ssa ry to e l i c i t
subm issive b eh av io r tow ard su p e ro rd in a te s from dogm atic
te a c h e rs w ith th e o p p o site b ein g tr u e a t "happy" sc h o o ls.
A ttitu d e s and C h a ra c te ris tic s o f Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
M otivation to E nter o r Leave F ie ld
Lord and W allace (90:171-173) re p o rte d th a t th e in
flu en c e o f frie n d s and r e l a t i v e s , a s w e ll a s a c tu a l c o n ta c t
57
w ith e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , was r e la te d to th e d e c is io n to
become s p e c ia l ed u c atio n te a c h e rs . These fin d in g s were
confirm ed by G o ttfrie d and Jones (4 7 ). F u rth e r confirm a
tio n was provided by Henley (58) who found o th e r i n f l u e n t i a l
f a c to rs as w e ll. He found th e to p te n in flu e n c in g fa c to rs
to b e : (a) a p ro fe s s o r o r in s tr u c to r ; (b) w orking w ith th e
handicapped; (c) a c o lle g e departm ent o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n ;
(d) o b se rv a tio n o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n c la s s e s ; (e) a re g u la r
co u rse in s p e c ia l ed u c atio n ; ( f ) a su rv ey co u rse in s p e c ia l
ed u catio n ; (g) p a r tic ip a tio n in a d ir e c t c o n v e rsa tio n ;
(h) a handicapped person; ( i ) an a d v iso r o r co u n selo r; and
( j) o th e r persons in g e n e ra l.
There i s s t i l l a g re a t sh o rta g e o f s p e c ia l educa
tio n te a c h e rs and a need f o r g r e a te r numbers to e n te r th e
f i e l d . Rich (119) in d ic a te d t h is in h er s ta tu s stu d y w ith
v ary in g fa c to rs being re s p o n s ib le fo r th e la ck o f r e c r u i t s .
F u rth e r re s e a rc h in to t h i s a re a o f re c ru itm e n t is a p p a r
e n tly needed. Che o f th e to p ic s needing more in v e s tig a tio n
is th e ex p erien ce v a r ia b le . G o ttfrie d and Jones (47:218-
223) n o ted t h a t th e re were c e r t a in ex p erien ces th a t lead
in d iv id u a ls to become te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
I t was u n ex p lain ed , however, why some in d iv id u a ls having
58
th e same ex p erien ces e le c te d to work in o c c u p a tio n a l a re a s .
A lso unexplained was why some in d iv id u a ls w ith o u t such
ex p erien ces e le c te d to work in s p e c ia l ed u catio n .
Once in th e f i e l d , however, many s p e c ia l ed u catio n
te a c h e rs a re known to leav e a f t e r a few y e a rs . Knox (77)
concluded th a t th e re a so n f o r tu rn o v e r r a te s in s p e c ia l
ed u c atio n programs was n o t g r e a tly d if f e r e n t f o r th o se
te a c h e rs in g e n e ra l. Young in ex p erien ced te a c h e rs a r e le s s
lik e ly to rem ain in th e f i e l d , and th e re fo re re c ru itm e n t
e f f o r ts should b e d ir e c te d tow ard s u c c e s s fu l experienced
te a c h e rs as w e ll. Riax d id n o t f e e l th a t a d d itio n a l s a la r y
was an e f f e c tiv e means o f r e c r u itin g tr a in e d in d iv id u a ls .
H e lle r (57) in h is stu d y o f " le a v e rs " tended to confirm
much o f Knox's fin d in g s . He concluded from a r a th e r ex te n
s iv e stu d y t h a t te a c h e rs who le a v e s p e c ia l ed u c atio n p o s i
tio n s a r e c h a ra c te riz e d by a la c k o f p rev io u s ex p erien ce
w ith e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , an a t t r a c t i o n to p o s itio n s in
r e g u la r ed u catio n , a f a i l u r e to re c e iv e a s p e c ia l ed u catio n
s c h o la rs h ip , and a te a c h in g p o s itio n w ith e x p erien ce p r i
m a rily a t th e upper le v e ls . P e rs o n a lity v a r ia b le s may be
th e key to th e problem o f " le a v e rs " acco rd in g to Day (3 1 ).
Her fin d in g s u sin g a m easure o f p e rs o n a lity f a c to rs in d i
c a te d t h a t th e te a c h e rs who l e f t th e f i e l d o f th e educable
59
m e n tally re ta rd e d ranked s ig n i f ic a n t ly h ig h e r th a n te a c h e rs
rem aining on s c a le s o f r e s p o n s ib ility , to le ra n c e , achieve**
m ent, i n t e l l e c t u a l e ffic ie n c y , p sy c h o lo g ic a l m indedness,
and f l e x i b i l i t y .
S ta tu s . R re s tie e . and tforale
When th e te a c h e r o f th e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild fin d s
h im self on th e f a c u lty o f a p u b lic sc h o o l, what is h is p eer
r e la tio n s h ip ? This was th e q u e stio n asked by N elson (99)
and th e one he attem p ted to answer in h is d o c to ra l th e s is .
Using so c io m etric d ev ices he found th a t th e in tr a - f a c u i ty
so c io m etric p o s itio n o f th e te a c h e r o f th e educable men
t a l l y re ta rd e d does n o t d i f f e r from t h a t o f th e re g u la r
classroom te a c h e r. A cceptance o r r e je c tio n o f th e te a c h e r
o f th e re ta rd e d is in flu e n c ed by f a c to r s o th e r th a n h is
te ac h in g s p e c ia lty .
How th e te a c h e r o f th e m e n ta lly re ta rd e d f e l t about
h is p eers and g e n e ra l w orking c o n d itio n s in c lu d in g h is
m orale was a complementary stu d y u n d ertak en by Spencer
(136). She made u se o f a q u e s tio n n a ire ad ap ted from Ryan's
stu d y on th e c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f te a c h e rs , and among h e r
m ajor fin d in g s were th e fo llo w in g : (1) te a c h e rs o f th e
educable m e n ta lly re ta rd e d in d ic a te d h ig h s a t i s f a c t i o n
w ith d ir e c to r s , n o n -teach in g em ployees, a d m in is tra to rs ,
and p u p ils . They w ere le s s s a t i s f i e d w ith te a c h e rs , p a r
e n ts , p h y s ic a l working c o n d itio n s , and te a c h e r tr a in in g ;
(2) women te a c h e rs had more fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s tow ard a l l
a re a s th a n men te a c h e rs ; (3) fo u r y ea r c o lle g e tra in e d ,
te a c h e rs o f th e re ta rd e d have h ig h e r m orale th an r e tr a in e d
te a c h e rs ; (4) age was n o t a f a c to r in m orale; (5) te a c h e rs
who had been asked to te ac h a s p e c ia l c la s s were found to
be le s s s a t i s f i e d th a n were te a c h e rs who had v o lu n te e re d ;
and (6) th e p resen ce o r absence o f o th e r te a c h e rs o f r e
ta rd e d c h ild re n in flu en c ed a t titu d e s tow ard a d m in is tra to rs ,
te a c h e rs , p a re n ts , and d ir e c to r s .
A stu d y o f th e p r e s tig e a t tr i b u te d t o te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n was conducted by Jones and G o ttfrie d
(68:465-468). The r e s u lt s re v e a le d t h a t a l l te a c h e rs of
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n a r e judged to p o ssess h ig h e r p r e s tig e
th a n te a c h e rs o f th e n o n -e x c e p tio n a l. Teachers o f th e
b lin d , d e a f, g if te d , em o tio n ally d is tu rb e d , and s e v e re ly
m e n ta lly re ta rd e d a r e seen as p o sse ssin g e s p e c ia lly high
s ta n d in g . In a second stu d y in t h i s a re a Jones (67) p re
se n te d d a ta on th e ra te d p r e s tig e (using a p o in t s c a le ) o f
c e r t a in s p e c ia l ed u catio n a re a s compared to re g u la r c la s s
61
te ach in g and a w ide spectrum o f o th e r o c c u p a tio n a l sp e
c i a l t i e s , u sin g a high sch o o l p o p u la tio n . The purpose
h e re was to d eterm in e how c e r ta in s p e c ia l ed u catio n a re a s
compared w ith a f u l l range o f o c c u p a tio n a l s p e c ia ltie s ,
r a th e r th a n r e g u la r c la s s te a c h in g only, in r a te d p r e s tig e .
The d a ta o f T able 1 re v e a l th e fin d in g s o f th e stu d y by
g iv in g th e o v e r - a ll p erce p tio n s o f th e p r e s tig e c a rr ie d by
a given s p e c ia lty , and th ey a ls o re v e a l th e d i f f e r e n t i a l
o cc u p atio n al p e rc e p tio n s o f boys and g i r l s .
P sy ch o lo g ical Charact e r i s t i c s
U tiliz in g s e lf - r e p o r t in v e n to rie s o f p e rs o n a lity
and m ental a b i l i t y , George (43) in v e s tig a te d f iv e d if f e r e n t
groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n : educable men
t a l l y re ta rd e d , speech, h ea rin g handicap, o rth o p ed ic h an d i
cap, and tr a in a b le m en tally re ta rd e d . He found t h a t t h is
group d isp la y e d th e fo llo w in g p r o f il e o f c h a r a c te r i s tic s :
h ig h m oral p urpose, o th e r-p e rso n co n scio u sn e ss, p a tie n c e ,
f r ie n d lin e s s , to le ra n c e , p e rso n a l warmth, sympathy,
optim ism , em phatic te n d e n c ie s, fe m in in ity , m odest i n t e l -
le c tu a lis m , and lack o f concern f o r o rd e r and system . In
s p i t e o f d if f e r e n t tr a in in g and a re a s o f in s tr u c tio n th e
group d isp la y e d a homogeneous p r o f il e th a t was re p o rte d
TA BL E 1
RATED PRESTIGE O F CERTAIN SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHING
SPECIALTIES A N D OTHER OCCUPATIONAL AREAS*
Combined
O ccupation Average G irls Boys
________________________________________________ R ating______________________________
C ollege and U n iv e rsity Teacher
Mayor o£ la rg e C ity
A rc h ite c t
A ir lin e P ilo t
Ju n io r C ollege Teacher
Teacher o f S everely M entally R etarded
Newspaper Colum nist
Teacher o f Secondary School Educable
M entally R etarded
Teacher o f Secondary School G ifted
Teacher o f Secondary School Science
Teacher o f Secondary School E n g lish
B u ild in g C o n tracto r
Teacher o f Elem entary School G ifted
Teacher o f Elem entary School Educable
M entally R etarded
In su ran ce Agent
Teacher o f Elem entary Grades 4-6
Teacher o f Elem entary Grades 1-3
Teacher o f N ursery School and K indergarten
8.06
(1)
8 .4 0
(1)
7.78
(1)
7.44 (2) 7.48 (2) 7.40 (2)
7.22 (3) 7.28 (3) 7.16 (3)
6.54 (4) 6.32 (12) 6.76 (4)
6.48 (5) 6.56 (8) 6.40 (5 .5 )
6 .48 (6) 7.20 (4 .5 ) 5.76
(11)
6.38 (7) 6.36 (1 0 .5 ) 6.40 (5 .5 )
6.32 (8) 7.01 (6) 5 .64 (12)
6.28 (9) 6.72 (7) 5 .84 (9)
6.24 (10) 6.36 (1 0 .5 ) 6.12 (8)
5.97
(11)
6 .40 (9) 5.44 (13)
5.86 (12) 5.56 (1 4 .5 ) 6.36 (7)
5 .8 4 (13) 6.28 (13) 5.40 (14)
5.68 (14) 7.20 (4 .5 ) 4 .16 (1 8 .5 )
5.45 (15) 5 .1 4 (16) 5.80 (10)
5.04 (16) 5.56 (1 4 .5 ) 4.56 (16)
4 .8 8 (17) 5.00 (18) 4.76 (15)
4.62 (18) 5.12 (17) 4.12 (20)
TA BLE 1—Continued
O ccupation
Combined
Average
R ating
G irls Boys
Teacher o f Secondary Home Economics ( g i r l s )
and I n d u s tr ia l A rts (boys) 4.23 (19) 4 .8 4 (19) 4 .4 0 (17)
Plumber 3 .9 6 (20) 3.76 (20) 4 .1 6 (1 8 .5 )
Taxi D river 3 .6 0 (21) 3.08 (2 1 .5 ) 3.04 (21)
S tre e tc a r Motorman 2 .7 6 (22) 3 .0 8 (2 1 .5 ) 2.22 (22)
S harecropper 2.02 (23) 3 .0 4 (23) 1.02 (23)
Shoe S hiner 1.19 (24) 1.06 (24) 1.32 (24)
N ote: Rank o rd e r in p a re n th e se s.
*R. L. Jones and N. W . G o ttfrie d , "The P re s tig e o f S p ecial E ducation T eaching,"
E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . XXXII (1966), 465-468.
u >
64
as " tr u ly a s to n is h in g ."
This tendency toward hom ogeneity among te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n was an im portant fin d in g o f M attson
(93) in a stu d y lim ite d to th e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f te a c h e rs
o f educable m e n ta lly re ta rd e d c h ild re n . He found i t impos
s i b l e to d is tin g u is h between groups o f th e s e te a c h e rs as
reg ard s t h e i r p e rso n a l c h a r a c te r is tic s and p sy c h o lo g ical
t r a i t s even grouped by t h e i r s u p e rv is o rs acco rd in g to
te a c h in g e f f e c tiv e n e s s .
In an a ttem p t to d is tin g u is h betw een th e m a n ife st
need s tr u c tu r e s o f in d iv id u a ls p u rsu in g c a re e rs in th e edu
c a tio n o f educable m e n tally re ta rd e d c h ild re n and th o se o f
in d iv id u a ls engaged in elem entary ed u c atio n , W oolfoik (155)
made u se o f th e Edwards P ersonal P referen ce Schedule and
th e M innesota M iltip h a sic P e rso n a lity In v en to ry . The m ajor
fin d in g o f th e stu d y was th e h ig h d eg ree o f s im ila r it y in
th e p a tte rn in g o f p sy c h o lo g ica l c h a r a c te r is tic s o f a l l
g ro u p s.
S h iftin g to a n o th e r a re a o f e x c e p tio n a lity , R udloff
(124) focused on th e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f te a c h e rs o f h earin g
handicapped c h ild re n . He c o n tra s te d a group o f 274 te a c h e rs
o f th e h e a rin g handicapped c h ild w ith a s im ila r number o f
65
te a c h e rs o f n o n ex cep tio n al c h ild re n u sin g th e Teacher
P referen ce Schedule, and th e S trong V o catio n al I n te r e s t
Blank. E s s e n tia lly he fin d s co n clu sio n s s im ila r to th e
o th e r s tu d ie s l i s t e d h e re . There were no o u tstan d in g d i f
fe re n c e s between th e two groups o f te a c h e rs . Of s p e c ia l
i n t e r e s t was th e f a c t th a t te a c h e rs o f th e h e a rin g h an d i
capped c h ild a r e n o t more c h ild -c e n te re d th an te a c h e rs o f
th e n o n ex c ep tio n al c h ild in t h e i r unconscious m o tiv atio n
fo r te a c h in g .
E v alu atio n o f S u cce ssfu l Teaching
The e v a lu a tio n o f s u c c e s s fu l te a c h in g among te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n as w e ll a s th e p re d ic tin g o f u l t i
m ate su ccess by th e s e te a c h e rs has been th e focus o f th re e
s tu d ie s re p o rte d h e re . Hamerlynck (55) made u se o f th e
M ille r A nalogies T est, th e Gowan Teacher Prognosis S cale o f
th e M innesota ttiltip h a s ic P e rs o n a lity In v en to ry , and th e
A ttitu d e Toward M entally R etarded C h ild ren S cale. He con
cluded from h is fin d in g s th a t th e t e s t s s e le c te d fo r th e
stu d y do n o t p r e d ic t ra te d e f f e c tiv e n e s s .
f e is g e ie r (95:229-235) on th e o th e r hand, u sin g a
s im ila r b a tte r y o f t e s t s , does f in d some dim ensions whereby
s u c c e s s fu l te a c h e rs can be d is tin g u is h e d from n o n -su c c e ssfu l
66
te a c h e rs . In a stu d y aimed a t id e n tify in g and q u a n tify in g
c h a r a c te r i s tic s w hich c o n trib u te to s u c c e s s fu l stu d e n t
te a c h in g o f m e n ta lly and p h y s ic a lly handicapped c h ild re n ,
th r e e c h a r a c te r i s tic p a tte rn s o f s u c c e s s fu l stu d e n t te a c h
ing ex p erien ces emerged from th e in v e s tig a tio n . The
s u c c e s s fu l stu d e n t te a c h e rs w ere:
1. W ell a d ju s te d , em o tio n ally s ta b le , and a b le to
en co u n ter d i f f i c u l t s p e c ia l c la s s s itu a ti o n s .
2. Possessed p h y sic a l energy, v i t a l i t y , and
enthusiasm n e c e ssa ry to meet s p e c ia l classroom
demands.
3. O btained h ig h sc o re s on m easures o f s c h o la s tic
achievem ent and a b i l i t y .
John (63) a ls o found th a t th e re w ere c e r ta in
c h a r a c te r is tic s th a t could determ ine th e s u c c e s s fu l te a c h e r
a s opposed to th e n o n -su c c e ssfu l te a c h e r. Her stu d y i n
v e s tig a te d o n ly th e te a c h e rs o f th e educable m e n tally r e
ta rd e d c h ild . She found th a t th e im p o rtan t c h a r a c te r is tic s
w ere th e u n d ersta n d in g o f th e educable m e n ta lly re ta rd e d
c h ild , e x c e lle n c e in in te rp e rs o n a l r e la tio n s h ip s , and
cu rricu lu m com petencies.
67
A ttitu d e s Toward E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
How do te a c h e rs and o th e r ed u cato rs f e e l toward th e
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n th a t come under t h e i r ju r is d ic tio n ?
I f th ey had t h e i r ch o ice, w hich o f th e ty p es o f e x c e p tio n
a l i t y would th e y most p re fe r to work w ith ? These q u e s tio n s ,
as w e ll as o th e rs o f a s im ila r n a tu re , have occupied th e
in v e s tig a tiv e e f f o r ts o f many re s e a rc h e rs in th e f ie ld o f
s p e c ia l ed u c atio n and t h e i r fin d in g s occupy a la rg e sh a re
o f th e p ro fe s s io n a l jo u rn a ls in th e f i e l d . In t h i s s e c tio n
o f t h i s c h a p te r some o f th e more s ig n if ic a n t s tu d ie s s h a ll
be d isc u sse d .
I t would be expected th a t th e more knowledge an
ed u c ato r had reg a rd in g a p a r tic u la r ty p e o f e x c e p tio n a lity ,
th e more p o s itiv e would be h is a t t i t u d e tow ard th a t group
o f c h ild re n . Not so , found Semmel (130:566-574) in h is
stu d y re g a rd in g m ental d e fic ie n c y . S p ecial te a c h e rs , i t
was found, had a g r e a te r knowledge o f th e s u b je c t th a n d id
re g u la r te a c h e rs , b u t both groups showed an e q u a lly h ig h
p o s itiv e a t t i t u d e sc o re , and th e re were no s ig n if ic a n t d i f
fe re n c e s to be found. As to b e expected a n o th e r stu d y in
th e same a re a found d if f e r e n t and o p p o site r e s u l t s . laBue
(81:433-434) found a s ig n if ic a n t c o r r e la tio n between
68
classroom a ttitu d e s o f te a c h e rs and th e amount o f p ro fe s
s io n a l in fo rm atio n th ey p o ssessed .
I t i s p o s s ib le t h a t in th e s e s tu d ie s th e assum ption
made about s p e c ia l ed u catio n te a c h e rs having g r e a te r knowl
edge r e f e r s only to some o f th e te c h n ic a l a s p e c ts o f th e
e d u c a tio n a l a s p e c ts o f th e jo b r a th e r th a n to ex p erien ce
w ith th e s e c h ild re n . Legant (83) a ls o found no s ig n if ic a n t
d iffe re n c e s among v ary in g groups o f te a c h e rs . In h er stu d y
she used re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs , te a c h e rs o f th e h a n d i
capped, and te a c h e rs who have had ex posture to p ro fe s s io n a l
courses in te ach in g such c h ild re n b u t who a re n o t a c tiv e ly
engaged in doing so . She p o s tu la te s th a t th e lack o f d i f
feren ces in a t ti t u d e s on a Q -so rt tech n iq u e may be due to
th e f a c t t h a t th e p o p u latio n s from w hich th e s u b je c ts were
drawn a re a c tu a lly p a r t o f one la rg e p o p u la tio n c o n ta in in g
an ov erlap p in g o f th o se v a ria b le s p o s tu la te d as being
se p a ra b le . Many classroom te a c h e rs a re te a c h in g h a n d i
capped c h ild re n in t h e i r c la s s e s , and a ls o i t i s p o s s ib le
t h a t th e s p e c ia l ed u catio n classroom may e n r o ll some c h i l
d ren who a r e slow le a rn in g b u t n o t n e c e s s a r ily handicapped.
The m ajor c o n c lu sio n drawn i s th a t f a c to rs o th e r th an
a c tu a l ex p erien ce w ith handicapped c h ild re n o r th a n expo
s u re to in fo rm atio n in c o lle g e c la s s e s about such c h ild re n
69
a f f e c t a v e rb a l ex p ressio n o f a t t i t u d e .
That one o f th e s e fa c to rs m ight be a dogm atic a t t i -
tu d e on th e p a r t o f th e in d iv id u a l was th e prem ise p resen ted
by Genskow (42:329-341). The stu d y , however, f a ile d to
su p p o rt th e i n i t i a l h y p o th e sis. There was no c o r r e la tio n
between a ttitu d e s and dogmatism.
A ttitu d e s them selves may n o t t e l l th e e n t i r e s to r y
o f th e d iffe re n c e s among groups o f te a c h e rs . The focus of
a ttitu d e s o r a c tio n o rie n te d r a th e r th a n v e rb a l o rie n te d
a s p e c ts may p la y a la rg e p a r t in t h i s d is c u s s io n . As an
example o f t h i s approach i s th e re p o rt o f Fine (39:429-430)
who found th a t th e s p e c ia l c la s s te a c h e rs put more s tr e s s
on p e rso n a l and s o c ia l ad ju stm en t th an do re g u la r te a c h e rs
and th a t s p e c ia l c la s s te a c h e rs a r e le s s demanding on th e
lo w -a b ility c h ild to " tr y h a rd e r."
Can th e a t titu d e s o f te a c h e rs be changed o r m odi
f ie d through some planned program ? Haring (56) devoted
f i f t e e n m eetings to e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ith th e s t a f f s o f
fo u r schools ( c ity , suburban, r u r a l , and p a ro c h ia l). By
means o f a G eneral In fo rm atio n In v en to ry , Classroom I n te
g ra tio n In v en to ry , A c tiv itie s Index, and a P ic tu re Judgment
T est changes in a t t i t u d e s , u n d e rsta n d in g s, and p e rs o n a lity
70
c h a r a c te r is tic s r e s u ltin g from th e workshops were in v e s ti
g a te d . S lig h t changes in a p o s itiv e d ir e c tio n w ith reg ard
to te a c h e rs ' resp o n ses to handicapped c h ild re n w ere found.
No change in te a c h e r p e rs o n a lity was e v id e n t. H aring con
cluded th a t "A pparently i t is p o s s ib le to e f f e c t m o d ific a
tio n in a t t i t u d e s w ith o u t r e s u lt a n t p e rs o n a lity ch an g es."
That a t t i t u d e s toward e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n may be
s tro n g ly in flu e n c e d by th e la b e ls a tta c h e d to them was th e
h y p o th esis put f o r th by Combs (24:145-158). la b e le d and
u n lab eled d e s c rip tio n s o f m e n tally d e f ic ie n t, p sychopathic,
sc h izo p h re n ic , and c e re b ra l p a ls ie d c h ild re n were d i s
tr ib u te d to 160 e d u c a to rs. A ttitu d e s tow ard th e c h ild re n ,
and th e la b e ls , w ere m easured on a tw e n ty -fiv e item r a tin g
s c a le . R e su lts w ere in te rp r e te d to mean t h a t la b e lin g does
not a f f e c t th e e d u c a to r's p e rc e p tio n o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren . The e f f e c ts w ere n o t c o n s is te n t fo r d if f e r e n t la b e ls .
For th e m e n ta lly d e f ic ie n t, th e c h ild was seen more nega
t iv e ly when th e d e s c r ip tio n was u n la b ele d th a n when la b e le d ,
la b e le d d e s c rip tio n s o f p sy ch o p ath ic, sc h iz o p h re n ic , and
c e re b ra l p a ls ie d c h ild re n w ere r a te d more n e g a tiv e ly than
were u n lab eled v e rs io n s . E xperience d id n o t seem to a f f e c t
e d u c a to rs' p e rc e p tio n s o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
la b e ls o r no la b e ls , th e m a jo rity o f ed u cato rs
appear to have rank ord ered in t h e i r own minds some ty p e o f
h ie ra rc h y f o r e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . Based upon t h i s rank**
o rd e rin g is t h e i r own a t t i t u d e reg ard in g which ty p e o f
c h ild th e y would most p r e f e r to work w ith . In an e x te n siv e
stu d y o f over 400 p ro fe s s io n a l w orkers and s tu d e n ts stu d y
ing f o r th e s e p ro fe s s io n s , Warren (151:136-144) found th a t
th e m e n tally re ta rd e d and th e b ra in -in ju re d w ere ranked as
among th e le a s t p re fe rre d groups w ith whom to work. In
g e n e ra l te a c h e rs tended to r e j e c t any e x c e p tio n a l groups
o th e r th an g if te d . This m agnified view th a t g if te d c h i l
d ren g e t from t h e i r te a c h e rs as a r e s u l t o f t h e i r p r a is e
was found by Parsons (108:404-406) to d i s t o r t somewhat th e
c h i l d 's p e rc e p tio n o f h is c a p a b il itie s . A nother i n v e s t i
g a to r (69:31) found th a t th e m a jo rity o f te a c h e rs had no
i n t e r e s t in ed u catin g g if te d c h ild re n . This h ie r a r c h ic a l
ty p e o f s c a lin g was found by Mirphy (97:208-211), u sin g a
r a tin g s c a le to survey th e a t titu d e s o f 309 New England
"Youth S p e c ia lis ts " tow ard th e h e a rin g , speech, v is u a l, and
p h y s ic a lly handicapped, slow le a rn e rs , d e lin q u e n t, em otion
a l l y d is tu rb e d , and g if te d c h ild re n . H earing handicapped
c h ild re n were among th e ty p es o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n th a t
th e youth s p e c ia lis t s le a s t p re fe rre d to te a c h .
A ttitu d e Measurement
72
D e fin itio n s
B efore one can begin a d is c u s s io n o f th e v a rio u s
forms o f a t t i t u d e measurement and some o f th e problems in**
h e re n t in them, i t becomes n ec essary to examine a few o f
th e b a s ic d e f in itio n s proposed f o r th e concept o f a t t i tu d e .
The term i t s e l f has found v ery common usage among b e h a v io ra l
stu d e n ts and th e re a r e a number o f t r a d i t i o n a l d e f in itio n s
t h a t should be c ite d and examined.
A m ajor p sy c h o lo g ical and p s y c h ia tr ic d ic tio n a ry
l i s t s th e d e f in itio n o f a t t i t u d e as fo llo w s: "An enduring,
learn ed p re d is p o s itio n to behave in a c o n s is te n t way toward
a g iv en c la s s o f o b je c ts ; a p e r s is te n t m en tal a n d /o r n e u ra l
s t a t e o f re a d in e ss to r e a c t to a c e r ta in o b je c t o r c la s s o f
o b je c ts , n o t as they a re b u t a s th e y a r e conceived to b e ."
This i s ta k en from E nglish and E n g lish (3 7 :5 0 ).
Krech, C ru tc h fie ld , and B allachey (79:177) d e fin e
a t t i t u d e as "an enduring system o f p o s itiv e o r n e g a tiv e
e v a lu a tio n s , em otional fe e lin g s , and pro o r con a c tio n
te n d e n cies w ith re s p e c t to a s o c ia l o b je c t." The emphasis
on th e e v a lu a tiv e domain o r dim ension o f a concept is a ls o
s tr e s s e d in th e a t t i t u d e d e f in itio n o f Anderson and
73
F ish b ein (5:437-443). They f a r th e r su g g est th a t th e a t t i
tu d e tow ard an o b je c t is th e sum o f th e s tre n g th o f b e lie f s
about th e o b je c t and th e e v a lu a tiv e a s p e c t o f th e s e b e l i e f s .
A llp o rt (3:45) p re fe rs to th in k o f a t titu d e s as a
s t a t e o f re a d in e s s , be i t m ental o r n e u ra l, which i s organ
ized w ith in th e in d iv id u a l through h is own p a r tic u la r back
ground o f ex p e rien ce, and e x e rts a d ir e c t in flu e n c e upon
th e way in which th e in d iv id u a l responds to " a l l o b je c ts
and s itu a tio n s w ith which i t is r e l a t e d ." G erberich
(44:132) a ls o d e fin e s a t t i t u d e as a s t a t e o f re a d in e ss
e x e rtin g in flu e n c e upon an in d iv id u a l's b eh a v io r.
The em phasis on b eh av io r i s seen in F uson's resp o n se
to a d e f in itio n o f a t t i t u d e (4 0 :8 5 6 ). He sees a t t i t u d e as
th e p r o b a b ility o f occu rren ce o f a d e fin e d b eh av io r in a
d e fin e d s it u a ti o n . Campbell (2 3 :31) a ls o em phasizes
resp o n ses in d e fin in g a t t i t u d e a s an in d iv id u a l's syndrome
o f resp o n se c o n siste n c y w ith reg ard to s o c ia l o b je c ts .
Edwards (34:2) p re fe rs to fo llo w th e lead o f
T hurstone (145) and d e fin e s a t t i t u d e a s th e degree o f p o s i
t i v e o r n e g a tiv e a f f e c t a s s o c ia te d w ith some p sy c h o lo g ica l
o b je c t.
Shaw and W right (131:3) in a re c e n t p u b lic a tio n
o f f e r s t i l l a n o th e r d e f in itio n o f a t t i t u d e which th e y f e e l
has e x tra c te d th e com m onalities o f m ost o f th e t r a d i t i o n a l
d e f in itio n s and r e la te d th e c o n s tru c t as c lo s e ly as pos
s i b l e to th e o p e ra tio n . A ttitu d e , f o r them, is viewed as
a s e t o f a f f e c tiv e re a c tio n s tow ard th e a t t i t u d e o b je c t,
d e riv e d from th e concepts o r b e l ie f s th a t th e in d iv id u a l
has concerning th e o b je c t, and p re d isp o sin g th e in d iv id u a l
to behave in a c e r ta in manner tow ard th e a t t i t u d e o b je c t.
A lthough th e y a g ree th a t th e b e l ie f s th a t th e in d iv id u a l
a c c e p ts about th e o b je c t and th e a c tio n ten d en cies o f th e
in d iv id u a l a r e in tim a te ly r e la te d to a t t i t u d e , n e ith e r a re
a p a r t o f th e a t t i t u d e i t s e l f .
In an e x c e lle n t summation o f th e g e n e ra l c h a ra c te r
i s t i c s o f a t t i t u d e s , Shaw and W right (131:6-10) o f f e r th e
fo llo w in g as th e dim ensions o f a t t i t u d e s :
1. A ttitu d e s a r e based upon e v a lu a tiv e concepts
reg a rd in g c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f th e r e f e r e n t
o b je c t and g iv e r i s e to m o tiv ated b eh av io r.
2 . A ttitu d e s a re co n stru ed a s v ary in g in q u a lity
and in te n s ity (or s tr e n g th ) on a continuum
from p o s itiv e through n e u tr a l to n e g a tiv e .
3. A ttitu d e s a r e le a rn e d , r a th e r th a n being in n a te
o r a r e s u l t o f c o n s titu tio n a l developm ent.
4 . A ttitu d e s have s p e c if ic s o c ia l r e f e r e n ts , o r
s p e c if ic c la s s e s th e re o f.
5. A ttitu d e s p ossess v a ry in g degrees o f i n t e r
re la te d n e s s to one a n o th e r.
75
6. A ttitu d e s a r e r e l a t iv e l y s ta b le and endur
in g .
Methods o f A ttitu d e Measurement
A number o£ s c a lin g tech n iq u es e x is t f o r th e u se o f
re s e a rc h e rs in th e f i e l d o f a t t i t u d e measurement o r a s s e s s
m ent. A few o f th e more prom inent methods w i l l be c ite d
and examined h e re .
Method o f Equal-A ppearing I n te r v a ls . —This te c h
n iq u e is based upon th e work o f T hurstone (146). I t i s a
judgm ental procedure and probably has been more w id ely used
th a n any o th e r method o f s c a le c o n s tru c tio n . In t h i s
method th e re appear a number o f statem en ts re p re s e n tin g
d if f e r e n t degrees o f s tre n g th o f th e a t t i t u d e . Statem ents
a r e s e le c te d to form a s e r ie s o f eq u al s te p s along th e
dim ension o f a ttitu d e - s tr e n g th . The respondent in d ic a te s
sim ple agreem ent o r d isag reem en t.
The f i r s t s te p i s to d esig n and c o lle c t a number o f
item s from th e l i t e r a t u r e and from p i l o t in te rv ie w s . These
item s a r e th en s o rte d by a group o f "ju d g es" in to elev en
p ile s o r c a te g o rie s ru n n in g from "most fa v o ra b le " through
a n e u tr a l p o in t to " l e a s t fa v o ra b le ." The ju d g es a r e to
ig n o re t h e i r own agreem ent o r disagreem ent w ith th e item
76
and m erely to p la ce th e Item In a p a r tic u la r c a te g o ry
acco rd in g to I t s m eaning.
Next th e p ile s a re numbered from one through elev en ,
and a s c a le v a lu e Is given fo r each Item . This v a lu e Is
u s u a lly computed as th e median o f th e p o s itio n given th e
Item by th e group o f ju d g e s. A ll Item s fo r which th e re Is
much disagreem ent among th e ju d g es o r fo r which th e re Is
v a r i a b i l i t y a r e r e je c te d as b ein g ambiguous and u n r e lia b le .
This r e je c tio n is accom plished by se c u rin g some m easure o f
sp read , u s u a lly being th e i n t e r q u a r t i l e range which a ls o
allow s f o r fin d in g m edians. A sm all number o f item s,
u s u a lly about tw enty, a r e th e n s e le c te d so th a t th ey a re
sp read evenly along th e a t t i t u d e continuum.
When a respondent checks item s w ith which he a g re e s,
h is sc o re is th e m edian o f th e s c a le v a lu es o f a l l th e item s
checked. The respondent should a g ree w ith only a v ery few
sta tem en ts th a t a re n e a r h is tr u e p o s itio n on th e a t t i t u d e
continuum .
Oppenheim (104:131) c a u tio n s th a t in t h i s s c a le we
a r e d e a lin g w ith eq u al-ap p ea rin g in te r v a ls and th e u n its
a r e th e re fo re n o t a d d itiv e and in te rc h a n g e a b le on a lin e a r
continuum . The d iv is io n o f th e continuum in to elev en u n its
77
is a r b itr a r y , and th e re fo re one cannot assume th a t a sc o re
o f e ig h t is n u m e ric ally tw ice as h ig h as a sc o re o f fo u r,
e tc .
The r e l i a b i l i t y o f such s c a le s has been re p o rte d to
be adequate and s a tis f a c to r y , o fte n reac h in g .75 o r b e t te r
(Oppenheim, 104:132 - Shaw, 131:22). The v a l i d i t y depends
la rg e ly upon th e a t t i t u d e being measured and th e s k i l l o f
th o se c o n s tru c tin g th e item s. Oppenheim (104:132) in d ic a te s
th a t th e s e s c a le s have an advantage in th a t o fte n a p a r a l le l
form emerges from th e item a n a ly s is th a t i s extrem ely u se
f u l in stu d y in g a t t i t u d e change.
Shaw and W right (131:22) summarize t h e i r fin d in g s
reg ard in g th e s e s c a le s as fo llo w s : "The method o f eq u a l-
appearing in te r v a ls perm its (but does n o t e n su re ) th e con
s tr u c tio n o f r e l i a b l e and v a lid s c a le s b u t is la rg e ly
u n su c c essfu l in producing s c a le s having o th e r d e s ira b le
c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s ."
L ik e rt S c a le s .—The c o n s tru c tio n o f th e L ik e rt
(84:1-55) ty p e o f s c a le is le s s la b o rio u s th an th e con
s tr u c tio n o f th e T hurstone s c a le . This tech n iq u e asks th e
respondent f o r th e d eg ree o f agreem ent w ith each sta te m e n t.
The sta te m e n ts do n o t need to be e q u a lly spaced to show
78
s tre n g th o f a t t i t u d e s . The more fa v o ra b le th e in d iv id u a l's
a t t i t u d e toward th e a t t i t u d e o b je c t, th e h ig h e r h is expected
sc o re fo r th e item . A fiv e -c a te g o ry r a tin g system is
u s u a lly employed: s tro n g ly approve, approve, undecided,
d isap p ro v e, and s tro n g ly d isap p ro v e. Scoring is accom
p lis h e d by a ssig n in g v a lu e s o f 5, 4, 3, 2, and 1, re s p e c
t i v e l y . This sc o rin g is rev e rse d fo r n e g a tiv e ly worded
item s.
S e le c tio n o f item s is accom plished by a d m in iste rin g
th e s c a le to a sample o f th e ta r g e t p o p u la tio n . Item
sc o re s a re th e n c o rre la te d w ith th e t o t a l sc o re , and th e
item s th a t c o r r e la te h ig h ly w ith th e t o t a l sc o re a re s e
le c te d fo r th e f i n a l s c a le . A lthough th e fiv e -p o in t s c a le
i s th e most fre q u e n tly used, some in v e s tig a to rs have used
a se v e n -p o in t degree-o f-ag reem en t sc o re (Oppenheim, 104:
140).
The L ik e rt procedures y ie ld m oderately r e l i a b l e
s c a le s acco rd in g to Shaw (131:24), and Oppenheim (104:140)
re p o r ts th a t a c o e f f ic ie n t o f .85 is o fte n ach iev ed .
V a lid ity depends upon th e p a r tic u la r s c a le under c o n sid e r
a tio n .
A ccording to Oppenheim (104:140) th e most se rio u s
c r itic is m o f th e L ik e rt s c a le is th a t a t o t a l sc o re may be
79
o b tain ed in many d if f e r e n t ways. This is te c h n ic a lly known
as lack o f r e p r o d u c ib ility . Because o f t h is f a c to r i t has
been argued by some th a t th e t o t a l sc o re has l i t t l e meaning
o r th a t two o r more id e n tic a l sc o res may have t o t a l l y d i f
f e r e n t m eanings. The p a tte r n o f responses o fte n becomes
more in te r e s tin g th an th e t o t a l sc o re .
I t has been claim ed by L ik e rt (84:1-55) th a t one o f
th e g re a t advantages o f th is system is th a t i t i s sim p ler
and e a s ie r to ap p ly in th e development o f an a t t i t u d e s c a le
th an i s th e method o f eq u al-ap p earin g in te r v a ls . Edwards
(34:169) ta k e s some is s u e w ith t h i s c o n te n tio n . I t i s h is
claim , th a t once th e judgm ents have been se cu red , s c a le and
Q -values could be r e a d ily determ ined and th a t th e o v e r - a ll
e f f o r t re q u ire d was n o t a p p re c ia b ly g r e a te r th a n th a t o f
th e e q u a l-ap p earin g method d iscu ssed in th e previous
s e c tio n .
SeaInpram-A n a lv sis. —This resp o n se te ch n iq u e was
f i r s t proposed by Guttm an_(54:139-150) as a n on-m etric
procedure fo r s c a lin g monotone a t t i t u d e ite m s. Guttman
(53, 52) d e sc rib e d th e procedure more f u lly in l a t e r
p u b lic a tio n s . In t h i s method th e sta tem en ts a re so com
posed th a t agreem ent w ith one Im plies agreem ent w ith a l l
80
o th e rs "low er" on th e s c a le . In th is c a se th e term s
"h ig h e r" and "low er" a r e thought o f in term s o f a t t i t u d e
s tr e n g th r a th e r th a n lo g ic a l in c lu s iv e n e s s . The method can
be used w ith item s o th e r th a n a t t i t u d e sta te m e n ts , such as
n e u ro tic symptoms o r th e p o sse ssio n o f consumer d u ra b le s.
A ccording to Green (50:336) th e developm ent o f a
p e r f e c t Guttman s c a le re q u ire s c a r e f u l p re p a ra tio n in
v o lv in g te d io u s t e s tin g and proper item sequence. Scoring
a ls o i s a problem fo r t h i s te ch n iq u e. A nother lim ita tio n
m entioned by Green (50:359) was th a t th e procedure was
im p ra c tic a l w ith more th a n te n o r tw enty ite m s.
Oppenheim (104:150-151) a g ree s w ith th e lim ita tio n s
m entioned above, b u t in d ic a te s t h a t t h i s s c a le o ffe rs th e
im p o rtan t sa fe g u ard o f u n id im e n sio n a lity . He goes on to
p o in t o u t t h a t th e Guttman s c a le s a re v e ry u s e fu l when
exam ining sm a ll s h i f t s o r changes in a t t i t u d e s . Shaw and
W right (131:26) a g re e w ith Oppenheim (104:151) th a t th e
s c a le s a r e u s u a lly r e l i a b l e and v a lid by u s u a l forms o f
m easurem ent, alth o u g h v a l i d i t y depends la rg e ly on th e m ani
f e s t c o n te n t o f th e item s.
Method o f graded d ich o to m ies.--T h is method was
desig n ed to av o id some o f th e d i f f i c u l t i e s in h e re n t in th e
81
eq u a l-ap p ea rin g in te r v a ls te ch n iq u e . A ccording to Edwards
(34:122-124), t h i s ta k e s In to acco u n t p o s s ib le I n e q u a litie s
In th e w idths o f th e in te r v a ls on th e p sy c h o lo g ica l con
tinuum .
As in th e method o f e q u al-ap p earin g in te r v a ls , a
la rg e number o f item s a r e c o lle c te d , and judges a re asked
to s o r t them in to a fix e d number o f c a te g o rie s spaced along
a fav o rab le n e ss continuum . No assum ption is made, however,
reg a rd in g th e r e l a t i v e d is ta n c e betw een c a te g o rie s . Shaw
and W right (131:23) s t a t e th a t th e m athem atical model
t r e a t s th e c a te g o rie s as contiguous segm ents o f th e a t t i
tu d e continuum , se p a ra te d by b o u n d aries. They a ls o in d i
c a te th a t w ith re s p e c t to r e l i a b i l i t y , v a l i d i t y , and u n i-
d im e n sio n a lity , th e te ch n iq u e d i f f e r s l i t t l e from th o se
developed by th e method o f eq u a l-ap p ea rin g in te r v a ls .
S c a le -d is c rim in a tio n te c h n iq u e . —Shaw and W right
(131:26) d e s c rib e t h i s tech n iq u e as one th a t i s a s y n th e s is
o f th e T hurstone, L ik e rt, and Guttman p ro ced u res. I t was
f i r s t o u tlin e d by Edwards and K ilp a tric k (35:374-384).
I n i t i a l l y t h i s method follow s t h a t o f eq u al-ap p earin g
in te r v a ls in s e le c tin g a s e t o f a c c e p ta b le item s. Follow
in g t h i s , th e s e item s a re a d m in istered to a sample drawn
82
from th e ta r g e t p o p u la tio n , fo llo w in g th e L ik e rt method o f
item s e le c tio n . Item d isc rim in a to ry power i s p lo tte d
a g a in s t th e T hurstone S cale v a lu e s and item s w ith th e
g r e a te s t d is c rim in a to ry power a r e s e le c te d . F in a lly , th e
s e le c te d item s a r e su b je c te d to a scalogram a n a ly s is .
U nfolding te c h n iq u e . —This te ch n iq u e as d e sc rib e d
by Coombs (24:145-158) is a method o f d isc o v e rin g and
is o la tin g a la te n t a t t i t u d e u n d erly in g th e p re fe re n c e s o f
a group o f in d iv id u a ls . I t begins w ith a s e t o f sta tem en ts
th a t a r e r e la te d to th e u n d erly in g a t t i t u d e . S u b jects a re
th e n asked to choose item s th a t th ey a r e most w illin g to
endorse. The item s chosen a r e assumed to be th o se n e a re s t
th e in d iv id u a l's p o s itio n on th e a t t i t u d e continuum . D irec
tio n i s ignored and i t is as i f th e resp o n d en t had fo ld ed
th e s c a le over, u sin g h is p o s itio n as th e fo ld in g p o in t.
From a s e t o f th e s e rank o rd e rs th e o rd e r o f item s on th e
continuum can be determ ined.
L aten t s tr u c tu r e a n a ly s is . —This approach, p rese n ted
by I a z a rs fe ld (82:362-412) and f u r th e r d e sc rib e d by Shaw
and W right (131:29) i s a n o th e r approach in th e work o f
q u a n tify in g q u a l ita tiv e a t t r i b u t e s . I t is more g e n e ra l in
n a tu re th an most o f th e procedures m entioned up to th is
p o in t. A ccording to Shaw and W right (131:29) L az arsfe ld
is "concerned w ith a t t i t u d e s tr u c tu r e and measurement o n ly
as p a r t o f th e b ro ad er is s u e o f r e la tio n s between concept
form ation and e m p iric a l re s e a rc h in th e b e h a v io ra l
s c ie n c e s ." I t i s a method o f s c a lin g r e p lie s to an a t t i
tu d e q u e s tio n n a ire based on th e assum ption t h a t c o n tra
d ic to ry o r p a r t i a l l y in c o n s is te n t r e p lie s can be ex p lain ed
in term s o f th e la te n t c la s s o r l a te n t d is ta n c e found in
d eeper u n d erly in g a t t i t u d e s . I t i s assumed th a t th e item s
a r e in te r c o r r e la te d because o f t h e i r common c o r r e la tio n
w ith th e u n d erly in g a t t i t u d e v a r ia b le .
D erived from th e g e n e ra l la te n t s tr u c tu r e model is
l a te n t c la s s a n a ly s is . I t h as, acco rd in g to Green (50:
359-362), a s i t s b a s ic id e a th a t in te r r e la tio n s h ip s among
p a r tic u la r item s r e f l e c t th e e x iste n c e o f two o r more d i s
t i n c t su b p o p u latio n s which make up th e t o t a l p o p u la tio n o f
resp o n d e n ts. Thus t h is a n a ly s is i s a c tu a lly a method o f
d iv id in g a p o p u la tio n o f s u b je c ts in to a number o f c la s s e s
o r ty p e s.
The l a te n t d is ta n c e s c a le i s a ls o d e riv e d from th e
g e n e ra l l a t e n t s tr u c tu r e m odel. This i s a tech n iq u e fo r
84
scalogram a n a ly s is based on a p ro b a b ility model. Shaw and
W right (131:29) in d ic a te th a t t h i s method has some advan
ta g e over th e Guttman p rocedure in th a t " p e rfe c t and im
p e rfe c t s c a le s can be re p re se n te d eq u a lly w e ll, and, s in c e
i t is based upon a p r o b a b ility model, most o f th e c r i t e r i a
f o r th e Guttman s c a le become u n n ec essary ."
F a c to r ia l s c a le s . —The lo g ic o f th e l a te n t s tr u c tu r e
a n a ly s is tech n iq u e resem bles th a t o f f a c to r a n a ly s is . Fac
t o r a n a ly s is is a s t a t i s t i c a l tech n iq u e, based on i n t e r -
c o r r e la tin g a l l th e item s w ith one an o th er, w hich th en
a b s tr a c ts one o r more " f a c to rs " th a t th e item s have in
common. This i s , acco rd in g to Oppenheim (104:142), a good
way o f en su rin g u n id im e n sio n a lity and safeg u ard in g a g a in s t
th e in c lu s io n o f u n re la te d item s. I t is a procedure w idely
used in th e f i e l d o f m e n tal t e s tin g . F a cto r a n a ly s is can
b e used w ith a s e t o f a t t i t u d e item s o r sta tem en ts when a
s in g le sc o re i s needed to express an in d iv id u a l's p o s itio n
on an a t t i t u d e continuum . A lso, f a c to r a n a ly s is can b e
used t o dem onstrate th a t a seem ingly u n ifie d a t t i t u d e com
plex i s in f a c t made up o f s e v e ra l independent f a c to r s . I t
a ls o en ab les th e in v e s tig a to r to show th e common a t t i t u d i n a l
b a s is fo r some w idely d iv e rg e n t is s u e s .
Oppenheim (104:142-143) p o in ts out th a t th i s is a
p a r tic u la r ly la b o rio u s tech n iq u e and has se v e re lim ita tio n s
u n le ss a com puter i s a v a ila b le . Most o f th e tim e f a c to r -
a n a ly s is is a p p lie d to fin is h e d s c a le s in s te a d o f o r ig in a l
item pools because o f th e many hundreds o f s e p a ra te c o r
r e la tio n s th a t would have to be made. Applying i t to a
s in g le s c a le w i l l throw lig h t on i t s u n id im e n s io n a lity ;
when a p p lie d to a b a tte r y o f s c a le s g iv en to th e same
resp o n d en ts, i t can re v e a l s i m i l a r i t i e s and d iffe re n c e s
between th e s c a le s a s w e ll as some o f th e u n d erly in g a t t i
tudes o r v a lu e system s. I t s g r e a te s t v a lu e acco rd in g to
Oppenheim (104:143) i s th a t i t "becomes a to o l fo r t h e o r e t i
c a l in v e s tig a tio n and new d is c o v e rie s ."
E valuation o f A ttitu d e Measurements
As our p rev io u s d isc u ssio n has shown, a t t i t u d e
s c a le s u s u a lly c o n s is t o f from a h a lf-a -d o z e n to two dozen
o r more a t t i t u d e sta te m e n ts, w ith which th e resp o n d en t is
asked to ag ree o r d is a g re e . They a r e r e l a t i v e l y crude
m easuring in stru m en ts whose c h ie f fu n c tio n is to d iv id e
people roughly in to a number o f broad groups, w ith reg ard
to a p a r tic u la r a t t i t u d e . Such s c a le s cannot p ro v id e th e
in v e s tig a to r w ith s u b tle in s ig h ts in in d iv id u a l c a s e s .
86
They a r e tech n iq u es f o r p la cin g people on a continuum in
r e l a ti o n to one a n o th e r, in r e l a t i v e and n o t in a b s o lu te
term s. How u s e fu l a p a r tic u la r s c a le i s depends upon i t s
v a rio u s p r o p e r tie s , some o f which w i l l be d isc u sse d h e re .
R e l i a b i l i t y .—The r e l i a b i l i t y o f any s c a le i s an
in d ic a tio n o f th e degree o f c o n siste n c y th e s c a le has in
g iv in g s im ila r r e s u lt s when an a t t i t u d e is m easured a number
o f tim e s. Oppenheim (104:120-159) f e e ls th a t th e v ery
n a tu re o f a t t i t u d e s c a le s in t h e i r le n g th and d iv e r s ity
