ED 117 492,

AUTHORTITLE

DOCUMENT RESUME

CE 006 163

Pelerson, Don; And OthersOfttmona] Field Test Report. Vol. 5. Yearnings. andEarnings. 1974-75.

INSTITUTION Mesa Public Schools, Ariz. Dept. of Research and

SPANS AGENCYPUB DATEF' Jun 75

- a II I.

NOTE 44p.; For related documents, see CE 006 159-170; ijor

the unit evaluated, see CE 004 718

'EDRS PRICE c MFL.$0.83 Plus'Postage. HC Not Available from EDRS.DESCRIPTORS Career Awareness; *Career Educatio Community

Planning; *Community Services; *Cu 'clansEvaluation; Elementary Education; Evaluation Methods;

. Grade 4; * oney Management; *Program Attitides; - .

Questionn ires; Tables (Data); Unit Plan-IDENTIFIERS Arizona; Field Testing

ABSTRACTThe field test report on the "Yearnings and Earnings"

'\nstructional unit for grade 4 is one of a series of reports on theArizona developed Career EducationrCurriculum Units. Presented isspecific information as to the, success of 'the units in terms of thelearner's cognitive, 'affective, and psychomotor behavior according toexpressed performance and behavioral objectives. Cognitive andstudent and teacher attitudinal data were collected from five sitesand projects in Arizona. Following the introductiln, a briefdescription of the unit is given. Thee body of the document, presentsand discusses various tables showing field test results in thefollowing areas: cp information describing the field test, includingdemographic. charac4Oristics of .both participating ,.teachers andlearners, (2) attitudinal data from both teachers and learnersconcerning the unit, (3) learner performance.data on the lessons'sp9cific items, :and (4) teacher recruitment, refinement data,analysis, and comments. Pour brief conclusions and.recommendationsare included. The document concludes with two appendixes: statistic's'and tabular data on student and teacher attitudes and a sample of thefield test instrument package--UNIVAL (forms and questionnaires onstudent and teacher attitudes and student,performance). (Author/BP)

%

***********************************************************************Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished

* materials not available from otter sources. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the-best copy available. Nevertheless, items of marginal ** reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality ** of the microfiche-and iardcopy reprodtctions,ERIC lakes available ** via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS).-EDRS is not* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions 311* supplied by EDRS are th--4-best that can be made from the original. *-**********************************************4************************

Iz1; ARIZONA RESEARCH OORDINATING UNIT

1535 ItLEST JEFFERSONPHOENIX, ARI ONA 85007

1 1

CO AVM

Figlip TEST REPORTVol. 5

YEARNINGS AND EARNINGSPan Peterson

Frank L. Vicinophdrles Small

James S. DeGracie

DONE OF A SERIES IN THEARIZONA STATEWIDE FIELD 'EST 1.974-75

I et

U,L DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,EDUCATION A WELFARENATIONAL INSTITUTE OF

EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS SEEN REPRO.OUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATION ORIGIN.ATING IT POINTS OFJWIEW OR OPINIONSSTATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL NATIONAL INSTITUTE OFEDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY

Conducted by-TEE DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH AND EVALUATION

Mesa Public Schools

Dr. Georoe N.,SmithL j.)r, James E. Zaharis

Superintendent Assistant Superint.endentEducational Sarvices

aj 4

. forTEE ARIZONA STATE.DETMENT OJ? EDUCATION

DA. Carolyn Warnier, SuperintendentArizona- Department of Education

Ilr

Eucjne L. DorAssociate !uperintendentf" forCareer Education,

Ind

'1

*1- C.oeonin

-.4.-Yavapai

44s:: WACO P

it:Roo s eve-nn+-ral. Mal,lricopa

Me s.a

A.

t

'1.4 County

L

a

.ti

1,101Z .01:D

So many have contributed major input 'o:t,o field test

'1

.. .

.

....---

pro, sses of unit delivery, monitoring.and instrument comlAetion,'that it is ,i1.tba sibletctract, note,-and applaud individual

OSe teirt

effort can see how much has been accomplished and have a posi-,

hive view of its educational significa-nee for the young -people

of . By documenting and analyl:ing the capabilities of

the cal:er education units tested,'we all have contributed a

s tivo boost to care.e e ucation.in schocll dJ..s triCts acrosscthe

state.