makes them more r e l i a b l e th an s in g le q u estio n s and th a t
r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f ic ie n ts o f .80 o r h ig h er a r e common. Shaw
and W right (131:16) l i s t th e th r e e b e s t methods o f e s t i
m ating th e r e l i a b i l i t y o f an a t t i t u d e s c a le as th e
(1) t e s t - r e t e s t method which is th e degree o f c o r r e la tio n
between sc o re s on th e same t e s t ; (2) th e e q u iv a le n t forms
method which is th e c o r r e la tio n between two com parable
forms o f th e same s c a le ; and (3) th e s p l i t - h a l f method
which i s th e c o r r e la tio n between com parable p a r ts o f th e
same s c a le .
V a li d ity .—This concerns w hether th e s c a le i s
m easuring what i t is supposed to m easure. Oppenheim (104:
75-76) p o in ts out th a t th is is a com plicated and d i f f i c u l t
87
process f o r a t t i t u d e s c a le s and he f e e ls th a t a t th e p re se n t
tim e th e re i s no way o f making su re th a t an a t t i t u d e s c a le
is v a lid . This is m o stly tr u e because o f th e lack o f c r i
t e r i a . What is needed a re groups o f people w ith known
a t t it u d e c h a r a c te r is tic s ( c r ite r io n groups) so t h a t i n v e s t i
g a to rs may se e i f t h e i r q u estio n s can d is c rim in a te between
them.
Shaw and W right (131:18-20) l i s t fo u r g e n e ra l p ro
cedures f o r e s tim a tin g th e v a l i d i t y o f p sy c h o lo g ic a l t e s t s .
These a r e : (1) p re d ic tiv e v a l id i t y , a m easure based on th e
r e la tio n s h ip between some fu tu re perform ance on an e x te rn a l
c r i te r i o n and an a t t i t u d e sc o re ; (2 ) co n cu rren t v a l i d i t y ,
th e r e la tio n s h ip betw een an a t t i t u d e s c a le sc o re and th e
p re se n t s ta tu s o r c l a s s i f i c a t i o n o f th e in d iv id u a l; (3) con
te n t v a l i d i ty , ev a lu a te d by determ in in g th e d eg ree to w hich
th e item s o f th e s c a le sam ple th e c o n te n t o f th e a t t i t u d e
domain b ein g m easured; and (4) c o n s tru c t v a l i d i t y , d e te r
mined by th e r e la tio n s h ip s between th e a t t i t u d e sc o re and
o th e r a s p e c ts o f th e p e rs o n a lity .
U h id im en sio n a litv . —This is e s s e n tia lly hom ogeneity.
The a t t i t u d e s c a le under c o n s id e ra tio n should be about one
th in g a t one tim e, as p u re ly a s is p o s s ib le . I f t h i s w ere
88
not tr u e , th en th e sc o re s t h a t two in d iv id u a ls would have
( i f th ey were i d e n tic a l) would n o t in d ic a te th a t th ey both
hold th e same a t t i t u d e s .
E q u ality o f u n i t s . —To Oppenheim (104:120) t h is
in d ic a te s th a t th e s c a le should fo llo w th e s t r a i g h t - l i n e
model and th a t some s o r t o f sc o rin g system should be d e
v is e d , p re fe ra b ly one based on in te rc h a n g e a b le u n its . Shaw
and W right (131:20) p o in t o u t th a t t h i s allow s us " to a v e r
age th e sc o re s f o r a g iv en in d iv id u a l d eriv e d from d if f e r e n t
s c a le s , to compare th e amount o f change produced by an ex
p erim en tal tre a tm e n t in in d iv id u a ls who f a l l a t d if f e r e n t
p o in ts on th e a t t i t u d e continuum , to compare sc o re s o f one
person w ith sc o re s o f a n o th e r on th e same s c a le , e t c ."
R e p ro d u c ib ility .—This is d e s ire d so th a t a sc o re
on an a t t i t u d e s c a le can show by means o f a s in g le fig u re
which sta tem en ts th e resp o n d en t agreed w ith and which he
d isa g re ed w ith , th u s d e fin in g h is p la c e on th e a t t i t u d e
continuum . Oppenheim (104:123) f e e ls th a t t h i s i s a r e
quirem ent th a t in p r a c tic e i s d i f f i c u l t to a c h ie v e . This
is p rim a rily because many a t t i t u d e pools a r e n o t amenable
to t h i s kind o f cum ulative o r p ro g re ssiv e s c a lin g , p a r tly
89
because th e y may n o t be u n id im en sio n al.
The zero p o i n t .—Shaw and W right (131:21) d isc u ss
th is p ro p e rty o f a t t i t u d e s c a le s . I t i s t h e i r c o n te n tio n
th a t a t titu d e s v ary in q u a lity from h ig h ly p o s itiv e to
h ig h ly n e g a tiv e im plying th a t th e re i s a p o in t on th e a t t i
tu d e continuum a t w hich th e q u a lity o f th e a t t i t u d e changes
from p o s itiv e o r n e g a tiv e . This p o in t i s , th e re fo re , th e
p o in t o f n e u t r a lity o r zero p o in t.
The Adorno "F" S cale
The "F" S cale designed by Adorno e t a l . (2) was
prepared to m easure a u th o rita ria n is m . In h is o r ig in a l stu d y
Adorno and h is a s s o c ia te s s e t out to m easure a n ti-s e m itic
and F a s c is tic te n d en cies (th e "F" o r ig in a lly sto o d f o r
fa sc ism ). I t was found in th e co u rse o f t h e i r in v e s tig a
tio n s th a t th e se te n d en cies were g e n e ra lly found among
in d iv id u a ls p o sse ssin g a u th o r ita r ia n c h a r a c te r i s tic s . These
c h a r a c te r is tic s w ere d efin e d as in c lu d in g th e fo llo w in g :
1. C onventionalism : R igid adherence to conven
tio n a l, m id d le -c la ss v a lu e s .
2. A u th o rita ria n su bm ission: Subm issive, un
c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e tow ard id e a liz e d m oral
a u th o r itie s o f th e ingroup.
A u th o rita ria n a g g re s sio n : Tendency to be on
th e lookout fo r, and to condemn, r e j e c t , and
punish people who v io la te co n v e n tio n al v a lu e s.
A n ti-* in tra c e p tio n : O pposition to th e su b je c
ti v e , th e im ag in ativ e, th e tender-m inded.
S u p e rs titio n and s te re o ty p y : The b e l i e f in
m y s tic a l d eterm in an ts o f th e in d iv id u a l's f a te ;
th e d is p o s itio n to th in k in r i g id c a te g o rie s .
Power and "to u g h n ess": Preoccupation w ith th e
dom inance-subm ission, strong-w eak, le a d e r-
fo llo w e r dim ension; id e n tif ic a tio n w ith power
f ig u r e s ; overem phasis upon co n v e n tio n a liz ed
a t t r i b u te s o f th e ego; exaggerated a s s e r tio n o f
s tre n g th and to u g h n ess.
D estru ctiv en ess and cynicism : G eneralized hos
t i l i t y , v i l l i f i c a t i o n o f th e human.
R r o je c tiv ity : The d is p o s itio n to b e lie v e th a t
w ild and dangerous th in g s go on in th e w orld;
th e p ro je c tio n outw ards o f unconscious em otional
im pulses.
Sex: Exaggerated concern w ith se x u al "goings-
Research S tu d ies
F u rth e r s tu d ie s have tended to v e r if y A dorno's
o r ig in a l d e f in itio n s o f th e a u th o r ita r ia n p e rs o n a lity , and
some have added s ig n i f ic a n t ly t o th e e x te n t o f th e a t t i -
tu d in a l c h a r a c te r is tic s t h i s d ev ice m easures. Jones (66:
107-127), f o r example, found t h a t th e person w ith a u th o r i
ta r ia n te n d en cies i s more lik e ly to view o th e rs in term s o f
power and i s le s s s e n s itiv e to th e p sy c h o lo g ica l o r p e r
s o n a lity c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f o th e r people th an is a non
a u th o r ita r ia n in d iv id u a l. L ip etz (88:95-99) ten d s to
confirm t h i s in h is stu d y which found th a t th e low a u th o r i
ta r ia n p erso n p erce iv e s o th e rs more a c c u ra te ly th a n th e
h ig h a u th o r ita r ia n p erso n .
K lein (76) c a rr ie d th e in v e s tig a tio n o f th e "F"
S cale f u r th e r and attem p ted to in v e s tig a te th e r e la tio n s h ip
between a u th o rita ria n is m and a b s tr a c t reaso n in g , concept
fo rm atio n and d ed u ctiv e reaso n in g a b i l i t i e s . On th e b a s is
o f th e fo rm u latio n s and fin d in g s o f p rev io u s re s e a rc h , i t
was h y p o th esized t h a t : A u th o rita ria n ism i s in v e rs e ly
r e la te d to a b s tr a c t re a so n in g , concept fo rm ation and deduc
t i v e rea so n in g . I t was found th a t s ig n if ic a n t n e g a tiv e
r e la tio n s h ip s e x is te d betw een th e v a ria b le s a u th o r ita r ia n -
ism -concept fo rm atio n and a u th o rita ria n is m -d e d u c tiv e
92
re a so n in g . R e la tio n sh ip s between a u th o rita ria n is m and
a b s tr a c t reaso n in g were g e n e ra lly in th e p re d ic te d n e g a tiv e
d ir e c tio n , b u t n o t s t a t i s t i c a l l y s ig n i f ic a n t .
S cale Limitations
The u se o f th e term a u th o r ita r ia n p e rs o n a lity as a
u n iv e rs a l p e rs o n a lity syndrome is n o t w arran ted acco rd in g
to Niyekawa (101:283-288). In a stu d y w ith Japanese sub
j e c t s u sin g th e "F" S cale he dem onstrated t h a t : (1) a u th o r i
ta ria n is m in Japan is c h a ra c te riz e d by acq u iescen ce, and,
th e re fo re , b o th ac q u iescen ce and ex tre m ity sc o re s o f
Japanese s u b je c ts a r e h ig h e r th a n th o se o f com parable
American s u b je c ts ; (2) lo w e r-c la ss s u b je c ts ten d to be
h ig h e r in b o th a u th o rita ria n is m and acq u iescen ce th a n upp er-
c la s s s u b je c ts ; and (3) s u b je c ts a t a median le v e l o f c u l
t u r a l s o p h is tic a tio n were h ig h e s t in acq u iescen ce. Niyekawa
su g g ests th a t th e c e r ta in ty o f Japanese s u b je c ts " i s not
based on id e o lo g ic a l c o n v ic tio n b u t on th e c o n v ic tio n t h a t
th e words o f th e a u th o r ity a re r i g h t . " He a ls o su g g ests
th a t a t e s t w ith g r e a te r emphasis on th e manner o f resp o n se
r a th e r th a n c o n te n t w i l l be a more v a lid to o l in c ro s s -
c u l tu r a l re s e a rc h .
Peabody (109:11-23) f u r th e r c r i t i c i z e s th e u se o f
a u th o rita ria n is m s c a le s , n o t from th e p o in t o f c r o s s -
c u l tu r a l re s e a rc h , b u t r a th e r as being more s u s c e p tib le to
agreem ent resp o n se b ia s th an a r e o th e r ty p es o f s e lf - r e p o r t
m easures such as th e M innesota M ultiphasic P e rs o n a lity
In v en to ry . He in te r p r e t s t h i s resp o n se b ia s n o t m echani
c a lly b u t a s a resp o n se tendency when th e s u b je c t is u n
c e r ta in . For Peabody, th e n , high a u th o rita ria n is m s c a le
sco res re p re s e n t sim ple-m indedness more th a n a u th o r ita r ia n
id e o lo g ie s .
Rokeach (123:349-355) took sh a rp is s u e w ith Peabody
reg a rd in g h is fin d in g s . Rokeach s ta te s th a t " th e resp o n se-
b ia s in te r p r e ta tio n o f fin d in g s o b tain ed w ith a u th o r ita r ia n
ism s c a le s cannot be re c o n c ile d w ith numerous s u b s ta n tiv e
fin d in g s ."
Teacher A ttitu d e s
The u se o f th e "F" S cale in th e p re se n t stu d y is to
m easure a u th o rita ria n is m as a tendency in te a c h e rs to use
"a n ti-d e m o c ra tic " te a c h e r-p u p il r e la tio n s h ip s . That t h i s
i s p o s s ib le has been dem onstrated in s e v e ra l s tu d ie s a lre a d y
c ite d in p rev io u s s e c tio n s o f th is d is s e r ta ti o n . Among
th e se was th e stu d y by P ie rs (112:245-249), u sin g th e
94
M innesota Teacher A ttitu d e In v en to ry as c o n tra s te d w ith th e
"F" S cale and th e stu d y by McGee (91:89-146) which p re
d ic te d te a c h e r b eh av io r from th e r e s u l t s o f th e "F" S cale.
O ther s tu d ie s p re v io u sly m entioned w hich used th e
"F" S cale In m easuring te a c h e r a t titu d e s were Reamers
(116:427-431) who found s ig n if ic a n t c o rre la tio n s between
F -S cale sc o re s and e ig h t p e rs o n a lity v a r ia b le s . Dandes
(30) s tu d ie d th e r e la tio n s h ip between a u th o rita ria n is m as
m easured by th e "F" S cale and m en tal h e a lth o f te a c h e rs
and found th a t th e le s s a u th o r ita r ia n w ere p sy c h o lo g ic a lly
h e a lth i e r . L indgren and S inger (8 7 :3 -7 ) in t h e i r i n v e s t i
g a tio n o f American and B ra z ilia n teach ers* a t titu d e s used
th e "F" S cale and found n e g a tiv e c o r r e la tio n s between
sc o re s and th e v a r ia b le "independence o f judgm ent." Gold
(45:77-80) stu d ie d stu d e n t " is o la te s " and found th a t high
"F" Scores f o r te a c h e rs were d i r e c tl y r e la te d to th e number
o f such is o la te s in t h e i r classro o m s.
O ther I n v e s tig a tiv e Areas
I t should n o t be presumed, however, th a t th e use o f
th e "F" S cale in m easuring a u th o rita ria n is m i s lim ite d to
th e f i e l d o f ed u catio n o r te a c h e r a t t i t u d e su rv ey s. Many
re s e a rc h s tu d ie s d e a lin g w ith v a rio u s s o c io lo g ic a l and
95
p sy c h o lo g ica l iss u e s have made u se o f t h i s s c a le a s w e ll as
th e Dogmatism S cale w hich is tak en up in th e next s e c tio n
o f t h i s c h a p te r.
As an example o f th e aforem entioned is th e stu d y by
Z ip p el (156:667-670) in v e s tig a tin g th e r o le o f a u th o r i
ta ria n is m in p a rty sw itch in g in th e 1964 p r e s id e n tia l
e le c tio n . I t was p o s tu la te d th a t prim ary group i d e n t if i c a
tio n is s tro n g e r th an id eo lo g y , th a t th e re would be no
d iffe re n c e on th e F -S cale o r th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale
betw een su p p o rters o f G oldw ater and Johnson o r a g re a t
amount o f p a rty sw itching and th a t th o se who sw itched would
have h ig h e r mean sco res on b o th s c a le s th an th o se who d id
n o t sw itch on th e grounds th a t id eo lo g y must be in te n s e to
overcome prim ary group lo y a lty . A ll hypotheses in th is
stu d y were confirm ed.
Sherwood (132:264-269) used th e F -S cale in h is i n
v e s tig a tio n o f some o f th e a t t it u d e s surrounding P re sid e n t
Kennedy's d e a th . High a u th o r ita r ia n a d u lt le ad e rs in con
s e rv a tiv e o rg a n iz a tio n s ex p ressed more concern f o r a f f ix in g
blame and m eting out punishm ent fo llo w in g P re sid en t
Kennedy's d eath th an d id low a u th o r ita r ia n l i b e r a l a r t s
u n d erg rad u ates. Those s c o rin g h ig h in a u th o rita ria n is m
tended to recommend th e u se o f punishm ent as a problem
96
so lv in g tech n iq u e, and e x p ia to ry punishm ent more th an
punishm ent by r e c ip r o c ity was recommended.
R e lia b ility
Adorno and h is a s s o c ia te s (2:258) re p o rt th a t th e
s c a le has an average r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f ic ie n t o f .90, th e
ran g e being from .81 to .97 (see Table 2 ). This would
in d ic a te th a t an in d iv id u a l ta k in g th is s c a le could be
p laced along a dim ension w ith v e ry l i t t l e m argin o f e r r o r .
Adorno h im se lf in ta lk in g about t h i s r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i
c ie n t in d ic a te s th a t:
. . . th e sc o re a tta in e d by an in d iv id u a l can be r e lie d
upon in th e sen se th a t chance e rro rs o f measurement
have been m inim ized so th a t in a r e p e t itio n o f th e
s c a le , a t a tim e when p o litic a l-so c io e c o n o m ic co n d i
tio n s were g e n e ra lly th e same as b e fo re , h is new sc o re
would e ith e r be th e same as h is f i r s t o r f a l l w ith in
narrow lim its above o r below i t . (2:258)
K erlin g e r re p o rts th a t th e s c a le had:
. . . sound th e o r e tic a l reaso n in g behind th e c o n s tru c
tio n , an e m p iric a l approach to an im portant s o c ia l
and p sy c h o lo g ica l problem , and th e stim u lu s to r e
se a rc h in th e measurement o f complex v a r ia b le s .
(73:489)
The Rokeach Dogmatism S cale
The Rokeach Dogmatism S cale c o n s is ts o f f o r ty s t a t e
m ents to be responded to by th e s u b je c t (see Appendix A).
TABLE 2
RELIABILITY OF THE F SCALE*
Group N R e lia b ility Mean** S.D.
George W ashington U n iv ersity Women 132 .84 3.5 1 .90
C a lifo rn ia S erv ice Club Men 63 .94 4 .0 8 1.03
M iddle-C lass Men 69 .92 3.69 1.22
M Lddle-Class Women 154 .93 3.62 1.26
W orking-Class Men 61 .88 4.19 1.18
W orking-Class Women 53 .97 3 .8 6 1.67
Los Angeles Men 117 .92 3.68 1.17
Los Angeles Women 130 .91 3.49 1.13
T estin g C lass Women 59 .89 3.62 .99
San Q uentin Men P riso n ers 110 .87 4.73 .86
Ito y ch ia tric C lin ic Women 71 .94 3.69 1.30
P s y c h ia tric C lin ic Men 50 .89 3.82 1.01
Employment S erv ice Men
106 .89 3 .7 4 1.04
M aritim e School Men 343 .81 4 .0 6 .77
O v e r-a ll Mean 1,518 .90 3.84 1.10
*T. W . Adorno e t a l . . The A u th o rita ria n P e rs o n a lity (New York: H arper and B ro th e rs,
1950).
**Means computed on th e b a s is o f resp o n ses p er Item .
98
Hie s c a le is designed to m easure a t t i t u d e s th a t in d ic a te
th e s u b je c t's b e l i e f system along th e continuum "open-
minded - clo sed -m in d ed ."
Rokeach (122) c o n stru c te d h is s c a le s d e d u c tiv e ly .
He s tu d ie d c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f open and c lo se d human b e l i e f
system s and c o n s tru c te d item s to ta p th e s e c h a r a c te r i s tic s .
He re p o rte d t h a t h ig h s c o re rs on th e Dogmatism S cale a re
re p e a te d ly found to d i f f e r from low s c o re rs in th e a b i l i t y
to s y n th e s iz e new b e l ie f s in to a new system , b u t n o t in th e
a b i l i t y to an a ly ze o r to break down s in g le b e l i e f s .
One v a r ia b le t h a t seems to acco u n t fo r th e d i f f e r
ences in th e fo rm atio n o f new system s betw een open and
c lo sed persons i s th e a b i l i t y to remember, o r to keep in
mind a l l th e new p a r ts to be in te g ra te d . A second v a r ia b le
is th e e x te n t to which one i s w illin g to "p la y a lo n g ," o r
to e n te r ta in new system s. A th ir d v a r ia b le is p a s t e x p e ri
ence, which d e fin e s w hether a p a r tic u la r system i s , psycho
lo g ic a lly speaking, new o r not new. A p a r tic u la r ta s k may
be e q u a lly u n fa m ilia r to two p erso n s, b u t may be new to one
and n o t new t o a n o th e r. A system is n o t new, p sy ch o lo g i
c a lly sp eak in g , i f i t can be shown to be ro o te d in s p e c if ic
p a s t ex p e rien ce , and in b e l ie f s formed a s a r e s u l t o f such
ex p e rien ce . The le s s new a system , th e more im p o rtan t
99
i s th e r o le o f in d iv id u a l d iffe re n c e s in th e c a p a c ity to
e n te r ta in new system s. A fo u rth v a r ia b le is w hether th e
b e l ie f s o f a new system ( p o l i t i c a l , r e lig io u s , s c i e n t i f i c ,
e t c . ) a r e exposed, imposed, ta u g h t o r prom ulgated a l l a t
once o r g ra d u a lly . In th o se w ith r e la tiv e l y c lo se d system s,
problem -solving i s c l e a r ly f a c i l i t a t e d when th e p a rts of
th e system a r e p re se n te d a l l a t once "on a s i l v e r p l a t t e r . "
A f i f t h v a r ia b le i s th e degree o f is o la tio n o f b e lie f s
w ith in th e system . The g r e a te r th e is o la tio n w ith in a
system , th e le s s p o s itiv e t r a n s f e r from one system to a
s im ila r one, and th e more d i f f i c u l t i t i s to d is c o v e r i n
h e re n t c o n tra d ic tio n s w ith in th e system .
The th e o r e tic a l im p lic a tio n s o f t h is s c a le , acco rd
ing to Rokeach (122:72) a r e :
1. Im portant a s p e c ts o f m ental fu n c tio n in g a re
a t tr i b u t a b l e to p e rs o n a lity r a th e r th a n to
i n t e l l e c t u a l a b i l i t y as such.
2. A p e rs o n 's b e l i e f system has p erv asiv e e f f e c ts
on d if f e r e n t sp h eres o f a c t i v i t y —id e o lo g ic a l,
c o n c e p tu a l, p e rc e p tu a l and e s th e tic .
3 . D ifferen ces in th e fu n c tio n in g o f persons who
a r e r e l a t i v e l y open and clo sed extends n o t
only to such c o g n itiv e a c t i v i t i e s a s problem
so lv in g , remembering and p e rc e iv in g , b u t a ls o
to em otional ex p erien ces as w e ll.
Rokeach c o n s tru c te d th e Dogmatism S cale as an e x te n
s io n o f th e Adorno "F" S cale m entioned in th e l a s t s e c tio n
100
o f th is c h a p te r. Rokeach f e l t v ery s tro n g ly th a t th e
F -s c a le measured a u th o rita ria n is m p rim a rily in ta p p in g
b e lie f s th a t m ight be co n sid ered dogmatism o f th e " r ig h t1 ''
wing a re a of p o l i t i c a l b e l i e f s . The Dogmatism S cale was
d ev ised to m easure a u th o rita ria n is m and dogmatism in b o th
th e r ig h t and " l e f t " sp h eres o f th e p o l i t i c a l scen e.
Research conducted by K erlin g er (74:391-399) ap p ears
to b e a r out th e f a c t th a t b o th th e F and Dogmatism S cales
a r e m easuring d if f e r e n t a s p e c ts o f th e a u th o r ita r ia n p e r
s o n a lity . The re s e a rc h began w ith th e q u e s tio n : Are
a u th o rita ria n is m and dogmatism p a rts o f th e same tinder ly in g
v a r ia b le , o r a re th e y d is c rim in a b le e n t i t i e s ? To answer
th i s and o th e r q u e stio n s th e F -S cale and th e Dogmatism
S cales were ad m in iste re d to 1,239 s u b je c ts in New York,
tfLchigan, and L o u isian a. Item c o rre la tio n s were f a c to r
analyzed and i t was found th a t th e F -S cale and Dogmatism
item s fo r th e most p a r t w ere loaded on d if f e r e n t f a c to r s ,
even though b o th w ere p o s itiv e ly c o r r e la te d . The F -S cale
and Dogmatism S cale th u s seem to be f a c t o r i a l l y d is c rim i
n ab le, even though b o th a r e m easures o f a u th o rita ria n is m .
Follow -up S tudies
A number o f s tu d ie s have ta k e n p la ce u sin g th e
101
Dogmatism S cale o f Rokeach to m easure v a rio u s f a c ts of
v ary in g In d iv id u als* p e r s o n a litie s and t h e i r r e la tio n s h ip
to th e a u th o rita ria n is m Rokeach p u rp o rts to fin d w ith h is
s c a le . Most o f th e s e in v e s tig a tio n s have tended to su p p o rt
Rokeach's o r ig in a l fin d in g s and have p o in ted out th e u s e
fu ln e ss and a d a p ta b ility o f t h i s s c a le .
One o f th e s e v a lid a tio n ty p es s tu d ie s involved th e
in flu e n c e o f b e l i e f system s on in te rp e rs o n a l p re ju d ic e .
Using 630 n in th g rad e s tu d e n ts , S te in (138:1-29) found
evidence s tro n g ly su p p o rtin g th e v a l i d i t y o f Rokeach*s
th e o ry . The re s e a rc h p o in te d out th a t when in fo rm atio n
about a stim u lu s p e rs o n 's b e lie f s in th e a re a o f p e rso n a l
v a lu e s i s made a v a ila b le , s im ila r it y o r d is s im il a r ity in
b e lie f s is th e prim ary d eterm in an t o f a t titu d e s o f w h ite
g e n tile s tow ard Negroes and Jews. These r e s u lt s were a ls o
found fo r Negro and Jew ish s tu d e n ts ' a t titu d e s tow ard mem
b e rs o f th e m a jo rity . Only se c o n d a rily d id r a c i a l or
r e lig io u s a f f i l i a t i o n p er s e , o r h ig h v e rsu s low r e l a t i v e
socioeconom ic s t a t u s , in flu e n c e th e stu d en ts* fe e lin g s and
a c tio n o r ie n ta tio n s tow ard o th e rs .
A nother in v e s tig a tio n which added s tre n g th to some
o f Rokeach's fin d in g s reg a rd in g th e dogm atic in d iv id u a l was
102
th e stu d y by Watson (152:105) In which dogmatism was lin k e d
w ith n e u ro tic ism and r i g i d i t y . Rokeach (122) o r ig in a lly
o ffe re d a d is t in c t io n between r i g i d i t y and dogmatism, in
which r i g i d i t y can be d efin ed a s th e i n a b i l it y to produce
n o v el o r changed responses w h ile dogmatism can be d efin ed
as th e i n a b i l i t y to u t i l i z e n o v el resp o n ses which have been
produced. W atson's fin d in g s tended to confirm th is d i s
tin c tio n .
That a dogm atic p erson would ten d to h o ld more
s tro n g ly to in fo rm atio n c o n s is te n t w ith h is own opinion
seemed to be an obvious b y -p ro d u ct o f th e closed-m inded
in d iv id u a l. Kleck (75:249-252) v e r if ie d th is in a study
c a llin g fo r responses to o p in io n -c o n s is te n t and o p in io n -
in c o n s is te n t in fo rm atio n . As expected, dogm atic s u b je c ts
d id show le s s r e c a l l of in c o n s is te n t in fo rm atio n and a
g r e a te r tendency to e v a lu a te c o n s is te n t in fo rm atio n more
p o s itiv e ly th a n d id open-minded s u b je c ts .
P a re n ts, a p p a re n tly , have much to do in th e develop
ment o f t h i s dogmatic a t t i t u d e p o rtra y e d by Rokeach and
v e r if ie d by o th e r re s e a rc h e rs . Rebhun (115:260-262) in h is
stu d y o f p a re n t a t titu d e s and t h e i r r e la tio n s h ip to th e
b e l i e f system found th a t closed-m inded people ten d to h o ld
103
p a re n ta l a t titu d e s which encourage t h e i r o ffs p rin g n o t to
in tru d e upon t h e i r b e l i e f - d i s b e l i e f system and th u s to
prom ote a s im ila r dogm atic approach in t h e i r c h ild re n .
Not a l l re s e a rc h s tu d ie s , however, tended to confirm
R okeach's o r ig in a l sta tem e n ts re g a rd in g th e dogm atic p e r
s o n a lity . As an example, Rokeach m a in ta in s th a t dogm atic
o r closed-m inded p erso n s, because o f th e th r e a t posed to
t h e i r r ig id ly h e ld b e l i e f system s by th e p o s s i b ilit y o f
se ein g new r e la tio n s h ip s among o ld id e a s , b e l i e f s , o r a t t i
tu d es a r e handicapped in t h e i r a b i l i t y to sy n th e siz e c o g n i
t i v e l y and p e rc e p tu a lly in com parison to open-minded
in d iv id u a ls . Johnson (64) undertook to stu d y t h i s r e l a t i o n
s h ip between dogmatism and p e rc e p tu a l s y n th e s is . He found
no su p p o rt fo r th e h y p o th esized r e la tio n s h ip between
dogmatism and perform ance on ta s k s in v o lv in g p e rc e p tu a l
a n a ly s is and s y n th e s is . What was found was a c u r v ilin e a r
r e la tio n s h ip w ith th e m iddle dogm atic group doing s i g n i f i
c a n tly b e t te r on each ta s k th a n th e high and low groups.
Johnson makes th e s u p p o sitio n t h a t th e re la tio n s h ip s m ight
b e due to th e rem oval o f th e v a ria n c e c o n trib u te d by i n t e l
lig e n c e , to resp o n se s e t b ia s in th e t e s t o r to a lack o f
v a l i d i t y o f th e t e s t . I f f u r th e r re s e a rc h confirm s th e
104
e x is te n c e o f th e c u r v ilin e a r r e la tio n s h ip , i t would seem to
n e c e s s ita te some re v is io n s in R okeach's th eo ry s in c e what
i s im plied is th a t extrem e open-m indedness can be as m al
a d a p tiv e as extrem e closed-m indedness in c e r t a in s it u a ti o n s .
F u rth e r c lu e s to th e ways in which in d iv id u a ls may
o r may n o t sc o re on th e Dogmatism S cale w ere provided by
Becker (6:287-293). Previous re s e a rc h had su g g ested th a t
low s c o re rs on th e Dogmatism S cale, which i s p o s itiv e ly
keyed, o b ta in low sc o re s because th e y ten d to re p re s s o r
deny sta tem en ts t h a t a r e s o c ia lly u n d e s ira b le o r r e f l e c t
a n e g a tiv e se lf-im a g e . R e su lts o f B eck er's in v e s tig a tio n
in d ic a te d th a t (1) low s c o re rs on th e Dogmatism S cale a re
n o t m o tiv ated d i f f e r e n t i a l l y to p re se n t a p o s itiv e s o c ia l
image, b u t a r e m o tiv ated d i f f e r e n t i a l l y to p re se n t a p o s i
t i v e p e rso n a l image and in th e d ir e c tio n ex p ected ; and
(2) m ales a r e more m o tiv ated to p re s e n t a p o s itiv e p e rso n a l
image th an a r e fem ales, and fem ales a r e more m o tiv ated to
p re se n t a p o s itiv e s o c ia l image th an a r e m ales.
In a n o th e r stu d y p o in ted a t ex ten d in g our knowledge
o f th e Dogmatism S cale, A lte r (4:967-969) p re se n te d norms
fo r th e S cale f o r th ir ty - s e v e n sam ples o f v a rio u s popula
tio n s . Women sco red c o n s is te n tly low er th a n men, and th e
105
d iffe re n c e seems due to a few item s. From h is fin d in g s
A lte r concluded th a t wide v a r ia tio n s in th e means re p o rte d
in d ic a te th a t th e Dogmatism S cale is probably h ig h ly s e n s i
t i v e to s u b -c u ltu ra l d if fe re n c e s . He su g g ests th a t lo c a l
norms fo r la rg e sam ples should be o btained b e fo re u sin g
th e Dogmatism S cale as an independent v a r ia b le .
Teachers* and Educators* R eactions
to th e Dnpmat-fsm S cale
In previous s e c tio n s o f th i s c h a p te r some r e f e r
ences to th e u se o f th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale w ith
te a c h e rs and o th e r ed u cato rs have been made. T heir f in d
ings have in d ic a te d a u s e fu l approach to m easuring te a c h e r
a ttitu d e s and re la tio n s h ip s w ith o th e r v a r ia b le s . Among
th e s e was th e stu d y by Dandes (30) who d isco v ered a d ir e c t
r e la tio n s h ip between a te a c h e r being open-minded o r c lo se d -
minded and th e s t a t e o f h is p sy c h o lo g ical h e a lth . The more
open-minded and l i b e r a l th e e d u c a to r's v iew points th e more
he tended to be p sy c h o lo g ic a lly h e a lth y .
Kramer (78) in v e s tig a te d th e r e la tio n o f b e l i e f
system s and e d u c a tio n a l v a lu e s . He used th e Dogmatism S cale
to m easure b e l ie f system s. He found "open-minded" te a c h e rs
more c o n s is te n t in t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l a ttitu d e s w hich tended
106
to p o in t In a p ro g re ssiv e d ir e c tio n . Soderbergh (133:245-
251) found v e te ra n te a c h e rs to be e x c e ssiv e ly dogm atic in
t h e i r b e l ie f system s. This tended to make them v ery
r e s i s t a n t to change and r i g i d l y to com partm entalize t h e i r
ideas and a t t i t u d e s . Robkin (121:47-49) was found to
d isa g re e v io le n tly w ith Soderbergh. He concluded th a t th e
tendency tow ard ex c essiv e dogmatism is n o t a g e n e ra l
c h a r a c te r i s tic o f th e p re se n t-d a y te a c h e r.
Voth (149) conducted q u ite an e x te n siv e in v e s tig a
tio n o f th e r e la tio n s h ip betw een dogmatism (as m easured on
th e Rokeach S ca le) and o th e r o b je c tiv e measurements o f an
education s tu d e n t's p ro g ress ( te s t r e s u l t s , grade p o in t
av erag es, number o f c r e d its in e d u c a tio n a l a d m in is tra tio n ).
He g e n e ra lly found th a t t e s t perform ance m easures used to
d e s c rib e and e v a lu a te d o c to ra l g rad u ates in ed u catio n were
n o t r e la te d t o dogmatism as m easured by th e Dogmatism S cale.
D octoral g rad u a tes in ed u catio n were found to be le s s dog
m atic th an u n d erg rad u ates. Those s tu d e n ts who chose a
f a i r l y heavy c o n c e n tra tio n o f g rad u ate sch o o l e d u c a tio n a l
a d m in is tra tio n courses w ere found to be more dogm atic th an
th o se who chose fewer e d u c a tio n a l a d m in is tra tio n c o u rse s.
This l a t t e r fin d in g o f Voth i s r a th e r in te r e s tin g
when one c o n s id e rs th e f a c t t h a t th o se in d iv id u a ls having
th e most courses in e d u c a tio n a l a d m in is tra tio n would
probably be sch o o l a d m in is tra to rs . This would ten d to lead
one to b e lie v e th a t th e predom inant number o f e d u c a tio n a l
a d m in is tra to rs were r a th e r "closed-m inded" in t h e i r b e l ie f
system . C ro ft (29) would have us b e lie v e th a t th e c lo se d -
minded a d m in is tra to r cannot do h is jo b as w e ll as th o se
a d m in is tra to rs c l a s s i f ie d as open-m inded. His stu d y in
volved th e r e la tio n s h ip between open and closed-m indedness
and th e p erce p tio n s o f people. Open-minded p rin c ip a ls
dem onstrated more accuracy th an closed-m inded p rin c ip a ls
when e stim a tin g s u p e rin te n d e n ts ' p e rc e p tio n s. From th e s e
fin d in g s C ro ft p re d ic te d th a t open-minded p rin c ip a ls could
more a c c u ra te ly e s tim a te in d iv id u a l te a c h e rs ' p erce p tio n s
th an do closed-m inded p r in c ip a ls . The fin d in g s o f th e l a s t
two c ite d s tu d ie s would tr u l y lead to a dilemma in th e
choosing o f ad eq u ate a d m in is tra to rs . I f most a d m in is tra to rs
ten d to be dogm atic, and i f dogm atic a d m in is tra to rs a re th e
p o o rest ty p e , th en th e p erso n n el d ir e c to r s o f many school
d i s t r i c t s have a r a th e r d i f f i c u l t jo b ahead o f them in
s e le c tin g th e most adequate in d iv id u a ls to f i l l adm inis
t r a t i v e p o s itio n s .
In a stu d y aimed a t in v e s tig a tin g th e e f f e c ts o f a
te a c h e r tr a in in g program Fakouri (38) a g a in confirm s th e
108
fin d in g s th a t th e "open-minded" in d iv id u a l makes f o r a
b e t t e r ed u c ato r, be he te a c h e r o r a d m in is tra to r. Using th e
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale h is stu d y supported th e fo llo w in g
c o n c lu sio n s : (1) open-minded s tu d e n ts have more fa v o ra b le
a t t i tu d e s toward te ach in g th a n closed-m inded s tu d e n ts ;
(2) open-minded stu d e n ts m a in ta in t h e i r r e l a t i v e l y more
fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s over closed-m inded stu d e n ts d u rin g th e
tr a in in g program; (3) among "open-m inded" s tu d e n ts , th o se
w ith h ig h achievem ent m o tiv a tio n change t h e i r a t titu d e s
s ig n if ic a n t ly more th an th o se w ith low achievem ent m o tiv a
tio n ; (4) th e a t titu d e s o f th e s tu d e n ts change s ig n i f ic a n t ly
d u rin g th e tr a in in g program.
R e lia b ility
Rokeach (122:90) re p o rts r e l i a b i l i t i e s f o r d i f f e r
e n t sam ples used in h is o r ig in a l re s e a rc h . A c o rre c t
r e l i a b i l i t y o f .81 was found fo r h is sample o f E n g lish C ol
leg e S tu d en ts. The r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f ic ie n t f o r th e E nglish
w orker sample was .78. In o th e r sam ples su b seq u en tly te s te d
a t M ichigan S ta te U n iv e rsity , Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity , and a t
a V eterans A d m in istratio n D o m iciliary , th e r e l i a b i l i t i e s
ranged from .68 to .93 (see Table 3 ).
T A B L E 3
RELIABILITY O F T H E D O G M A T IS M SCALE*
Group N R e lia b ility Mean S.D.
E n g lish C olleges I I 80 .81 152.8 26.2
E n g lish Workers 60 .78 175.8 2 6.0
Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity I 22 .85 142.6 2 7.6
Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity I I 28 .74 143.8 2 2 .1
Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity I I I 21 .74 142.6 23.3
Ohio S ta te U h iv e rsity IV 29 .68 141.3 2 7 .8
Ohio S ta te U h iv e rsity V** 58 .71 141.3 28.2
143.2 27.9
M ichigan S ta te U h iv e rsity IV 89 .78
-
mm
V.A. D om iciliary** 80
-
183.2 2 6 .6
24 .93
-
mm
17 .84
- -
*MLlton Rokeach, The Open and Closed Mind (New York: Basic Books, I9 6 0 ), p. 90.
**The Ohio S ta te U n iv e rsity V r e l i a b i l i t y was o b ta in ed by a t e s t - r e t e s t , w ith f iv e to
s ix months between t e s t s . The r e l i a b i l i t y o f .84 f o r th e V.A. group was o b tain ed in
th e same way w ith a t le a s t a month betw een t e s t s .
109
110
Rokeach makes th e follow ing comment concerning th e
above s ta te d r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t s :
These r e l i a b i l i t i e s a re co n sid ered to be q u ite s a t i s -
fa c to ry , e s p e c ia lly when we remember th a t th e Dogmatism
S cale co n ta in s q u ite a s tra n g e c o lle c tio n o f item s th a t
cover a l o t o f t e r r i t o r y and appear on th e su rfa c e to be
u n re la te d to each o th e r. The f a c t th a t s u b je c ts ag ree
o r d is a g re e w ith th e se item s in a c o n s is te n t manner is
borne out by item a n a ly se s. These an a ly se s compare su b
je c t s sc o rin g in th e upper and low er q u a rte rs o f th e
frequency d is tr ib u tio n s on each o f th e item s. They
ty p ic a lly show th a t high and low dogm atic s u b je c ts d i f
f e r c o n s is te n tly and in a s t a t i s t i c a l l y s ig n if ic a n t
manner on th e g re a t m a jo rity o f item s. (122:90)
The Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
D esc rip tio n
The Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l i s a g rap h ic r a tin g s c a le
d ev ised by Osgood, S uci, and Tannenbaum (107). I t has been
d e scrib ed by Remmers (117:360) as "a sim p le-lo o k in g b u t
h ig h ly s o p h is tic a te d " d ev ice.
In a c tu a l use th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l method asks
a s u b je c t to respond to , o r r a t e , o r ju d g e a concept on a
s e rie s o f se v en -p o in t b ip o la r s c a le s . Each item would
appear a s fo llo w s:
good :_____ :_____ :______:_____ :______:_____ bad
The s u b je c t is asked to p u t a check mark in th e p o s itio n
in d ic a tin g b o th th e d ir e c tio n and in te n s it y o f h is fe e lin g
I l l
toward th e o b je c t (o r co n cep t) being ev a lu ated . Scores a re
o b tain ed by a ssig n in g w eights to each p o s itio n on th e r a tin g
s c a le .
A ccording to Osgood (107:25) each s c a le as d e sc rib e d
above s e ts up what i s p o s tu la te d as a semanMc sp a c e . This
is d efin e d by Osgood a s :
. . . a reg io n o f some unknown d im e n sio n a lity and
E u clid ian in c h a ra c te r. Each sem antic s c a le , d efin ed
by a p a ir o f p o la r (oppos i t e - in-m eaning) a d je c tiv e s ,
i s assumed to re p re s e n t a s tr a i g h t lin e fu n c tio n th a t
p asses through th e o r ig in o f t h is space, and a sample
o f such s c a le s th en re p re s e n ts a m u ltid im en sio n al sp ace.
The la rg e r o r more r e p r e s e n ta tiv e th e sam ple, th e b e t t e r
d efin ed is th e space as a w hole. (107:25)
Oppenheim (104:207) d e s c rib e s th e sem antic space as
one o f th e most in te r e s tin g a s p e c ts o f th is te ch n iq u e .
Using t h i s concept sim ple p r o f ile - a n a ly s is can show th e
d if f e r e n t ways in w hich s e v e ra l o b je c ts o r concepts a re
r e la te d on th e same s e t o f s c a le s and how two o r more groups
d i f f e r in th e se r e s p e c ts .
Using s e ts o f "D -scores" Osgood (107:90-104) p u r
p o rts to show how th e concepts a r e r e la te d to one a n o th e r
in t h e i r sem antic and a t t i t u d i n a l p a tte rn s o f a s s o c ia tio n s ,
o r more sim ply, in term s o f t h e i r s im ila r ity o r d if fe re n c e .
The "D -scores" summarize th e degree o f d iffe re n c e between
co n cep ts. These sc o re s a r e o b tain ed by f i r s t se c u rin g
112
th e r a tin g s from a s in g le s u b je c t f o r a number o f co n cep ts.
Any two concepts can be tak en and th e d iffe re n c e between
them c a lc u la te d on every s c a le ; th e se d iffe re n c e s squared;
th e sq u ares added f o r th e e n t ir e s e t o f s c a le s ; and th e
sq u are ro o t ta k en o f th e sum. This f in a l fig u re becomes
th e "D” o r d is ta n c e -s c o re f o r th e s e two co n cep ts. R epeat
ing th e o p e ra tio n fo r a l l p o s s ib le com parisons betw een th e
concepts used w ill r e s u l t in a tr ia n g u la r ta b le o r D -m atrix,
showing th e d is ta n c e sc o re o f every concept a g a in s t a l l th e
o th e r concepts used. I f t h i s m atrix c o n s is ts o f n o t more
th an th r e e fa c to rs th e D -scale v alu es can be drawn in a
diagram showing concepts th a t a re se p a ra te d by sm all
D -values c lo s e ly to g e th e r, and o th e rs a t a g re a t d is ta n c e .
This r e s u ltin g diagram s im p lif ie s th e jo b o f stu d y in g th e
r e l a t i v e s im ila r ity o f d if f e r e n t concepts to th e s u b je c t
b ein g s tu d ie d . By u sin g t h is method th e re s e a rc h e r can
stu d y changes th a t occur over a p erio d o f tim e. I f th e
re s e a rc h e rs w ish to d e a l w ith a group r a th e r th a n w ith a
s in g le in d iv id u a l th e n th e r a tin g s can be added and
averaged, a f t e r which th e D -values w ill be c a lc u la te d as
b e fo re .
A ttitu d e Measurement
In d is c u s s in g th e u se o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
as a m easuring in stru m en t, Osgood (107:190) d e fin e s th e
meaning o f a concept as " i t s a llo c a tio n to a p o in t in th e
m u ltid im en sio n al sem antic sp a c e ." Follow ing t h is d e f in i
tio n o f m eaning, Osgood d e fin e s a t t i t u d e as " th e p ro je c tio n
o f t h is p o in t onto th e e v a lu a tiv e dim ension o f th a t sp a c e ."
O bviously ev ery p o in t in sem antic space has an e v a lu a tiv e
component (even though th e component may be o f zero magni
tu d e , when th e e v a lu a tiv e judgm ents a r e n e u tr a l) , and th e r e
fo re , every concept must in v o lv e an a t t i t u d i n a l component
as p a rt o f i t s t o t a l meaning.
Using f a c to r - a n a ly tic procedures Osgood and Suci
(106:325-338) e s ta b lis h e d th re e g e n e ra l fa c to rs o f meaning
m easured by th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l te ch n iq u e . These
fa c to rs w ere id e n tif ie d as an e v a lu a tiv e fa c to r, a potency
f a c to r , and an a c t i v i t y f a c to r . Since i t has been p o in ted
out by Osgood (107:190) th a t he and h is a s s o c ia te s conceive
o f a t t i t u d e a s an e v a lu a tio n , th e e v a lu a tiv e f a c to r seems
to m easure th e d ir e c tio n and in te n s ity o f an in d iv id u a l's
a t t i tu d e toward th e o b je c t being r a te d . The b i- p o la r s c a le s
o f p a ire d -a d je c tiv e s found to have h ig h loadings on th e
114
e v a lu a tiv e f a c to r (.7 5 o r b e t t e r ) a r e : good-bad, b e a u tif u l-
u g ly , sw ee t-so u r, c le a n - d ir ty , t a s t y - d i s t a s t e f u l , v a lu a b le -
w o rth le ss , k in d -c ru e l, p le a s a n t-u n p le a s a n t, b itte r - s w e e t,
happy-sad, sa c re d -p ro fa n e , n ic e -a w fu l, f ra g ra n t-f o u l,
h o n e s t-d ish o n e st, and f a i r - u n f a i r .
In t h e i r procedure of u sin g th e sem antic d if f e r e n
t i a l tech n iq u e as a measurement o f a t t i t u d e , Osgood and h is
a s s o c ia te s (107:191) have u n ifo rm ly assig n ed th e u n fav o r
a b le poles o f th e e v a lu a tiv e s c a le s ( e .g ., bad, u n f a ir ,
w o rth le ss , e t c . ) th e sc o re "1" and th e fa v o ra b le p oles
(good, f a i r , v a lu a b le ) th e sc o re " 7 ." This i s done re g a rd
le s s o f th e p re s e n ta tio n o f th e s c a le s to s u b je c ts in th e
g rap h ic d i f f e r e n t i a l , where th e y would p robably be random
ized in d ir e c tio n in o rd e r to p rev en t any " s e t" from
o ccu rin g . A ll e v a lu a tiv e r a tin g s a r e th e n summed to o b ta in
th e a t t i t u d e " s c o re ."
Using t h is sc o rin g te c h n iq u e i t i s easy to d e te r
mine th e d ir e c tio n o f th e a t t i t u d e m erely by n o tin g tow ard
w hich o f th e two p o le s th e s c o re f a l l s . A sc o re th a t f a l l s
in th e m iddle o f th e s c a le s , d e fin e d by "4" in t h i s system ,
is tak en as an index o f n e u t r a lity o f a t t i t u d e . The in
te n s ity o f th e a t t i t u d e i s judged by how f a r out alo n g th e
115
e v a lu a tiv e dim ension th e sc o re l i e s . Osgood (107:192)
assumes th a t u n id im e n sio n a lity is provided a u to m a tic a lly in
th e f a c to r a n a ly tic procedures from which th e s c a le s were
s e le c te d .
In a stu d y concerned w ith th e g e n e ra l p ro p e rtie s o f
th e tech n iq u e, Mehling (94:576-578) found added w eight fo r
th e u se o f th e d ev ice as a measurement o f a t t i t u d e . He
used a n in e -p o in t n u m erical r a tin g and found t h a t :
. . . th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l . . . does m easure both
th e d ir e c tio n and in te n s ity o f a t t i t u d e . Furtherm ore,
t h i s g iv es added w eight to th e assum ption th a t th e
m iddle (number 4 ) in te r v a l in th e s c a le s re p re s e n ts th e
n e u tr a l p o in t in th e a t t i t u d e . (94:576)
E v alu atio n o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
A g re a t d e a l o f re se a rc h has been und ertak en w ith
th is in stru m en t to determ ine i t s u se fu ln e ss in p sy c h o lo g ical
re s e a rc h . Remmers (117:361) makes th e sta tem en t th a t a l
though Osgood and h is a s s o c ia te s p u b lish ed t h e i r o r ig in a l
book only a s a p ro g ress r e p o r t, "th e y have p ro g ressed f a r
enough to p ro v id e a m easuring d ev ice th a t i s f le x ib le ,
w idely a p p lic a b le , sim ple to a d m in iste r, and in accord w ith
many c r i t e r i a o f an a c c e p ta b le m easuring d e v ic e ." In
a n o th e r statem en t Remmers (117:322) d e c la r e s : "In summary,
th e sem antic d i f f e r e n t i a l , in th e lig h t o f th e rig o ro u s
116
and e x te n siv e ex p erim en tatio n th a t i t has so f a r undergone,
ap p ears to be a w id ely u s e fu l re se a rc h in stru m e n t." Moss
(96:47-54) made a su rv ey o f th e u se o f th e Semantic D iffe r
e n t i a l in many a re a s . Although he f e e ls th e re a r e many
m ethodological problem s to be so lv ed , he concludes th a t th e
to o l i s "a lread y a u s e fu l in stru m e n t." Shaw and W right
(131:30), w h ile n o t as e n th u s ia s tic as Remmers, s t a t e th a t:
" R e la tiv e to o th e r a t t i t u d e s c a le s , th e a t t r i b u t e s o f th e
sem antic d i f f e r e n t i a l ap p ear to be a c c e p ta b le ." Suci
(144:25-30) f e e ls s tro n g ly th a t h is fin d in g s dem onstrate
th e s t a b i l i t y o r g e n e r a liz a b ility o f th e Semantic D iffe re n
t i a l p rocedure. Green and G o ld fried (51), however, ta k e
is s u e w ith Osgood's concept o f th e b ip o la r ity o f sem antic
sp ace. They te s te d t h i s concept by having s u b je c ts r a t e
a s e r ie s o f concepts on a s in g le - a d je c tiv e form o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l. C o rre la tio n and f a c to r a n a ly tic
r e s u l t s f a ile d to y ie ld su p p o rt fo r a g e n e ra liz e d , b ip o la r,
and sym m etrical model o f sem antic sp ace. Some a d je c tiv e
p a irs seem to have a g r e a te r lik e lih o o d o f b ein g fu n c tio n
a l l y b ip o la r th an o th e rs , alth o u g h th e re seems to be some
s o r t o f a c o n c e p t-sc a le in te r a c tio n involved in th e e x is
te n c e o f b ip o la r ity .
117
R e l i a b i l i t y .—Osgood and h is c o lleag u es (107:192)
re p o r t a stu d y in v o lv in g t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l ran g in g from .86 to .93 w ith a mean r
o f .9 1 . Jen k in s, R ussel, and Suci (62) re p o rte d an average
t e s t - r e t e s t r e l i a b i l i t y o f .97 in a stu d y w ith t h i r t y su b
j e c t s . Norman (103:581-584) s tu d ie d s e v e ra l s t a b i l i t y
c h a r a c te r is tic s of th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l, h o ld in g con
c e p ts and s c a le s c o n sta n t and exam ining v a r i a b i l i t y over
o ccasio n s and over com parable s u b je c t groups. He found
in c o n siste n c y in in d iv id u a l item r e l i a b i l i t y , f a c to r-s c o re
r e l i a b i l i t y and concept m eaning. C onsistency a c ro ss groups,
however, was e x c e lle n t. Group mean D v a lu e s and group mean
ra tin g s w ere b o th h ig h ly r e l i a b l e . He concluded by sa y in g :
The Semantic D if f e r e n tia l has proven to be an a c c u ra te
in stru m en t fo r re c o rd in g a f f e c tiv e a s s o c ia tio n s o f
s tim u li, p a r tic u la r ly to th e e x te n t th a t such a s s o c i
a tio n s a r e c u ltu r a lly o r s u b c u ltu ra lly d e fin e d so th a t
measurements may be averaged over groups o f in d i
v id u a ls . (103:582)
V a li d ity .—Osgood e t a l . (107:193-195) p re se n t e v i
dence o f v a l i d i t y as estim a ted by c o r r e la tio n s w ith o th e r
s c a le s . One o f th e se s c a le s was th e T hurstone s c a le . Each
o f th e th r e e concepts (The Negro, The Church, and C a p ita l
Punishm ent) was ra te d a g a in s t a s e r ie s o f s c a le s , in c lu d in g
118
f iv e p u re ly e v a lu a tiv e ones. S u b jects a ls o In d ic a te d t h e i r
a t t i t u d e s on th e Ih u rsto n e S cales s p e c if ic a lly designed to
s c a le th e s e a t t i t u d e o b je c ts . C o rre la tio n s ranged from
.74 to .82, and when c o rre c te d fo r a tte n u a tio n th e v a l i d i t y
c o e f f ic ie n ts were ra is e d to th e o rd e r o f .90 o r b e t t e r .
Osgood concludes " th a t w hatever th e Thurstone s c a le s
m easure, th e e v a lu a tiv e f a c to r o f th e sem antic d i f f e r e n t i a l
m easures j u s t about as w e ll." Guttman s c a le sc o re s m easur
ing a t titu d e s o f farm ers tow ard th e a g r ic u ltu r a l p r a c tic e
o f crop r o ta tio n were c o r r e la te d w ith a th re e -ite m Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l s c a le . The re p o rte d c o r r e la tio n was .7 8 .
Osgood s t a t e s : "Again we may say th a t th e Guttman s c a le and
th e e v a lu a tiv e s c a le s o f th e d i f f e r e n t i a l a re m easuring th e
same th in g to a c o n sid e ra b le d e g re e ." In s p ite o f th e s e
fin d in g s , N ichols and Shaw (100:273-279) su g g est c a u tio n in
a c c e p tin g th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l as e q u iv a le n t to o th e r
forms o f a t t i t u d e m easurem ent. They found h ig h c o r r e la tio n
betw een Semantic D if f e r e n tia l sc o re s and sco re s on T hurstone
s c a le s only when th e a t t i t u d e was n o t s a l i e n t to th e su b
j e c t s .
R esearch Uses o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
Almost s in c e i t s in c e p tio n th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
119
has proved I t s e l f extrem ely u s e fu l In a v a r ie ty o f e x p e ri
m ental s tu d ie s and a p p lic a tio n s . Many o f th e se a p p lic a tio n s
ap p ear alm ost c o n s ta n tly in th e l i t e r a t u r e in a d d itio n to
th e fifty -so m e s tu d ie s re p o rte d in Osgood, S uci, and
Tannenbaum (107). Some o f th e se w i l l be c ite d h e re to
i l l u s t r a t e th e v a r ie ty o f u se s.
One o f th e most dram atic u ses o f th e Sem antic D if
f e r e n t i a l tech n iq u e was made by Osgood and L uria (105:
579-591) when th e y were a b le to d i f f e r e n t i a t e e f f e c tiv e ly
th e p e rs o n a lity s tr u c tu r e s o f Eve W hite, Eve Black, and
Ja n e—a case o f t r i p l e p e rs o n a lity .
In an i n d u s t r ia l s e ttin g T rian d is (148:221-225)
used th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l to stu d y i n d u s tr ia l su b je c ts*
p erce p tio n s o f jo b s and p eo p le. The people and jo b s were
as fo llo w s: w eld er, te a c h e r, v ic e - p re s id e n t, p erso n n el
d ir e c to r , t h e i r s u p e rv is o r's b o ss, th e v ic e -p re s id e n t of
t h e i r d iv is io n , "a fello w a t work whom you l i k e ," and "an
e f f e c tiv e manager you have known w e ll and who is n o t th e
same as any o f th e people a lre a d y r a te d ." He found th a t
persons lik e th o se who perform t h e i r r o le in s o c ie ty
acco rd in g to th e " id e a l" expected b e h a v io r. A lso in an
i n d u s t r ia l s e t t in g S co tt (128:179-198) used th e Semantic
120
D if f e r e n tia l s c a le s as m easures o f "m o rale." He developed
th e s c a le s f o r n in e m orale co n c ep ts, o b ta in in g responses
from n in e ty -tw o en g in eers in a m anufacturing company.
Using f a c to r a n a ly tic tech n iq u es he found c e r t a in fa c to rs
f o r each o f th e co n cep ts. Ih e fa c to rs tended to be e f f e c
tiv e and a c tiv a tio n a l in n a tu re .
In a s e ttin g j u s t as f a r removed from th e f i r s t two
as i s im aginable, Gray and W heeler (49:241-247) used th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l a s an in stru m en t to examine th e re c e n t
folksong movement. In th is stu d y th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
was used to c o l le c t o p inions from c o lle g e stu d e n ts on th e
v a lu e th ey g iv e to s e le c te d fo lk so n g s perform ed on re c o rd s .
F a c to r a n a ly s is was done on some o f th e d a ta and th re e
f a c to rs w ith h ig h s c a le lo ad in g s w ere e x tra c te d . The t e n t a
t i v e c o n c lu sio n s reached by th e in v e s tig a to rs were th a t
perform ed folksongs can be e s th e t i c a l ly ev alu ated in a
m eaningful way w ith th e r e q u is i te p sy c h o lo g ic a l to o ls , in
t h is c a se th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l.
In a n o th e r stu d y showing how f a r a f ie ld th e u se o f
th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l can go i s an in v e s tig a tio n by
Bryan (10:441-450) in th e a ttitu d e s o f c a l l g i r l s . He
ad m in istered th e s c a le to tw e n ty -e ig h t resp o n d en ts, a l l
121
c u r r e n tly a c tiv e In p r o s titu t io n . Each was asked to r a te
h e r s e lf , o th e r c a l l g i r l s , w om en-in-general, " jo h n s ," and
m en -in -g en e ral. The fin d in g s in d ic a te d some d isc re p a n c ie s
between th e in d iv id u a l a t t i t u d e s o f th e c a l l g i r l s and th e
a t titu d e s ex p ressed a s o cc u p atio n al id e o lo g ie s .
E d u catio n al r e s e a r c h .—As i t has in a wide v a r ie ty
o f p sy c h o lo g ical re s e a rc h , th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l has
proven i t s e l f e q u a lly v a lu a b le in th e f i e l d o f e d u c a tio n a l
re se a rc h and in a re a s r e la te d to ed u c atio n .
B eters (110:1-21) in a stu d y d esigned to d i f f e r e n t i
a te between d e lin q u e n t and nondelinquent boys found th a t
th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l was more th a n adequate in p ro
v id in g t h i s d i f f e r e n t i a t io n . R avitz (114:459) used th e
^ — [
technique to in v e s tig a te teach ers* v e rb a l b eh a v io r. His
fin d in g s proved h is h y p o th e sis th a t th e v e rb a l b eh av io r o f
i
te a c h e rs r e f le c te d t h e i r concern f o r s e l f o r s tu d e n ts . |
Program e v a lu a tio n s have made use o f th e instrum ent I
under d is c u s s io n , beginning w ith an e a r ly stu d y o f t h i s
procedure by Webb and H a rris (153:260-263) who used th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l to e v a lu a te an N D EA (N atio n al Defense |
E ducation A ct) i n s t i t u t e f o r c o u n se lo rs. Nine concepts
122
were s e le c te d fo r r a tin g b o th b e fo re and a f t e r th e i n s t i -
t u t e . Changes In th e sem antic p r o f ile s were a s se sse d by
means o f th e s t a t i s t i c "D ." There were s ig n if ic a n t concept
changes In fiv e out o f th e n in e s e le c te d , w ith two rem ain
ing n e u tr a l.
G arriso n (41:692-696) a ls o made use o f th e Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l in program e v a lu a tio n . Seven program -concepts
were ra te d on a tw elv e-item s c a le by one hundred te a c h e rs
from p riv a te r e s i d e n t i a l sch o o ls fo r e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
and tw en ty -fo u r p u b lic school te a c h e rs w ith l i t t l e e x p e ri
ence w ith e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . While a l l a s p e c ts o f th e
program were ra te d p o s itiv e ly , th e e v a lu a tio n and potency
f a c to r sco re s were c o r r e la te d f o r ed u c a tio n in a l l te a c h e rs
and f o r psychotherapy in th e p riv a te school te a c h e rs . This
c o r r e la tio n and low e v a lu a tiv e r a tin g o f psychotherapy by
th e p riv a te school te a c h e rs was in te rp r e te d by G arriso n a s
in d ic a tin g a n e g a tiv e b ia s a r is in g from th e in te n s iv e
a s p e c ts o f a tre a tm e n t program in a r e s id e n t i a l s e ttin g
r a th e r th a n a s s e s s in g th e v alu e o f psychotherapy.
Using th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l to t e s t S u p er's
V o catio n al A djustm ent Theory was th e a re a o f re s e a rc h and
in v e s tig a tio n u n d ertak en by Schuh (126:516-522). Three
hypotheses were d e riv e d from th e th e o ry t h a t v o c a tio n a l
123
adjustm ent Is dependent upon im plem entation o f th e s e l f -
co n cep t: (1) th e same dim ensions o f meaning a re a ttr ib u ta b le
to th e s e l f - and jo b - r e la te d co n cep ts; (2) s u b je c ts w ill
r a t e th e concepts in th e same way a c ro ss th e dim ensions;
and (3) th e s e lf-c o n c e p t is s ta b le over tim e. Using th e
concepts "Jfy self," "Mp J o b ," and "Employer” i t was found
th a t hypotheses one and two were p a r t i a l l y r e je c te d and
h y p o th esis th re e accep ted a t th e .01 le v e l.
As m ight be expected th e u se o f th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l as a measurement o f a t titu d e s has been used
e x te n s iv e ly in th e e d u c a tio n a l a re a a s w e ll as some o f th e
o th e r f ie ld s o f b e h a v io ra l re se a rc h . R ecently Schuh and
Quesada (127:301-302) used th e d ev ice to a s s e s s th e a t t i
tu d es o f F ilip in o and American c o lle g e s tu d e n ts . They used
th e concepts "m yself, ” " th e way I would m ost want to b e ,"
"my r o le as a s tu d e n t," and "my fa c u lty a d v is o r ." S ubjects
were American c o lle g e s e n io rs a t th e U n iv e rsity o f C a li
f o rn ia , B erkeley, and c o lle g e s e n io rs a t th e U n iv ersity o f
th e E ast, M anila, P h ilip p in e s . The co n clu sio n s drawn from
th e stu d y w ere: (1) s tu d e n ts in th e P h ilip p in e s and th e
U nited S ta te s se e t h e i r e d u c a tio n a l environm ents as
n o tic e a b ly d if f e r e n t; (2) th e d iffe re n c e s betw een fem ale
124
sam ples a re more numerous th a n betw een th e m ale sam ples;
and (3) F ilip in o and American c o lle g e s e n io rs have extrem ely
s im ila r e v a lu a tio n s o f th em selv es. O ther e d u c a tio n a l r e
s e a rc h e rs u sin g th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l as a measurement
o f a t titu d e s a r e Husek and W ittrock (61:209-213) who i n
v e s tig a te d th e d im e n sio n a lity o f a t titu d e s o f ed u catio n
s tu d e n ts toward te a c h e rs ; S tem p el's (140:4-5) stu d y in
v e s tig a tin g th e a t titu d e s tow ard in s tr u c tio n as r e la te d to
th e c o s t o f in s tr u c tio n ; and S trem 's (143) su rv ey o f th e
a t t i t u d e s o f high sch o o l d ro p o u ts.
Summary
This c h a p te r p re se n te d an overview o f re se a rc h
l i t e r a t u r e p e rtin e n t to th e stu d y tinder c o n s id e ra tio n . I t
was by no means an e x h a u stiv e survey o f a l l re s e a rc h
s tu d ie s , b u t intended to h ig h lig h t some o f th e more r e p r e
s e n ta tiv e in v e s tig a tio n s .
The f i r s t s e c tio n d e a lt w ith s tu d ie s r e la te d to th e
a t t it u d e s and c h a r a c te r is tic s o f te a c h e rs in g e n e ra l. I t
was seen th a t te a c h e rs have s l i g h t l y m odified t h e i r p o in ts
o f view toward c h ild re n s in c e th e c la s s ic stu d y o f Wick-
man (154), and a re now more prone to view them in a manner
s im ila r to c l i n i c a l p s y c h o lo g is ts . S tu d ies w ere c ite d
in d ic a tin g th a t on o ccasio n te a c h e rs ' a t t i t u d e s toward
c h ild re n were due to t h e i r own p e rs o n a lity n eed s, r e la te d
to th e s u b je c t m a tte r b ein g ta u g h t o r w ith th e p a r tic u la r
m ethodology employed. D e fin ite r e la tio n s h ip s w ere i n d i
c a te d betw een th e ty p e o f c o lle g e o r u n iv e r s ity a te a c h e r
a tte n d e d , th e ty p e o f tr a in in g in c u rre d p r io r to te ac h in g ,
and th e a t titu d e s in d ic a te d by te a c h e rs on v a rio u s o b je c
t i v e m easures. T each ers' p e rs o n a lity and c h a r a c te r is tic s
came under s c ru tin y , beg in n in g w ith th e o u tsta n d in g r e
se a rc h o f Ryan (125). As m ight be ex p ected , o th e r in v e s t i
g a tio n s showed d e f i n i t e re la tio n s h ip s betw een th e p erso n
a l i t y o f a te a c h e r and some o f th e dominant a t titu d e s shown
by t h a t same te a c h e r. Measures o f a u th o rita ria n is m and
dogmatism have a ls o been used in te a c h e r su rv ey s and most
o f th e s tu d ie s c ite d in d ic a te d some c o r r e la tio n between
th e s e a t t i t u d i n a l domains and classroom b e h a v io r. In
g e n e ra l, th e h ig h ly a u th o r ita r ia n and dogm atic te a c h e r
showed classroom b eh a v io r in c o n s is te n t w ith what is g en e r
a l l y conceived o f a s "good" tech n iq u es w ith c h ild re n .
Teachers o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ere th e focus o f
th e n ex t s e c tio n o f th e c h a p te r. V arying m o tiv a tio n a l
f a c to rs w ere found to in flu e n c e th e te a c h e r to e n te r th e
f i e l d o f s p e c ia l ed u c atio n , in c lu d in g background, fam ily,
f rie n d s , and e d u c a tio n a l so u rc e s. Some s tu d ie s in d ic a te d
th a t te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n have a somewhat h ig h e r
s ta tu s le v e l th an o th e r te a c h e rs . Jones (68) p re se n ts a
c h a rt in d ic a tin g some h ie r a r c h ic a l r a tin g s . The ju r y is
s t i l l out on th e d iffe re n c e s between re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs
and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , some s tu d ie s in d i
c a tin g s ig n if ic a n t c h a r a c te r i s tic d iffe re n c e s and o th e r
s tu d ie s in d ic a tin g no d iffe re n c e a t a l l . This la ck o f
agreem ent a ls o in flu e n c e d methods o f e v a lu a tin g o r p r e d ic t
in g e f f e c tiv e s p e c ia l ed u catio n te a c h e rs .
The a t titu d e s t h a t te a c h e rs hold tow ard v a rio u s
groups o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n was n ex t d isc u sse d and i t
was g e n e ra lly found t h a t te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l groups
h o ld more fa v o ra b le a t t i t u d e s tow ard t h e i r ch arg es th an
o th e r e d u c a to rs. The p a r tic u la r la b e ls used f o r th e s e
c h ild re n seemed to in flu e n c e th e a t titu d e s h e ld by a l l edu
c a to r s . In s p it e o f la b e ls , i t appeared th a t te a c h e rs in
g e n e ra l had, in t h e i r own m inds, rank o rd ered e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n on le v e ls o f ac cep tan ce, w ith g if te d c h ild re n
u s u a lly coming out on to p and m en tally d e f ic ie n t c h ild re n
127
on th e bottom .
A ttitu d e measurement was examined beginning w ith a
d is c u s s io n o f v a rio u s d e f in itio n s o f a t t i t u d e i t s e l f . Most
w rite r s in th e f i e l d seem to ag ree th a t a t t i t u d e is some
ty p e o f a s t a t e o f re a d in e ss p red isp o sin g an in d iv id u a l to
behave in a c e r t a in manner tow ard p a r tic u la r s o c ia l o b je c ts
in h is environm ent. The v a rio u s forms o f a t t i t u d e m easure
ment w ere d isc u sse d in tu r n : (1) eq u a l-ap p ea rin g in te r v a ls ,
(2) Id k e rt S cales, (3) S calo g ram -an aly sis, (4) graded d i
chotom ies, (5) s c a le -d is c rim in a tio n te ch n iq u e , (6) u n fo ld in g
te ch n iq u e , (7) l a te n t s tr u c tu r e a n a ly s is , and (8) f a c t o r i a l
s c a le s . These measurement tech n iq u e s could be e v a lu ated by
t h e i r p ro p e rtie s w hich were l i s t e d a s : (1) r e l i a b i l i t y ,
(2) v a l i d i t y , (3) u n id im e n sio n a lity , (4) e q u a lity o f u n its ,
(5) r e p r o d u c ib ility , and (6) ze ro p o in t.
The th r e e a t t i t u d e m easures used in th i s p a r tic u la r
stu d y w ere n ex t examined, namely th e Adorno "F" S cale, th e
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale, and th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l.
The s c a le s were examined in term s o f t h e i r developm ent,
t h e i r unique c h a r a c te r i s tic s , e v a lu a tiv e s tu d ie s , and t h e i r
u se in re se a rc h in v e s tig a tio n s b o th in and out o f th e f i e l d
o f e d u c a tio n . I t was g e n e ra lly concluded th a t each o f th e
128
th re e tech n iq u es was a more th a n adequate m easure o f th e
a t t i t u d e In q u e stio n and had proven v a lu e in v a rio u s f ie ld s
o f b e h a v io ra l re se a rc h , p a r tic u la r ly in th e f i e l d o f educa
tio n and r e la te d a re a s .
C H A P T E R I I I
SO U RCE O F D A T A A N D M E T H O D O L O G Y
This c h a p te r d e sc rib e s th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
used in conducting th e re s e a rc h . The a t t i t u d e m easuring
in stru m en ts co n tain ed in th e Survey a re d isc u sse d . The
method used in d is tr ib u tin g and a d m in iste rin g th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey is p resen ted a s w e ll as th e method in which
th e com pleted forms were re tu rn e d to th e exam iner. The
n a tu re o f th e sample p o p u la tio n s used and th e method by
which th e y were s e le c te d fo r t h i s in v e s tig a tio n a r e a ls o
c ite d . F in a lly , a d is c u s s io n o f th e re se a rc h d e sig n and a
statem en t concerning th e s t a t i s t i c a l treatm en t o f th e d a ta
a re g iv en .
The Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
D e sc rip tio n
The Teacher A ttitu d e Survey a s used in t h i s re s e a rc h
stu d y c o n s is te d o f a f i f t e e n page document (see Appendix A).
129
130
The cover page co n tain ed an in tro d u c to ry statem en t I n d i
c a tin g some o f th e reaso n s f o r th e re se a rc h and s o li c i t e d
th e co o p eratio n o f th e te a c h e rs who were to ta k e p a r t in
th e stu d y . B art I was a P ersonal Data Blank which asked
th e te a c h e r-re sp o n d e n ts to com plete two pages o f q u e stio n s
p e rta in in g to t h e i r p e rso n a l and p ro fe s s io n a l background.
B art I I c o n s is te d o f a com bination o f th e Adorno "F" S cale
and th e Rokeach S cale, and B art I I I th e p re se n t v e rs io n o f
th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l.
The Adorno and Rokeach S cales
The Adorno "F" S cale c o n s is ts o f tw en ty -n in e s t a t e
m ents to which th e respondent r e a c ts acco rd in g to a s ix -
p o in t s c a le ran g in g from " I Agree a L itt le " to " I D isagree
Very Much." The Rokeach S cale c o n s is ts o f f o r ty sta te m e n ts
o f a s im ila r n a tu re to which th e p a r tic ip a n t responds in a
manner id e n tic a l to th a t o f th e Adorno S cale. On th e
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey, B art I I , th e s e two s c a le s were
combined in to a s in g le s ix ty -n in e item q u e s tio n n a ire w ith
o u t any d i f f e r e n tia tio n betw een th e two s c a le s . The in
s tr u c tio n s fo r b o th a r e id e n tic a l in th a t th e respondent i s
asked to r e a c t acco rd in g to h is f e e lin g and p e rso n a l
o p in io n about each o f th e sta tem en ts as p a rt o f a stu d y
131
o f "how p eople th in k and f e e l about a number o f im portant
s o c ia l and p e rso n a l q u e s tio n s ."
M arking. —The in s tru c tio n s to th e respondents were
to mark each o f th e sta tem en ts in th e combined Adorno-
Rokeach S cale by th e fo llo w in g number system ran g in g from
a +1 to a -3 :
+1: I Agree a l i t t l e -1 : I D isagree a L i t t l e
42: I Agree on th e Whole -2 : 1 D isagree on th e Whole
43: I Agree Very Mich -3 : I D isagree Very Mich
S co rin g . —For purposes o f s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is th e
combined s c a le s were se p a ra te d in to two s e ts o f sc o res and
tr e a te d s e p a ra te ly . Items one through tw en ty -n in e a re th e
"F" S cale item s, and item s t h i r t y through s ix ty -n in e a re
th e Rokeach S cale. This s e p a ra tio n was done in o rd er to
o b ta in s e p a ra te m easures f o r "dogmatism" and " a u th o r ita r ia n
ism ." A mark o f 43 was sco red as 7, 42 as 6, 41 as 5, -1
as 3, -2 as 2, and -3 as 1. This i s acco rd in g to th e
sc o rin g scheme d e sc rib e d by Adorno (2) and Rokeach (122).
Four p o in ts w i l l be co n sid ered th e h y p o th e tic a l n e u tra l
resp o n se and was assig n ed when th e item was o m itted . By
summing th e p o in ts assig n ed to each item a "sc o re" was
132
o b ta in ed f o r each in d iv id u a l s u b je c t on th e two s c a le s .
The h ig h e r an in d iv id u a l's sc o re , th e g r e a te r au th o ritarian * *
ism o r dogmatism a r e p a r t o f h is a t t i t u d i n a l system .
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
The Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l made up F art I I I o f th e
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey. I t was d e sc rib e d to th e respond
e n ts as a stu d y " to m easure th e meanings o f c e r ta in th in g s
to v a rio u s people by having them ju d g e them a g a in s t a
s e r ie s o f d e s c r ip tiv e s c a le s ." There follow ed com plete
in s tru c tio n s as to th e m arking o f th e te n s c a le s along w ith
s p e c if ic examples g iv en in th e f i r s t two pages o f F art I I I .
C oncepts. —Ten d if f e r e n t co n cep ts were chosen fo r
each o f th e p a r tic ip a tin g te a c h e rs to respond to . These
concepts w ere s e le c te d to allo w th e resp o n d en ts to r e a c t to
a v a r ie ty o f sch o o l r e la te d to p ic s , w ith th e emphasis on
d if f e r e n t groups o f s tu d e n ts and c o lle a g u e s. The concepts
w ere in o rd e r: "Mp S e lf ," "The Average S tu d e n t," "The
G ifted S tu d e n t," "T each ers," "The Slow L e a rn e r," "Adminis
t r a t o r s , " "The Handicapped C h ild ," "The E ducation P ro fe s
s io n ," " D is c ip lin e ," and "C u rricu lu m ."
S c a le s .—Osgood e t a l . (107) id e n tif ie d th re e d i f
f e r e n t dim ensions th a t were behind th e s c a le s o f b ip o la r
a d je c tiv e s . These w ere: E v a lu a tiv e , Potency, and A c tiv ity .
I t was t h e i r fin d in g th a t a t t i t u d e i s id e n tif ie d w ith th e
e v a lu a tiv e dim ension o f th e t o t a l sem antic space. Since
t h i s stu d y d e a ls f i r s t and forem ost w ith a t t i t u d e s , th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l chosen fo r t h i s re s e a rc h made use o f
s c a le s th a t were fa c to r-a n a ly z e d a s b ein g h e a v ily loaded in
th e e v a lu a tiv e a re a . The s c a le s chosen w ere: good-bad;
ta s t y - d i s t a s t e f u l ; f a i r - u n f a i r ; v a lu a b le -w o rth le s s ; b e a u ti
fu l-u g ly ; p le a sa n t-u n p le a s a n t; b itte r - s w e e t; h o n e s t-d is
h o n est; sad-happy; and n ic e -a w fu l. The " p o s itiv e -n e g a tiv e "
d ir e c tio n o f th e s c a le s was a lte r n a te d to p rev en t th e sub
j e c t s from e s ta b lis h in g a p o s itio n - s e t.
tfe rk in g .—The s u b je c ts were in s tru c te d to r e a c t to
each o f th e te n co n cep ts by m arking one o f th e seven spaces
th a t e x is te d between each o f th e s e ts o f b ip o la r a d je c tiv e
s c a le s . These marks were to be p laced c lo s e to th e end o f
th e s c a le th ey f e l t was "Very C lo sely R e la te d ," "Q uite
C lo sely R e la te d ," o r "Only S lig h tly R e la te d ." The m id
p o in t o f th e s c a le was to be marked i f th e respondent f e l t
co m p letely n e u tra l on th e s c a le when co n sid ered in term s
134
o f th e concept being ev a lu ated .
S co rin g . —For th e s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is o f th e d a ta ,
a num erical "sc o re " was a ssig n e d to each o f th e seven
spaces between each s e t o f b ip o la r a d je c tiv e s . A sc o re
o f seven was assig n ed to th e p o s itio n c lo s e s t to th e nega
t i v e term , s ix to th e n ex t sp ace, f iv e to th e n e x t, and
so on. A sc o re o f fo u r re p re se n te d n e u t r a l i ty on th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l as i t d id on th e Adorno and Rokeach
S c ale s. An in d iv id u a l's sc o re on any one concept o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l was tak en to be th e sum o f th e
p o in ts assig n ed t o each o f th e te n s c a le s . Scores on each
concept could range from a high o f sev en ty to a low o f te n .
The h ig h e r th e sc o re th e g r e a te r th e in d ic a tio n o f nega
t iv e fe e lin g s tow ard th a t p a r tic u la r co n cep t. This is a
r e v e rs a l o f th e o r ig in a l sc o rin g method d e sc rib e d by
Osgood (107:191) in which th e n e g a tiv e p o les were assig n ed
th e v a lu e o f one and th e p o s itiv e p o les th e v a lu e o f seven.
This r e v e r s a l was made to conform more w ith th e sc o rin g
system o f th e Rokeach and Adorno S cales. The in te r p r e ta
tio n o f th e sc o re s rem ains id e n tic a l except f o r th e d i f f e r
ences n o ted above.
D is trib u tio n Procedures
P rio r to th e d is t r ib u t io n and a d m in is tra tio n o f th e
q u e s tio n n a ire , th e c h ie f a d m in is tra to r o f each o f th e sch o o l
d i s t r i c t s in q u e stio n was co n ta c te d and p erm issio n to con**
d u ct th e re s e a rc h was o b ta in ed . An appointm ent was th en
made w ith th e p r in c ip a l o f th e sc h o o l s e le c te d . The s e le c
tio n o f th e sc h o o l was made on th e b a s is o f th e p resence
o f c la s s e s f o r e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . In every c a se except
one, th e sch o o l used f o r t h i s re se a rc h housed b o th s p e c ia l
ed u c atio n c la s s e s and re g u la r classroom . Follow ing th e
c o n v e rsa tio n w ith th e sch o o l p r in c ip a l, arrangem ents were
made fo r th e exam iner to p re se n t th e Teacher A ttitu d e
Survey a t a r e g u la rly scheduled f a c u lty meeting*
During th e co u rse o f th e fa c u lty m eeting th e
exam iner p e rso n a lly d is tr ib u te d th e q u e s tio n n a ire to th e
te a c h e rs p re se n t and d isc u sse d th e v a rio u s a s p e c ts o f th e
Survey. Included in th e d is c u s s io n was an ex p la n atio n o f
th e stu d y , an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f th e method to be used in
m arking th e d if f e r e n t s e c tio n s o f th e Survey, and th e means
to be used in re tu rn in g th e Survey to th e exam iner. Ex
p la n a tio n s o f th e m arking system to be used w ere accom
panied by ch alk -b o ard i l l u s t r a t i o n s as w e ll as th e use o f
136
o th e r v is u a l d ev ices such as overhead tra n s p a re n c ie s . Time
was allow ed f o r q u e stio n s from th e assem bled te a c h e rs .
When s u f f i c ie n t numbers o f te a c h e rs o f re g u la r
classroom s had been c o n ta c te d by th e exam iner, th e fa c u lty
m eeting approach was no lo n g er u sed . In stea d th e exam iner
met w ith in d iv id u a l te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , o r
sm all groups o f th e s e te a c h e rs in t h e i r r e s p e c tiv e sc h o o ls.
The same form at was follow ed w ith th e sm all groups and
in d iv id u a ls as was d e sc rib e d fo r th e f a c u lty m eetin g s. In
a l l cases th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey forms w ere p e rso n a lly
l e f t w ith each te a c h e r and e x p l ic i t v e rb a l in s tr u c tio n s
g iv en .
In a l l cases th e te a c h e r- resp o n d en ts w ere asked to
com plete th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey a t some o th e r tim e o r
p la ce than when and where i n i t i a l l y p rese n ted to them. A ll
were encouraged to com plete th e q u e s tio n n a ire p r iv a te ly a t
t h e i r own r a t e and d u rin g a tim e and p la c e o f t h e i r ch o ic e.
Each respondent was urged n o t to d isc u ss any o f th e m a te ria l
in th e Survey p r io r to com pleting th e form . A ll resp o n d
e n ts were assu re d o f com plete c o n f id e n tia lity . In a d d itio n
a l l th o se who p a r tic ip a te d in th e stu d y were prom ised a
copy o f th e sum m arization o f th e stu d y and i t s fin d in g s .
R eturn o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
To a s s u re te a c h e rs o f com plete c o n f id e n tia lity o f
t h e i r resp o n ses to th e Survey, arrangem ents w ere made fo r
th e r e tu r n o f th e com pleted q u e s tio n n a ire s d ir e c tly to th e
exam iner. This was accom plished by a tta c h in g each ques
tio n n a ir e to a stamped envelope th a t was ad d ressed to th e
exam iner. Upon com pletion o f th e form th e te a c h e rs were
in s tru c te d to p la c e th e Survey in th e a tta c h e d envelope and
drop in to th e n e a re s t m a il box. This assu re d th e te a c h e rs
th a t no one o th e r th a n th e y and th e exam iner would be a b le
to view th e com pleted Surveys. Since th e placem ent o f th e
name on th e com pleted forms was s t r i c t l y o p tio n a l, th e
te a c h e r who com pleted th e q u e s tio n n a ire could rem ain com
p le te ly anonymous.
As th e forms w ere re c e iv e d by th e exam iner, each
was f i r s t catalo g u ed acco rd in g to th e c u rre n t teach in g
assignm ent o f th e te a c h e r who had com pleted i t . They were
th e n numbered in th e o rd e r in w hich th e y were re c e iv e d .
This numbering was used l a t e r in d eterm in in g th o se te a c h e rs
who would b e p a r t o f th e f i n a l sam ple used in th e re s e a rc h .
In o rd e r to a s s u re th e g r e a te s t r e tu r n p o s s ib le o f
a l l q u e s tio n n a ire s d is t r ib u t e d , each te a c h e r re c e iv in g
138
a copy o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was a ls o s e n t a
follow -up l e t t e r through th e m a ll. This l e t t e r was s e n t
approxim ately two weeks fo llo w in g th e d is t r ib u t io n o f th e
survey, and w h ile th anking th e te a c h e r f o r h is o r h e r co
o p e ra tio n in th e re s e a rc h a ls o f u r th e r s o lic it e d them to
r e tu r n th e com pleted q u e s tio n n a ire as soon as p o s s ib le .
Two d if f e r e n t l e t t e r s o f t h i s ty p e were se n t (see Appen
d ix B), depending on w hether th e te a c h e r had been co n ta cte d
through a fa c u lty m eeting o r through p erso n a l c o n ta c t.
D e sc rip tio n of t h e S am p le
Teaching S p e c ia liz a tio n s
The Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was d is tr ib u te d to two
broad c la s s i f ic a ti o n s o f te ach in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s : (1) th o se
te a c h e rs who were engaged in th e te ach in g o f re g u la r c l a s s
rooms; and (2) th o se te a c h e rs engaged in th e te a c h in g o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
Teachers o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n were so c l a s s i f i e d
acco rd in g to th o se s p e c ia liz a tio n s re q u irin g s p e c ia l cred en
t i a l s from th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia in o rd er to te a c h . This
in clu d es b o th th e m e n ta lly and p h y s ic a lly e x c e p tio n a l. The
c a te g o rie s o f e x c e p tio n a litie s a re as fo llo w s :
139
1. A u rally Handicapped (Deaf and Hard o f H earin g ).
2 . Educable M entally R etarded.
3 . O rth o p ed ically Handicapped (in clu d in g C e reb ra l
R a isle d ).
4 . Speech Handicapped.
5 . T rain ab le M entally R etarded.
6. V isu a lly Handicapped (B lind and P a r tia lly
S ig h ted ).
No o th e r c a teg o ry o f e x c e p tio n a lity was used f o r th is sample
o th e r th a n th e six l i s t e d above. One o th e r broad a re a c u r
r e n tly e x is ts in th e -State o f C a lifo rn ia : th e E d u ca tio n ally
H andicapped. This group was n o t in clu d ed p rim a rily due to
th e f a c t th a t s p e c ia liz e d tr a in in g and c r e d e n tia ls a r e n o t
y e t re q u ire d f o r te a c h e rs engaged in working w ith th e edu
c a tio n a lly handicapped. In a d d itio n , th e r e l a t i v e recency
o f th e estab lish m e n t o f t h i s program in th e S ta te o f C a li
f o rn ia has n o t y et allow ed f o r a u n ifo rm ity o f approach
from sc h o o l d i s t r i c t to sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
In a d d itio n to th e e x c e p tio n a litie s m entioned above
w hich e x i s t on a sta te -w id e b a s is , th e re a re o th e r " s p e c ia l
c la s s e s " to be found in in d iv id u a l d i s t r i c t s . These may
in c lu d e c la s s e s fo r th e e m o tio n a lly d is tu rb e d , c la s s e s f o r
140
th e n e u ro lo g ic a lly handicapped, and th e s o -c a lle d " s o c ia l-
ad ju stm en t" c la s s e s f o r c h ild re n who have shown them selves
to be b eh av io r problem s. Where such c la s s e s e x is t th e
c r i t e r i a f o r t h e i r estab lish m e n t have been s e t up by th e
in d iv id u a l d i s t r i c t and th e re i s n o t th e u n ifo rm ity o f
approaches th a t e x is ts in th e s ix s p e c ia liz a tio n s p re
v io u s ly m entioned. The te a c h e rs o f th e s e " s p e c ia l c la s s e s "
a r e n o t n e c e s s a r ily h o ld e rs o f s p e c ia liz e d c re d e n tia ls or
te a c h e rs having a background o f s p e c ia liz e d tr a in in g . Both
o f th e s e fa c to rs a r e tr u e o f th e te a c h e rs inclu d ed in th is
re s e a rc h . Because o f th e aforem entioned reasons none o f
th e " s p e c ia l c la s s e s " e s ta b lis h e d by in d iv id u a l d i s t r i c t s
w ere included in t h i s sam ple.
Teachers o f re g u la r classroom s were d esig n ate d as
te a c h e rs engaged in te ach in g groups o f stu d e n ts who had n o t
in any way been term ed as e x c e p tio n a l o r " s p e c ia l."
h i a d d itio n to id e n tify in g te a c h e rs acco rd in g to
t h e i r s p e c ia liz a tio n s , a l l te a c h e rs in clu d ed in th i s sam ple
w ere id e n tif ie d as being elem entary te a c h e rs o r secondary
te a c h e rs . For th e purposes o f t h i s stu d y elem entary
te a c h e rs were th o se who were engaged in teach in g yo u n g sters
in th e age range commonly accep ted in th e S ta te o f C a li
fo rn ia fo r s tu d e n ts in grades k in d e rg a rte n through s ix .
141
Secondary te a c h e rs were th o se engaged in te ach in g yo u n g sters
in th e age range th a t would be found in grades seven through
tw elv e. For re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs th e a c tu a l grade
le v e ls b ein g ta u g h t were used fo r t h i s d e s ig n a tio n o f e l e
m entary o r secondary. For th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n i t was n e c essary to u se age ranges sin c e in many
cases s p e c if ic grade le v e l d e s ig n a tio n s a r e n o t used f o r
th e se c la s s e s .
Geographic Area
The Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was d is tr ib u te d o n ly to
te a c h e rs a c tiv e ly engaged in te a c h in g in p u b lic schools in
th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia . Teachers from th r e e types o f d i s
t r i c t s were used fo r th is sam ple: (1) U nified School D is
t r i c t s ; (2) Union High School D i s tr ic ts ; and (3) Elem entary
School D i s tr i c t s .
Teachers from tw enty-one d if f e r e n t school d i s t r i c t s
in seven d if f e r e n t co u n tie s in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia
re tu rn e d com pleted q u e s tio n n a ire s to be used in t h i s stu d y .
The la r g e s t number o f d i s t r i c t s w ere in Los Angeles County.
The seven c o u n tie s used in th e sam ple w ere:
1. Los Angeles County—fo u rte e n sch o o l d i s t r i c t s .
2. Marin County—one sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
142
3 . Mendocino County—one sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
4 . Merced County—one sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
5 . M onterey County—one sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
6. Orange County—two sc h o o l d i s t r i c t s .
7. Solano County—one sch o o l d i s t r i c t .
A breakdown o f th e in d iv id u a l d i s t r i c t s w ith in each
county, as w e ll as th e ty p es o f te a c h e rs re tu rn in g com
p le te d Teacher A ttitu d e Survey Forms is g iv en in Table 4.
Number
A t o t a l o f 508 te a c h e rs w ere p e rs o n a lly co n tacted
and given a copy o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey Form to
com plete. Of t h i s number, 385 re tu rn e d com pleted Forms to
be used in t h i s stu d y . This re p re s e n ts a r e tu r n o f 76 per
c e n t.
Of th e t o t a l number o f te a c h e rs g iv en a q u e s tio n
n a ir e to com plete, 274 o f th e s e w ere r e g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs and 234 w ere te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
The form er group re tu rn e d 210 q u e s tio n n a ire s f o r a 77 p er
c e n t r e tu r n , and th e l a t t e r re tu rn e d 175 q u e s tio n n a ire s f o r
a 75 p er ce n t r e tu r n .
A com plete breakdown o f th e number o f forms su b
m itte d and re tu rn e d is g iv en in T able 5 and Table 6.
143
TABLE 4
SCHOOL DISTRICTS RECEIVING ATTITUDE SU RV EY S
SCH O O L DISTRICT
TEACHER C L A .SSIFIGATKD N
> »
b
a
i
H
M
8
H
!
a
1
o
0
«
A
1
•8
£
3
* 4
1
> %
f * 4
W
m
3
•8
•a
a
4 J
3
p %
H
a
u
a
3
•
ad
• 3
M
&
3
• H
1
P s
H
H
3
id
1
8 *
js
u
u
o
■ 3
g;
3
1
3
A
O
8
flu
m
•8
-o
b
3
3
> *
H
H
*
d J
I
a
rd
1
•H
a
&
'S
flu
■ H
1
fd
ad
2
< r l
>
LOS ANGELES C O U N T Y
Azusa Elem entary School D is tr ic t X
C en tin ela-V aliev Union Hiah School D is tr ic t X X
*
X
C ovina-V allev U n ified School D i s t r i c t X X X X
E n ta rn rise E len an tarv School D is tr ic t X X X
E l Monte E lea en tarv School D is tr ic t X X
Hudson E len an tarv School D is tr ic t X X X X
Inglewood U n ified School D is tr ic t X X X X X
Lawndale E len an tarv School D is tr ic t X X X
Lennox E len an tarv School D is tr ic t X X
L i t t l e Lake C ity E len en tarv School D i s t r i c t X X X X X
Mountain View E len en tarv School D is tr ic t X
Rowland E len en tarv School D is tr ic t X X X
San G ab riel E len en tarv School D is tr ic t X
T orrance U nified School D is tr ic t X X
M A RIN C O U N TY
T an aln ais Union Hiah School D i s t r i c t X X
M EN D O C IN O C O U N TY
Uklah U n ified School D is tr ic t X X
M E R C ED C O U N T Y
Merced C itv E len en tarv School D is tr ic t X X X
M O N TER EY C O U N TY
M onterev-Peninsula U nified School D i s t r i c t X X X
O R A N G E C O U N T Y
Anaheim C ity Elem entary School D is tr ic t
ft
X
F u lle rto n E len en tarv School D i s t r i c t X X
SO LA N O C O U N TY
F a ir f ie ld E len en tarv School D i s t r i c t X X X X
144
TABLE 5
REGULAR CLASS TEACHERS RECEIVING A N D RETURNING
TEACHER ATTITUDE SU RVEY
Teacher C la s s if ic a tio n
Number
Subm itted
Number
Returned
Per c e n t
R eturned
Elem entary Teachers 140 114 81
Secondary Teachers 134 96 71
T o tal 274 210 77
T A B L E 6 145
TEACHERS O F EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN RECEIVING A N D RETURNING
TEACHER ATTITUDE SURVEY
Number Number Per c e n t
Teacher C la s s if ic a tio n ______ Subm itted Returned Returned
E lem entary Teachers o f
th e A u ra lly Handicapped 22 17 77
Secondary Teachers o f
th e A u ra lly Handicapped 2 2 100
Elem entary Teachers o f th e
Educable M entally R etarded 72 51 71
Secondary Teachers o f th e
Educable M entally R etarded 36 25 69
Elem entary Teachers o f th e
O rth o p e d ic ally Handicapped 21 15 72
Secondary Teachers o f th e
O rth o p ed ic a lly Handicapped 5 4 80
Elem entary Teachers o f
th e Speech Handicapped 30 24 80
Secondary Teachers o f
th e Speech Handicapped 8 6 75
Elem entary Teachers o f th e
T ra in ab le M entally R etarded 16 14 88
Secondary Teachers o f th e
T ra in ab le M entally R etarded 6 5 83
Elem entary Teachers o f
th e V isu a lly Handicapped 9 7 78
Secondary Teachers o f
th e V isu a lly Handicapped 7 5 71
Total 234 175 75
146
Research Design
Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C hildren v s .
R egular C lass Teachers
The i n i t i a l phase o f th is re s e a rc h stu d y was to
compare te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ith re g u la r c l a s s
room te a c h e rs acco rd in g to t h e i r resp o n ses on th e v a rio u s
s e c tio n s o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey. A d d itio n a lly b o th
groups were to be combined and com parisons made on th e
b a s is o f elem en tary o r secondary grade le v e ls .
S e le c tio n o f sample (re g u la r c la s s te a c h e r s ) . —As
noted in th e p rev io u s s e c tio n , a t o t a l o f 274 te a c h e rs in
re g u la r classroom s were given co p ies o f th e Teacher A t t i
tu d e Survey to com plete. Of th e s e , 77 p er c e n t d id com
p le te th e survey and r e tu r n them to th e exam iner, re p re
s e n tin g a t o t a l o f 210 te a c h e rs . As th e s e survey forms
w ere rece iv ed th e y were numbered c o n s e c u tiv e ly in th e o rd er
re c e iv e d . For th e purposes o f th e f i n a l sam ple s e le c tio n
a ta b le o f random numbers was c o n su lted (Edwards, 33:472).
Using th e numbers o b tain ed from th e ta b le o f random numbers
a t o t a l o f 100 te a c h e rs o f re g u la r classroom were s e le c te d .
These were s e le c te d in th e p ro p o rtio n o f s ix ty elem entary
te a c h e rs and f o r ty secondary te a c h e rs . I h is was done
so th a t th e re s e a rc h sample could conform w ith th e a c tu a l
d is tr ib u tio n s o f te a c h e rs among elem entary and secondary
le v e ls in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia as in d ic a te d in Table 7,
acco rd in g to Magnuson (92).
S e le c tio n o f sam ple (tea ch e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d r e n ) . —The sam ple o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n was
chosen in much th e same fa sh io n as th o se chosen from th e
group o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs . A t o t a l o f 234 te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n were given co p ies o f th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey to com plete. Ih ese te a c h e rs g e n e ra lly
re p re se n te d a l l th e te a c h e rs engaged in th e te a c h in g o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ith in th e sch o o l d i s t r i c t s e le c te d .
A t o t a l o f 175 o f th e s e te a c h e rs re tu rn e d com pleted forms
fo r a p ercen tag e o f 75. The breakdown by s p e c ia liz a tio n is
g iven in Table 8. As th e q u e s tio n n a ire s were rec e iv e d ,
each was numbered in c o n secu tiv e fa sh io n acco rd in g to th e
o rd e r in which re c e iv e d . Each group was numbered w ith in
i t s own s p e c ia liz a tio n a re a . A ccordingly th e re were
f i n a l l y tw elve numbered groups o f Teacher A ttitu d e Survey
forms from th e tw elve groups of te a c h e rs l i s t e d in Table 6,
page 145. A ta b le o f random numbers was a g a in co n su lte d
in Edwards (33:472) and each g ro u p 's f i n a l sam ple was