The task of Field Test nanager has been simplifie& cqnsider-

ably b e%cellent staff Support from the Mesa Public $chools

7N purt.rHnt of P.esearch and 'Evaluation, responsive :assistanco,-ro4,the Mate Departent at Education, and the effective Martage-

ment shown by the field test coordinators from the 1,:.espectIve

fit letest projects.

Juno, 1)75

.,

,./40410-7 e4,4Fu.-anl... Leo Vielno

2-1d Toot anage4

S

0

$

FIELD TEOT TA81, FORCB

State Lepartment of Educationlieverly__Wheolcr-r-Director, Rusel&ch CoordinzitinvUnit

,

Public-rff--7,-7-DeparEment of ReSeardh EaluatiOnFr,ank Lee VicyLno, pirector, EvaluationDr. James 8. DeGraKe, Director, Research

P(Actroor., Rusarch AssociateCh,trie8 Small, Research AssociateJulleLindholm, Research Associate

it FieldTeZt CoordinatOrss

'1,:2ft B. 8tanten, WACOPVoung, Pinal'McF,ibiten,ri-County

Lawjle%., Coconlno,

t,Jc..::qt2 0 CoconinoJ.erry O'Brien, CoconinoJr 2. VanWinkle,'YdVapaiandra-ncCarthy, Roosevelt

Chrles Small, MeSaJcL12'. 114114am3e1 , Pima'4in;-flaiirison, Central Mariceva

Nortnrn Ar4ona- State UniversityDr. Sam. Bliss:; DirectorEaucati nal Resources Managem nt CenterData eL,11ction

L'_

.17

41.

4

PliE,ACEJ

sl

Tnis.is one 6f* a sories f field test roports oneiolopod\CareorEdu,4.a-tion Curriculum Units.

nit spoqific, field test matocH 2

.0eA-all tield toStrationale-and canp latio -oc i 1 for ,all

--_ field ttrftcd-un-it

The work presented 7:111d reported herein tea perpursuant to contract from the Ariftona St o Dopartment ofJIdttion. tho opinions oxpre horein do notneeeessarily retrect the position ol%poli o;,f, the onaState. Department o1 Education and no oficial endorsementby the Arl'zona State bopartmnt.of Education should bo in-ferrod. 8

INTRODUCTION

The major purpose ofitoot innovative programs ouch as

career :duration is_to affect I sitive1y learners' cognitive,

affective, and pOychoMotor behavior according to expreoed

performance and behavioral ohjectives. The presenkt field test

.oL career education curriculuM nit is designed to, examine

the success of the unit in terms of the above. Cognitive and

attitldinal data have been collected from,s3,tes and projects

across the state of Arizona. The following projects were in-

volved in the effort of fiald testing the unitd: Central,

MarIcepa, Co- nino, Mesa Pima, Pinal, Roosevelt, Tri-County,

Wi-:COP, and Yavapai.

Data on the presentunit, _hOweVer', have been collected

from the following sites:

ClassroomsClassroomoUsed In 4

Central Maricopa 3a.

Mesa a 1 1

Pima 6. 2

Tri=County 300'

-3

WACOP 5 5,

Total 18 14

*Data rr,ceived in time for ana s

71

significant statistics w.7e, presented and di,scussed*in,

the Field Test aesult8 section of this rejort. Other statis-,

tics and tabular data are presented in,Appendix I-of this

ieport.

,.

0

9

0

f

-UNITDESCRIPTION

Grade 4: Yearnings and Earnings

The primary purpose.of this unit is to help the learners

analyze the domestic situation-of a..hotne,in terms of whet is

available, what is needed, and how' all these are prqvided

for within the c'ommunity. Emphasis i, placed on the learner's

,understanding of planned and unplanr ed experTies and the need

for budgeting money to meet the expense of a home.

44.

4

93

41.

2r4

7

.4

4

0

4

FIELD TESRESULTS_.