148
TABLE 7
REG U LA R CLASSRO OM TEACHERS IN CALIFORNIA
P ercentage
Number o f
T o tal
Elem entary Teachers 96,738 60
Secondary Teachers 65,682 40
T o tal 162,420 100
TA BL E 8
TEACHERS OF EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN IN CALIFORNIA*
— aaaaa— aa— p — a u .. iii— r — s — g B c a c a — a e n — = — c — a a B a c a g g ^ a B c a s B —
Elem entary Secondary
Level Level T o tal
Teacher S p e c ia liz a tio n s Num- Per Num- Per Num- Per
b e r c e n t b e r c e n t b e r c e n t
A u ra lly Handicapped 262 78 74 22 336 5
Educable M entally R etarded 2,612 75 866 25 3,478 56
O rth o p ed ically Handicapped 393 94 25 6 418 7
Speech Handicapped 1,031 89 128 11 1,159 20
T ra in ab le M entally R etarded 498 86 81 14 579 9
V isu a lly Handicapped 127 60 88 40 215 3
T o ta l 4,923 1,262 6,185 100
*Based upon fig u re s o b tain ed from th e C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation,
D iv isio n o f S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Sacram ento.
150
s e le c te d acco rd in g to t h e i r p ro p o rtio n in th e t o t a l popula
tio n o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in th e S ta te o f
C a lifo rn ia as l i s t e d in Table 8 u n t i l a f i n a l sample of
100 o f th e s e te a c h e rs was s e le c te d . The breakdown o f th e
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n chosen f o r t h i s sample
is given in Table 9.
Treatm ent o f d a t a . —The d a ta fo r each o f th e 200
te a c h e rs s e le c te d fo r t h i s phase o f th e re se a rc h were sum
m arized onto an IBM e le c tro n ic Data p ro cessin g card by a
keypunching p ro c e ss. A ll th e d a ta co n tain ed on th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey, in c lu d in g th e p e rso n a l d a ta , were punched
in to one card acco rd in g to a predeterm ined num erical code.
These d a ta were th e n tr a n s f e r r e d to e le c tro n ic m agnetic
ta p e from which com putations w ere made by means o f com puter
programs a t th e U n iv e rsity of Southern C a lifo rn ia Computer
Sciences L aboratory, u t i l i z i n g a Honeywell 800 com puter.
Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C hildren
The second phase o f t h i s re s e a rc h stu d y was to com
p are th e resp o n ses on th e d if f e r e n t s e c tio n s o f th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey made by th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s of
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . No d if f e r e n tia tio n
151
T A B L E 9
TEACHERS OF EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN USED IN
INITIAL PHASE OF RESEARCH *
Teacher C la s s if ic a tio n
Elem entary
Level
Secondary
Level T o ta l
A u rally Handicapped 4 1 5
Educable M entally Retarded 40 16 56
O rth o p ed ic a lly Handicapped 6 1 7
Speech Handicapped 18 2 20
T ra in ab le M entally R etarded 8 1 9
V isu a lly Handicapped 2 1 3
T o tal 78 22 100
^Comparison o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and s p e c ia l c la s s
te a c h e rs .
152
was made acco rd in g to g rad e le v e l in t h i s phase o f th e
stu d y , alth o u g h th e f i n a l sam ple s e le c te d was chosen accord*
ing to th e p ro p o rtio n o f elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs
o c c u rrin g in th e a c tu a l p o p u la tio n o f te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia .
S e le c tio n o f sample.—A fte r th e group of 100
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n were s e le c te d fo r use in
th e i n i t i a l phase o f th e re s e a rc h as o u tlin e d above, t h e i r
numbered Teacher A ttitu d e Survey forms were re tu rn e d to th e
o r ig in a l group o f 175 te a c h e rs . The f i n a l sample o f s ix ty
te a c h e rs chosen fo r t h i s phase o f th e re s e a rc h came from
th e o r ig in a l group o f 175 te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
Ten te a c h e rs from each o f th e s ix s p e c ia liz a tio n groups
were chosen. A p ro p o rtio n a te number of elem entary o r
secondary te a c h e rs w ere used in th e sample acco rd in g to
t h e i r number in th e a c tu a l p o p u la tio n o f te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia . The breakdown
o f th e te a c h e rs used in t h i s secondary phase o f th e r e
search i s given in Table 10. A ll te a c h e rs s e le c te d were
ag ain chosen acco rd in g to a ta b le o f random numbers p re
se n ted by Edwards (33:472).
153
TABLE 10
TEACHERS OF EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN USED IN
SECON D PHASE OF RESEARCH*
Teacher C la s s if ic a tio n
A u rally Handicapped
Educable M entally R etarded
O rth o p ed ically Handicapped
Speech Handicapped
T rain ab le M entally R etarded
V isu a lly Handicapped
T o tal
Elem entary Secondary
Level Level T o tal
8 2 10
8 2 10
9 1 10
9 1 10
9 1 10
6 4 10
49 11 60
^Comparison o f d if f e r e n t s p e c ia ltie s o f te a c h e rs o f
ex c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
154
Treatm ent o f th e d a ta , — In a s im ila r fa sh io n to
th a t d escrib ed in th e i n i t i a l phase o f t h is re s e a rc h stu d y ,
a l l th e d a ta f o r each o f th e s ix ty te a c h e rs used in t h i s
p a rt o f th e stu d y w ere e n te re d in to IBM punched c a rd s.
These d a ta were th e n s to re d on m agnetic ta p e s and th e
n ecessary com putations c a rr ie d out on e le c tro n ic com puters
by means o f com puter programs a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Southern
C a lifo rn ia Computer Sciences la b o ra to ry u sin g a Honeywell
800 com puter.
S t a t i s t i c a l Treatm ent o f Data
N ull H ypothesis
N o n -d ire c tio n a l n u l l hypotheses were advanced fo r
a l l com parisons between d if f e r e n t groups o f te a c h e rs on
each o f th e a t t i t u d e m easures b ein g used.
S ig n ific a n c e Level
Alpha e q u a l to .05 was re q u ire d fo r th e r e je c tio n
o f th e n u ll h y p o th e sis. A t o t a l o f 260 te a c h e rs were
s e le c te d fo r p a r tic ip a tio n in t h is stu d y .
R egular C lass T eachers v s. Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
The i n i t i a l s t a t i s t i c a l tre a tm e n t o f th e d a ta
155
compared th e re a c tio n s o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and th o se
o f th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n to th e Adorno "F"
S cale, th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale, and th e te n concepts
o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l. In a d d itio n , th e grade le v e l
o f in s tr u c tio n (elem entary o r secondary) was tak en in to
c o n s id e ra tio n . A tw o -p art a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e was chosen
to d eterm ine th e d iffe re n c e s between th e two groups o f
te a c h e rs as w e ll as to determ ine th e in te r a c tio n between
th e ty p e o f te a c h e r and th e g rad e le v e l o f in s tr u c tio n .
A cceptance o r r e je c tio n o f th e n u l l hypotheses was d e t e r
mined by th e F r a tio s o b tain ed f o r each o f th e m easurements
m entioned.
V a ria tio n Among Teachers o f
E x ce p tio n al C hildren
The second s t a t i s t i c a l tre a tm e n t o f th e d a ta sought
to determ in e v a r i a b i l i t y among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a
tio n s o f te a c h e rs of e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . As p re v io u sly
m entioned a random sample o f s ix t y te a c h e rs , te n from each
o f th e s p e c ia liz a tio n s , was used in t h i s phase o f th e
stu d y .
A nalysis o f v a ria n c e . —A one-way a n a ly s is o f
v a ria n c e was used to d eterm ine i f th e six groups o f
156
te a c h e rs d i f f e r in t h e i r re a c tio n s to th e Adorno "F” S cale,
th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale, and th e te n concepts o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l. A cceptance o r r e je c tio n o f th e
n u l l hypotheses was determ ined by th e F r a t i o s o b tain ed f o r
each o f th e measurements m entioned.
M u ltip le ran ee t e s t . — I f th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e
as d e sc rib e d above in d ic a te d d iffe re n c e s o f a s ig n if ic a n t
n a tu re , th e n th e s ix d if f e r e n t means on each o f th e a t t i
tu d e s c a le s was to be compared by u se o f th e Duncan's New
M ilt ip le Range T est. This would determ ine w hich o f th e
s p e c ia ltie s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n d if fe re d
th e m ost from th e o th e r groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
Summary
This c h a p te r has p re se n te d a d e s c rip tio n o f th e
so u rce o f d a ta and th e m ethodology o f tre a tm e n t. The
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was d e sc rib e d in d e t a i l in c lu d in g
d e s c rip tio n s o f th e a t t i t u d e m easuring in stru m en ts th a t
made up th e la r g e s t p a rt o f th e Survey. These a t t i t u d e
m easuring d ev ices a re th e Adorno "F" S cale, th e Rokeach
Dogmatism S cale, and th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l. The l a t t e r
157
was d ev ised to be used w ith te n sch o o l r e la te d co n cep ts,
each o f which was to be responded to by means o f te n s c a le s
o f b ip o la r a d je c tiv e s .
The method o f d is tr ib u tin g and a d m in iste rin g th e
Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was ex p lain ed . A ll te a c h e rs p a r
ti c i p a ti n g in th e stu d y were c o n ta cte d p e rs o n a lly by th e
exam iner e i t h e r in re g u la r fa c u lty m eetings o r in d iv id u a lly .
The Surveys were re tu rn e d to th e exam iner in th e stamped
and ad d ressed envelopes th a t accompanied each one. Follow -
up l e t t e r s were used to encourage th e la r g e s t r e tu r n pos
s ib l e .
The re se a rc h d esig n was o u tlin e d and d isc u sse d .
The f i n a l number of 260 te a c h e rs were s e le c te d f o r th e
stu d y by means o f a ta b le o f random numbers. The s t a t i s t i
c a l tre a tm e n t o f th e d a ta o b tain ed was p re se n te d . The use
o f th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e and th e Duncan's New M ultiple
Range T est were d e sc rib e d .
C H A PT E R IV
FINDINGS
In t h i s c h a p te r a re p resen ted th e fin d in g s o f th e
in v e s tig a tio n o u tlin e d in C hapter I I I . The i n i t i a l s e c tio n
d e a ls w ith some o f th e d a ta o b tain ed in th e P ersonal Data
s e c tio n o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey. The r e s u lt s o f th e
two-way a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e d esig n com paring te a c h e rs o f
ex c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ith te a c h e rs o f re g u la r classroom s
(allow ing fo r in te r a c tio n o f grade le v e l) a re d isc u sse d .
This l a t t e r d is c u s s io n is in term s o f each o f th e a t t i t u d e
m easures used in th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey. S ig n ific a n c e
o r lack o f s ig n ific a n c e in th e d iffe re n c e s between th e
groups is in d ic a te d in term s o f th e F r a t i o s c a lc u la te d .
The d iffe re n c e s among v ary in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n were te s te d w ith a one-way a n a ly s is
o f v a ria n c e and a r e a ls o p resen ted in t h i s c h a p te r. Again
s ig n ific a n c e o r la c k o f s ig n ific a n c e i s in d ic a te d by th e
F r a tio s c a lc u la te d . The f i n a l s t a t i s t i c under c o n s id e r
a tio n is th e New M u ltip le Range T est w hich in d ic a te s which
158
o f th e s p e c ia ltie s among te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
d if f e r s more th a n th e o th e rs . The l a s t p a rt o f th e c h a p te r
is a sum m arization o f a l l th e fin d in g s co n tain ed th e r e in .
P ersonal Data Inform ation
The p e rso n a l d a ta under d is c u s s io n in t h i s s e c tio n
a re drawn from th e i n i t i a l sam ple o f two hundred te a c h e rs
as was d e sc rib e d in C hapter I I I . One hundred a r e re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs —s ix ty from elem entary classroom s and
f o rty from secondary classroom s as is found in th e p ro p o r
tio n o f re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs throughout th e S ta te o f
C a lifo rn ia as d e sc rib e d in T able 5, page 144. The second
hundred te a c h e rs a r e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . The
breakdown o f s p e c ia liz a tio n s and grade le v e ls in t h i s group
is d e sc rib e d in Table 9 , page 151.
Sex
Females predom inate th e t o t a l sam ple. Of th e en
t i r e group o f 200 te a c h e rs , 154 o r 77 per cen t a r e fem ale
w hereas 46 o r 23 p er c e n t a r e m ale. A pproxim ately th e same
r a t i o s a r e found in th e two sub-groups alth o u g h th e re is
a s l i g h tl y g r e a te r number o f fem ales in th e group o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . Of th e re g u la r classroom
160
group, 74 p er ce n t a r e fem ales, w ith 80 p er c e n t fem ales
in th e group o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . See
Table 11 fo r sum m arization.
B irth p la c e
T h ir ty 's ix s t a t e s a re re p re se n te d in th e sam ple o f
two hundred te a c h e rs . The la r g e s t number re p re s e n tin g
21.5 p e r cen t a r e n a tiv e C a lifo rn ia n s . The s t a t e w ith th e
n ex t h ig h e s t p ercen tag e i s New York, alth o u g h th e number
d im in ish es to 7.5 p er c e n t. The two sub-groups do n o t
d i f f e r s ig n if ic a n tly in th e d is t r ib u t io n o f b ir th p la c e s .
Of th e fo u rte e n s ta te s n o t re p re se n te d in th e sam ple, seven
a re so u th ern s ta te s and th e o th e r seven a r e such s p a rs e ly
populated s ta te s as A laska, Nevada, Rhode Isla n d , and Maine.
A t o t a l o f th re e te a c h e rs (1.5 p er c e n t) l i s t e d t h e i r b i r t h
p la c e as being o th e r th a n th e U nited S ta te s . A ll th re e
w ere p a r t o f th e sub-group o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren .
C ollege A ttended
The la r g e s t number o f te a c h e rs in th e e n t i r e group
o f two hundred in d ic a te d th a t th e y had re c e iv e d th e main
p a r t o f t h e i r h ig h e r ed u catio n a t a s t a t e c o lle g e .
161
TABLE 11
SEX O F TEACHERS IN SA M PLE O F 200
Sex
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers of
E xceptional
C h ild ren
T o tal
Num- Per
b e r c e n t
Female
Male
74
26
80
20
154
46
77
23
T o ta ls 100 100 200 100
162
S ix ty -fiv e o r 32.5 p er ce n t o f th e group were g rad u ates o f
e ith e r a s t a t e c o lle g e of a p p lie d a r t s o r a s t a t e te a c h e rs
c o lle g e . The n ex t la r g e s t group in d ic a te d th a t t h e i r p r i
mary so u rce o f ed u catio n was conducted w ith in th e f a c i l i t i e s
o f a s t a t e u n iv e r s ity . S ixty-tw o, o r 31 p e r c e n t, were
g rad u ates o f a s t a t e o p erated u n iv e rs ity in one o f th e
f i f t y s t a t e s . The sub-groups (re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs v s .
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ), however, were re v e rse d
in t h is tendency. The la r g e s t p ro p o rtio n o f te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n re c e iv e d degrees a t s t a t e c o lle g e s
w hereas th e la r g e s t p ro p o rtio n o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs
re c e iv e d t h e i r degrees a t s t a t e u n iv e r s i tie s . R egular
c la s s te a c h e rs showed a s l i g h t l y h ig h e r p ercen tag e o f t h e i r
number coming from p riv a te u n iv e r s itie s o r p r iv a te c o lle g e s .
A t o t a l o f two in d iv id u a ls in d ic a te d g ra d u a tio n from a c i t y
u n iv e rs ity , b o th r e f e r r in g to th e C ity U n iv e rsity o f New
York. Table 12 g iv es a com plete breakdown o f th e g ro u p s'
e d u c a tio n a l background.
Degrees A tta in ed
The v a s t m a jo rity o f te a c h e rs in b o th groups l i s t e d
th e b a c h e lo r's degree as th e h ig h e s t th e y had a tta in e d .
S lig h tly more re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs in d ic a te d a m a s te r's
163
TA BLE 12
TYPE OF COLLEGE ATTENDED BY TEACHERS
IN SAM PLE OF 200
Type o f C ollege
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ildren
T o tal
Num- Per
h e r c e n t
S ta te U n iv e rsity 32 30 62 31
P riv a te U n iv e rsity 25 22 47 23.5
S ta te C ollege 28 37 65 32.5
P riv a te C ollege 14 10 24 12.0
C ity U n iv ersity 1 1 2 1.0
T o tals 100 100 200 100
164
degree and th re e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs claim ed th e p o sse s
sio n o f a d o c to ra te (see Table 13).
Grant
As p a r t o f th e P erso n al Data s e c tio n o f th e Teacher
A ttitu d e Survey, te a c h e rs were asked i f p a r t o f t h e i r edu
c a tio n had been funded by any ty p e o f g ra n t. A t o t a l o f
fo rty -se v e n te a c h e rs re p re s e n tin g 23.5 p er c e n t o f th e
group in d ic a te d th a t t h e i r c o lle g e ed u catio n had been
a s s is te d by a g ra n t (see Table 14). There were many types
o f such a s s is ta n c e l i s t e d in c lu d in g Parent Teachers A ssoci
a tio n g r a n ts , g ra n ts from p r iv a te fo u n d atio n s, g ra n ts from
governm ental ag en cies ( s ta t e and f e d e r a l) , and a s s is ta n c e
to v e te ra n s through v a rio u s "G .I. B i l l s ." The two groups
d id n o t d i f f e r s ig n i f ic a n tly in t h i s re s p e c t, alth o u g h
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n showed a s l i g h t l y h ig h er
p ercen tag e o f t h e i r number re c e iv in g f in a n c ia l a s s is ta n c e .
C re d e n tia ls
Each te a c h e r respondent was asked to in d ic a te a l l
th e C a lifo rn ia S ta te c re d e n tia ls th a t th ey p o ssessed .
These appeared to f a l l in to th re e c a te g o r ie s : (1) Teaching
C re d e n tia ls ; (2) S p e c ia l Teaching and S p e c ia l S ervices
165
TABLE 13
HIGHEST DEGREES ATTAINED BY TEACHERS
IN SA M PLE O F 200
Degree
R egular
C lass *
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C hildren
T o ta l
Num- Per
h e r c e n t
B a c h e lo r's
M a ster's
D octorate
67
24
0
76
30
3
143
54
3
71.5
27.0
1.5
T o ta l 100 100 200 100
166
TABLE 14
G RA N TS OBTAINED BY TEACHERS IN SAM PLE OF 200
R egular Teachers o f T o tal
C lass E x cep tio n al Num- Per
Teachers C h ildren h er c e n t
R eceiving G rant 21 26 47 23.5
Not R eceiving Grant 79 74 153 76.5
T o tal 100 100 200 100
167
C re d e n tia ls ; and (3) A d m in istra tiv e C re d e n tia ls .
Teaching c r e d e n tia ls . —As m ight be ex p ected , b e
cause o f th e la r g e r number o f elem entary te a c h e rs in th e
e n tir e sam ple, th e predom inant number o f resp o n d en ts i n d i
c ated th a t th e y h e ld th e elem entary te ach in g c r e d e n tia l.
The n ex t la r g e s t number were h o ld ers o f a secondary te a c h
ing c r e d e n tia l. The elem entary c r e d e n tia l h o ld e rs made up
th e m a jo rity o f th e two sub-groups b u t in th e group of
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n th e re w ere few er h o ld e rs
o f secondary te a c h in g c r e d e n tia ls . Many resp o n d en ts in d i
c a te d th a t they h e ld a com bination o f c r e d e n tia ls (see
Table 15).
S p e c ia l c r e d e n t i a l s .—Because o f t h e i r te a c h in g
s p e c ia liz a tio n an overwhelming number o f te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n w ere h o ld ers o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n cred en
t i a l s w hereas alm ost none o f th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs
possessed th e s e . Less th an 5 p er c e n t o f th e t o t a l sample
possessed any o th e r s p e c ia liz e d c r e d e n tia l (see Table 16).
A d m in istra tiv e c r e d e n tia Is . —Less th an 5 p er c e n t
o f th e e n t i r e sam ple o f two hundred in d ic a te d th a t they
h eld a d m in is tra tiv e c r e d e n tia ls . Both sub-groups in d ic a te d
168
TABLE 15
TEACHING CREDENTIALS
C re d e n tia l
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C hildren
T o tal
Num- Per
h e r cen t
K indergarten* Primary
Elem entary
Ju n io r High
Secondary
K indergarten* Primary
and Elem entary
E lem entary and
J u n io r High
Secondary and
Ju n io r High
None L isted
1
58
3
29
2
0
2
71
7
5
6
1
6
1.5
64.5
5 .0
17.0
4 2 .0
11 5.5
3
129
10
34
3
6
1.5
3 .0
T o tals 100 100 200 100
169
TABLE 16
SPECIAL CREDENTIALS
C re d e n tia l
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren
T o tal
Num- Per
b e r c e n t
S p ecial E ducation
P upil P ersonnel
J u n io r C ollege
P upil P ersonnel and
S p ecial Education
None L iste d
0
3
1
0
96
72
0
0
4
24
72
3
1
4
120
36
1.5
0.5
2.0
60.0
T o tals 100 100 200 100
170
a s im ila r lack o f a d m in is tra tiv e lic e n s e s (see T able 17).
P ro fe ss io n a l O rg an izatio n s
The n a tio n a l and s ta te -w id e p ro fe s s io n a l o rg a n iz a
tio n s to which th e te a c h e r resp o n d en ts in d ic a te d membership
were com piled (see T able 18). T h irte e n d if f e r e n t o rg a n iz a
tio n s were re p re s e n te d . The v a s t m a jo rity o f b o th re g u la r
c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n i n d i
ca te d membership in th e C a lifo rn ia Teachers A sso c ia tio n and
th e N atio n al E ducation A sso c ia tio n . Many in d ic a te d member
sh ip in more th a n one o rg a n iz a tio n . As m ight be expected,
th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in d ic a te d membership
in a number o f s p e c ia liz e d o rg a n iz a tio n s r e f le c tin g t h e i r
i n t e r e s t in th e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild .
E xperience
A ll te a c h e rs in th e sam ple o f two hundred were
q u e rie d as to th e number o f y ears o f ex p erien ce th ey had
a tta in e d on t h e i r c u rre n t assignm ent as w e ll as t h e i r t o t a l
y ears o f ex p erien ce in th e f i e l d o f te a c h in g . As can be
seen from r e f e r r in g to T able 19, th e group o f re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs had s l i g h t l y more ex p erien ce on t h e i r c u rre n t
assig n m en t—more th a n one y e a r. There was no s ig n if ic a n t
171
TABLE 17
ADMINISTRATIVE CREDENTIALS
C re d e n tia ls
R egular
Class
Teachers
Teachers o f
E xceptional
C hildren
T o tal
Num- Per
b e r c e n t
Elem entary
A d m in istratIv e 2 2 4 2 .0
Secondary
A d m in istrat iv e 1 0 1 0.5
G eneral
Adminis t r a t iv e 3 1 4 2 .0
None L isted 94 97 191 95.5
T o tals 100 100 200 100
TABLE 18
PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
172
O rg an izatio n
Regular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers of
E xceptional
C h ild ren T o tal
American A sso c ia tio n o f
M ental D eficien cy 0
American F e d e ra tio n Teachers 1
American Speech and H earing
A sso c ia tio n 0
C a lifo rn ia C ounseling and
Guidance A sso c ia tio n 1
C a lifo rn ia Speech and
H earing A sso c ia tio n 0
C a lifo rn ia Teachers
A sso c ia tio n 80
C a lifo rn ia Teachers
Deaf and Hard o f H earing 0
C ouncil o f E x cep tio n al
C hildren 0
E x cep tio n al C h ild re n 's
Foundation 0
N atio n al E ducation
A sso c ia tio n 58
Phi D elta Kappa 3
Pi lambda Theta 4
Teachers o f Spanish and
P ortuguese 1
None LLsted 13
4
0
1 1
1
9
81
2
15
2
59
0
0
0
1 1
4
1
11
2
9
161
2
15
2
117
3
4
1
24
173
TABLE 19
Y EA RS O F EXPERIENCE—CURRENT ASSIGNMENT
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C hildren T o tal
Mean
Standard D ev iatio n
Minimum
Maximum
6.65
5.89
1.00
33.00
4 .4 8
3 .8 7
1.00
15.00
5.65
5.09
1.00
33.00
174
d iffe re n c e , however, In th e t o t a l y ears o f ex p e rien c e as
in d ic a te d in Table 20.
Comparison o f Teachers o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
and R egular C lass Teachers
The r e s u lt s o f a two-way a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e were
used to determ ine i f any s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e e x is te d
betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and r e g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs in th e manner in w hich th e y responded to th e a t t i
tu d e m easures used in t h i s stu d y . A two-way a n a ly s is o f
v a ria n c e was used in o rd er to m easure any p o s s ib le d i f f e r
ence th a t m ight e x i s t in th e le v e l o f in s tr u c tio n ( e le
m entary o r secondary) as w e ll a s te a c h e r s p e c ia liz a tio n
(re g u la r c la s s o r e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ) and a ls o any p os
s i b l e in te r a c tio n betw een th e s e two a re a s . In each case
th e sample o f two hundred te a c h e rs was se p a ra te d in to fo u r
g ro u p s: (1) elem entary re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs ; (2) e l e
m entary te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ; (3) secondary
re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs ; and (4) secondary te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
Four F r a ti o s were c a lc u la te d fo r each o f th e
th ir te e n m easures o f a t t i t u d e : (1) v a r ia tio n betw een th e
ty p es o f te a c h e rs ; (2) v a r ia tio n among th e le v e ls o f
175
TABLE 20
Y EA RS OF EXPERIENCE—TOTAL
R egular Teachers o f
C lass E x cep tio n al
Teachers C h ild ren
Mean 11.45 10.28
Standard D eviation 8.70 7.73
Minimum 1.00 1.00
Maximum 34.00 34.00
T o ta l
10.86
8.23
1.00
34.00
in s tr u c tio n ; (3) in te r a c tio n between le v e l o f in s tr u c tio n
and ty p e o f te a c h e r; and (4) v a r ia tio n betw een th e fo u r
groups p re v io u sly m entioned. For th e f i r s t th r e e sources
o f v a r ia tio n , w ith 1 and 196 degrees o f freedom , an F r a t i o
o f 3.8916 would b e s ig n if ic a n t a t th e .05 p o in t. For th e
l a s t so u rce o f v a r ia tio n , w ith 3 and 196 d eg rees o f freedom,
an F r a t i o o f 2.5516 would be s ig n if ic a n t a t th e .05 p o in t.
Each o f th e t h i r t e e n m easures is d isc u sse d s e p a ra te ly in
th e fo llo w in g s e c tio n s . The numbers in p aren th ese s fo llo w
ing some o f th e su b se c tio n t i t l e s in d ic a te th e number o f
th e h y p o th esis as o u tlin e d in C hapter I (pages 11-18). In
a d d itio n to th e d is c u s s io n o f th e d a ta , a l l s t a t i s t i c a l
in fo rm atio n i s p re se n te d in ta b u la r form . For each o f th e
t h i r t e e n m easures o f a t t i t u d e th e re is a ta b le o f th e means
o f th e fo u r groups and a s e p a ra te ta b le p re se n tin g th e
a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e d a ta . In each case th e s e two ta b le s
appear on th e same page fo r ease o f re fe re n c e and g r e a te r
c l a r i t y .
Dopmafcism
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 1 .1 ) . —A d iffe re n c e o f alm ost
f iv e p o in ts was e v id e n t in th e means o f r e g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in th e sco res
177
o b ta in ed on th e Rokeach Dogmatism Scale (Table 2 1 ). A l
though th is d if fe re n c e d id evidence some d is s im il a r ity
between th e two g roups, w ith th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs
responding to th e s c a le in a s l i g h tl y more dogm atic fa sh io n ,
th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e (Table 22) y ie ld e d an F r a t i o o f
1.51 which i s below th e le v e l (3.8916) re q u ire d to r e j e c t
th e n u ll h y p o th e sis. The r e s u l t s , th e re fo r e , in d ic a te th a t
th e re i s no d if fe re n c e in t h i s b e l ie f system betw een
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and r e g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs as m easured by t h e i r responses on th e Rokeach
Dogmatism S cale.
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 1 .3 ) . —An even sm a lle r d i f
fe re n c e in mean sc o re s is found e x is tin g betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs (Table 2 1 ). The n e g lig ib le
d iffe re n c e (le s s th a n two p o in ts ) is borne out in th e ob
ta in e d F r a t i o (T able 22) le s s than 1. The n u l l h y p o th esis
m ust be accep ted h e re a ls o and s ta te d th a t th e re is no
d iffe re n c e betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h i s b e l i e f system (dogmatism) as m easured on
th e Rokeach Dogmatism S cale.
178
TA B L E 21
COM PARISON OF REG U LA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—M EA N S—R O K EA C H D O G M A TISM SCALE
L evel
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 132.07 129.45 131.14
Elem entary 132.63 126.77 129.23
T o tals 132.31 127.33 129.83
TABLE 22
COM PARISON OF REG U LA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE—
RO K EA CH D O G M A TISM SCALE
OF
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 1,225.13 1 1,225.13 1.51
le v e l o f I n s tr u c tio n 447.06 1 447.06 .55
I n te r a c tio n 319.79 1 319.79 .39
Between Groups 1,991.98 3 666.66 .83
W ithin Groups 158,533.16 196 808.88
T o tal 160,525.14 199
179
A u th o rita ria n ism
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 2 .1 ) . —By means o f th e Adorno ”F”
S cale te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs were c o n tra s te d in t h e i r te n d en c ies tow ard a u th o r i
ta ria n is m . A d if fe re n c e o f ap proxim ately f iv e p o in ts was
noted in th e two means (Table 2 3 ), w ith th e re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs having th e h ig h e r a u th o rita ria n is m s c o re . This
d iffe re n c e , however, was n o t found to be s ig n if ic a n t ac co rd
in g to th e F r a t i o o b ta in ed through an a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e
(Table 2 4 ). The r a t i o o f 2 .1 1 was below th e re q u ire d r a t i o
o f 3.8916 needed f o r s ig n ific a n c e a t th e .05 p o in t. The
n u ll h y p o th esis i s te n a b le and th e co n clu sio n i s th a t th e re
i s no d iffe re n c e betw een re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in a u th o rita ria n is m as m easured by
th e Adorno "F" S cale.
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 2 .2 ) . —When elem entary
te a c h e rs were compared to secondary te a c h e rs th e d iffe re n c e s
in t h e i r a u th o rita ria n is m sc o re s were even sm a lle r th an th e
c o n tra s t between te a c h e r ty p es (Table 2 3 ). The F r a t i o
o b tain ed in th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e i s sm a lle r th a n 1 i n d i
c a tin g th a t no s ig n ific a n c e d iffe re n c e e x is ts between th e
180
TA BLE 23
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—M EA N S—A D O R N O F SCALE
L evel
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E xceptional
C h ildren T o tals
Secondary
E lem entary
97.10
91.80
87.27
88.93
93.61
90.16
T o tals 93.92 88.57 91.24
TABLE 24
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN-- ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE—
A D O R N O F SCALE
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares Freedom Square R atio
Type o f Teacher 1,431.13 1 1,431.13 2.11
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 503.72 1 503.72 .74
I n te r a c tio n 217.88 1 217.88 .32
Between Groups 2,152.63 3 717.58 1.06
W ithin Groups 132,683.54 196 676.96
T o tal 134,836.17 199
3.81
two g roups. The n u ll h y p o th esis i s m ain tain ed as p re
v io u s ly s ta te d : "There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o r i
t a r i a n a t t i t u d e between elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs ."
M yself
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 3 .1 ) . —T eachers were asked to
respond to th e concept "M yself" on a form o f th e Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l. R egular c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f excep
t i o n a l c h ild re n d iffe re d by only one p o in t in t h e i r r e
sponses to t h i s concept as can be n o ted in Table 25. This
d iffe re n c e proved to be n o t s ig n if ic a n t as shown by th e
F r a t i o o b tain ed in T able 26. The r a t i o o f 1.19 i s below
th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e chosen f o r t h i s stu d y . The
n u l l h y p o th e sis i s upheld and th e co n clu sio n i s th a t no
s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e e x is ts betw een re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs
and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in t h e i r expressed
a t t i t u d e s tow ard them selves on a form o f th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l .
L evels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 3 .2 ) . —The d iffe re n c e between
th e mean sc o re o f elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs
was le s s th an one p o in t (.1 0 ) on th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
182
T A B L E 25
C O M PA R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILD REN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—" S elf”
Level
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary
Elem entary
22.72
23.38
22.64
21.97
22.69
22.59
T o tals 23.12 22.12 22.62
TABLE 26
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS O F VARIANCE—
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—" S e lf M
SB ESsssssaK ^SK SsnsrB aasnsancaaEsaESB saaaG ssasssssssssaESSSB sasES& SB SSS
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares Freedom Square R atio
Type o f Teacher 50.00 1 50.00 1.19
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n .48 1 •
00
.01
I n te r a c tio n 17.43 1 17.43 .41
Between Groups 67.91 3 22.64 .54
W ithin Groups 8 ,2 5 5 .2 1 196 42.12
T o tal 8,323.12 199
183
concept " f y s e l f ." This in s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e was r e
f le c te d in th e F r a t i o (Table 26) co n sid erab ly le s s th an
one. As re g a rd s grade le v e ls o f in s tr u c tio n th e n u ll
h y p o th e sis i s supported as s ta te d : "There i s no d iffe re n c e
in th e a t t i t u d e s toward o n e s e lf betw een elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e r s ."
Average S tudent
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 4 .1 ) . —On an o th e r p a r t o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l th e sample o f two hundred te a c h e rs
w ere asked to respond to th e concept "The .Average S tu d en t."
A pproxim ately one p o in t d if f e r e n tia te d re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs from te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n on th e mean
sco res c a lc u la te d from t h e i r resp o n ses (Table 2 7 ). The
a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e a s re p o rte d in Table 28 in d ic a te s an
F r a t i o o f 1.12 which i s in s u f f ic ie n t to w arran t th e r e j e c
tio n o f th e n u ll h y p o th e sis. As re g a rd s t h e i r expressed
a t titu d e s toward th e average stu d e n t th e re i s no s ig n if ic a n t
d iffe re n c e between re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
L evel o f in s tr u c tio n ( 4 .2 ) . —The d iffe re n c e s between
elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs a re somewhat
184
T A B L E 27
C O M P A R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CHILDREN--MEANS- - SE M A N T IC DIFFERENTIAL--
"A V E R A G E ST U D EN T*
le v e l
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers of
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary
Elem entary
27.17
24.95
26.91
24.19
27.08
24.52
T o tals 25.84 24.79 25.31
TABLE 28
COM PARISON O F REGULAR CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"AVERAGE STUDENT"
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares Freedom Square R atio
Type o f Teacher 55.13 1 55.13 1.12
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 280.12 1 280.12 5.71*
I n te r a c tio n 34.82 1 34.82 .71
Between Groups 370.07 3 123.36 2.52
W ithin Groups 9,610.73 196 49.03
T o tal 9 ,9 80.80 199
* P < .05
185
g r e a te r (Table 2 7 ). When an a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e was p e r
formed th e F r a t i o exceeded th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e .
This v a lu e o f F (5 .7 1 ) in d ic a te s th a t th e n u ll h y p o th e sis
i s u n te n ab le . The co n clu sio n i s th a t th e re i s a s i g n i f i
can t d iffe re n c e among elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e tow ard th e average
s tu d e n t. Secondary te a c h e rs a re more n e g a tiv e in t h e i r
fe e lin g toward t h i s concept th a n a r e elem entary te a c h e rs .
G ifted Student
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 5 .1 ) . —R egular c la s s te a c h e rs
do n o t d i f f e r g r e a tly from te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
in th e mean sc o re s d e riv e d from t h e i r resp o n ses tow ard th e
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l concept o f th e g if te d stu d e n t
(Table 2 9 ). The F r a t i o c o n sid e ra b ly le s s th an one
(Table 30) b e a rs o u t t h i s sm all d iffe re n c e and se rv e s as
a d efen se fo r th e s ta te d n u l l h y p o th e sis th a t th e re e x is ts
no d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i t u d e s tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t
betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c l a s s
room te a c h e rs .
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 5 .2 ) . —Elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs had alm ost id e n tic a l mean sc o re s
186
T A BL E 29
C O M PA R ISO N O F R EG UIAR CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL CH ILD REN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC DIFFERENTIAL—
’’GIFTED ST U D EN T”
L evel
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 24.80 23.95 24.50
Elem entary 23.72 25.24 24.58
T o tals 24.15 25.24 24.55
TABLE 30
COM PARISON OF REGUIAR CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—’’GIFTED STUDENT”
O F
Sum o f
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 32.81 1 32.81 .58
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n .27 1 .27 .004
In te ra c tio n 56.39 1 56.39 1.25
Between Groups 89.47 3 29.82 Less
th an 1
W ithin Groups 10,915.93 196 55.69
T o tal 11,005.40 199
187
d e riv ed from t h e i r resp o n ses to th e concept o f th e g if te d
stu d e n t (Table 2 9 ). An F r a t i o co n sid e ra b ly le s s th a n one
was o b tain ed and th e n u ll h y p o th e sis upheld fo r th e concept
"The G ifted S tudent" between le v e ls o f in s tr u c tio n as w e ll
as between ty p es o f te a c h e rs . No s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e
e x is ts between elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs w ith
re s p e c t to t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e s toward th e g if te d
s tu d e n t.
Teachers
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 6 .1 ) . —Teachers o f b o th types
(re g u la r c la s s and e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ) showed v ery l i t t l e
d iffe re n c e in t h e i r resp o n ses tow ard th e concept "T eachers"
(Table 3 1 ). The F r a t i o o b tain ed in th e a n a ly s is o f v a r i
ance was below th e le v e l o f s ig n ific a n c e re q u ire d in t h i s
stu d y and su sta in e d th e n u l l h y p o th e sis. The fin d in g s
in d ic a te th a t th e re i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s
toward te a c h e rs between te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs .
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 6 .2 ) . —A s li g h tly g r e a te r
d if fe re n c e was noted when elem entary te a c h e rs were con
tr a s te d w ith secondary te a c h e rs (Table 31). The d iffe re n c e ,
188
T A B L E 31
C O M PA R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILDREN—M E A N S— SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TEA CH ER S”
Level
R egular
C lass
Teachers
T eachers of
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 26.67 25.32 26.19
Elem entary 24.83 23.61 24.14
T o tals 25.57 23.61 24.78
TABLE 32
COM PARISON O F REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"TEACHERS"
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 124.82 1 124.82 1.49
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 179.53 1 179.53 2.14
I n te r a c tio n 49.85 1 49.85 .59
Between Groups 354.20 3 118.06 1.41
W ithin Groups 16,412.82 196 83.73
T o tal 16,767.02 199
189
however, was n o t enough to o b ta in an F r a t i o la rg e enough
to r e j e c t th e n u ll h y p o th e sis (Table 3 2 ). As f a r a s th e
com parison o f elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs i s con
cerned th e re i s no d iffe re n c e betw een th e two groups in
t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e tow ard te a c h e rs .
The Slow L earner
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 7 .1 ) . —When mean sc o re s were
c a lc u la te d f o r re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n from t h e i r resp o n ses to th e Sem antic D iffe r
e n t i a l concept "The Slow L earner" i t was found t h a t th ey
d if fe re d by 4 .6 9 p o in ts (Table 3 3 ). The a n a ly s is o f
v a ria n c e (Table 34) produced an F r a t i o c o n sid e ra b ly h ig h e r
th a n th a t s ta te d a s b ein g re q u ire d f o r th e .05 p o in t o f
s ig n ific a n c e . In f a c t i t exceeded th e .01 p o in t o f s ig
n if ic a n c e . This F r a t i o le a d s to a r e je c tio n o f th e s ta te d
n u ll h y p o th e sis. R egular c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs of
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n do d i f f e r s ig n if ic a n tly in t h e i r ex
p ressed a t titu d e s tow ard th e slow le a rn e r, w ith te a c h e rs o f
re g u la r classroom s showing a more n e g a tiv e d is p o s itio n
tow ard t h i s ty p e o f stu d e n t th a n do te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
190
TA BL E 33
COM PARISON O F REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—M EA N S—SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—
"THE S L O W LEARNER"
L evel
R egular
C lass
T eachers
Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o ta ls
Secondary 35.25 29.45 33.19
Elem entary 32.25 28.56 30.17
T o ta ls 33.45 28.76 31.15
TABLE 34
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"THE S L O W LEARNER"
OF
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 1,147.21 1 1,147.21 13.65*
Level o f I n s tru c tio n 373.40 1 373.40 4.44**
I n te r a c tio n 167.15 1 167.15 1.99
Between Groups 1,687.76 3 562.59 6 .7 0
W ithin Groups 16,468.73 196 84.02
T o ta l 18,156.49 199
* P < .01
** P < .05
191
Levels o f I n s tr u c tio n ( 7 .2 ) . —Elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs a ls o in d ic a te d a marked d iffe re n c e
in t h e i r p o s itio n tow ard th e slow le a rn e r (Table 3 3 ). A l
though somewhat sm a lle r th a n th e two ty p es o f te a c h e rs
d escrib ed above, th e d iffe re n c e n e v e rth e le s s y ie ld e d an
F r a t i o (Table 34) which was s ig n if ic a n t a t th e .05 p o in t.
Elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs do d i f f e r in
t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e s toward th e slow le a rn e r, w ith
te a c h e rs a t th e secondary le v e l being le s s to le r a n t o f
th is ty p e o f s tu d e n t.
A d m in istrato rs
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 8 .1 ) . —In t h e i r resp o n ses to th e
concept "A d m in istrato rs" th e two ty p es o f te a c h e rs i n d i
cated a mean d iffe re n c e o f 1.43 p o in ts (Table 3 5 ). This
s lig h t d iffe re n c e d id n o t prove to be s ig n if ic a n t when
te s te d through th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e (Table 3 6 ). The
F r a t i o o f 1.42 was below th e p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e r e
q u ired acco rd in g to th e sta n d ard s e s ta b lis h e d fo r th is
p a r tic u la r stu d y . The n u l l h y p o th e sis i s , th e re fo re , con
firm ed. As f a r a s t h e i r measured a t t i t u d e s tow ard ad m in is
t r a t o r s a r e concerned, th e re i s no d iffe re n c e between
192
TA BLE 35
C O M PA R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S AN D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILD REN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"ADM INISTRATORS”
Level
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o£
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 28.87 25.77 27.77
Elem entary 26.48 26.01 26.22
T o tals 27.44 26.01 26.70
TABLE 36
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL- -"ADMINISTRATORS”
O F
Sum o f
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 109.52 1 109.52 1.42
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 103.68 1 103.68 1.34
I n te r a c tio n 34.48 1 34.48 .45
Between Groups 247.68 3 82.56 1.07
W ithin Groups 15,135.32 196 77.22
T o ta l 15,383.00 199
193
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and r e g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs .
Levels o f in s t r u c tio n ( 8 .2 ) . —An alm ost id e n tic a l
d iffe re n c e in mean sc o re s was found betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs (Table 35) a s was found
betw een th e two ty p es o f te a c h e rs m entioned above. Hie
F r a t i o o f 1.34 was a ls o below th e re q u ire d le v e l and th e
n u l l h y p o th esis was h e re to o upheld (Table 3 6 ). There a r e
no d iffe re n c e s in th e a t t i t u d e s toward a d m in is tra to rs
between elem entary g rad e te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
The Handicapped C hild
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 9 .1 ) . —One o f th e la r g e s t d i f
fe re n c e s between groups on th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
resp o n ses was found on th e re a c tio n s to th e concept "The
Handicapped C h ild ." R egular c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in d ic a te d mean sco res (Table 37) w hich,
when te s te d f o r s ig n ific a n c e by th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e
(Table 3 8 ), was found to be s ig n if ic a n t beyond th e .01
p o in t. In t h i s ca se th e n u ll h y p o th e sis becomes u n te n a b le .
There does e x is t a d if fe re n c e between te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs in t h e i r ex
p ressed fe e lin g s tow ard th e handicapped c h ild , w ith re g u la r
194
T A B L E 37
C O M PA R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL CH ILD REN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC DIFFERENTIAL—
’’T H E H A N D IC A PPED CHILD"
Level
R egular
C lass
Teachers
Teachers o£
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 32.25 28.00 30.74
Elem entary 30.48 26.46 28.21
T o ta ls 31.19 26.80 28.99
TABLE 38
COM PARISON O F REGULAR CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"THE HANDICAPPED CHILD"
O F
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 936.61 1 936.61 13.95*
Level o f Ins tim e t ion 274.21 1 274.21 4.08**
In te r a c tio n 158.71 1 158.71 2.36
Between Groups 1,369.53 3 456.51 6.80
W ithin Groups 13,155.89 196 67.12
T o ta l 14,525.42 199
* P < .01
** P < .05
195
c la s s te a c h e rs in d ic a tin g a more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e toward
t h i s ty p e o f c h ild .
L evels o f in s tr u c tio n ( 9 .2 ) . —C fc i th e same concept
o f th e handicapped c h ild th e elem entary te a c h e rs and second
a ry te a c h e rs in d ic a te d a much sm a lle r v a r ia tio n in t h e i r
resp o n ses th a n was tr u e above (Table 3 7 ). This d if fe re n c e ,
however, was found to be a s ig n if ic a n t one ac co rd in g to th e
F r a t i o o b tain ed (Table 3 8 ). The s ig n ific a n c e i s beyond
th e .05 p o in t p re v io u sly e s ta b lis h e d . The n u ll h y p o th e sis
m ust be r e je c te d . As re g a rd s t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e s
tow ard th e handicapped c h ild th e re i s a s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r
ence between elem entary le v e l te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs who
work a t a secondary le v e l, w ith th e l a t t e r group in d ic a tin g
more n e g a tiv e fe e lin g s tow ard t h i s ty p e o f s tu d e n t.
E ducation P ro fessio n
Types o f te a c h e rs (1 0 .1 ). —The resp o n ses o f th e
sam ple o f two hundred te a c h e rs tow ard th e concept "The Edu
c a tio n P ro fessio n " a re summarized in Table 39. The two
groups under c o n s id e ra tio n showed a r a th e r sm all d if fe re n c e .
The F r a t i o o b tain ed f o r t h i s so u rce o f v a r ia tio n was le s s
th a n s ig n if ic a n t (Table 4 0 ). The n u ll h y p o th e sis i s te n a b le
196
T A B L E 39
COM PARISON O F REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—M EA N S—SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—
"EDUCATION PROFESSION"
Level
R egular
C lass
T eachers
T eachers o f
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 26.82 25.23 26.26
Elem entary 25.43 23.97 24.61
T o tals 25.99 24.25 25.12
TABLE 40
COM PARISON O F REG U LA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"EDUCATION PROFESSION"
O F
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 151.46 1 151.46 2.41
le v e l o f I n s tr u c tio n 116.45 1 116.45 1.85
I n te r a c tio n 43.04 1 43.04 .68
Between Groups 310.95 3 103.65 1.65
W ithin Groups 12,303.33 196 62.78
T o tal 12,614.28 199
as o r ig in a lly s ta te d In C hapter I : "There I s no d iffe re n c e
in th e a t titu d e s tow ard th e ed u catio n p ro fe ssio n between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs ."
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n (1 0 .2 ). —With re s p e c t to th e
concept concerning th e ed u catio n p ro fe s s io n , elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs showed s l i g h t l y le s s d i f
feren c e in t h e i r reco rd ed re a c tio n s th a n d id th e two ty p es
o f te a c h e rs m entioned in th e p rev io u s s e c tio n s . The mean
sco res o b tain ed (Table 39) were proven to be in s ig n if ic a n t
in t h e i r v a r ia tio n according to th e F r a t i o in Table 40.
This p ro v id es f o r an a s s e r tio n o f th e n u ll h y p o th e sis.
There i s no d iffe re n c e between elem entary te a c h e rs and
secondary te a c h e rs in t h e i r reco rd ed a t t i tu d e s toward th e
concept "The E ducation P ro fe s s io n ."
D is c ip lin e
Types o f te a c h e rs (1 1 .1 ). —R egular c la s s te a c h e rs
and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n showed a s lig h t v a r i
a tio n in t h e i r resp o n ses toward th e concept " D isc ip lin e "
w ith re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs on th e more n e g a tiv e sid e o f
th e continuum (Table 4 1 ). The d iffe re n c e , however, proved
198
T A B L E 41
C O M P A R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CLASS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL C H ILD REN—M E A N S —SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL-DISCIPLINE"
Level
R egular
C lass
Teachers
T eachers of
E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 33.97 31.86 33.23
Elem entary 33.26 31.54 32.90
T o tals 33.55 31.61 32.58
TABLE 42
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL--"DISCIPLINE"
O F
Sum o f
Degrees
o f fean F
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares Freedom Square R atio
Type o f Teacher 188.18 1 188.18 2.13
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 37.47 1 37.47
C M
•
I n te r a c tio n n 123.63 1 123.63 1.40
Between Groups 349.28 3 116.43 1.32
W ithin Groups 17,288.70 196 88.21
T o tal 17,637.98 199
199
to be in s ig n if ic a n t. The F r a t i o o b ta in ed (2 .1 3 ) i s below
th a t p re v io u sly s ta te d a s being needed f o r th e .05 p o in t o f
s ig n ific a n c e . The n u ll h y p o th e sis i s s u s ta in e d . There i s
no d iffe re n c e in th e a t ti t u d e s tow ard d is c ip lin e between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
L evels o f in s tr u c tio n (1 1 .2 ). — In t h e i r mean sc o re s
th e elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs d if fe re d
le s s th an one p o in t in t h e i r reco rd ed re a c tio n s toward
d is c ip lin e (Table 4 1 ). This extrem ely sm all d iffe re n c e was
seen in th e F r a t i o o b ta in ed (T able 4 2 ). This r a t i o o f
le s s th an 1 is s h a rp ly in d ic a tiv e o f th e la ck o f any s i g
n if ic a n t v a r ia tio n . The n u ll h y p o th e sis is u pheld. There
i s no d iffe re n c e betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r m easured a t titu d e s tow ard d is c ip lin e .
C urriculum
Types o f te a c h e rs ( 1 2 .1 ) .—Extrem ely s im ila r r e
a c tio n s w ere noted by re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in t h e i r resp o n ses to th e a re a o f
cu rricu lu m (Table 4 3 ). As expected, t h i s a re a f a ile d to
produce a s ig n if ic a n t F r a t i o (T able 44) and, th e re fo r e ,
2 0 0
T A B L E 43
C O M PA R ISO N O F R E G U L A R CUSS T E A C H E R S A N D T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN--M EANS—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—* ' C U R R IC U L U M "
R egular Teachers o f
C lass E x cep tio n al
Level Teachers C h ild ren T o tals
Secondary 31.65 32.18 31.84
Elem entary 31.93 30.38 31.06
T o tals 31.82 30.78 31.30
TABLE 44
COM PARISON OF REGULAR CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"CURRICULUM"
O F
Source o f V a ria tio n
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Type o f Teacher 54.08 1 54.08 .68
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 26.07 1 26.07 .33
I n te r a c tio n 31.26 1 31.26 .39
Between Groups 111.41 3 37.14 .47
W ithin Groups 15,540.59 196 79.29
T o tal 15,652.00 199
2 0 1
th e n u ll h y p o th e sis i s p rese rv e d . There i s no d iffe re n c e
between te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs in t h e i r a t t i t u d e s tow ard cu rricu lu m .
L evels o f in s tr u c tio n (1 2 .2 ). —For a l l in te n ts and
purposes th e mean sc o re s o f elem entary te a c h e rs and second
a ry te a c h e rs a re id e n tic a l in t h e i r re a c tio n s to th e con
c e p t o f cu rricu lu m (Table 4 3 ). The F r a t i o o b tain ed o f
le s s th an 1 in d ic a te s a b s o lu te ly no s ig n if ic a n t v a r ia tio n
between th e two groups (Table 4 4 ). The n u ll h y p o th esis
m ain tain ed by t h i s fin d in g i s th a t th e re i s no d iffe re n c e
in th e a t titu d e s tow ard cu rricu lu m betw een elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
T o tal Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l
(Ten School R elated C oncents)
Types o f te a c h e rs (1 3 .1 ). —When a l l te n a re a s o f
th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l used in t h i s stu d y a r e tak en t o
g e th e r and tr e a te d s t a t i s t i c a l l y as one s c o re , th e re e x is ts
a d iffe re n c e o f 16.28 p o in ts between th e te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs (Table 4 5 ).
This d iffe re n c e proves to be s ig n if ic a n t a t th e .05 p o in t
due to th e F r a t i o o f 4 .8 7 o b tain ed th ro u g h th e a n a ly s is
2 0 2
T A B L E 45
COM PARISON OF REGULAR CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—MEANS--SEMANTIC
DIFFERENTIAL-- " TOTAL”
■ o s s s s a is a s s s s s r a a c s a s s s s s s s B s v a c s ^ a H B S S B a s x a a s B B S s a s B S S S M G S s a s s s s s s s s s s s s c s
R egular Teachers o f
C lass E x cep tio n al
le v e l Teachers C h ild ren T otals
Secondary 287.42 271.18 281.66
Elem entary 276.85 263.00 269.02
T o tals 281.08 264.80 272.94
TABLE 46
COM PARISON OF REGULA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—” TOTAL”
*
E sg M B sa B s s s a s s s s s a s B G s s s s s B B s a & s ^ B a s s s N C s a e s s a s s s s s s n B B s a B S S s s s s s s s c s s s a s a M
Degrees
Sum o f o f Msan F
Source o f V a ria tio n Squares Freedom Square R atio
Type o f Teacher 13,251.94 1 13,251.84 4.87*
Level o f I n s tr u c tio n 6,834.40 1 6,834.40 2.51
I n te ra c tio n 3,001.84 1 3,001.84 1.10
Between Groups 23,088.18 3 7,696.06 2.83
W ithin Groups 533,208.80 196 2,720.45
T o tal 556,296.98
* P < .05
203
o f v a ria n c e (T able 4 6 ). The n u ll h y p o th e sis in t h i s
in s ta n c e becomes u n te n a b le . I t must be concluded, th e r e
fo re , th a t when a l l te n concepts o f th e Sem antic D iffe re n
t i a l a re combined, th e re i s a d iffe re n c e betw een te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs in
t h e i r a t titu d e s tow ard th e s e sch o o l r e la te d a r e a s . Teachers
o f re g u la r classroom s ten d to view th e co n cep ts o f s e l f ,
average s tu d e n t, g if te d s tu d e n t, te a c h e rs , s lo w -le a rn e r,
a d m in is tra to rs , handicapped c h ild , ed u c atio n p ro fe s s io n ,
d is c ip lin e , and cu rricu lu m in a more n e g a tiv e o r le s s
fa v o ra b le manner th a n do te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
Levels o f in s tr u c tio n (1 3 .2 ). —The com bination o f
a l l te n concepts o f th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l in d ic a te s a
d iffe re n c e betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r combined a t titu d e s tow ard th e s e sch o o l
r e la te d a re a s (T able 4 5 ). The d iffe re n c e , however, is n o t
la rg e enough to be co n sid ered s ig n if ic a n t . The F r a t i o
o b tain ed through th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e (Table 4 6 ) is
below th a t re q u ire d f o r th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e . Hie
n u ll h y p o th esis cannot be reaso n ab ly r e je c te d . There is no
d iffe re n c e betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r a t t i tu d e s tow ard a com bination o f te n
204
sch o o l r e la te d concepts as m easured by th e vise o f th e
Semantic D if f e r e n tia l.
Comparison o f S p e c ia liz a tio n s Among Teachers
o f E x cep tio n al C h ild ren
The r e s u lt s o f a one-way a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e were
vised to d eterm ine i f any s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s e x is te d
between th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
and th e way in which th e y responded to th e th ir te e n m easures
o f a t t i t u d e . In each case F r a t i o s were c a lc u la te d . For
each o f th e th ir te e n m easures w ith 5 and 54 degrees o f
freedom , th e F r a t i o f o r th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e is
2.384 o r g r e a te r . Each o f th e th ir te e n m easures i s d i s
cussed s e p a ra te ly . The numbers in p aren th ese s fo llo w in g
each su b se c tio n t i t l e in d ic a te th e number o f th e h y p o th e sis
as o u tlin e d in C hapter I (pages 1 1-18). In a d d itio n to th e
d is c u s s io n o f th e d a ta a l l s t a t i s t i c a l in fo rm atio n is p re
se n ted in ta b u la r form . For each o f th e th ir te e n m easures
o f a t t i t u d e th e re is a ta b le o f th e means o f th e s ix groups
and a s e p a ra te ta b le p re se n tin g th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e
d a ta . In each case th e s e two ta b le s appear on th e same
page fo r ease o f re fe re n c e and g r e a te r c l a r i t y .
Dogmatism (1 .3 )
The s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
showed a v a r ia tio n in mean sc o re s on th e Rokeach Dogmatism
S cale from 115.00 to 132.70 (Table 4 7 ). The ran g e o f in d i
v id u a l sco res was from 68 to 190. When th e d a ta were
te s te d on an a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e an F r a t i o o f le s s th an 1
was o b tain ed (Table 4 8 ). This r a t i o makes i t u n reaso n ab le
to r e j e c t th e n u l l h y p o th e sis. I t must be concluded,
th e re fo r e , th a t among th e s ix groups o f s p e c ia liz a tio n s
o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n no s ig n i f ic a n t d i f f e r
ences e x is t in th e b e l i e f system o f open-m indedness -
closed-m indedness (dogmatism) a s m easured by th e Rokeach
Dogmatism S cale.
A u th o rita ria n ism (2 .3 )
The r e s u l t s o f th e Adorno ”F" S cale show a v a r i
a tio n in means among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n from 73.30 to 98.80 (Table 4 9 ). The
in d iv id u a l sc o re s ranged from a low o f 29 to a h ig h o f 165.
The a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e (Table 50) y ie ld e d an F r a t i o o f
1.423. This f a l l s below th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e r e
q u ire d f o r th e r e je c tio n o f th e n u ll h y p o th e sis. The f in d
in g s in d ic a te th a t among th e s ix groups o f s p e c ia liz a tio n s
206
TA BL E 47
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN--MEANS—
RO K EA C H D O G M A TIC SCALE
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 115.00 27.84 68 - 167
O rth o p ed ic ally
Handicapped 10 121.10 25.41 85 - 153
V is u a lly Handicapped 10 125.10 21.80 91 - 166
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 131.30 25.04 89 - 186
T ra in a b le M entally
R etarded 10 128.90 18.05 93 - 152
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 132.70 32.21 72 - 190
TABLE 48
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN--ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE—
R O K EA CH D O G M A TIC SCALE
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
_______________________ Squares_____ Freedom Square R atio
Between Groups 2,276.352 5 455.27 .706
W ithin Groups 34,830.898 54 645.02
T otal 37,107.250 59
207
TA BLE 49
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—M EA N S—A D O R N O F SCALE
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 80.80 22.36 45 - 117
O rth o p ed ically
Handicapped 10 79.00 23.45 29 - 100
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 73.30 27.04 42 - 128
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 87.40 20.85 63 - 123
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 89.50 13.06 60 - 109
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 98.90 31.74 52 - 165
TABLE 50
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE—
A D O R N O F SCALE
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups
W ithin Groups
3,950.256
29,988.327
5
54
790.051
555.339
1.423
T o ta l 33,938.583 59
208
o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n no s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r
ences e x i s t in th e a re a o f a u th o rita ria n is m as measured by
th e Adorno "F" S cale.
A ttitu d e Toward S e lf (3 .3 )
The Semantic D if f e r e n tia l was used to d eterm ine
a t t i t u d e s tow ard o n e s e lf by each o f th e te a c h e rs in th e
sam ple. A g e n e ra lly p o s itiv e d ir e c tio n was in d ic a te d in
each o f th e mean sc o re s o b ta in ed from th e s ix groups
(Table 5 1 ), w ith means ran g in g from 23.60 to 2 9 .50. The
a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e y ie ld e d an F r a t i o o f .325 which is
f a r below th e .05 p o in t re q u ire d in t h i s stu d y . The n u ll
h y p o th e sis i s te n a b le and th e re fo r e th e co n clu sio n i s th a t
among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
th e re a r e no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s in th e way th e y p e r
c e iv e them selves (as in d ic a te d from t h e i r resp o n ses on th e
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l) .
The Average Student (4 .3 )
The s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
w ere asked to respond to a Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l w ith th e
co n cep t "The Average S tu d e n t." The means o f each group
in d ic a te a g e n e ra lly p o s itiv e a t t i t u d e (Table 5 3 ). The
ran g e o f sc o re s from 12 to 47 was in s u f f ic ie n t, however,
209
T A B L E 51
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN- -M EANS- - SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—” SELF”
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 22.60 4 .9 0 16 - 32
Q rth o p ed ically
Handicapped 10 22.50 8.11 12 - 39
V is u a lly Handicapped 10 25.70 7.14 19 - 40
A u rally Handicapped 10 23.40 9.13 1 5 - 4 2
T ra in a b le M entally
R etarded 10 22.20 5.60 16 - 34
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 22.50 7.17 12 - 37
TABLE 52
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"SELF”
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R a tio
Between Groups 82.646 5 16.529 .325
W ithin Groups 2,7 4 3 .5 3 7 54 50.806
T o ta l 2,826.183 59
2 1 0
T A B L E 53
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CHILDREN- * * M E A N S - - SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TH E A V E R A G E ST U D EN T”
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 23.60 5 .9 1 14 - 32
O rth o p e d ic a lly
Handicapped 10 24.70 8.15 12 - 35
V is u a lly Handicapped 10 29.50 10.537 17 - 47
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 27.30 7.99 1 4 - 4 4
T ra in a b le M entally
R etarded 10 24.70 6.10 15 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 25.40 9.45 15 - 43
TABLE 54
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"THE AV ERA G E STUDENT"
Sim o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups 224.196 5 44.839 .681
W ithin Groups 3,553.404 54 65.804
T o ta l 3,777.600 59
2 1 1
to In d ic a te any s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e s . The F r a t i o o f
.681 makes i t n e c e ssa ry to m a in ta in th e n u ll h y p o th e sis and
conclude th a t among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n , th e re e x is ts no d iffe re n c e in t h e i r a t t i
tu d es tow ard th e av erag e stu d e n t as m easured by t h e i r
resp o n ses on th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l.
The G ifted S tudent (5 .3 )
S im ilar re a c tio n s to th e concept "The G ifted S tu
d e n t" w ere reco rd ed by th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f excep
t io n a l c h ild re n (Table 55). The F r a t i o h e re was a ls o
below 1 upholding th e n u ll h y p o th e sis (Table 5 6 ). Among
th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs p a r tic ip a tin g in
t h i s s e c tio n o f th e stu d y th e re a re no s ig n if ic a n t d i f f e r
ences in t h e i r reco rd ed a t t it u d e s tow ard th e g if te d s tu d e n t.
Teachers (6 .3 )
A somewhat g r e a te r ran g e o f resp o n ses to th e con
c e p t "T eachers" was noted in t h i s s e c tio n o f th e Sem antic
D if f e r e n tia l (Table 5 7 ). The F r a t i o o b tain ed (Table 5 8 ),
alth o u g h la r g e r th a n 1, was below th e p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e
re q u ire d and a g a in th e n u ll h y p o th esis is f u lly su p p o rted .
Among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs of e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
2 1 2
TA BLE 55
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL C H ILD R EN —M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—“T H E GIFTED STU D EN T"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 23.50 6.42 15 - 36
O rth o p e d ic a lly
Handicapped 10 23.10 8.35 12 - 39
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 25.70 7.46 20 - 40
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 27.20 6.11 20 - 38
T ra in a b le M entally
R etarded 10 28.50 7.12 20 - 42
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 24.11 8.81 14 - 40
TABLE 56
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"THE GIFTED STUDENT"
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups 248.401 5 49.680 .899
W ithin Groups 2,984.183 54 55.263
T otal 3,232.583 59
213
T A B L E 57
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CHILDREN--M EANS—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TEA C H ER S"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 23.70 6.83 13 - 32
O rth o p ed ic ally
Handicapped 10 24.00 7.33 13 - 39
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 30.60 11.079 20 - 54
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 25.60 8.45 1 7 - 4 4
T rain ab le M entally
R etarded 10 23.00 6.88 14 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 25.90 10.15 13 - 40
TABLE 58
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS O F VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—nTEACHERS"
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups 364.250 5 72.850 1.001
W ithin Groups 3,929.400 54 72.767
T o tal 4,293.650 59
214
th e re a re no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s in t h e i r a t titu d e s
tow ard te a c h e rs .
The Slow L earner (7 .3 )
I n s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s in th e means o b tain ed
from th e resp o n ses toward "The Slow L earner" (Table 59)
w ere reco rd ed f o r each o f th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs under
c o n s id e ra tio n . The F r a t i o i s a g a in le s s th an 1 (Table 6 0 ),
a ffirm in g th e n u l l h y p o th esis once more. Among th e s ix
groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n th e re a r e no
s ig n i f ic a n t d iffe re n c e s in t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward th e slow
le a r n e r .
Administr a to rs (8 .3 )
The ran g e o f resp o n ses reco rd ed tow ard th e concept
"A d m in istrato rs" i s in d ic a te d in T able 61. The a p p a re n tly
sm all d iffe re n c e s in th e l i s t o f means a r e upheld in th e
F r a t i o o b ta in e d (Table 6 2 ). A gain th e co n clu sio n is th a t
n u l l h y p o th e sis i s m aintained and t h a t as f a r as t h e i r re**
r
corded a t t i t u d e s toward a d m in is tra to rs a r e concerned, th e re
a r e no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s among th e s ix groups o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
215
TA B L E 59
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIONAL CH ILD REN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TH E S L O W L E A R N E R "
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 27.70 8.38 15 - 40
O rth o p ed ic ally
Handicapped 10 2 6.90 7.35 13 - 39
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 28.50 7.84 17 - 40
A u rally Handicapped 10 31.10 8.40 15 - 44
T rain ab le M entally
Retarded 10 28.80 7.48 19 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 28.10 10.22 14 - 40
TABLE 60
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEMANTIC DIFFERENTIAL--"THE SL O W LEARNER"
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups 138.425 5 27.685 .399
W ithin Groups 3,745.759 54 69.366
Total 3,884.183 59
216
TA BL E 61
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILDREN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"ADM INISTRATORS"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 26.40 8.35 14 - 40
O rth o p ed ically
Handicapped 10 23.60 7.63 13 - 40
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 30.00 10.874 19 - 52
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 29.80 9 .1 8 19 - 47
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 28.70 9.99 17 - 47
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 28.00 11.585 14 - 48
TABLE 62
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—“ADMINISTRATORS"
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean
Square
F
R atio
Between Groups 289.152 5 57.830 .617
W ithin Groups 5,064.582 54 93.789
Total 5,353.733 59
217
The Handicapped C hild (9 .3 )
The fin d in g s on th e resp o n ses tow ard th e h a n d i
capped c h ild a re in d ic a te d in T able 63. The a n a ly s is o f
v a ria n c e in Table 64 re v e a ls an F r a t i o le s s th a n 1. This
once more confirm s th e n u l l h y p o th e sis and le a d s to th e
co n clu sio n th a t among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f excep
t i o n a l c h ild re n th e re a r e no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s in
t h e i r a ttitu d e s tow ard th e handicapped c h ild .
The E ducation P ro fessio n (1 0 .3 )
The resp o n ses tow ard th e concept "The E ducation
P ro fessio n " as in d ic a te d in Table 65 re v e a l v ery m inor d i f
fe re n c e s among th e g ro u p s. This i s borne o u t in T able 66
where th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e y ie ld s an F r a t i o le s s
th a n 1 and is su p p o rtiv e o f th e s ta te d n u ll h y p o th e sis:
"There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t titu d e s tow ard th e educa
tio n p ro fe ssio n among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ."
D is c ip lin e (1 1 .3 )
Somewhat h ig h e r means w ere o b tain ed in t h i s a re a
th a n on th e o th e r p a r ts o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l
(Table 6 7 ). This would ap p ear to in d ic a te a s l i g h t l y more
218
T A BL E 63
C O M P A R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILD REN—M EANS--SEM ANTIC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TH E H AND IC A PPED CH ILD"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 25.30 8.64 14 - 40
O rth o p ed ically
Handicapped 10 24.10 8.62 14 - 40
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 27.70 8.77 14 - 40
A u rally Handicapped 10 29.40 7.71 19 - 45
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 26.60 6.90 20 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 26.50 8.30 14 - 40
TABLE 64
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—
"THE HANDICAPPED CHIU)"
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
_______________________ Squares_____ Freedom Square R atio
Between Groups 168.138 5 33.628 .506
W ithin Groups 3,588.445 54 66.453
Total 3,756.583 59
219
TA BLE 65
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S
O F EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILDREN—M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL—"TH E EDUCA TIO N PROFESSION"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 27.30 9.44 11 - 41
O rth o p e d ic ally
Handicapped 10 26.40 10.19 10 - 40
V is u a lly Handicapped 10 25.10 8.45 17 - 40
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 28.50 8.11 20 - 46
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 25.30 9.86 10 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 25.40 9.03 10 - 40
TABLE 66
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE—
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"THE
EDUCATION PROFESSION"
Degrees
Sum o f o f Mean F
Squares_____ Freedom Square R atio
Between Groups 88.816 5 17.763 .208
W ithin Groups 4,6 0 6 .8 3 4 54 85.312
T otal 4,695.650 59
2 2 0
T A B L E 67
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CH ILD R EN —M E A N S—SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL- -"DISC IPLINE"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 32.00 8.38 1 9 - 4 4
O rth o p ed ic a lly
Handicapped 10 27.70 7.97 15 - 40
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 39.30 11.86 29 - 69
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 28.60 8.38 18 - 45
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 30.60 9 .7 1 13 - 48
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 29.60 10.09 15 - 49
TABLE 68
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"DISCIPLINE"
Degrees
Sum o£ o f Mean F
Squares_____ Freedom Square R atio
Between Groups 820.888 5 164.178 1.839
W ithin Groups 4,821.445 54 89.286
T otal 5,642.333 59
2 2 1
n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e toward th e concept o f " D is c ip lin e " th an
tow ard th e o th e r co n cep ts, alth o u g h w ith a l l th e means
below f o r ty th e d ir e c tio n is s t i l l p o s itiv e . G re ate r d i f
fe re n ce s among th e groups were a ls o o b ta in ed , alth o u g h th e
f i n a l F r a t i o (Table 68) i s below th e .05 p o in t of s i g n i f i
cance re q u ire d in th is stu d y . This r a t i o makes i t u n reaso n
a b le to r e j e c t th e n u ll h y p o th esis and le ad s to th e co n clu
s io n th a t among th e s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n th e re a re no d iffe re n c e s in t h e i r a t titu d e s toward
d is c ip lin e .
C urriculum (1 2 .3 )
S lig h tly h ig h e r mean sc o re s were o b ta in ed on th e
concept "C urriculum " (Table 69), alth o u g h n o t a s h ig h as
th o se fo r th e concept " D is c ip lin e ." Again, i t appears th a t
t h i s group o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n seems to be
s l i g h t l y more n e g a tiv e in t h e i r fe e lin g s about cu rricu lu m
th a n tow ard some o th e r concepts used in th e Sem antic D if
f e r e n t i a l . The d iffe re n c e s among th e groups, however, a re
extrem ely sm a ll as is noted in th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e
(Table 70) where an F r a t i o le s s th a n 1 was o b ta in e d . The
n u ll h y p o th e sis is te n a b le h ere as b e fo re and must b e r e
s ta te d : "There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t t it u d e s toward
2 2 2
T A B L E 69
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EXCEPTIO NAL CHILDREN-- M E A N S- - SE M A N T IC
DIFFERENTIAL--"CURRICULUM"
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 31.80 8.65 1 5 - 4 4
O rth o p ed ic ally
Handicapped 10 28.90 9.56 12 - 40
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 33.20 8.95 17 - 46
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 30.50 7.25 1 6 - 4 4
T ra in a b le M entally
R etarded 10 28.00 8.47 18 - 40
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 33.50 11.06 14 - 51
TABLE 70
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"CURRICULUM"
Sum o f
Squares
Degrees
o f
Freedom
Mean F
Square R atio
Between Groups 258.344 5 51.669 .630
W ithin Groups 4,429.056 54 82.020
T otal 4,687.400 59
223
cu rricu lu m among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
Ten School R elated Concepts (1 3 .3 )
A s t a t i s t i c a l a n a ly s is o f a l l te n concepts in th e
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l in stru m en t was perform ed. The sc o re s
on a l l o f th e concepts (S e lf, Average S tu d en ts, G ifted
S tu d en ts, T eachers, Slow L earner, A d m in istra to rs, Handi
capped C hild, E ducation P ro fessio n , D is c ip lin e , and Cur
ricu lu m ) were contained and t h e i r means a r e re p o rte d in
Table 71. A lthough th e range o f in d iv id u a l sc o re s was
s iz a b le , th e a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e (Table 72) y ie ld e d an
F r a t i o le s s th an 1 in d ic a tin g stro n g su p p o rt f o r th e n u ll
h y p o th e sis: "There is no d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i t u d e s toward
a com bination o f te n s c h o o l-re la te d concepts as measured
by th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l among th e d i f f e r e n t s p e c i a l i
z a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ."
Comparison o f In d iv id u a l Means
The com plete s e t o f an aly ses o f v a ria n c e in d ic a te d
th a t no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s e x is te d betw een any o f th e
means d e riv e d . I t was, th e re fo re , u n n ecessary to perform
th e Duncan's New H ilt ip le Range t e s t in o rd e r to determ ine
224
TA BLE 71
C O M PA R ISO N O F SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G T E A C H E R S O F
EX C EPTIO NA L CHILDREN- -M EA N S - -SEM ANTIC
DIFFERENTIAL—"T O T A L ”
S p e c ia liz a tio n Number Mean S.D. Range
Speech Handicapped 10 264.90 63.95 149 - 358
O rth o p ed ic a lly
Handicapped 10 247.10 66.63 135 - 337
V isu a lly Handicapped 10 297.90 69.03 206 - 400
A u ra lly Handicapped 10 281.40 71.32 186 - 438
T ra in ab le M entally
R etarded 10 266.70 53.54 182 - 394
Educable M entally
R etarded 10 268.90 80.62 136 - 409
TABLE 72
COM PARISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS O F
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE-
SEM ANTIC DIFFERENTIAL—"TOTAL”
Degrees
Stm o f o f Mean F
Squares_____ Freedom Square R atio
Between Groups 13,909*763 5 2,781.953 .606
W ithin Groups 247,840.171 54 4,589.633
T otal 261,749.933 59
225
how th e means d if f e r e d . Computer d e riv e d t v a lu e s in d ic a te
a la ck o f s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e between any two means on
any o f th e t h i r t e e n m easures o f a t t i t u d e .
Summary
This c h a p te r p rese n ted th e fin d in g s o f th e i n v e s t i
g a tio n as p re v io u sly d e sc rib e d in C hapter 1 1 1 . The i n i t i a l
s e c tio n d e a lt w ith th e d a ta drawn from th e P erso n al Data
s e c tio n o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey. I t was found th a t
th e predom inant number o f te a c h e rs were women. Most o f th e
sam ple were b o m in C a lifo rn ia and w ere g rad u ated from a
s t a t e c o lle g e w ith th e m a jo rity re c e iv in g a b a c h e lo r's
d eg ree as t h e i r h ig h e s t academ ic t i t l e . Very few o f th e
group re c e iv e d f in a n c ia l a s s is ta n c e in t h e i r ed u c atio n .
The d is t r ib u t io n o f c r e d e n tia ls h eld by th e sam ple i n d i
c a te d th a t most w ere p o sse sso rs o f th e b a s ic te a c h in g c r e
d e n t ia l s , w ith te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n h o ld in g th e
m a jo rity o f th e s p e c ia liz e d te ach in g c r e d e n tia ls . The
C a lifo rn ia Teaching A sso c ia tio n claim ed most o f th e group
a s members, alth o u g h t h i r t y - e i g h t d if f e r e n t o rg a n iz a tio n s
w ere re p re s e n te d . The group averaged about fo u r to s ix
y ears ex p erien ce on t h e i r c u rre n t assignm ent, and te n to
226
elev en y ears in t h e i r t o t a l te ach in g background.
In th e second s e c tio n o f th e c h a p te r th e fin d in g s
r e la te d to th e com parison o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs were d isc u sse d Each o f th e
t h ir te e n m easures o f a t t i t u d e was p re se n te d s e p a ra te ly
in c lu d in g th e means o f each group and th e r e s u l t s o f th e
a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e . When th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs were
compared w ith th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n i t was
found th a t th ey d if fe r e d s ig n i f ic a n t ly on only th re e o f
th e m easures o f a t t i t u d e : Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—The Slow
L earner; Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—Handicapped C h ild ; and th e
T o tal Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l. In each c a se th e re g u la r
c la s s te a c h e rs h e ld th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e . On th e
o th e r te n m easures o f a t t i t u d e th e n u l l h y p o th esis was
ac c e p ted . A sum m arization o f th e s e fin d in g s i s g iv en in
Table 73.
When elem entary te a c h e rs were compared to secondary
te a c h e rs th ey w ere found to d i f f e r on th r e e a r e a s : Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l—Average S tudent; Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—
Handicapped C h ild ; and Semantic D if f e r e n tia l—Slow L earner.
In each case th e secondary te a c h e rs showed th e more nega
tiv e a t t i t u d e . On th e o th e r te n m easures o f a t t i t u d e
227
TABLE 73
COM PA RISO N OF REG U LA R CLASS TEACHERS A N D TEACHERS
OF EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS
H ypothesis
Code A ttitu d e Measure
F
R atio P
1.1
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale 1.51
a .
2.1 Adorno "F" S cale 2.11
-
3 .1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Myself 1.19 -
4 .1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Average Student 1.12 -
5 .1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: G ifted S tudent .58
m
6 .1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Teachers 1.49 -
7.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Slow L earner 13.65 .01
8.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: A d m in istrato rs 1.42 -
9 .1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Handicapped 13.95 .01
10.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Education P ro fessio n 2.41
-
11.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: D isc ip lin e 2.13 -
12.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: C urriculum .68 -
13.1 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: T o tal 4.87 .05
228
th e n u ll h y p o th e sis was found te n a b le . These fin d in g s a re
summarized in Table 74.
The l a s t s e c tio n o f th e c h a p te r d isc u sse d th e f in d
ings re g a rd in g th e com parisons o f th e s ix v a r i e t i e s o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . I t was found th a t th e s e
s ix s p e c ia liz a tio n s were extrem ely homogeneous and showed
no s ig n i f ic a n t d iffe re n c e s on any o f th e t h i r t e e n m easures
o f a t t i t u d e . Hie n u ll h y p o th e sis was acce p ted in each c a se .
The summary o f th e s e d a ta i s g iv en in T able 75.
229
TABLE 74
COM PARISON OF ELEM EN TA RY TEACHERS A N D SEC O N D A R Y TEACHERS—
S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS
i>othesis
Code A ttitu d e Measure
F
R atio P
1.2 Rokeach Dogmatism S cale .55 -
2 .2 Adorno "F" S cale .74 -
3 .2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: M yself .01
-
4 .2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Average S tudent 5.71 .05
5 .2 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: G ifte d S tudent .004 -
6 .2 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: Teachers 2.14 -
7.2 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: Slow L earner 4.44 .05
8.2 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: A d m in istrato rs 1.34
« •
9 .2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Handicapped 4.08 .05
10.2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: E ducation P ro fe ssio n 1.85 -
11.2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: D is c ip lin e .42 -
12.2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: C urriculum .33 -
13.2 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: T o tal 2.51
m
230
TABLE 75
COM PA RISON OF SPECIALIZATIONS A M O N G TEACHERS OF
EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN—S U M M A R Y OF FINDINGS
H ypothesis F
Code A ttitu d e Measure R atio
1.3
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale .706
-
2 .3 Adorno "]P" S cale 1.423
•
3.3 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: Ity self .325
« ■
4.3 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: Average S tudent .681 -
5.3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: G ifte d S tudent .899
•
6.3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Teachers 1.001 -
7.3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Slow L earners .399
m
8.3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: A d m in istrato rs .617
m
9 .3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: Handicapped .506
m
10.3 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: E ducation P ro fe ssio n .208 -
11.3 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: D is c ip lin e 1.839
-
12.3 Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l: Curriculum .630
-
13.3 Semantic D if f e r e n tia l: T o tal .606
« ■
C H A PT E R V
FINDINGS, SUM M A RY , CONCLUSIONS,
AND RECOMMENDATIONS
F in d in g s
P erso n al Data
I t has long been an accep ted f a c t th a t fem ales p lay
a predom inant r o le in th e e d u c a tio n o f c h ild re n in th e
U nited S ta te s . This is a p p a re n tly tr u e among e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n a s w e ll as c h ild re n a tte n d in g re g u la r c la s s e s . In
each th e fin d in g s in t h i s stu d y in d ic a te d th a t ap proxim ately
80 p er ce n t o f th e te a c h e rs in our p u b lic schools a re women.
And s in c e th e la r g e s t number o f te a c h e rs a re a t th e e l e
m entary le v e l, th e concept th a t th e elem entary sc h o o l i s a
"fem inine i n s t it u t i o n " is u pheld.
The r o le o f s t a t e i n s t i t u t i o n s o f h ig h e r ed u catio n
i s a ls o c l e a r in th e fin d in g s o f t h is stu d y . A pproxim ately
tw o -th ird s o f th e sample o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs rec e iv ed t h e i r ed u c atio n a t
231
232
e ith e r a s t a t e u n iv e rs ity o r s t a t e c o lle g e . Although many
o f th e s e s t a t e in s t it u t i o n s o f f e r a d iv e r s if ie d program o f
ed u catio n , t h e i r fu n c tio n as a " te a c h e rs ' c o lle g e " is s t i l l
h ig h ly i n f l u e n t i a l in th e e d u c a tio n a l f i e l d . The te a c h e rs '
p re fe re n c e fo r s t a t e i n s t itu ti o n s over p r iv a te in s t itu ti o n s
may a ls o g iv e some in d ic a tio n o f th e g e n e ra l socioeconom ic
background o f th is group o f e d u c a to rs, alth o u g h th is would
be an im plied f a c t and is n o t d i r e c t l y o b serv ab le from th e
d a ta g ath ered in t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
Ohce com pleting t h e i r i n i t i a l ed u catio n , th e la r g e s t
number o f te a c h e rs in d ic a te d th a t th ey d id n o t seek h ig h e r
e d u c a tio n a l d e g re e s. S lig h tly more th a n a q u a rte r o f th e
group w ere h o ld e rs o f advanced degrees (degrees beyond th e
b a c h e lo r's le v e l) . This was tr u e in both th e group o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs .
I t m ight be expected th a t th e la r g e s t number o f te a c h e rs
p o ssessin g advanced degrees would be th o se engaged in
te ach in g a t th e secondary le v e l. Up u n t i l re c e n tly th e
a tta in m e n t o f a secondary te a c h in g c r e d e n tia l re q u ire d th e
e q u iv a le n t o f a m a s te r's d eg ree. Since 40 p er c e n t o f th e
group o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs a re a t th e secondary le v e l,
and s in c e o n ly 24 p er c e n t o f t h is group in d ic a te d th e
233
p o sse ssio n o f a degree beyond th e b a c h e lo r’s le v e l, i t is
ap p aren t th a t th e s ta te d assum ption is n o t su p p o rted by th e
ev idence. The la r g e r p ro p o rtio n o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n h o ld in g advanced degrees (in c lu d in g th r e e doc
t o r a t e s ) may be due to th e e x tra e d u c a tio n a l req u irem en ts
needed to a t t a i n many o f th e s p e c ia l te a c h in g c r e d e n tia ls ,
alth o u g h i t may a ls o be in d ic a tiv e o f an in c re a se d d e s ire
to o b ta in f u r th e r ed u c atio n . The mean number o f y ears
in d ic a te d as t o t a l ex p erien ce in te ac h in g was approxim ately
te n . This in d ic a te s th a t most o f th e group had s u f f i c ie n t
tim e to o b ta in advanced d eg rees, b u t th a t f o r one reaso n o r
a n o th e r, o ver 70 p er c e n t d id n o t do so .
In v e s tig a to rs such as Rich (119) and Reynolds
(1 1 8 :1 -5 ) have in d ic a te d th e g re a t need fo r r e c r u itin g