_.Y.E2p41NThIGS__ANaEANI-IsIGS,

This section of the report presents the data summary

and analygis for the field teat of the curriculum unit. An

lip outline of this section follows:

A. A deicription of the field test including demo-

graphic characteristicsof.both participating

teachers and learners.

B. Attitudinal data from both teachers and learners

concerning the unit.

''C.Leaner performance data on the lessonspecific4

A itpmst.

D. Teacher refinemen data, analysis and comments.

s.4

,4

11

I

'

TALE

I

NUMBER OF LEARNERS EXPOSED BY

SELECTED DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

11

SEX

ETHNIC COMPOSITION

AMERICAI

SPANISH

ANGLO

dTOTAL

PROJECT

MALE

FEMALE

INDIAN

BLACK.

SURNAME

WHITE

,OTHER NUMBER

Central

Maricopa

88

86

Mesa

14

16

Pima

28

31

Tri-County

43

38

WACOP

75

64

0 0 0 2

18

150

2

813

028

138

98

e.27

50

,1

174

030

0 0 1

59

139

Total

247

235

Percent)?

51

49

316

99

363

0.6

20

.*

.75

482

b

TABLE 11

N&NBER OF INS' aUCTORS BY SELECTED

DENOGPAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS

4

ROJBCT

Central

Maricopa

Mesa

CaPima

Tri-County

,./ACOP

"*" Total

4

YEA

LESS

MALE *FtMALE

1

S OF EX. PIENCE

CAREER EDUCATION

MEE DEV'ID,-

TAUGHT'

READ

THAn

C.. ED.

C. ED.

'C. ED.

15,

,UNIT OR

UNIT OR UNIT OP

-5

6-10 11 -15 YRS./ P ROG PAN

P ROC;

ztt4

P ROG Ps/2.4

"ENP

,IENCE- .

EM LIAR.

TP

It*T *

CAREER

ED.

HAL NO'

EXPOS.

TO

C. ED.

12

00

10

0

01

01

00

0 v.*

20

k"

00

00

03

12

00

00

14

03

10

01

212

2-

51

1

9 1 1

10

0 20

20

30 0

IOW

f

r.

DESCHIPTION OF THE :PARTICIPANTS

The data in this report was obtained frolp the projects,

teachers and ,learners described in the following tables.

1. Learners

Table I.presents demographic information on the

learn,rethatwereexposedtotheunitin the field.

test. Examining Table I, it can be An that the male)

and female learners are fairly evenly represented. There

Wps low representation-by the minority group&.. Out

of 482-learners 25% (119) were from minority back--

grounds 20% (99). Spanish Surname, 3% (16) Black

0.6% (1) American Indian, and 0.2% (1.) Other

'2. Teachers

Table II presents the total number and selected

demographic characteristics of the teacherS presenting

the unit.

ujPw'w'It can t I noted froth Table II that 12 of the 14

teachers that taught tiT unit were female.

The median years of experience for this group falls

between 1-5 years. It should be noted that this group

of teachers was .moderately sgAisticated concerning.

Career education. All 14' teachers were faMiliar with

137

1'

career education. HoWever,, only one had previously taught a

career:education unit or progra'M and only one had actually deve-

loped a career education unit .or program.,

ATTITUDINAL DATA

1. Teacher Attitude

Included in each UNIVAL (Unit Evaluation Instrument)

was an InstrUctor Attitudinal Data Sheet-which asked

two questions concerning attitudes toward career educa-

tion in general and three questions concerning the

teacher's attitude toward the unit (gee/Appendix II).

a. Teacher Attitude-Toward Career Education

Examining the teachers' general Attitude ;toward

career education .(Table III) it,can be seen that the

mean response across questions and projects is a very

high 3.96, on a scale where 5 is the highest positive

response. Of the 28 possible responses, 25 (89%) are

positive toward career education, 1 (4%) isno

opinion, and only 2 (7%) negative.

b. Teacher Attitude Toward the Unit

Table IV summarizes the teacher attitudes toward

the unit.

The teachers' high positive attitude toward career

education carried over somewhat to the teachers' attitude

148

TABLE' III

4

TEACHER ATTITUDE TOWARD GAREER EDUCATION

(Number.,- Percept and Mean of Instruptor Responses

to Attitude Items 1 and*2'Combined)

STRONGLY,

NO

STRONGLY

..POSITtVE

POSITIVE:

OPINION

NEGATIVE

NEGATIVE

MEAN

PROJECT

.N

N%

N%

.%

N

Central

-

Maricopa

00

6'100

0

Mesa,

150

.1

50

0

Pima

250

250

0

crt

Tri-County

00

467

1

WACOP

110

880

0

Total

-4

14

21

75

a

0 0 0

47 0 4

00

04.00

00

00

4.50

00

00

4.50

117

00

3.50

110

00

3.90

27

3.96

toward the unit. The teachers show a high 3.62 positive

attitude toward the unit. Of the possible 42 responesL

28(66%) are positive, t8 (19%) are of no opinion, and

6" (14 %I negative.

Correlations between the Teacher Attitude toward

career educatiOn and Teacher Attitude toward the unit

were not significant (Appendix I).

2. Learner Attitude

When learner attitude toward the unit is examined

(Table V), we see a moderately high positive feeling to-

ward the,uhit across all projects. Of the 2749 responses

66% were posiiye toward the unit,, 27% no opinion, and

only 7% were negative taWard thetnit.',

Correlations between the teacher attitude toward

the unit_

and learner attitude were not significant

(Appendix I).

LEARNER PERFORMANCE

In order to examine learners performance on the unit,

and to assess how well the objectives of the unit are met,

cumulative scores over all the lessoh items Within the unit

(total learner scores) were examined. Table VI presents the

total learner scores in percentages by projects. This score

reflects the unit's overall success concerning delivery of

16

lo

S

TABLE

IV

TEACHER ATTITUDE TOWARD UNIT

-

(Number, Percent and Mean of Instructor Responses

To Attitude. Items 3,

4 and 5 Combined)

',PROJECT

STRONGLY

POSITIVE

N%

.

POSITIVE

'N

,

Central

Mar

222

5:56

Mesa

267

133

.

Pima.

17i

233

-1.

Tri-County

111

444

WACOP.

00

10 A-

t67

Total

614

22

52

'-'

NO

STRONGLY

*OPINION

NEGATIVE

_NEGATIVE

MEA

N%

'')

N

0

33*

1

,,

22

1

213

819

.4

%N

%

0o

4.00

00

04.67

.

17

00

3.50

11

111

,3.33

13

17

3.40

3.62

. a

TABLE V

LEARNER ATTITUDE TOWARDS UNIT(NUMBER,-PERCENT AND MEAN OR COMPOSITE

'LEARNER ATTITUDE RESPONSES)

DON'T ,

YES /HAPPY, :CARE/OK NO/SADPROJECT N N % MEAN,

entra1aricopa

M sa

P ma.

Tri-Couhty

WACOP

Tota1

a \

748 65. 337' 29 73 6 2.58

52 36 56 39 36 25 2.11ONO MOM

1101

448 86 080' 15 29 5 2.75

571 64 273 30 54 6 2.58

8 66 746 27 192 7 2.59

4,

NUMBER ANDTO LESSON

TABLE VI

PERCENT OF CORRECTIMBEDDED ITEMS FOR

LEARNER RESPONSESA GIVEN4Ny t

A4

PROJECT

CentralMarj.copa

Mesa

Pima

NUMBER OFRESPONSES

..

1015

167

ONO

NUMBER OF PERCENT OF ,

CORRECT_ 7CORRECV---RES.R.QNSES !;'1iSPONSES

873

125

Tri-County 528 434 82

WACOP 883 7.61

r".136

Total 2 93 2189

S

S

Am.

0

0

its objectives.

The scores from each project range from a low of 75%4

at Mesa to a high of 86% at Central Maricopa and WACOP.

1

ese,responsep appear uniform with no one project varying,4.

ar from the mean score (84 %) thereby exerting a dispropor-

tionate,influence..

Various other data s collected from the teachers

involved in the field test of the units.