g r e a te r numbers o f te a c h e rs in to th e f i e l d o f s p e c ia l edu
c a tio n . As p a r t o f th e inducem ents o ffe re d to p ro sp e c tiv e
c a n d id a te s has been th e p ro sp ect o f f in a n c ia l a s s is ta n c e in
th e form o f e d u c a tio n a l g ra n ts . The e f f e c ts o f t h i s p ro
gram a r e somewhat q u e stio n a b le in lig h t o f th e in fo rm atio n
r e la te d by th e sam ple o f te a c h e rs in t h i s stu d y . There
appeared to be v ery l i t t l e d iffe re n c e betw een re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs and te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in th e number
234
th a t have been f in a n c ia lly a s s is te d in t h e i r ed u catio n
through th e medium o f some ty p e o f g ra n t. A pproxim ately
o n e -q u a rte r o f both groups had re c e iv e d a g ra n t o f some
form, w ith th e v a s t m a jo rity a p p a re n tly fin a n c in g t h e i r
ed u c atio n through o th e r means.
The d is tr ib u t io n o f c r e d e n tia ls h eld by th e sample
o f te a c h e rs i s r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f th e d is t r ib u t io n o f
te a c h e r s p e c ia liz a tio n s . This i s r e f le c te d in th e la rg e r
number o f elem entary te ach in g c r e d e n tia ls , and th e la rg e
number o f s p e c ia liz e d c r e d e n tia ls among th e te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . Both th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and
th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n a p p a re n tly eschew th e
a tta in m e n t o f a d m in is tra tiv e c r e d e n tia ls .
W hile both groups o f te a c h e rs in d ic a te d membership
in th e s t a t e and n a tio n a l te a c h e rs a s s o c ia tio n s , th e d i s
t r ib u ti o n o f te a c h e rs among th e o th e r o rg a n iz a tio n s r e p r e
sen ted was re p re s e n ta tiv e o f th e te a c h e r s p e c ia liz a tio n s
in th e sam ple. This appeared to in d ic a te th a t alth o u g h
s p e c ia liz e d groups o f te a c h e rs have some s p e c ia liz e d i n t e r
e s t s , a l l a r e involved in th e g e n e ra l f i e l d o f te a c h in g and
have an id e n tif ic a tio n w ith th e broad a re a o f te a c h in g -in -
g e n e ra l.
235
Both th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and th e te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in d ic a te d approxim ately te n y ea rs o f
t o t a l ex p erien ce in th e f i e l d o f ed u c atio n . The te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , however, in d ic a te d approxim ately
two y ears le s s e x p erien ce on t h e i r c u rre n t assig n m en t. The
reaso n f o r t h i s d if fe r e n c e i s n o t ap p a re n t in th e a v a ila b le
d a ta , b u t m ight be in d ic a tiv e o f a g r e a te r number o f changes
in te a c h in g assignm ents among th e te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
The co m p ila tio n o f d a ta g ath ered from th e P ersonal
Data s e c tio n o f th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey in d ic a te s v ery
l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . As f a r a s t h e i r resp o n ses
to th e item s in t h i s s e c tio n o f th e Survey a re concerned
b o th groups in d ic a te s im ila r e d u c a tio n a l and p e rso n a l back**
grounds. This would appear to su p p o rt th e c o n te n tio n o f
Legant (83) who m a in ta in s th a t re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n a re a c tu a lly p a r t o f one
la rg e p o p u la tio n .
Comparison o f T eachers o f Excep tio n a l
C h ild ren and R egular C lass Teachers
On th e t h i r t e e n d if f e r e n t m easures o f a t t i t u d e used
in t h i s stu d y , te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n d if fe re d
236
from re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs on only th re e a re a s . This
g e n e ra l conform ity between th e two groups appears to sup
p o rt th e fin d in g s o f Legant (83) who In d ic a te d th a t th e two
groups a c tu a lly a r e p a rt o f one la rg e p o p u latio n co n tain in g
an o v erlap p in g o f th o se v a r ia b le s p o s tu la te d as being
se p a ra b le .
The th r e e a re a s o f d if fe re n c e , however, d e tr a c t
somewhat from t h i s co n c lu sio n . The two groups were shown
to d i f f e r in t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e s toward th e slow
le a rn e r and th e handicapped c h ild , w ith a s ig n ific a n c e
le v e l beyond .0 1 . When a l l te n a re a s o f th e Sem antic D if
f e r e n t i a l were combined, th e two groups d if fe re d s i g n i f i
c a n tly a t th e .05 p o in t o f s ig n ific a n c e . This would appear
to in d ic a te th a t w ith re s p e c t to th e th re e a re a s m entioned,
th e two groups a r e n o t p a r t o f one la rg e p o p u la tio n .
The concepts o f th e slow le a rn e r and th e h a n d i
capped c h ild a r e e s p e c ia lly in te r e s tin g . One f a c to r o f
i n t e r e s t i s th e extrem ely h ig h F r a t i o s o b tain ed fo r th e s e
f a c t o r s —b o th in excess o f .0 1 . The o th e r in te r e s tin g
f a c to r i s th a t o f a l l te n co n cep ts on th e Semantic D iffe r
e n t i a l , th e s e w ere th e only two th a t r e la te d to c h ild re n
th a t w ere " d if f e r e n t" in some re s p e c t from t h e i r c la ssm a te s.
I t i s p o s s ib le th a t th e g if te d c h ild could be in clu d ed in
t h i s " d if f e r e n t" ca teg o ry , b u t th e two groups were extrem ely
c lo s e in t h e i r exp ressed a t t i t u d e s tow ard th is ty p e o f s t u
d ent . I t becomes ap p a re n t th a t th e two groups o f te a c h e rs
d i f f e r m ost s ig n if ic a n tly in t h e i r expressed a t titu d e s
tow ard sch o o l r e la te d s u b je c ts when co n fro n ted w ith such
concepts th a t d e a l w ith c h ild re n who a re u s u a lly co n sid ered
" d i f f i c u l t " to handle o r ed u cate. The more n e g a tiv e a t t i
tu d es in b o th cases a r e h e ld by th e re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs .
I t i s e v id e n t th a t te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n a re
extrem ely more a c c e p tin g o f th e c h ild who p o ssesses a p h y si
c a l o r m en tal handicap. This may be due to d if f e r in g ex
p e rie n c e s w ith such c h ild re n , o r d if f e r in g p e rs o n a lity
v a r ia b le s among th e two groups o f te a c h e rs . F ine (39:429-
430), f o r example, found th a t th e te a c h e r o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n p u t more s tr e s s on p e rso n a l and s o c ia l adjustm ent
th an d id re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs and th a t th e s p e c ia l c la s s
te a c h e rs were le s s demanding on th e lo w -a b ility c h ild to
" tr y h a r d e r ."
The above would appear to imply th a t te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n have some o f th e a t titu d e s t h a t would
norm ally be expected o f them. T h eir more p o s itiv e fe e lin g s
238
tow ard th e handicapped and slo w -le a rn in g c h ild would ten d
to confirm th e fin d in g s o f George (43) who in d ic a te d th a t
th e s p e c ia l c la s s te a c h e r was to le r a n t, f rie n d ly , warm,
sy m p ath etic, o p tim is tic , e p a th e tic , po ssessed o f a high
m oral purpose and o th e r-p e rso n co n scio u sn ess, and p a tie n t.
A lthough t h i s in v e s tig a tio n d id n o t s p e c if ic a lly examine
th e a re a s m entioned, i t observed o th e r f a c to r s . From th e
d a ta i t cannot be concluded th a t te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n p o ssess le s s dogm atic o r a u th o r ita r ia n f e e lin g s ,
o r have more p o s itiv e fe e lin g s tow ard a v a r ie ty o f sch o o l
r e la te d to p ic s th a n do te a c h e rs o f r e g u la r classroom s.
This would ap p ear to be somewhat a t v a ria n c e w ith th e con
ce p t t h a t te a c h e rs of e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n t r u ly f u l f i l l
th e "expectancy" th a t George (43) found. Although more
p o s itiv e in t h e i r expressed f e e lin g s tow ard th e slow
le a rn e r and handicapped c h ild , o u r stu d y d id n o t fin d th e
te a c h e r o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n le s s closed-m inded th an th e
te a c h e r o f re g u la r classroom s o r having le s s tendency to
crav e o r demand obedience o r su b o rd in a tio n .
I t a p p e a rs, however, th a t b o th groups o f te a c h e rs
ten d to b e s l i g h t l y le s s dogm atic and a u th o r ita r ia n th an
a re th e groups used f o r th e s ta n d a rd iz a tio n o f both th e
239
Rokeach Dogmatism S cale and th e Adorno "F" S cale (see
Table 3, page 109, and T able 4, page 143). In a l l cases
th e means o f b o th th e group o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs were low er th an any o f
th e norm ative groups.
On th e te n concepts o f th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l
p rese n te d to b o th groups o f te a c h e rs , th e a re a s o f th e slow
le a rn e r and th e handicapped c h ild were th e only ones show*
ing s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e s . When a l l te n concepts were
combined in to one sc o re , however, and th e n tr e a te d s t a
t i s t i c a l l y , th e re d id appear to be a d iffe re n c e s ig n if ic a n t
a t th e .05 p o in t. Here a g a in , th e te a c h e rs o f re g u la r
classroom s h eld th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e s . Nine o f th e
concepts a re d e f in it e ly s c h o o l-re la te d (only ex c ep tio n is
“M y S elf")* One co n clu sio n th a t can be drawn h ere is th a t
w h ile n o t d if f e r in g s p e c if ic a lly on a number o f sch o o l
r e la te d s u b je c ts , th e re i s a g e n e ra lly more n e g a tiv e a t t i
tu d e on th e p a r t o f re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs tow ard th e
e n t ir e broad concept o f "e d u c a tio n "—th a t th e re g u la r c la s s
te a c h e rs f e e l le s s p o s itiv e ly tow ard t h e i r p ro fe s s io n th an
do te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . On a l l b u t one o f th e
concepts ("The G ifted S tu d en t") th e te a c h e rs o f re g u la r
240
classroom s showed mean sco res more n e g a tiv e ly o rie n te d th an
d id te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . On th e o th e r hand,
i t m ight be argued th a t th e s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e found on
th e " t o t a l " Semantic D if f e r e n tia l was due to th e in flu e n c e
o f th e h ig h ly s ig n if ic a n t v a ria n c e found on only two o f th e
te n co n cep ts, and th a t except f o r th e s e two a re a s no r e a l
d iffe re n c e e x i s ts . F u rth e r t e s tin g o f a s t a t i s t i c a l n a tu re
would be needed to determ ine th e a c c e p ta b ility o f t h i s
l a t t e r sta te m e n t.
Comparison o f Elem entary T eachers and
Secondary Teachers
When th e sample o f two hundred te a c h e rs was d iv id e d
in to elem en tary and secondary le v e l te a c h e rs , th e two
groups th u s formed were found to d i f f e r on th re e o f th e
t h ir t e e n m easures o f a t t i t u d e used in t h i s stu d y . A ll th r e e
o f th e s e a re a s were concepts used in th e Semantic D iffe re n
t i a l .
Of th e te n concepts employed in th e Semantic D if
f e r e n t i a l , fo u r d e a lt d ir e c tly w ith s tu d e n ts : The Average
S tu d en t, The G ifted S tudent, The Slow L earner, and The
Handicapped C h ild . On only one o f th e s e fo u r concepts was
no d if fe re n c e noted between elem en tary and secondary
241
te a c h e rs : The G ifte d C h ild . Oh a l l th e o th e r th r e e con
c e p ts d e a lin g w ith c h ild re n , th e secondary te a c h e rs in d i
c a te d a more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e th an d id th e elem entary
te a c h e rs .
These fin d in g s appear to ag ree w ith a number o f
o th e r s tu d ie s th a t have p o in ted out some o f th e d iffe re n c e s
between th e a t ti t u d e s and c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f elem entary
and secondary te a c h e rs . More s p e c if ic a lly a r e th e s tu d ie s
r e f le c tin g d iffe re n c e s in a ttitu d e s tow ard s tu d e n ts .
S to u ffe r (142:271-285) found th a t th e secondary te a c h e r is
le s s involved w ith th e s tu d e n t's in d iv id u a l and unique
problem s. P h illip s (111:2528) found th a t elem entary
te a c h e rs have more fa v o ra b le a t titu d e s tow ard t h e i r s t u
d en ts th an do secondary te a c h e rs and t h i s was a ls o th e con
c lu sio n o f Ryan (125).
One o f th e co n clu sio n s th a t can be drawn from th e
above m entioned s tu d ie s as w e ll a s th e r e s u l t s o f t h i s
in v e s tig a tio n i s t h a t th e elem entary te a c h e r i s a s u p e rio r
te a c h e r and th a t th e secondary te a c h e r la c k s some o f th e
im portant q u a l it i e s needed to do an e f f e c tiv e jo b in th e
p ro fe s s io n . This in v e s tig a to r , however, te n d s to a g ree
w ith th e sta tem en t made by S to u ffe r (141:271-285) th a t
242
th e secondary sch o o l does n o t o r d in a r ily p ro v id e th e
te a c h e r w ith as prolonged an exposure to any one c h ild as
does th e elem entary sch o o l and co n seq u en tly th e s tu d e n t's
problem s, w h ile r e a l and f e l t , lo s e t h e i r s ig n ific a n c e as
In d iv id u a l and unique problem s.
The i n a b i l i t y o f th e Dogmatism S cale o r th e "F"
S cale to d is tin g u is h d iffe re n c e s between grade le v e ls o f
te a c h e rs o r te a c h in g assignm ents o f te a c h e rs i s probably
due to th e b ro ad er a re a s o f a t t i t u d e tapped by th e se two
m easures as compared w ith th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l. The
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l asked fo r resp o n ses to one s p e c if ic
concept, w hereas b o th th e "F" S cale and Dogmatism S cale
re q u ire d resp o n ses to a number o f d if f e r e n t a re a s which
were th e n combined to form one o v e r - a ll a t t i t u d e " s c o re ."
That th e "F" S cale and th e Dogmatism S cale a r e d ir e c tly
r e la te d to a te a c h e r 's classroom b eh av io r toward stu d e n ts
has been re p o rte d by in v e s tig a to rs such as McGee (91:50).
I t can only be concluded, th e re fo re , th a t th e b eh av io r
toward s tu d e n ts in g e n e ra l i s n o t s ig n i f ic a n tly d if f e r e n t
between groups o f te a c h e rs re g a rd le s s o f grade le v e l ta u g h t
o r s p e c if ic te ac h in g assig n m en ts. S p e c ific a t titu d e s
toward c e r ta in ty p es o f s tu d e n ts , however, do d i f f e r as
243
was shown on p a r ts o f th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l.
V ariance Among Teachers o f
E x cep tio n al C h ildren
When s ix groups o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
re p re s e n tin g s ix s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n were compared w ith one a n o th e r on th e th ir te e n
m easures o f a t t i t u d e used in t h i s stu d y , i t was found th a t
th e re w ere no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s among th e groups on
any o f th e m easures. A ll th e F r a t i o s o b ta in ed w ere ex
trem ely sm all, and only th re e o f th e th ir te e n exceeded 1.
T his g iv e s every in d ic a tio n th a t th e te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n tend to be an extrem ely homogeneous group
in t h e i r te n d en c ies tow ard dogmatism and a u th o rita ria n is m ,
and t h e i r a t titu d e s tow ard a number o f s c h o o l-re la te d
to p ic s a s w e ll as t h e i r expressed a t t i t u d e s tow ard them
s e lv e s .
Although each o f th e s ix groups has p a r tic ip a te d in
d if f e r e n t tr a in in g , a re a s o f in s tr u c tio n , and e x p e r ie n tia l
background, th e hom ogeneity found in t h e i r a t t i t u d i n a l
resp o n ses is a s George (43) found, " tr u ly a s to n is h in g ."
The same ty p e o f hom ogeneity among te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n was in d ic a te d by M attson (9 3 ). D esp ite t h e i r
244
somewhat d if f e r in g backgrounds, th e v ary in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s
o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n appear to be drawn from
th e same p o p u la tio n .
S um m ary
The Problem
The ed u catio n o f th e e x c e p tio n a l c h ild in th e Ameri
can p u b lic school i s becoming an ev er g r e a te r e n te r p ris e .
More and more c h ild re n a r e being id e n tif ie d a s belonging to
one o r more c a te g o rie s o f e x c e p tio n a lity . This i s p a r
t i a l l y due to th e in c re a s in g p o p u la tio n o f s tu d e n ts w ith in
our p u b lic sch o o ls and a ls o to b e t t e r methods o f d ia g n o sis
as w e ll as a g r e a te r u n d erstan d in g o f d iffe re n c e s among
sch o o l-ag e y o u n g ste rs. V arious a s p e c ts o f our s o c ie ty have
a ls o in c re a se d th e number o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in our
sc h o o ls—g r e a te r com pulsory a tte n d a n c e law s, movement to
th e c i t y , th e g r e a te r em phasis on ed u c atio n and rem aining
in sch o o l, e tc . With th e growth o f programs f o r th e excep
t io n a l c h ild has come th e concom itant growth in th e numbers
o f p ro fe s s io n a l p erso n n el employed in th e s e program s. The
growth in p erso n n e l, however, has n o t alw ays k ep t pace
w ith th e needs and has le d to problem s in tr a in in g and
245
re c ru itm e n t o f q u a lif ie d te a c h e rs and o th e r s p e c i a li s t s .
This i s so in s p it e o f stim u la n ts such a s f e d e r a l fellow**
sh ip s and tr a in e e s h ip s in th e f i e l d o f s p e c ia l ed u catio n .
R art o f th e problem has a r is e n in th e la ck o f accep ted
sta n d ard s re g a rd in g th e s p e c if ic com petencies re q u ire d of
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n as w e ll as lack o f con
tin u in g sta n d a rd s in th e a c c r e d ita tio n o f th e s e te a c h e rs .
A ll sig n s seem to p o in t to a g r e a te r need fo r f u r th e r in
v e s tig a tio n s in to some o f th e c h a r a c te r i s tic s o f th e
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n as w e ll a s te a c h e rs in
re g u la r classro o m s, in c lu d in g modes o f b eh a v io r and a t t i
tu d es .
Numerous s tu d ie s o f te a c h e rs ' a t t i t u d e s have in d i
c a te d t h e i r im portance in d eterm in in g e f f e c t iv e te ach in g
b e h a v io r. Dandes (30) and Kramer (78) showed th e im por
ta n c e o f th e a re a s o f dogmatism and a u th o rita ria n is m in th e
b eh av io r and m en tal h e a lth o f th e te a c h e r. O ther a t t i -
tu d in a l v a r ia b le s w ere in v e s tig a te d by Wickman (154),
S to u ffe r (141:271-285; 142:358-362), H unter (6 0 :3 -1 1 ), Horn
(59:118-125), L indgren (85 :8 0 -8 5 ), and Ryan (125). Jones
(67), Khax (77), M eisgeier (95:229-235), George (43), and
M attson (93) c o n c e n tra te d on th e a t t i t u d e s and o th e r
246
p e r s o n a lity v a ria b le s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
The purpose o f t h i s stu d y was to id e n tif y c r i t i c a l
a re a s o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r ta in a t t i t u d i n a l v a r ia b le s ( in
clu d in g dogmatism and a u th o rita ria n is m ) among te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r c la s s te a c h e rs in s e le c te d
school d i s t r i c t s in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia . To determ ine
i f grade le v e l in flu e n c e d a t titu d e s th e stu d y a ls o u n d er
took to id e n tif y c r i t i c a l a re a s o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r ta in
a t t i t u d i n a l v a r ia b le s among te a c h e rs o f elem entary and
secondary grade le v e ls . F in a lly , t h i s stu d y was conducted
to id e n tif y c r i t i c a l a re a s o f d iffe re n c e s in c e r t a i n a t t i
tu d in a l v a ria b le s among s ix d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n in s e le c te d sch o o l d i s
t r i c t s in th e S ta te o f C a lifo rn ia . These s ix s p e c ia liz a
tio n s inclu d ed th e fo llo w in g : (1) a u r a lly handicapped;
(2) educable m e n tally re ta rd e d ; (3) o rth o p e d ic a lly h a n d i
capped; (4) speech handicapped; (5) tr a in a b le m e n tally
re ta rd e d ; and (6) v is u a lly handicapped.
Method
A Teacher A ttitu d e Survey was c re a te d which con
ta in e d th e fo llo w in g s e c tio n s (see Appendix A ): (1) Per
so n a l Data Blank; (2) Combined Rokeach Dogmatism S cale and
247
Adorno "F" (a u th o rita ria n is m ) S cale c o n s is tin g o£ s ix ty -
n in e item s; and (3) te n concepts o f th e Semantic D iffe re n
t i a l .
The P erso n al Data s e c tio n asked s u b je c ts to in d ic a te
c e r ta in a s p e c ts o f t h e i r p e rso n a l and p ro fe s s io n a l back
ground such a s ag e, te ach in g assignm ent, c r e d e n tia ls h eld ,
y ears o f ex p e rien ce , degrees earn ed , c o lle g e a tte n d e d , and
p ro fe s s io n a l o rg a n iz a tio n s in w hich th e y h eld membership.
The Rokeach Dogmatism S cale was d esigned by i t s
a u th o r to m easure th e b e l i e f system closed-m indedness -
open-m indedness. The Adorno "F" S cale has evolved to be
used a s a m easure o f th e a u th o r ita r ia n in d iv id u a l. Both o f
th e se s c a le s w ere combined in p a rt I I o f th e Teacher A t t i
tude Survey in to a s in g le q u e s tio n n a ire o r o p in io n n a ire o f
s ix ty -n in e ite m s. Hie resp o n d en ts were asked to read each
item and in d ic a te t h e i r agreem ent o r la c k o f agreem ent
acco rd in g to a g iv en s ix -p o in t s c a le .
The Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l c o n s is te d o f te n co n cep ts:
m yself, th e av erag e s tu d e n t, th e g if te d s tu d e n t, te a c h e rs ,
th e slow le a r n e r , a d m in is tra to rs , th e handicapped c h ild ,
th e ed u c atio n p ro fe s s io n , d is c ip lin e , and cu rricu lu m .
Respondents re a c te d to each o f th e co n cep ts by p la c in g
248
a mark on one o f seven spaces between te n s e ts o f b ip o la r
a d je c tiv e s . The te n s e ts o f a d je c tiv e s w ere: good-bad,
t a s t y - d i s t a s t e f u l , f a i r - u n f a i r , v a lu a b le -w o rth le s s ,
b e a u tifu l-u g ly , p le a s a n t-u n p le a s a n t, s w e e t- b itte r , h o n est-
d ish o n e st, happy-sad, and n ic e -a w fu l.
Teachers s e le c te d f o r th e stu d y in clu d ed e n t ir e
f a c u ltie s o f sch o o ls housing s p e c ia l e d u catio n program s.
Both te a c h e rs o f re g u la r classroom s and te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n were in v o lv ed . The exam iner met w ith th e
e n tir e fa c u lty d u rin g a r e g u la rly scheduled fa c u lty m eeting
to d i s t r i b u t e th e Teacher A ttitu d e Survey, s o l i c i t th e
te a c h e rs ' c o o p e ra tio n , g iv e in s tru c tio n s f o r i t s com pletion
and r e tu r n . When s u f f i c ie n t numbers o f te a c h e rs o f re g u la r
classroom s had been co n tacted th e n d u rin g th e l a t t e r phases
o f th e stu d y th e in v e s tig a to r would c o n ta c t only th e
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n a t th e sch o o l in v o lv ed .
S im ilar procedures were used w ith th e s e te a c h e rs a s w ith
e n tir e f a c u lty groups.
The Teacher A ttitu d e Surveys were re tu rn e d d ir e c tly
to th e exam iner in a stamped and add ressed envelope. As
they were re tu rn e d th e y w ere numbered in th e o rd e r in which
th ey w ere re c e iv e d .
249
A t o t a l o f 385 q u e s tio n n a ire s w ere re tu rn e d from
508 d is t r ib u t e d , re p re s e n tin g a 76 p er c e n t r e tu r n . Of
t h i s group, 210 were from te a c h e rs o f r e g u la r classroom s
and 185 from te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . Upon t h e i r
r e c e ip t each o f th e forms was "sco red " a cco rd in g to a
sta n d a rd iz e d form ula e s ta b lis h e d f o r each o f th re e a t t i t u d e
s c a le s m entioned.
A group o f 200 te a c h e rs (100 r e g u la r c la s s and
100 te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n ) was s e le c te d from th e
group o f 385 q u e s tio n n a ire s by u se o f a ta b le o f random
numbers. The s e le c tio n was made so th a t th e sample con
formed to th e g e n e ra l p o p u la tio n o f te a c h e rs in C a lifo rn ia
as to th e p e rcen tag e o f elem entary and secondary le v e ls and
as to th e p ercen tag e o f each o f th e s ix d if f e r e n t s p e c i a l i
z a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n . A ll d a ta from
t h i s group w ere e n te re d onto punched c a rd s and com parisons
betw een elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs as w e ll as
betw een te a c h e rs o f re g u la r classroom s and te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n w ere made by a s t a t i s t i c a l procedure
(5wo-way a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e ) through com putations p e r
formed on an e le c tro n ic com puter.
These 200 q u e s tio n n a ire s were re tu rn e d to th e
o r ig in a l group o f 385 and a n o th e r sam pling was made by
250
th e u se o f a ta b le o f random numbers. This tim e only
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n were chosen—te n from each
s p e c ia liz a tio n in th e p ro p er p ro p o rtio n o f elem entary and
secondary le v e l te a c h e rs . With t h i s group o f s ix ty te a c h e rs
th e six groups o f s p e c ia liz a tio n s were compared w ith one
an o th er as to t h e i r re a c tio n s to th e th r e e a t t i t u d e s c a le s
p re v io u sly m entioned. A one-way a n a ly s is o f v a ria n c e was
used h ere th ro u g h th e a u sp ic e s o f an e le c tr o n ic com puter.
For b o th th e sample o f 200 and th e sample o f 60 a
s e r ie s o f F r a t i o s w ere o b tain ed through th e a n a ly s is o f
v a ria n c e . From th e s e F r a t i o s i t was concluded where s ig
n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s e x is te d o r d id n o t e x i s t .
Findings
The m ajor fin d in g s a r e l i s t e d below in th e same
form at as th e hypotheses w ere o r ig in a lly s ta te d in Chap
t e r I :
1 .0 Dogmatism
1 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e in th e tendency
to b e open-minded o r closed-m inded between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs .
1.2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e te n d
ency to be open-minded o r closed-m inded between
elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
1.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e te n d
ency to be open-minded o r closed-m inded among th e
v ary in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
A u th o rita ria n ism
2 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o ri-
ta r ia n a t t i t u d e between te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs .
2 .2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o r i
t a r ia n a t t i t u d e between elem entary te a c h e rs and
secondary te a c h e rs .
2 .3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a u th o ri
ta r ia n a t t i t u d e among th e v ary in g s p e c ia liz a tio n s
o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward S e lf
3 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard o n e s e lf between te a c h e rs o f excep
tio n a l c h ild re n and te a c h e rs o f re g u la r
classro o m s.
3 .2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d e s tow ard o n e s e lf between elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs .
3 .3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d e s tow ard o n e s e lf among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia l
iz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward th e Average Student
4 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d e s tow ard th e average stu d e n t betw een te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e r s .
4 .2 There e x i s ts a s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e (P < .05)
betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r ex p ressed a t t i t u d e tow ard th e
av erag e s tu d e n t, w ith secondary te a c h e rs h o ld in g
th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e .
4.3 There i s no d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i t u d e s toward
th e average stu d e n t among th e d if f e r e n t s p e c i a l i
z a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n
A ttitu d e s Toward th e G ifted Student
5 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r
classroom teach ers*
5 .2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t it u d e s tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t between e l e
m entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
5.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard th e g if te d stu d e n t among th e
d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward Teachers
6 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t it u d e s tow ard te a c h e rs between te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
6.2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard te a c h e rs between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
6.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard te a c h e rs among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
A ttitu d e s Toward th e Slow L earner
7.1 There e x i s ts an extrem ely s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e
(P < .0 1 ) betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs in t h e i r
ex p ressed a t titu d e s tow ard th e slow le a rn e r, w ith
r e g u la r classroom te a c h e rs h o ld in g th e more nega
t i v e a t t it u d e s .
7.2 There e x is ts a s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e (P < .0 5 )
betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r ex p ressed a t t i t u d e s toward th e
slow le a rn e r, w ith secondary te a c h e rs hold in g
th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e s .
7.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard th e slow le a r n e r among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h i l
d ren .
8 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward A d m in istrato rs
8 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard a d m in is tra to rs between te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e r s .
8 .2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard a d m in is tra to rs between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
8.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard a d m in is tra to rs among th e d if f e r e n t
255
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
9 .0 A ttitu d e s Toward th e Handicapped C hild
9 .1 There e x is ts a h ig h ly s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e
(P .0 1 ) between te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs in t h e i r
exp ressed a t ti t u d e s tow ard th e handicapped c h ild ,
w ith te a c h e rs o f r e g u la r classroom s h o ld in g th e
more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e s .
9 .2 There e x is ts a s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e (P < .05)
betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs in t h e i r ex p ressed a t titu d e s toward
th e handicapped c h ild , w ith secondary te a c h e rs
h o ld in g th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e s .
9 .3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es tow ard th e handicapped c h ild among th e
d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f excep
t io n a l c h ild re n .
10.0 A ttitu d e s Toward th e E ducation P ro fessio n
10.1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e a t t i
tu d es toward th e ed u catio n p ro fe ssio n between
te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and te a c h e rs
o f re g u la r classro o m s.
10.2 There is no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e In th e
a t titu d e s tow ard th e ed u catio n p ro fe ssio n
betw een elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary
te a c h e rs .
10.3 There Is no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t titu d e s tow ard th e ed u catio n p ro fe ssio n among
th e d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
11.0 A ttitu d e s Toward D is c ip lin e
11.1 There is no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t titu d e s tow ard d is c ip lin e between te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
11.2 There is no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard d is c ip lin e between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
11.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard d is c ip lin e among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
12.0 A ttitu d e s Toward C urriculum
12 .1 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard cu rricu lu m between te a c h e rs
o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs .
12.2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t titu d e s tow ard cu rricu lu m between elem entary
te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs .
12.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s toward cu rricu lu m among th e d if f e r e n t
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
13.0 A ttitu d e s Toward Ten Combined S chool-R elated Concepts
13.1 There e x is ts a s ig n i f ic a n t d iffe re n c e (P < .0 5 )
betw een te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and
re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs in t h e i r expressed
a t t it u d e s tow ard a com bination o f te n sc h o o l-
r e la te d co n cep ts, w ith re g u la r classroom
te a c h e rs h o ld in g th e more n e g a tiv e a t t i t u d e s .
13.2 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e in th e
a t t it u d e s tow ard a com bination o f te n sc h o o l-
r e la te d concepts betw een elem entary te a c h e rs
and secondary te a c h e rs .
13.3 There i s no s ig n if ic a n t d if fe re n c e in th e
a t t i t u d e s tow ard a com bination o f te n sch o o l-
r e la te d concepts among th e d if f e r e n t
258
s p e c ia liz a tio n s o f te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l
c h ild re n .
C onclusions
1. Teachers o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n and re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs a re e s s e n ti a ll y s im ila r in t h e i r a u th o r i
ta r ia n c h a ra c te r and dogm atic n a tu re .
2. Elem entary te a c h e rs and secondary te a c h e rs a re
e s s e n tia ll y s im ila r in t h e i r a u th o r ita r ia n c h a ra c te r and
dogm atic n a tu re .
3 . P ublic school te a c h e rs in g e n e ra l ap p ear to be
somewhat le s s dogm atic and a u th o r ita r ia n th an th e popula
tio n a t la rg e .
4. R egular classroom te a c h e rs a r e le s s ac ce p tin g
and to le r a n t o f th e slo w -le a rn in g c h ild and handicapped
c h ild th a n a re te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
5. There appears to be a tendency among re g u la r
classroom te a c h e rs to h o ld s l i g h t l y more n e g a tiv e fe e lin g s
tow ard a s p e c ts o f t h e i r p ro fe s s io n th an do te a c h e rs o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n .
6. Secondary te a c h e rs a re le s s a c c e p tin g and
to le r a n t of stu d e n ts th a n a re elem entary te a c h e rs .
259
7. With th e ex cep tio n o f t h e i r a t titu d e s toward
s tu d e n ts , elem entary and secondary te a c h e rs a re e s s e n tia lly
a homogeneous group.
8. Teachers o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , d e s p ite t h e i r
d if f e r e n t s p e c ia liz a tio n s , tr a in in g , and ex p erien ce, a re
an ex trem ely homogeneous group w ith re s p e c t to t h e i r
a u th o r ita r ia n c h a ra c te r, t h e i r dogm atic n a tu re , and t h e i r
ex p ressed a t t i t u d e s toward a v a r ie ty o f s c h o o l-re la te d
to p ic s .
Reconmendat io n s
1. C a lifo rn ia school d i s t r i c t s , in co n ju n ctio n
w ith te a c h e r- tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s , should make every
attem p t to r e c r u i t g r e a te r numbers o f m ale te a c h e rs in to
th e f i e l d o f ed u catio n , w ith th e g r e a te s t em phasis on th e
elem entary le v e l.
2. F u rth e r a n a ly s is should be made o f th e u se o f
f in a n c ia l g ra n ts a s a means o f ind u cin g in d iv id u a ls in to
becoming te a c h e rs o f e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n to determ ine
w hether th e y a r e tr u ly e f f e c tiv e in producing th e d e s ire d
r e s u l t s .
3. C a lifo rn ia school d i s t r i c t s , in co n ju n ctio n
w ith te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s , should in v e s tig a te
260
methods and tech n iq u es fo r c re a tin g a g r e a te r u n d erstan d in g
o f th e " d if f e r e n t" c h ild among re g u la r classroom te a c h e rs .
4 . C a lifo rn ia sch o o l d i s t r i c t s , in c o n ju n c tio n
w ith te a c h e r - tr a in in g i n s t i t u t i o n s , should in v e s tig a te
methods and te ch n iq u e s fo r c re a tin g a g r e a te r degree o f
em phatic aw areness o f th e in d iv id u a l needs o f stu d e n ts
among secondary te a c h e rs in s p i t e o f t h e i r la ck o f p ro
longed exposure to any one c h ild .
5. F u rth e r in v e s tig a tio n should b e made reg ard in g
th e a t t i t u d e s o f te a c h e rs by attem p tin g to r e l a t e v a rio u s
a s p e c ts o f p e rso n a l d a ta (age, sex, e t c . ) to th e outcome o f
teach ers* resp o n ses to v a rio u s a t t i t u d e m easures.
6. F u rth e r in v e s tig a tio n should be made reg a rd in g
th e r e la tio n s h ip s betw een some o f th e m easures o f a t t i t u d e
used in t h i s stu d y . Is th e mean sc o re o b ta in ed f o r each
group o f te a c h e rs on th e dogmatism s c a le s ig n i f ic a n tly
h ig h e r o r low er th a n th e mean sc o re o b tain ed on th e "F"
s c a le , and i f so , why? Do th e v a rio u s groups o f te a c h e rs
d i f f e r s ig n i f ic a n t ly in t h e i r a t titu d e s tow ard th e concept
" D isc ip lin e " a s compared to th e concept "C urriculum " and
i f so , why? Are th e re o th e r s ig n if ic a n t d iffe re n c e s among
th e resp o n ses to th e v a rio u s s c h o o l-re la te d co n cep ts?
APPENDIX A
TEACHER ATTITUDE SU RV EY
261
TEACHER ATTITUDE SU RVEY
262
This i s p a rt o f an in v e s tig a tio n o f th e a ttitu d e s
th a t classroom te a c h e rs may hold on a v a r ie ty o f is s u e s .
I t re p re s e n ts a p o rtio n o f a d o c to ra l stu d y b ein g conducted
a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Southern C a lifo rn ia . I t is hoped th a t
th e outcome o f t h i s re se a rc h may be a b le to make a s i g n i f i
ca n t c o n trib u tio n to th e te ach in g p ro fe ssio n in g e n e ra l and
s p e c if ic a lly in such a re a s as te a c h e r tr a in in g , te a c h e r
re c ru itm e n t, and c r e d e n tia l o rg a n iz a tio n . Your p a r tic ip a
tio n in t h i s in v e s tig a tio n is u rg e n tly needed in o rd er to
accom plish th e s e r e s u l t s . Your co o p e ra tio n in responding
a c c u ra te ly to th e follow ing q u e s tio n n a ire s i s e a rn e s tly
s o l i c i t e d . P lease respond f r e e ly to a l l item s a s your own
fe e lin g s d i c t a t e . A ll m a te ria l w i l l be handled s t r i c t l y
c o n f id e n tia lly and no in fo rm atio n w ill be used on an in d i
v id u a l b a s is in re p o rtin g d a ta . When you have fin is h e d
f i l l i n g o u t a l l p a rts o f th e q u e s tio n n a ire (h o p efu lly w ith in
2 o r 3 d ay s) p le a se en clo se i t in th e a tta c h e d stamped and
ad d ressed envelope and re tu r n i t th ro u g h th e m a il.
Your a s s is ta n c e in th e conduct o f t h i s re se a rc h i s
g r e a tly a p p re c ia te d . The d a ta g ath ered in t h i s study should
prove to be o f v alu e to your sch o o l d i s t r i c t and p a r t i c i
p an ts in v o lv ed . Copies o f th e r e s u lt s o f t h i s stu d y w ill
be made a v a ila b le to a l l who p a r tic ip a te .
PART I
PERSONAL D A TA BLA N K
THE INFORM ATION TO BE REQUESTED IS STRICTLY CONFIDEN
TIAL.
PERSONAL INFORMATION WILL N O T BE USED O N AN INDIVIDUAL
BASIS IN REPORTING D A TA .
P lease com plete th e fo llo w in g :
1. N A M E (o p tio n a l—n o t needed f o r th is re s e a rc h )__________
2. SCHOOL DISTRICT___________________________________________
3. SCHOOL____________________________________________________
4 . SEX: M A L E FEM A LE
5. BIRTHPLACE________________________________________________
6. AGE: (P lease check th e a p p ro p ria te sp ace)
Age 30 and under ____ Age 41 through 45____
Age 31 through 35____ Age 46 through 50____
Age 36 through 40____ Age 51 and over______
7. Y O U R CU RRENT TEACHING ASSIGNMENT: (S u b ject ta u g h t o r
te a c h in g s p e c ia lty . I f you a r e te ach in g a group o f
e x c e p tio n a l c h ild re n , p le a s e s t a t e t h i s as your te a c h
ing s p e c i a l t y .)___________________________________________
8. G R A D E LEVEL TAUGHT: (P lease check th e a p p ro p ria te
s p a c e .)
K indergarten through grade 3_____ Grades 7 o r 8___
Grades 4 , 5, o r 6 Grades 9 through 12___
9. YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN CURRENT TEACHING ASSIGNMENT:___
10. TOTAL N U M B E R OF Y EA RS OF EXPERIENCE IN TEACHING:______
264
11. TEACHING ASSIGNMENT HELD PREVIOUS TO CURRENT POSITION
( i f a n y ):__________________________________________________
12. DEGREES EA RN ED (Check a p p ro p ria te spaces f o r Degree
and f i l l in o th e r in fo rm atio n re q u e s te d ):
Year G ranting
Received Major I n s t itu t io n
Ed.D. o r Hi. D. _________ _____ ________
M.A. o r M.S.
A.B. o r B. S.
13. W A S A N Y PART OF Y O U R EDUCATIONAL W O R K T O W A R D THE
D EG REE OR CREDENTIAL FUNDED BY A FEDERAL, STATE,
O R PRIVATE GRANT?
YES ____ No
14. IF THE A N SW ER TO N U M B ER 13 IS YES, W H A T W A S THE FU N D
ING A G EN CY INVOLVED?____________________________________
15. PUBLIC EDUCATION CREDENTIALS POSSESSED (Issu ed by th e
C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E d u catio n ):
16. PROFESSIONAL ORGANIZATIONS TH A T Y O U ARE AFFILIATED
WITH:
265
PA R T I I
INSTRUCTIONS: The fo llo w in g i s a stu d y o f how people th in k
and f e e l about a number o f im p o rtan t s o c ia l and p e rso n a l
q u e s tio n s . The b e s t answer to each sta tem en t below i s your
PERSONAL OPINION. W e have t r i e d to co v er many d if f e r e n t
and opposing p o in ts o f view ; you may fin d y o u rs e lf ag reein g
s tro n g ly w ith some o f th e sta te m e n ts, d isa g re e in g j u s t as
s tro n g ly w ith o th e rs , and perhaps u n c e rta in about o th e rs .
Whether you ag ree o r d is a g re e w ith any sta te m e n t, you can
be su re th a t many people f e e l th e same a s you do.
Mark each statem en t in th e l e f t m argin acco rd in g to how
much you d is a g re e o r a g ree w ith i t . P lease mark every one.
W rite a +1, +2, 43, o r -1 , -2 , -3, depending on how you
f e e l in each ca se.
+1; I AGREE A LITTLE -1 : I DISAGREE A LITTLE
42: I AGREE O N THE W H O L E -2 : I DISAGREE O N THE W H O L E
4-3 : I AGREE VERY M U C H -3 : I DISAGREE VERY M U C H
1. Obedience and re s p e c t f o r a u th o rity a re th e most
im portant v ir tu e s c h ild re n should le a rn .
2 . A p erso n who has bad m anners, h a b its , and b reed in g
can h a rd ly expect to g e t along w ith d ecen t p eo p le.
_3. I f people would ta lk le s s and work more, everybody
would be b e t t e r o f f .
4 . The businessm an and th e m an u factu rer a r e much more
im portant to s o c ie ty th a n th e a r t i s t and th e p ro fe s
s o r.
5. Science has i t s p la c e , b u t th e re a r e many im portant
th in g s th a t can n ever be u nderstood by th e human
mind.
6. Young people sometimes g e t r e b e llio u s id e a s , b u t as
th ey grow up th ey ought to g e t over them and s e t t l e
down.
266
_ 7 . What th is co u n try needs m ost, more th an laws and
p o l i t i c a l program s, a r e a few courageous, t i r e l e s s ,
devoted le a d e rs in whom th e people can p u t t h e i r
f a i t h .
_ 8 . No sane, norm al, d ec en t person could ev er th in k o f
h u rtin g a c lo s e f rie n d o r r e l a ti v e .
_ 9 . Nobody ev e r le arn e d an y th in g r e a lly im portant
except through s u f fe rin g .
10. What th e youth needs i s s t r i c t d is c ip lin e , rugged
d e te rm in a tio n , and th e w i l l to work and f ig h t f o r
fam ily and c o u n try .
11. An in s u lt to our honor should always be p u n ish ed .
12. Sex crim es, such a s ra p e and a tta c k s on c h ild re n ,
d eserv e more th a n m ere im prisonm ent; such c rim in a ls
ought to be p u b lic ly whipped, o r w orse.
13. There i s h a rd ly an y th in g lower th an a p erson who
does n o t f e e l a g r e a t lo v e, g r a titu d e , and re s p e c t
f o r h is p a re n ts .
14. Most o f our s o c ia l problem s would be so lv ed i f we
would somehoe g e t r i d o f th e immoral, crooked, and
feeble-m inded p eo p le.
15. Homosexuals a r e h a rd ly b e t t e r th an c rim in a ls and
ought to be s e v e re ly punished.
16. When a person has a problem o r w orry, i t i s b e s t
f o r him n o t to th in k about i t , b u t to keep busy
w ith more c h e e rfu l th in g s .
17. Every p erson should have com plete f a i t h in some
su p e rn a tu ra l power whose d e c isio n s he obeys w ith o u t
q u e s tio n .
18. Some people a r e b o m w ith an u rg e to jump from h ig h
p la c e s .
19. People can be d iv id e d in to two d i s t i n c t c la s s e s ;
th e weak and th e s tro n g .
267
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Some day i t w i l l probably be shown th a t a s tro lo g y
can e x p la in a l o t o f th in g s .
Wars and s o c ia l tro u b le s may someday b e ended by an
earth q u ak e o r flo o d th a t w i l l d e stro y th e whole
w orld.
No weakness o r d i f f i c u l t y can hold us back i f we
have enough w i ll power.
I t i s b e s t to use some prew ar a u th o r itie s in
Germany to keep o rd e r and p rev en t chaos.
Most people d o n 't r e a l i z e how much our liv e s a r e
c o n tro lle d by p lo ts h atch ed in s e c r e t p la c e s .
Human n a tu re being what i t i s , th e re w i l l alw ays be
war and c o n f lic t.
F a m ilia rity b reed s contem pt.
Nowadays when so many d if f e r e n t kinds o f people
move around and mix to g e th e r so much, a person has
to p ro te c t h im se lf e s p e c ia lly c a r e f u lly a g a in s t
ca tch in g an in f e c tio n o r d is e a s e from them.
Nowadays more and more p eople a r e prying in to
m a tte rs th a t should rem ain p e rso n a l and p r iv a te .
The w ild sex l i f e o f th e o ld Greeks and Romans was
tame compared to some o f th e goings-on in t h i s
co u n try , even p la ce s where people m ight le a s t ex
p e c t i t .
The U nited S ta te s and R ussia have j u s t about noth in g
in common.
The h ig h e s t form o f government i s a democracy and
th e h ig h e s t form o f democracy i s a government ru n
by th o se who a re most i n t e l l i g e n t .
Even though freedom o f speech f o r a l l groups i s a
w orthw hile g o a l, i t i s u n fo rtu n a te ly n e c e ssa ry to
r e s t r i c t th e freedom o f c e r t a in p o l i t i c a l g roups.
268
33. I t i s o n ly n a tu r a l th a t a person would have a
much b e t t e r acq u ain tan ce w ith id e a s he b e lie v e s in
th an w ith id eas he opposes.
34. M A N on h is own i s a h e lp le s s and m ise ra b le c re a tu re .
35. Fundam entally th e w orld we liv e in i s a p r e tty
lonesome p la c e .
36. M jst p eo p le j u s t don*t g iv e a "damn” f o r o th e rs .
37. I 'd lik e i t i f I could fin d someone who would t e l l
me how to so lv e my p e rso n a l problem s.
38. I t i s o n ly n a tu ra l f o r a person to be r a th e r f e a r
f u l o f th e fu tu re .
39. There i s so much to be done and so l i t t l e tim e to
do i t .
40. Once I g e t wound up in a h eated d is c u s s io n , I j u s t
c a n 't s to p .
41. In a d is c u s s io n I o fte n fin d i t n e c e ssa ry to re p e a t
m yself s e v e ra l tim es to make su re I am being u n d er
sto o d .
42. In a h ea ted d is c u s s io n I g e n e ra lly become so
absorbed in what I am going to say th a t I fo rg e t
to l i s t e n to what th e o th e rs a r e sa y in g .
43. I t i s b e t t e r to be a dead h ero th a n a liv e coward.
44 . While I d o n 't lik e to adm it t h i s even to m y self,
my s e c r e t am b itio n i s to become a g r e a t man, lik e
E in s te in , Beethoven, o r Shakespeare.
45. The main th in g in l i f e i s f o r a p erso n to want to
do som ething im p o rtan t.
46. I f given th e chance, I would do som ething o f g re a t
b e n e f it to th e w orld.
47. In th e h is to r y o f mankind th e re have pro b ab ly been
j u s t a h an d fu l o f r e a l l y g re a t th in k e rs .
269
.48. There a re a number o f people I have come to h a te
because o f th e th in g s th e y stan d f o r .
49. A man who does n o t b e lie v e in some g re a t cause has
n o t r e a l ly liv e d .
50. I t i s only when a p erso n dev o tes h im s e lf to an
id e a l o r cause th a t l i f e becomes m eaningful.
.51. Of a l l th e d if f e r e n t p h ilo so p h ie s which e x i s t in
t h i s w orld, th e re i s p robably only one which i s
c o r r e c t.
52. A person who g e ts e n th u s ia s tic about to o many
causes i s lik e ly to be a p r e tty ’’ w ishy-w ashy” s o r t
o f a person.
53. To compromise w ith our p o l i t i c a l opponents is
dangerous because i t u s u a lly lead s to th e b e tra y a l
o f o u r own s id e .
54. When i t comes to d iffe re n c e s o f o p in io n in r e lig io n
we must be c a r e f u l n o t to compromise w ith th o se who
b e lie v e d if f e r e n tly from th e way we do.
55. In tim es lik e th e s e , a p erso n must be p r e tty s e l
f is h i f he c o n sid e rs p rim a rily h is own h ap p in ess.
56. The w o rst crim e a person could commit i s to a tta c k
p u b lic ly th e people who b e lie v e in th e same th in g
he does.
.57. In tim es lik e th e s e i t i s o fte n n ec essary to be
more on guard a g a in s t id e a s p u t out by p eople o r
groups in one*s own camp th a n by th o se in opposing
camps.
58. A group which t o le r a te s to o much d iffe re n c e s o f
o p in io n among i t s own members cannot e x i s t f o r long.
.59. There a re two k in d s o f people in t h i s w o rld : th o se
who a re f o r th e t r u t h and th o se who a re a g a in s t th e
tr u th .
270
60. M y blood b o ils whenever a person stu b b o rn ly re fu s e s
to adm it h e 's wrong.
61. A person who th in k s p rim a rily o f h is own happiness
i s b en eath contem pt.
62. Most o f th e id e a s which g e t p rin te d nowadays a r e n 't
w orth th e paper th ey a r e p rin te d on.
63. In t h i s com plicated w orld o f ours th e only way we
can know w h a t's going on i s to r e ly on le a d e rs o r
e x p e rts who can be tr u s te d .
64. I t i s o fte n d e s ir a b le to re s e rv e judgment about
w h a t's going on u n t i l one has had th e chance to
h e a r th e o p in io n o f th o se one r e s p e c ts .
65. In th e long ru n th e b e s t way to liv e i s to p ick
o n e 's frie n d s and a s s o c ia te s from among th o se
t a s t e s and b e l ie f s a r e th e same
‘ 66. The p re se n t i s a l l to o o fte n f u l l o f unhappiness.
I t i s o n ly th e f u tu re th a t co u n ts.
67. I f a man i s to accom plish h is m issio n s in l i f e , i t
i s sometimes n e c e ssa ry to gamble " a l l o r n o th in g
a t a l l . "
68. U n fo rtu n ately , a good many p eople w ith whom I have
d isc u sse d im p o rtan t s o c ia l and m oral problem s
d o n 't r e a l ly u n d erstan d what i s going on.
69. Most people j u s t d o n 't know w h a t's good fo r them.
271
PART I I I
INSTRUCTIONS
The purpose o f t h i s p a r t o f th e stu d y i s to m easure th e
meanings o f c e r t a in th in g s to v a rio u s p eo p le by having them
ju d g e them a g a in s t a s e r ie s o f d e s c r ip tiv e s c a le s . In
ta k in g t h i s t e s t , p le a se make your judgm ents on th e b a s is
o f what th e s e th in g s mean to you. On each o f th e follow ing
pages, you w i l l fin d two d if f e r e n t co n cep ts to be judged
and b en eath them a s e t o f s c a le s . You a r e to r a t e th e
concept on each o f th e s e s c a le s in o rd e r.
Here i s how you a re to u se th e s e s c a le s :
I f you f e e l th a t th e concept a t th e to p o f th e s c a le s is
VERY CLOSELY RELATED to one end o f th e s c a le , you should
p la c e your check-m ark as fo llo w s :
f a i r X :_____ :______:_____ :_____ :______:_____ u n f a ir
or
f a i r :_____ :_____ :_____ :______:______: X u n f a ir
I f you f e e l t h a t th e concept i s QUITE CLOSELY RELATED to
one o r th e o th e r end o f th e s c a le (but n o t ex tre m ely ), you
should p la c e your check-mark as fo llo w s:
stro n g : X :______ :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ weak
o r
stro n g ______:_____ :_______:_____ :______: X___:_____weak
I f th e concept seems O N L Y SLIGHTLY RELATED to one s id e as
opposed to th e o th e r s id e (but is n o t r e a l l y n e u tr a l) , th en
you should check a s fo llo w s:
a c tiv e ______:_____ : X :_____ :_____ :_____ :_____ p a ssiv e
272
o r
a c tiv e :_____ :_____ :______: X ;______:_____ p a ssiv e
The d ir e c tio n toward which you check, o f co u rse, depends
upon which o f th e two ends o f th e s c a le seem most ch a ra c
t e r i s t i c o f th e th in g you*re ju d g in g .
I f you c o n sid e r th e concept to b e NEUTRAL on th e s c a le ,
b o th sid e s o f th e s c a le EQ U ALLY ASSOCIATED w ith th e concept,
o r i f th e s c a le i s COM PLETELY IRRELEVANT, u n re la te d to th e
concept, then you should p la ce your check-m ark in th e
m iddle sp ace:
s a fe :_____ :______: X :_____ :______:_____ dangerous
IMPORTANT: (1) p la c e your check-m arks in THE M IDDLE OF THE
SPACES, n o t on th e b o u n d a rie s:
THIS NOT THIS
• • • V • • • V ’
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ • • ♦ A > • A _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
(2) Be s u re to check every s c a le f o r e v e r y co n cep t—
D O NOT OM IT ANY.
(3) Never put more th a n one check-m ark on a s in g le
s c a le .
Sometimes you may f e e l as though y o u 'v e had th e same item
b e fo re on th e t e s t . This w ill n o t be th e c a se , so D O N O T
LO O K BACK A N D FORTH th ro u g h th e item s. Do not t r y to
remember how you checked s im ila r item s e a r l i e r in th e t e s t .
M A K E EA CH ITEM A SEPARATE A N D INDEPENDENT JUDGM ENT. Work
a t f a i r l y h ig h speed through t h i s t e s t . Do n o t w orry o r
p u zzle over in d iv id u a l item s. I t is your f i r s t im pres
s io n s , th e im m ediate " fe e lin g s " about th e item s, th a t we
w ant. On th e o th e r hand, p le a se do n o t be c a r e le s s ,
because we want your tr u e im p ressio n s.
273
M y SELF
G O O D _
TASTY.
UNFAIR.
VALUABLE,
UGLY.
PLEASANT.
BITTER.
HONEST.
SAD.
NICE
B A D
DISTASTEFUL
.FAIR
W O RTH LESS
.BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
.HAPPY
A W FU L
THE A V ERA G E STUDENT
good.
TASTY.
UNFAIR.
VALUABI£_
UGLY.
pleasant.
bitter.
honest.
SAD.
nice.
.BAD
.DISTASTEFUL
.FAIR
W O RTH LESS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
.DISHONEST
.HAPPY
A W F U L
274
T H E GIFTED ST U D E N T
G O O D .
TASTY
UNFAIR.
VALUABLE,
U G L Y _
PLEASANT
BITTER
HONEST,
SA D _
NICE
TEACHERS
G O O D :____ :____ :____ :__
TASTY____ :____ :____ :____ :__
UNFAIR____ :____ :____ :____ :__
V A LU A BLE____ :____ :____ :____ :__
U G LY____ :____ :____ :____ :__
PLEASANT____ :____ :____ :____ :__
BITTER____ :____ :____ :____ :__
HONEST ____ :____ :____ :_ _
SA D____ :____ :____ :____ :__
NICE____ :____ :____ :____ :
B A D
DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
W O RTH LESS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W FU L
B A D
DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
WORTHI£SS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W FU L
275
T H E S L O W L E A R N E R
G O O D :____ :___ :__________:__
TASTY____ :____ :___ :__________:_
UNFAIR____ :____ :___ :__________:_____
VALUABLE____ :____ :___ :__________:___
U G LY____ :____ :___ :__________:__
PLEASANT : ____ :____ :__________:___
BITTER____ :____ :___ :_____
HONEST____ :____ :___ :__________:_____
SA D____ :____ :___ :__________:___
NICE____ :____ :___ :_____ :____ :
ADMINISTRATORS
G O O D _
TASTY
UNFAIR
VALUABLE,
U G L Y _
PLEASANT,
BITTER,
HONEST,
SAD,
NICE
J B A D
DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
W O RTHLESS
.BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
.SW EET
.DISHONEST
HAPPY
.A W FU L
.B A D
.DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
.W O RTH LESS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W F U L
276
T H E H ANDIC APPED CHILD
G O O D
TASTY.
UNFAIR.
VALUABLE.
UGLY.
PLEASANT
BITTER.
HONEST
SAD.
NICE
.BAD
DISTASTEFUL
.FAIR
W O RTH LESS
.BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W FU L
G O O D
TASTY
UNFAIR
VALUABLE
UGLY.
PLEASANT.
BITTER.
HONEST.
SA D _
NICE
THE EDUCATION PROFESSION
B A D
DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
W O RTH LESS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W F U L
277
DISCIPLINE
G O O D
TASTY
UNFAIR
VALU A BLE
U G L Y _
PLEASANT
BITTER
HONEST
SA D _
NICE
B A D
DISTASTEFUL
.FAIR
W O RTH LESS
BEAUTIFUL
UNPLEASANT
SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W FU L
G O O D
TASTY.
UNFAIR
VALUABLE.
U G LY
PLEASANT.
BITTER
HONEST.
SAD.
NICE
CURRICULUM
.BA D
.DISTASTEFUL
FAIR
.W ORTHLESS
BEAUTIFUL
.UNPLEASANT
.SW EET
DISHONEST
HAPPY
A W F U L
APPENDIX B
FOLLOW-UP LETTERS
278
u t o -XjE i w o o d u u n r i r a p s c h o o l , d i s t r i c t
279
4 0 1 S O U T H I N G L E W O O D A V B 4 U E
O R C H A R D 3 - 3 1 1 0 ....
I N G L E W O O D , C A L I F O R N I A
. . O R E G O N 8 - 3 7 5 1
Dear
I re c e n tly had th e p le a su re o f app earin g a t a f a c u lty m eet
ing a t your sch o o l to ask your co o p e ra tio n in a s s is ti n g me
w ith a re s e a rc h p r o je c t. This re s e a rc h p ro je c t is p a r t o f
a d o c to ra l stu d y a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Southern C a lifo rn ia
and c o n s is ts o f an a n a ly s is o f te a c h e r s ' a t titu d e s tow ard
a v a r ie ty o f s u b je c ts .
You and o th e r members o f your f a c u lty in d ic a te d a w illin g
n ess to com plete th e q u e s tio n n a ire t h a t 1 l e f t w ith you.
I would lik e to ex p ress my a p p re c ia tio n to you f o r ta k in g
tim e from your extrem ely busy sch ed u le to f i l l out t h i s
q u e s tio n n a ire and r e tu r n i t to me in th e accompanying en
v e lo p e . Each q u e s tio n n a ire re tu rn e d re p re s e n ts a m eaning
f u lly im portant p a rt o f th e re s e a rc h p la n . Your c o n s c i
e n tio u sn e ss in re tu rn in g th e com pleted q u e s tio n n a ire is
g r e a tly a p p re c ia te d .
I t i s my hope th a t t h i s re s e a rc h w i l l be o f some v a lu e to
th e ed u c a tio n p ro fe s s io n . Your c o n trib u tio n to t h i s r e
se a rc h has been in v a lu a b le . Thanks a g a in .
S in c e re ly ,
Joseph A. Platow
P.S. I f , by some chance, you have n o t y e t had an oppor
tu n ity to f i l l out th e q u e s tio n n a ire , I would be v ery
g r a te f u l i f you would do so and r e tu r n i t to me in
th e envelope p rovided. Since th e number o f re tu rn s
a re im p o rtan t, your q u e s tio n n a ire could g r e a tly in
flu e n c e th e success o f t h i s re s e a rc h .
HTGHJECW001D TTNTFTHID S C H O O L D IS T R I C T
280
4 0 1 S O U T H I N G L E W O O D A V E N U E • I N G L E W O O D , C A L I F O R N I A
O R C H A R D 3-3110..............................................O R E G O N 8 - 3 7 5 1
Dear
A q u e s tio n n a ire was re c e n tly l e f t w ith you to com plete.
This q u e s tio n n a ire is p a rt o f a d o c to ra l re s e a rc h p ro je c t
b eing c a r r ie d on a t th e U n iv e rsity o f Southern C a lifo rn ia
and c o n s is ts o f an a n a ly s is o f te ach e rs* a t titu d e s tow ard
a v a r ie ty o f s u b je c ts .
I would lik e to express my a p p re c ia tio n to you f o r ta k in g
tim e from your extrem ely busy sc h ed u le a t th is tim e o f th e
y ear to f i l l out t h is q u e s tio n n a ire and r e tu r n i t to me in
th e accompanying envelope. Each q u e s tio n n a ire re tu rn e d
re p re s e n ts a m ean in g fu lly im portant p a r t o f th e re s e a rc h
p la n . Your c o n sc ie n tio u sn e ss in re tu rn in g th e com pleted
q u e s tio n n a ire is g r e a tly a p p re c ia te d .
I t is my hope th a t th is re s e a rc h w i l l be o f some v a lu e to
th e e d u c a tio n p ro fe ssio n . Your c o n trib u tio n to th is re**
se arch has been in v a lu a b le . Thanks a g a in .
S in c e re ly ,
Joseph A. Platow
P.S. I f , by some chance, you have n o t y et had an oppor**
tu n it y to f i l l out th e q u e s tio n n a ire , I would be v ery
g r a te f u l i f you would do so and r e tu r n i t to me in
th e envelope provided. Since th e number o f re tu rn s
a r e im p o rta n t, your q u e s tio n n a ire could g r e a tly i n
flu e n c e th e success o f t h i s re s e a rc h .
BIBLIOGRAPHY
I
281
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1. Abraham, W illa rd . "Outlook f o r S p e c ia l E d u catio n ,"
N atio n al E ducation Jo u rn a l. LV (1966), 50-51.
2. Adorno, T. W.; Frenkel-B runsw ik, E lse ; Levinson,
D aniel J . ; and Sanford, N e v itt R. The A u th o ri
t a r i a n P e rs o n a lity . New York: H arper and
B ro th e rs, 1950.
3. A llp o rt, G. W . "The H is to r ic a l Background o f Modern
S o c ia l Psychology," in G. Lindzey ( e d .), Handbook
o f S o cia l Psychology. V ol. I . Cambridge: A ddison-
W esley, 1954. I^>. 3-56.
4 . A lte r, R ichard D ., and W hite, Jack B. "Some Norms fo r
th e Dogmatism S c a le ," P sy ch o lo g ical R eports. XIX
(1966), 967-969.
5. Anderson, L. R ., and F ish b ein , M . " P re d ic tio n o f
A ttitu d e From Number, S tre n g th , and E v alu ativ e
A spect o f B e lie fs About th e A ttitu d e O bject:
A Comparison o f Summation and C ongruity T h e o rie s,"
Jo u rn a l o f Personnel and S o c ia l Psychology. I I
(1965), 437-443.
6. Becker, G ilb e rt, and D ileo, Diana T. "Scores on
Rokeach's Dogmatism S cale and th e Response Set to
P resen t a P o s itiv e S o c ia l and P erso n al Im age,"
Jo u rn a l o f S o c ia l Psychology. IXXI (1967), 287-
293.
7. Bentzen, Mary Maxine. "Some E ffe c ts o f Dogmatism in
Elem entary School P rin c ip a ls and T each ers."
Unpublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f
C a lifo rn ia , Los A ngeles, 1965.
282
283
8. Boag, Audrey K. "S p e c ia l S e rv ic e s—Are They In c re a s
in g in Our Schools?" New York S ta te E d u catio n al
A sso c ia tio n Jo u rn a l. L II I (1966), 21 f f .
9. Brumbaugh, R obert B .; Hoedt, Kenneth C .; and B e ise l,
W illiam H. "Teacher Dogmatism and P ercep tu al
A ccuracy," Jo u rn a l o f Teacher E ducation. XVII
(1966), 332-335.
10. Bryan, James H. "O ccupational Id eo lo g ie s and In d i
v id u a l A ttitu d e s o f C a ll G ir ls ," S o c ia l Problems.
X III (1966), 441-450.
11. B utcher, H. J . "The A ttitu d e s o f S tudent Teachers to
E d u catio n : A Comparison With th e A ttitu d e s o f
E xperienced Teachers and a Study o f Changes During
th e T rain in g C ourse," B r itis h Jo u rn a l o f S o c ia l
and C lin ic a l Psychology. IV (1965), 17-24.
12. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau fo r R iy si-
c a l l y E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . C a lifo rn ia R ib lie
School Programs fo r V isu a lly Handicapped C hildren
and Youth. Sacram ento, 1966.
13. . D irecto ry --D e af and Hard o f H earing.
Sacram ento, 1965.
14. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau fo r Educa
t i o n a l l y Handicapped and M entally E x cep tio n al
C h ild re n . School D is tr ic ts and Countv O ffices
O perating S p ecial T rain in g C lasses fo r Educable
M entally R etarded M inors. Sacram ento, 1966.
15. _________ . School D is tr ic ts and O ffic es o f Countv
S u p erin ten d en ts o f Schools O perating S p ecial
C lasses fo r T rain ab le M entally R etarded M inors.
Sacram ento, 196 7.
16. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau fo r fh y s ic a lly
E x ce p tio n al C h ild ren . Schools and C lasses fo r
O rth o p e d ic a llv Handicapped C h ild ren In clu d in g th e
284
C ere b ral P a lsie d in N orthern C a lif o r n ia . S acra
m ento, 1966.
17. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau fo r P hysi
c a lly E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . Schools and C lasses
fo r O rth o p ed ic allv Handicapped C h ild ren In clu d in g
th e C ereb ral P a lsied in Southern C a lifo rn ia .
Sacram ento, 1966.
18. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau f o r Educa
t io n a lly Handicapped and M entally E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren . School S u p erin ten d en ts O perating Spe
c i a l C lasses fo r T ra in a b le M entally R etarded.
Sacram ento, 1966.
19. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau f o r P hysi
c a lly E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . Speech and H earing
S p e c ia lis ts in C a lifo rn ia R ib lie Schools. Annual
D ire c to ry . Southern C a lif o rn ia . Sacram ento, 1967.
20. . Speech and H earing S p e c ia lis ts in C a li
fo rn ia R ib lie Schools. Annual D ire c to ry . N orthern
C a lifo rn ia . Sacram ento, 1967.
21. C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, D iv isio n o f
S p e c ia l Schools and S e rv ic e s, Bureau f o r Educa
t io n a lly Handicapped and M entally E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren . Teachers o f T ra in a b le M entally R etarded
C h ild ren . Sacram ento, 1967.
22. C a lifo rn ia , S ta te o f. E ducation Code. V ols. I and I I .
Sacram ento: Department o f G eneral S e rv ic e s, Docu
m ents D iv isio n , 1967.
23. Campbell, T. T. "The In d ire c t Assessm ent o f S o c ia l
A ttitu d e s ," P sy ch o lo g ical B u lle tin . XLVII (1950),
15-38.
24. Combs, Ronald H., and H arper, J e rr y L. " E ffe c ts o f
la b e ls on A ttitu d e s o f E ducators Toward Handicapped
C h ild re n ," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren , XXXIII (1967),
399-403.
285
25. Connor, Leo. "The Changing World o f S p e c ia l Educa
t i o n ," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . XXXIV (1967), 65-66.
26. Conway, E. D. " A ttitu d e s o f Teachers o f Grades One,
Two, and T hree, in L ouisiana, Toward th e Teaching
o f R eading." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n ,
Oklahoma S ta te U n iv e rsity , 1964.
27. Cook, W alter; Leeds, C a rro l H .; and C a llis , R obert.
"The S ig n ific a n t F acto rs in T each ers' Classroom
A ttitu d e s ," Jo u rn a l o f Teacher E ducation. V II
(1956), 274-279.
28. Coombs, C. H. "P sy ch o lo g ica l S caling W ithout a U nit
o f M easurem ent," P sy ch o lo g ical Review. LVII
(1950), 145-158.
29. C ro ft, John C. "Open and Closed-MLndedness and P er
c e p tio n s o f Leader B eh av io r," U. S. Departm ent o f
H ealth, E ducation, and W elfare, O ffic e o f Educa
tio n , C ooperative R esearch Report Number S-045.
W ashington: Government P rin tin g O ffic e , 1964.
30. Dandes, H erbert M arvin. "The R e la tio n sh ip Between
Measured P sy ch o lo g ical H ealth and C e rta in A t t i
tu d es and V alues o f T ea ch ers." U npublished
d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , Syracuse U n iv e rs ity , 1964.
31. Day, M arjorie S. "Elem entary Teachers o f Educable
M entally R etarded C h ild re n ." U npublished d o c to ra l
d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f C a lifo rn ia , Los
A ngeles, 1966.
32. Edwards, A llen L. E xperim ental Design in Psycho
lo g ic a l R esearch. New York: H olt, R in eh art and
W inston, 1964.
33. ________ . S t a t i s t i c a l Methods fo r th e B eh av io ral
S cien ces. New York: R in eh art and Company, 1957.
34. ________ . Techniques o f A ttitu d e S cale C o n stru c tio n .
New York: A p p leto n -C en tu ry -C ro fts, I n c ., 1957.
286
35. Edwards, A. L ., and K ilp a tric k , F. P. "A Technique
f o r th e C o n stru c tio n o f A ttitu d e S c a le s ," Jo u rn a l
o f A pplied Psychology. XXXII (1948), 374-384.
36. Ends, A lb ert W . "An Exam ination o f th e I n te r r e la tio n
Among A u th o rita ria n P e rs o n a lity , C r i t i c a l P r a c ti
c a l i t y and S ele cte d V ariab les o f Teacher Be
h a v io r." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n ,
M ichigan S ta te U n iv e rsity , 1965.
37. E n g lish , Horace B ., and E n g lish , Ava Champney.
A Comprehensive D ictio n ary o f P sy ch o lo g ical and
P sy c h o a n a ly tic a l Terms. New York: Longmans,
Green and C o., I n c ., 1958.
38. F akouri, Mohamed Ebrahim. "The E ffe c ts o f C losed-
Mindedness and Achievement M otivation on A ttitu d e
Change." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , Uni
v e r s it y o f In d ian a , 1964.
39. F ine, Marvin J . " A ttitu d e s o f R egular and S p ec ial
C lass Teachers Toward th e Educable M entally
R etarded C h ild ," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . XXXIII
(1967), 429-430.
4 0 . Fuson, W . M . " A ttitu d e s : A Note on th e Concept and
I t s R esearch C o n tex t," American S o c io lo g ic a l
Review. V II (1942), 856-857.
4 1 . G arriso n , M ortim er. "The Use o f a Semantic D iffe re n
t i a l in Program E v a lu a tio n ," American Jo u rn a l o f
M ental D eficien cy . IXIX (1965), 692-696.
42. Genskow, Jack K., and M aglione, Frank D. " F a m ilia rity ,
Dogmatism, and R eported S tu d e n ts ' A ttitu d e s
Toward th e D isa b le d ," Jo u rn a l o f S o c ia l Psychology.
IXVII (1965), 329-341.
43. George, John A rnold. " P ro file s in S p e c ia l E d u catio n ."
Unpublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , S t. Louis Uni
v e r s ity , 1966.
44. G erberich, J . R. Measurement and E v alu atio n in th e
Modern School. New York: David, M e Cay and Com
pany, In c ., 1962.
287
45. Gold, H ila ry A. "The Classroom I s o la te : An A d d itio n a l
Dimension fo r C o n sid eratio n in th e E v alu atio n o f
a Q u ality Education Program ," Jo u rn a l o f S p ecial
E ducation. XXXI (1962), 77-80.
46. Good, C a rte r V. D ictio n ary o f E ducation. New York:
McGraw H ill, 1959.
47. G o ttfrie d , N. W., and Jones, R. L. "Some O bservations
on th e Background F acto rs A sso ciated w ith C areer
Choices in th e Teaching o f E x cep tio n al C h ild re n ."
Pfeper read a t th e C ouncil fo r E x cep tio n al C h il
d ren , P h ila d e lp h ia , A p ril, 1963.
48. . "C areer Choice F acto rs in S p ecial Educa
t i o n ," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . X X X (1964), 218-223.
49. Gray, P h illip H., and W heeler, G lo ria E. "The Sem antic
D if f e r e n tia l as an In stru m en t to Examine th e Recent
Folksong Movement," Jo u rn a l o f S o c ia l Psychology.
U X II (1967), 241-247.
50. Green, B ert F. " A ttitu d e M easurem ent," in G. Lindsey,
Handbook o f S o c ia l Psychology. Cambridge:
Addison-W esley P u b lish in g Co., 1954. Pp. 335-369.
51. Green, R ussel F ., and G o ld frie d , Marvin R. "On th e
B ip o la rity o f Semantic S pace," P sy ch o lo g ical Mono
graphs . 1965.
52. Guttman, L. "The Problem o f A ttitu d e and Opinion
M easurement," in S. A. S to u ffe r, Measurement and
P re d ic tio n . P rin c eto n : P rin c eto n U n iv ersity P ress,
1950. Pp. 46-59.
53. _________. "The C o rn ell Technique fo r S cale and In
t e n s i t y A n a ly s is," E d u catio n al and P sy ch o lo g ical
Measurement. V II (1947), 247-280.
54. _________ . "A B asis fo r S calin g Q u a lita tiv e D ata,"
American S o c io lo g ic a l Review. IX (1944), 139-
150.
288
55. Hamerlynck, Leo A. " P e rs o n a lity , Academic A p titu d e,
and A ttitudes: o f In ex p erien ced Teachers o f Re
ta rd e d C h ild re n ." Unpublished d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a
tio n , U n iv e rsity o f Oregon, 1963.
56. H aring, N o rris G .; S te rn , George G .; and C urickshank,
W . M . A ttitu d e s o f Educators Toward E x cep tio n al
C h ild ren . S yracuse: Syracuse U n iv ersity P ress,
1958.
57. H e lle r, Harold W . "The R e la tio n sh ip Between C e rta in
Background C h a ra c te ris tic s o f S p ecial E ducation
Teachers and T h eir D ecisions to Leave S p ecial
E d u catio n ." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n ,
Colorado S ta te C o lleg e, 1964.
58. Henley, C harles E. "The I d e n tif ic a tio n and E v alu atio n
o f th e E x te rn a l F a cto rs Which In flu en ced Colorado
S ta te C ollege G raduates to Major in S p e c ia l Edu
c a tio n ." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n ,
Colorado S ta te C ollege, 1965.
59. Horn, John L ., and M orrison, W . L. "Dimensions o f
Teacher A ttitu d e s ," Jo u rn a l o f E ducational Psy
chology. LVI (1965), 118-125.
60. H unter, E. C. "Changes in Teachers* A ttitu d e s Toward
C h ild re n 's B ehavior Over th e l a s t T h irty Y ears,"
M ental Hygiene. XLI (1957), 3-11.
61. Husek, T. R ., and W itrock, M . C. "The Dimensions o f
A ttitu d e s Toward Teachers as Measured by th e
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l ," Jo u rn a l o f E d u catio n al
Psychology. L II I (1962), 209-213.
62. Je n k in s, J . J . ; R u ssel, W . A .; and Suci, G. J .
"An A tlas o f Sem antic P ro file s fo r 360 W ords," in
S tu d ies on th e Role o f language B ehavior. Tech
n ic a l Report Number 15. M inneapolis: U n iv e rsity
o f M innesota ftress, 1957.
63. John, Mary Jan e. "An E v alu atio n o f S elf-R a tin g s on
Teaching Competencies by M issouri Teachers of
289
Educable M entally R etarded C h ild re n ." U npublished
d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n , In d ian a U n iv e rsity , 1965.
64. Johnson, Bruce R obert. "An In v e s tig a tio n o f th e
C o g n itiv e and D efensive A spects o f Dogmatism."
U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f
W ashington, 1965.
65. Johnson, James Sydney. "The R e la tio n sh ip o f Open”
and Closed-M indedness to Success in Student
T eaching." Unpublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n ,
George Peabody C ollege f o r T eachers, 1966.
66. Jo n es, Edward E. "A u th o rita ria n ism as a D eterm inant
o f F irs t-Im p re s s io n F orm ation," Jo u rn a l o f Per
s o n a lity . X X III (1954), 107-127.
67. Jo n es, R. L. "S p e c ia l E ducation Teaching in th e
O ccupational S tru c tu re : A F a c to r A n aly tic S tu d y ."
Paper read a t th e C ouncil f o r E x cep tio n al C h ild ren ,
Toronto, A p ril, 1966.
68. Jones, R eginald L ., and G o ttfrie d , Nathan W . "The
P re s tig e o f S p e c ia l E ducation T eaching," Excep
t i o n a l C h ild ren . XXXII (1966), 465-468.
69. Jo sep h in e, S. "Teachers R eaction to G ifted C h ild re n ,"
G ifte d C h ild ren Q u a rte rly . V (1961), 31.
70. J o s h i, Mohan C ., and S riv a sta v a , R. P. " In te llig e n c e
and Teaching A ttitu d e ," Guidance Review. I I
(1965), 95-103.
71. Kearney, Nolan, and Rocchio, P a tric k . "The R e latio n
Between th e M TAI and S u b ject M atter Taught by
Elem entary T each ers," E d u ca tio n al A d m in istra tio n
and S u p erv isio n . XLI (1955), 358-360.
72. _________. "The E ffe c t o f Teacher E ducation on th e
T e a ch er's A ttitu d e ," Jo u rn a l o f E d u catio n al
R esearch. XLIX (1956), 703-708.
73. K e rlin g e r, Fred N. Foundations o f B eh av io ral R esearch.
New York: H o lt, R in eh art and W inston, In c ., 1964.
290
74. K erlin g er, Fred N ., and Rokeach, M ilton. "The
F a c to ria l N ature o f th e F and D S c a le s ," Jo u rn a l
o f P e rs o n a lity and S o c ia l Psychology. IV (1966),
391-399.
75. Kleck, Robert E ., and Wheaton, J e rr y . "Dogmatism and
Responses to O p in io n -C o n sisten t and O pinion-
In c o n s is te n t In fo rm a tio n ," Jo u rn a l o f P e rs o n a lity
and S o c ia l Psychology. V (1967), 249-252.
76. K lein, M orris Moshe. "C o g n itiv e Functions R elated to
A u th o rita ria n ism and Dogmatism." U npublished
d o c to ra l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Yeshiva U n iv e rsity , 1961.
77. Knox, S tan ley C. "A Study o f F acto rs R e la tin g to
Teacher Turnover in S p e c ia l E ducation in Minne
s o ta ." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , Uni
v e r s i t y o f M innesota, 1966.
78. Kramer, Abe S. "The I n te r r e la t io n of B e lie f Systems
and E d u catio n al V alu e s: A Study o f th e E d u catio n al
A ttitu d e s o f In d iv id u a l School T each ers." Un
p u b lish ed d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , New York U niver
s i t y , 1963.
79. K retch, D .; C ru tc h fie ld , R. S .; and B allachey, E. L.
In d iv id u a l in S o c ie ty . New York: McGraw-Hill,
1962.
80. K uipers, Joan H. "An I n v e s tig a tio n In to th e V alue-
A ttitu d e S tru c tu re o f C e rta in Urban T each ers."
Unpublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , Wayne S ta te
U n iv e rsity , 1961.
81. IaBue, A. C. "T each ers' Classroom A ttitu d e s ," Jo u rn a l
o f Teacher E ducation. X (1959), 433-434.
82. I a z a rs fe ld , P. G. "The Logic and M athem atical Founda
tio n o f la te n t S tru c tu re A n a ly s is," in S. A.
S to u ffe r, Mftyaifreme n t and P re d ic tio n . P rin c e to n :
P rin ceto n U n iv e rsity P ress, 1950. Pp. 362-412.
83. Legant, Jean Luse. "A Comparison o f A ttitu d e s Toward
Handicapped C h ild ren Between Three Groups o f
291
Teachers as Expressed on a Q -S o rt." Unpublished
D o cto ral U L sserta tio n , U n iv e rsity o f New Mexico,
1965.
84. L ik e rt, R. A. "A Technique fo r th e Measurement of
A ttitu d e s ," A rchives o f Psychology. CXL (1932),
1-55.
85. Lindgren, H. C., and P atto n , Gladys May. "A ttitu d e s
o f High School and O ther Teachers Toward C h ildren
and C urrent E d u catio n al M ethodology," C a lifo rn ia
Jo u rn a l o f E d u catio n al R esearch. IX (1958), 80-85.
86. _________, and Lindgren, F. "Expressed A ttitu d e s o f
American and Canadian Teachers Toward A u th o rity ,"
P sy ch o lo g ical R eports. V II (1960), 51-54.
87. _________, and S in g er, E. P. " C o rre la te s o f B ra z ilia n
and North American A ttitu d e s Toward C hild-C entered
P ra c tic e s in E d u c a tio n ," Jo u rn a l o f S o c ia l Psy
chology. IX (1963), 3 -7 .
88. LLpetz, M . E. "The E ffe c ts o f In fo rm atio n on th e
Assessm ent o f A ttitu d e s by A u th o rita ria n s and Non-
A u th o rita ria n s ," Jo u rn a l o f Abnormal and S o cial
Psychology. IX (1960), 95-99.
89. Lipscomb, E. E. "A Study o f th e A ttitu d e s o f Student
T eachers in Elem entary E ducation (w ith) Lipscomb
S cale o f Teacher A ttitu d e s ." U npublished d o c to ra l
d is s e r ta ti o n , Indiana U n iv e rsity , 1962.
90. Lord, F. E ., and W allace, H. M . "R ecruitm ent of
S p e c ia l E ducation T each ers," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren .
X V (1949), 171-173.
91. McGee, H. M . "Measurement o f A u th o rita ria n ism and I ts
R e la tio n to T each ers' Classroom B eh av io r," G enetic
Psychology Monographs. L II (1955), 89-146.
92. Magnuson, H. W . S a la rie s o f C e r tif ic a te d Employees in
C a lifo rn ia Rib l i e Schools 1966-1967. Sacram ento:
C a lifo rn ia S ta te Department o f E ducation, 1967.
292
93.
94.
95.
96.
97.
98.
99.
100.
101.
102.
M attson, B. D. "The P ersonal C h a ra c te ris tic s o f
Teachers o f C h ild ren W ho Are M entally R e tard ed ."
U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n , Colorado
S ta te C o lleg e, 1962.
M ehling, R. A. "A Simple T est fo r M easuring In
te n s ity o f A ttitu d e s ," Rib l i e Opinion Q u arterly .
XXIII (1959), 576-578.
M eisgeier, C. "The I d e n tif ic a tio n o f S u ccessfu l
Teachers o f M entally o r F h y sica lly Handicapped
C h ild re n ," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren . XXXII (1965),
229-235.
Moss, C. S. "C urrent and P ro jected S ta tu s o f Seman
t i c D if f e r e n tia l R esearch ," P sy ch o lo g ical Record.
X (1960), 47-54.
Mirphy, D ick stein , and D ripps, E. "A cceptance,
R e je c tio n , and th e H earing H andicapped," V olta
Review. IX11 (1960), 208-211.
N elson, C alv in . "A ffe c tiv e and C o g n itiv e A ttitu d e s
o f Ju n io r High School Teachers and R ip ils ,"
The J o u rn a l o f E d u catio n al R esearch. LVIII
(1964), 81-83.
N elson, R. E. "A Study o f th e In tra -F a c u lty S ocio
m e tric P o s itio n o f th e Teacher o f th e Educable
M entally R e tard ed ." Unpublished d o c to ra l d i s
s e r ta tio n , Syracuse U n iv e rsity , 1964.
N ichols, S. A ., and Shaw, M . E. "S alien cy and Two
Measures o f A ttitu d e ," P sy ch o lo g ical R eports.
XIV (1964), 273-274.
Niyekawa, Agnes M . "A u th o rita ria n ism in A u th o rita ria n
C u ltu re : The Case o f Ja p an ," In te rn a tio n a l Jo u rn a l
o f S o c ia l P sy c h ia try . X II (1966), 283-288.
N o ll, V ic to r H ., and N o ll, Rachel P. "The S o c ia l
Background and V alues o f P ro sp ectiv e T each ers,"
in th e T w entieth Yearbook o f th e N atio n al
C ouncil on Measurement in E ducation. 1963.
Pp. 108-114.
293
103.
104.
105.
106.
107.
108.
109.
110.
111.
112.
113.
Norman, W . T. " S ta b ility C h a ra c te ris tic s o f th e
Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l," American Jo u rn a l o f
Psychology. IXXII (1959), 581-584.
Oppenheim, A. N. Q u estio n n aire Design and A ttitu d e
M easurement. New York: B asic Books, In c ., 1966.
Osgood, C. E ., and I u r ia , Z. "A B lind A nalysis o f
a Case o f M iltip le P e rso n a lity Using th e Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l ," Jo u rn a l o f Abnormal and S o c ia l
Psychology. XLIX (1954), 579-591.
Osgood, C. E., and S uci, G. J . "F ac to r A nalysis o f
M eaning," Jo u rn a l o f Experimental Psychology.
L (1955), 325-338.
_________, Suci, G. J . , and Tannenbaum, P. H. The
Measurement o f Meaning. Urbana: U n iv e rsity o f
I l l i n o i s P re ss, 1957.
P arsons, T. H. "The O rdeal o f th e G ifted C h ild ,"
School and S o cie ty . X C (1962), 404-406.
Peabody, Dean. "A u th o rita ria n ism S cales and Response
B ia s ," P sy ch o lo g ical B u lle tin . IXV (1966), 11-23.
P e te rs , J . S. "Socio-Economic Egocentrism in D elin
qu en ts and N on-D elinquents," Rxrdue U n iv e rsity
S tu d ies o f H igher E ducation. IXXXV (1957),
1- 21.
P h illip s , Raymond V. "A Study o f A ttitu d e and Per
s o n a lity V ariab les Among In -S e rv ic e T each ers,"
D is s e rta tio n A b s tra c ts . XVI (1956), 2528.
P ie rs , E lle n . " E ffe c ts of I n s tr u c tio n on Teacher
A ttitu d e s : Extended Group D esign," D is s e rta tio n
A b s tra c ts . XIV (1955), 245-249.
R abinow itz, W illiam , and Rosenbaum, I r a . "Teaching
E xperience and T each ers' A ttitu d e s ," Elem entary
School Jo u rn a l. IX (1960), 313-319.
294
114.
115.
116.
117.
118.
119.
120.
121.
122.
123.
124.
R av itz, L. A. "Teacher S elf-A cceptance R elated
to A cceptance o f R ip ils In th e C lassroom ,"
D is s e rta tio n A b stra c ts. XVIII (1958), 459.
Rebhun, M artin T. "P aren t A ttitu d e s and th e Closed
B e lie f-D is b e lie f System ," P sy ch o lo g ical R eports.
X X (1967), 260-262.
Reamers, H. H. "R ela tio n sh ip s Between E ight V ari
a b le s and F T est Scores o f T ea ch ers," Jo u rn a l o f
E d u catio n al Psychology. XLV (1954), 427-431.
_________. "R ating Methods in R esearch in T each in g ,"
in N. L. Gage, The Handbook o f R esearch on
Teaching. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1963.
Pp. 329-378.
R eynolds, Maynard C. "A P ro fessio n in a H urry: The
Need f o r S ta n d a rd s," E x cep tio n al C h ild ren .
XXXIII (1966), 1-5.
Rich, A n ette L. "The S ta tu s o f Teachers o f th e
Educable M entally R etard ed ." U npublished
d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f P ittsb u rg h ,
1960.
R ich ard s, I h i l l i p H. "A D e sc rip tiv e Study o f
Teachers* A ttitu d e s About D iffe re n t A spects o f
T h eir Work." U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n ,
U n iv e rsity o f Nebraska Teachers C o lleg e, 1964.
Robkin, T. Y. "The Dogmatism o f T eachers?" Jo u rn a l
o f Teacher E ducation. XVII (1966), 47-49.
Rokeach, M ilton. The Open and Closed MLnd. New
York: B asic Books, 1960.
. "A u th o rita ria n ism S cales and Response
B ia s: Comment on Peabody's P ap er," P sy ch o lo g ical
B u lle tin . IXVII (1967), 349-355.
R udloff, Joseph Stephen. "A D e sc rip tiv e P ro f ile o f
T eachers o f H earing Handicapped C h ild ren w ith
295
125.
126.
127.
128.
129.
130.
131.
132.
133.
Im p lic a tio n s fo r Teacher R ecru itm en t." Unpub
lis h e d d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f
C a lifo rn ia , Los A ngeles, 1966.
Ryan, David G. C h a ra c te ris tic s o f T eachers. Wash
in g to n : American C ouncil on E ducation, 1960.
Schuh, A llen J . "Use o f th e Sem antic D if f e r e n tia l
in a T est o f S u p er's V o catio n al A djustm ent
T heory," Jo u rn a l o f A pplied Psychology. L (1966),
516-522.
_________, and Quesada, C arm encita. "A ttitu d e s o f
F ilip in o and American C ollege S tudents A ssessed
w ith th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l," Jo u rn a l o f
S o c ia l Psychology. LXXII (1967), 301-302.
S c o tt, W illiam E. "The Development o f Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l S cales as Measures o f 'M o ra le ,'"
P ersonnel Bsvchologv. X X (1967), 179-198.
S egal, I s a b e lle . "Choice o f Level o f Teaching.
A Study o f P e rso n a lity F a c to rs A ffe c tin g Spe
c i a l i z a t i o n W ithin th e Teaching P ro fe s s io n ."
U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv ersity o f
M ichigan, 1963.
Semmel, Melvyn J . "Teacher A ttitu d e s and Inform ation
P e rta in in g to M ental D e fic ie n c y ," American
J o u rn a l o f M ental D eficien cy . IX III (1959), 566-
574.
Shaw, M . E ., and W right, J . M . S cales f o r th e
Measurement o f A ttitu d e s . New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1967.
Sherwood, John. "A u th o rita ria n ism , M oral Realism ,
and P re sid e n t Kennedy's D eath," B r itis h Jo u rn a l
o f S o c ia l and C lin ic a l Psychology. V (1966),
264-269.
Soderbergh, P ete r A. "Dogmatism and th e Rib l i e
School T each er," The Jo u rn a l o f Teacher Educa
tio n . X V (1964), 245-251.
296
134.
135.
136.
137.
138.
139.
140.
141.
142.
143.
Solomon, D an iel. " B irth O rder, Family Com position,
and Teaching S ty le ," P sy ch o lo g ical R eports. XVII
(1965), 871-874.
Southwest School D is tr ic ts C ooperative E ducation
Program. Handbook f o r S p e c ia l E ducation.
Inglewood, 1966.
Spencer, E liz a b e th F. "M orale F acto rs Among Teachers
o f th e M entally R e tard ed ." U npublished d o c to ra l
d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f I l l i n o i s , 1962.
S p r in th a ll, Norman A. "A Comparison o f Values Among
T eachers, Academic U nderachievers, and A ch iev ers,"
Jo u rn a l o f Experim e n ta l E ducation. XXXIII (1964),
193-196.
S te in , David D. "The In flu e n c e o f B e lie f Systems on
In te rp e rs o n a l P re ju d ic e : A V a lid a tio n Study o f
Rokeach*s Theory o f P re ju d ic e ," P sy ch o lo g ical
Monographs. IXXX (1966), 1-29.
S te in , J e f f ( e d ito r ) . The Random House D ictio n ary
o f th e E nglish language. New York: Random House,
1966.
Stem pel, Guido H. "The R e la tio n sh ip o f Cost o f
In s tr u c tio n and A ttitu d e s Toward I n s tr u c tio n ,"
The Jo u rn a l o f E d u catio n al R esearch. LVII (1963),
4 -5 .
S to u ffe r, G. A. W . "B ehavior Problems o f C h ild ren
Viewed by Teachers and M ental H y g ie n is ts ," M ental
Hygiene. XXVI (1952), 271-285.
_________. "The A ttitu d e o f Secondary-School Teachers
Toward C e rta in B ehavior Problems o f C h ild re n ,"
School Review. IXIV (1956), 358-362.
Strem, Bruce E. "An A ttitu d e Survey o f High School
D ropouts by Means o f th e Semantic D if f e r e n tia l."
U npublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta tio n , U n iv e rsity of
Southern C a lifo rn ia , 1966.
297
144.
145.
146.
147.
148.
149.
150.
151.
152.
153.
S uci, G. J . "A Comparison o f Semantic S tru c tu re s in
American Southwest C u ltu re G roups,” Jo u rn a l o f
Abnormal and S o c ia l Psychology. IXI (1960), 25-
30.
T hurstone, L. L. "Comment,” American Jo u rn a l of
Sociology. L II (1946), 39-50.
_________, and Chave, E. J . The Measurement o f A t t i
tu d e . Chicago: U n iv e rsity o f Chicago P ress,
1929.
To lo r , A lexander; S c a r p e tti, W illiam L .; and lan e,
Paul A. "Teachers* A ttitu d e s Toward C h ild re n 's
Behavior R e v is ite d ,” Jo u rn a l o f E ducational
Psychology. LVIII (1967), 175-180.
T ria n d is, H. C. " D if f e r e n tia l P ercep tio n o f C e rta in
Jobs and People by Managers, C lerk s, and Workers
in In d u s try ," Jo u rn a l o f A pplied Psychology.
X L III (1959), 221-225.
Voth, John A. "Dogmatism and T est Performance
R e latio n sh ip s o f D o cto ral S tudents in E d u catio n ."
Unpublished d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , U n iv e rsity o f
M innesota, 1965.
Wandt, Edwin. "A Comparison o f th e A ttitu d e s o f Con
t r a s t i n g Groups of T e a c h e rs," E d u catio n al and
P sy ch o lo g ical M easurement. XIV (1954), 418-422.
Warren, Sue A llen , and T urner, R obert. "A ttitu d e s
o f P ro fe ss io n a ls and S tudents Toward E x cep tio n al
C h ild re n ," The T rain in g School B u lle tin . IX II
(1966), 136-144.
Watson, Davis L. " In tro v e rs io n , N eu ro tic ism,
R ig id ity and Dogmatism," Jo u rn a l o f C onsulting
Psychology. XXXI (1967), 105.
Webb, A llen P ., and H a rris , John T. "A Semantic
D if f e r e n tia l Study o f C ounselors in an N D EA
I n s t i t u t e ," P erso n n el and Guidance Jo u rn a l.
XLII (1963), 260-263.
298
154.
155.
156.
Wickman, E. K. C h ild re n 's B ehavior and T eachers*
A ttitu d e s . New York: Commonwealth Fund, 1932.
W ooIfoik, Eva K. "The R e la tio n o f C e rta in Psycho
lo g ic a l C h a ra c te ris tic s to a Choice o f a Type o f
Teacher P re p a ra tio n Program ." U npublished
d o c to ra l d is s e r ta ti o n , Syracuse U n iv e rsity , 1965.
Z ip p el, B e rt, and Norman, Ralph D. "P arty Sw itching,
A u th o rita ria n ism , and Dogmatism in th e 1964
E le c tio n ," P sy ch o lo g ical R eports. XIX (1966),
667-670.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