The data collected included the following information:

1. Teachers indicated whether they had experience in

jobs-other than teaching and whether this informa-

tion hkps in teaching' the unit. It was found that

8 of the 14 teachers (57%) had previous experience

in a job other than taching. Seven of these felt

that the experiT66 helped in teaching the unit. J

(Tables VII and VIII)

2. The teachers were asked how many guest speakers

they used. Fin/ of the 14 teachers (36%) did not

use guest 'speakers. A total of 9 guest speakers

were used in the 21 classrooms. (Table IX)

. The teachers were also asked to indicate the amount

of time devoted to the unit.. per week and what

time of day (AM or PM) the unit was primarily taught.li

The median number of hours spent per week teaching

the unit fell between 1-2 hours. Thirteen (93%)

teachers taught the unit in the afternoon while only

1 (7%) taught the unit in the morning. (Table X

and XI)

2014

_TABLt- VII"

NUMBER AND ,PERCENT OF INSTRUCTORS THAT TAUGHT

EACH UNIT BY OCCUPATION OTHete THAN TEACHING

lb

SOCIAL

PHYSICAL

CHEMICAL

TECHNI-

CONSTRUC-

SCIENCE

SCIENCES

SCIENCES

BUSINESS

CAL

.

TI_ON

INDUSTRY

OTHER

NONE

TOTAL

PROJECT

NN

%%

N,%

N%

N%

,NO.

Central

4

Maricopa

00

267

0

00

00

00

116

a.o

aMesa

,Pima

4 0

00

00

00

01,0

0,

I-.

tnTri-County

00

00.

00

00

00

WACOP

00

00

0o/

480

00

Tot9.1

0'

00

0.

00

750

00

4P

(

V.\

00. 0

00

.0

00

00

0

00

00

00

00

133

00

3

00

00

1

02

100

2

00

31-00

.--

3.

' 0'

.0

I''.20

5.

.

.,

17

643

14

44.

40

I

TABLE VIII

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF INSTpCTORS THAT TAUGHTEACiTUNIT BY WHETHER PREVIOUS EXPERIENCE. HELPS

IN-CAREER EDUCATION

PROJECT N,

o

YES%

NON

Central.Maricopa 3 , 100

Mesa 0 1

Pima 0 0 0)

#

Tri-County 0 0 0\._

.

*WACOP 4 80

Total. 7 50. ' 1

NO/ PREVIOUS

EXPERIENCE TOTAL% N % NUMBER

0 0 0 3

100

0

7

1104. 0 1 ,,.-

2 100 2

3 100 3

1 20 5

6 43 14

22

4

4

111

TABLE-,

NUMBER AND PERCENT OF INSTRUCX .THAT-TAUGHT EACHUNIT BY THE NUMBER Of GUE SPEAKERS USED

9

PROJECT N A

:Central,Maricopa

Mesa

.4.Pima

Tri-Counte

WACOPJ -

.

2

. O

0

100

33

40$

3

0 lf0

t

3

.100

100100

0

64,''

)60,

Total 36 9 64

/7

0

0

6,

0*.

0

0

3

TOTALNUMBER.

0 0 0 3

( -0 '0* 0 1

op 0L 0 0 0 0 2

0 -0 3

0' 0 ' 0 0 0 5-

u

0 0 0 0 0 14

17

23

I

of

4

TALE X

_NUMBER ANb PERCENT OF RISTRUCTORS THAT TAUGHT EACH IUNIT

BY AMOUNT OF TIME DEVOTED TO THE UNIT EACH

WEER

/.

,I

PROJECT

Central

'Maricopa

Mesa

Pima

N4 2

Tii-County

0

WACOP

0

Total

-3

LESS

THAN

1 HR.

-,HRS,

%N

14

-

N

2-3

HRS.%

N

3-5

HRS.%

MORE

THAN

5 HRS:

NV

TOTAL

NUMBER

:

33

00

267

0'40

0.%.

03

00

Q'

14100

00

00

14

*

100

0'0

t0

00

00

40

01

33

267

00

0`0

-

ti

3

03

60

fi20

120

05

13.

21-

29

643,

'1

0.Q

X

4

X

a.