The Relation Of Sense Of Humor To Creativity, Intelligence, And Achievement

PDF

A Paradigm For The Implementation Of Accountability Measures In Bilingualeducation

PDF

A Factor Analytic Study Of Tests Designed To Measure Reading Ability

PDF

A Semantic Differential Investigation Of Significant Attitudinal Factors Related To Three Levels Of Academic Achievement Of Seventh Grade Students

PDF

Predicting and assessing academic achievement of disadvantaged high school students utilizing a test of study habits and skills

PDF

An Investigation Of The Relationship Between College Freshman Withdrawal And Certain Critical Personality And Study Orientation Factors

PDF

Teacher Assessment Of Creative Potential In Fifth-Grade Students

PDF

A Study Of Relationships Between Grades And Measures Of Scholastic Aptitude, Creativity, And Attitudes In Junior College Students

PDF

Delinquency As A Function Of Intrafamily Relationships

PDF

An Experimental Analysis Of The Relationship Between The Reliability Of Amultiple-Choice Examination And Various Test-Scoring Procedures

PDF

A Study Of The Factorial Validity And Reliability Of The Individual Test Of Creativity

PDF

Communicating Behavioral Objectives As Reading Expectancies To Students And Parents

PDF

The Relationship Of A Model Behavioral Counseling Program To Teacher Perceptions Of Children With Problems

PDF

A Four-Year Follow-Up Of Educationally Disadvantaged Preschool Children, Analyzing Home Environment Variables Facilitating Achievement

PDF

An Individual Testing Approach To Assess Creative Abilities

PDF

A Comparison Of Two Instructional Programs For Severely Retarded Readers At The Junior High School Level

PDF

A Monte Carlo Evaluation Of Interactive Multidimensional Scaling

PDF

A Measure Of Cultural Deprivation

PDF

Prediction Of Therapeutic And Intellectual Potential In Mentally Retardedchildren

PDF

A Study Of The Comparability Of The Wisc And The Wais And The Factors Contributing To Their Differences

Asset Metadata

Creator Platow, Joseph A. (author)

Core Title Attitudinal Variables Among Teachers Of Exceptional And Non- Exceptional Children

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Educational Psychology

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

Tag education, educational psychology,OAI-PMH Harvest

Language English

Contributor Digitized by ProQuest (provenance)

Advisor Metfessel, Newton S. (committee chair), Hayes, Mabel E. (committee member), Lovell, Constance (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c18-664652

Unique identifier UC11360868

Identifier 6909037.pdf (filename),usctheses-c18-664652 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier 6909037.pdf

Dmrecord 664652

Document Type Dissertation

Rights Platow, Joseph A.

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