A r

TABLE XI

.NUMBER AND PERCENT' OF INSTRUCTORS ,THAT TAUGHT ,

t EACH MITT BY TIME. TAUGHT

-PROJECT

CentialMaricopa

Mesa

Pima

Tri-County

WACOP

1 33

0. a 0

nTotal 1 7

4

PMr-

TOTAL.NUMBER

3 100

i 1 . 100...-

2 100 2

67 3

5 100 5

13 93 14'

A

X

S 25.

19

I

TABU XII

NUMBER OF-114kUCTORS THAT'TAUGHT-EACH UNIT,BY TYPE OF CLASSROOM AND METHOD OF TEAMING

. e

PROJECT

CentralMaricopa

Mesa

Pisa

Tri-County

WACOP

OPENCISSROOM

.

-SELFCONTAINED.V $

'4 TEAM,TAUGHT'.

on,

0 0 1 '33 2 67

1 100 0 0 -.. 0

0 0' 2 100, 0 0

0 -0 _3 100 0

1 20 4 $0 0 0

.Total 10, A

73.

e

20

.

J

4. The teachers were also asked what kind of class-.

room or metilod_of teaching they used Ten (71%)

of the classrooms were self-contained, 2 (14%)

te.

were open classroom and 2.(14 %) were team taught.

Table XII)

Correlations were calcUlated between tile above data

and.. Student AttitUde, Teacher. Attitude and Student Perfor-

mance. No significant correlations were fOund.,

TEACHER REFINEMENT.,ANALYSIS AND COMMENTS

Specific revision data was obtained by asking the field

test teachers to make comments regarding each lesson taught'.

TheSe comments were solicited in the UNIVAL.

The following list represents a composite of teacher

comments regarding the,various:aSpects of the unit, as well

as a lesson by lesson critique of the unit, lheSe comments

have been analyzed and recommendations for revision preSent-

ed.,

TEACHER COMMENTS

When reading the tAacher comments it should be noted

that not'all teachers respond to the open ended items. There-

fore, 'some of the-responses,seem inconsistent with the teacher

respo ses to the closed items. The closed items, it is felt:,

27

21

C

reflect a true attitude toward the unit over the teacher4

sampled. The teacher comments are from selected teachers

that felt strongly enough to take the-opportunity to re:

spond. The comments are, therefore, more for curriculum

refinement than for overall evaluation of the unit.

Central Maricopa

Maps - poorly done.

Pima

Well made and easy to teach. Students were very invol-

ved and participated freely. Little interest, expressed by

students. Unit too long and difficult. Too narrow in scope.

Lesson suggested 90 minutes, we took 9 months.

Tri-County

Really liked the unit. Well written especially learn-

ing activities. Only brightest children made application to

own lives. Assessment iteills for lesson 5 too difficult.

WACOP

Would like taped interviews because people don't want

to talk to such young students. Too advanced for 4th grade.

The objectives and expectations are beyond their scope and

comprehension. The subject matter and presentation is

boring and lacks excitement and color. Format and objectives

are easily followed. Excellent unit. Unit ties in great

with social studies curriculum'.

28

The relevant data collected duKing the field test is

summarized below:

1. A total of 573 learners were expbsed to this unit ife 5

of tht 9 participating projects. Fifty-one percent

of the learners were male and 25% representatives of

minority backgrounds.. -

2. Of the 14 teachers that presented the unit twelve were

female, the median years' of experience was between 1-54

yeArS,40110 only 2 had taught or developed career ed-

ucation-material.

3. Teachers expressed a very positive attitude toward

career educatibn in general (3.96 on a scale where 5 was.

the highest positive response). Though still positive,

tl teachers' attitude toward this particular unit was

lower (3.62).

4. The learners also exhibited a positive attitude toward

the unit. with 66% of the 2749 responses positive,. 24% no

opinion, and,only 7% negative.

5. The learners' overall performance was high (84% correct).

There was very little variability across leisons ant7 units.

6. A list of the teachers critical comments and recommendations

was presented in the body of this report.

23 29

0

. r

I

-se

4

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

l. Future users oethis unit should review the unit in

its entirety payirig particular attention to the con-

tent of each activity noting when during their teaching

year it is best to be taught.

During instalittion the teachers, while not 'constrain-

ed by field testing, should be made aware that the

lessons as presented are-only suggestions and may-be

modified, resequenced, augmented or reduced as,desired.

3. This unit presents a-wide range-Of activity suggestions,

many of which may be extracted to constitute an enrich-

mentprogram in addition totheanit.

4. This unit was well received by both students and teachers.

It is recommended that this unit,be included in the imple-e

mentation phase of curriculum development.

3024

ta

I

APPENDIX I

Additional Data

31

4

no

Mean Instructor Attitude Toward the Unit by Instructor AttitudeToward Career Education

Project Teacher

Instructor InstructorUnit Attitude

Attitude Career Ed..ue . .

Central Maricopa

. .

2

3

3.67

4.67

3.67

4.00'

4.00

4.00

Mesa 1 4.67 4.50.

r

Pima 1 3.33 5.00

2 3.67 4.00

Tri-County 1 3.67 3.00

/ 2 3.33 4.00L

3 3.00 _ 3.50

WACOP 1 3;00 4.00

2 2.67' 3.00

3 3.67 4.00

4 4.00 4.00

5 4.00 4.50

r = 0.41

32

Mean Student Attitude by Times of Day Unit Taught

Project . Teacher. Attitu

Time ofDay

=rim =

Central Maricopa 1

2

3 K

2.57

2.64

2.57

1

1

1

Mesa 1 2.11 1

Pima 1 - 1

2 - 1

0 Tri-County 1 2.94 . 1

2 2.54 2

2.73 1-

v .

WACOP 1 2.42 1

,_.

2 2.29 1

3 2.81 1

4 2.52 1

5,

2.75 1

r = -0.05

33

0

Men Instructor Attitude Toward the Unit by Mean Learner Attitude

Proiect Teacher #

In.structorUnit

AttitudeLearnerAttitude

Central Maricopa 1

2

3

3.67

f 4.67

3.67

2.57

2.6,4

2.57

Mesa 1 4.67

.

,

2.11

Pima,

1.

3.33 -

. 2 3.67

Tri-County 1 3.67 2.940 -

2 3.33 2.54

3 3.00 '2.73

WACOP 1 3.00 2.42

2 2.67 2.29

3 3.67 2.81

4. 4.00 2.52

5 4.00 2.751\

r = 0.04

4

34

11

111

Mean, Learners Performanc on a Unit by Mean Instructor AttitudeToward Unit

Pro ect Teach* Learner

r # Performance

InstructorUnit.

Attitude

Central Maricopa 1

2

3

91

70

91

3.67,

4.67

3.67

Mesa/ 1 75 4.67

..

1Pima 1 - 3.33

.2 - , 3.67

Tri-County 1 91 3.6'7

2 66 3.33

3 87 3.00

WACOP 1 85 3.00

c.

2

3

98

91,

2.67

3.67

4 84 4.00

5.

71 4.00.

r. = -0.54

*Percent of students attaining unit objectives

35

0

71:

Mean Student Performance by- Time of Day Unit TaUght

Proi ect Teacher #,*1,earner

Performance

Time ofDay -

1= m 2=am

Central Maricopa

.

.

91

ZO

91

.

1

1

1

1 +Am..

2

3

Mesa

.

75 1

yima 1 1

2 - 1

Tri-county 1 91- )

2 66 2

3 87.

1

.

WACOP- 1.

.

85 1

.

2

3

98

91. ,

.

1'

1

4 84 1

5 71 1

.

. _ .

r = -0.53

*Percent ot studenti attaining unit objectives

36

FIELD TEST INSTRUMENT PACKAGE

4

37

EvrealwandilieroatED Emma

YEARNINGS AND EARNINGS

GRADE LEVEL: 4

4 c 11+

41.

Please print:

Instructor

PART I

CAREER EDUCATION FIELD TESTPROGRAM INFORMATION

School

Unit or' Kit Title 'District

Grade Leyel Project,

pate unit or Xit introduced in the classroom

Student* data: (*the numbers 'should agree),

4*Total number of students expos,ed to the unit

mo. day- year

*Number of students of each sex: a. male b. female

*Number of students in each ethriic group:

a. - Aineritan, Indian

b. Black,

c' Spanish Surname

d. Anglo White

e. Other

DIRECTIONS:, Circle the letter, ow your,. answt:7r in each of thefollowing gpestLon4. 4

Teacher

How ny years have ypu worked in the field of educat

a. Less than one

1-5 years

c. 6 10 years

d. 11 -15 years

MOre than 15 years

Which of the following would best describe your exposure toCareer Education dateri have:

: .a. Developed a Career Education unit or program

b., Tanght a Career Education unit or program

Read a Career Education unit or program

d. Had some exposure to Career Education

o. Had no exvosure to Career Education 4

38

rWhat is your sex?

b. Female

Is your classroom: (more than one answer may be applicable)

a. Open

b. Self-contained

c. Team taught

What time of day were the lessons taught (predominantly)?

a.. AM

b. PM

How much time did you devote to the unit each week?

a. Less than 1 hour

b. 41-2 hours

c. 2-3 hours

d. 43-5 hours

e. More than 5 hours

How many guest speakers were used in conjunction with theunit?

a. 0

b. 1$

c. 2

d. 3

e. 4 or more

Have you had another occupation other thanteachinq?

a. Social sciences

b. Physical sciences

c. Chemical sciences

d. ausiness

39

e. Technical

f. Construction

g. Industry

h,.

0*.41.

r

Did this experience help in teaching the Career Educationunit?

a.. Yes

,b. No

PART II

Learner Performance Data

Directions: Please provide an indication of how well thelessons delivered the performance objectives.The lesson numbers and methods of evaluationfor each have been indicated. Page numbers;objective specifications, and item numbers areindicated as appropriate. Please indicate thetotal nufaber of learners responding. Then recordthe number that responded correctly. Completethis form as you teach each lesson of the unit.

Method of Evaluation Number of Learners

Lesson Page No. InstructorNumber Item No. Test Checklist Judgment Respondin

.gigt .

.:(vv,

Minimum of1 correct

Minimum of3 correct

6 (fl)p.60

ee6 (#2)p..6

Yearnings and EarningsGArde Level 4

41

1.

4.

PART In

Instructor Attitudinal Data

Directions& Reid each statement and place a cAsibk-in'the,bo*under `the heading that _describes your visponte.

Strong y'Wee

,0

Opinioninion Disagree- 2 Y

DisagreeClasses in sly sub3ectgrade level would bemore meaningful and tele-vant+if focused aroundCareer Education dbjec-tives. ,

Career EduCatiOn is justanother fad that willsoon be for-otten.

After minimal revisionsthis unit will beready for statewidedistribution.

-

The learning activitieswere very effective inhelping meet the per-formance stated. .

.

k

_.

.

The content of the unitrelates directly to.myreular class r.ram.

.

.

.

0

v.

Indicate below any further comments concerning the strengths orweaknesses of the unit.

111111111=1

11

42

PART III (Continued)

Learner Attitudinal Data

On the following page is an attitudinal survey Whi.chwe would like your learners to respond to. Please removethat page from this instrument and reproduce enough copiesfor each of your learners. We feel that it would be bestif your learners responded to this.survey at the completionof the unit. If your learners do not have the needed readingability to complete the survey, please read and explain theitems to them. After the learners have completed the survey,please tally their responses and record the total number oflearners responding in each manner of the form providedbelow.

2.

3.

5.

6.

7.

YES I DON'T`CARE

OK

12

43

O

NO

PAM III (pontv4)

LEARNER ATTITUDINAL FORM

1. Would you want to know moreabout what we have learnedin these, lessons?

2. Do you know more now abouttheselessone than before?

YES I DOWT.

NO

3. Were the lessons interestingto you?

4. Do you think that next year'sclass should be .given theselessons?

5. How did you feel about thelessons?

. 6. How did most of your otherclagsmates feel about the.lessons?

7. How did your teacher feelabout the lessons?

13

44

HAPPY OK SAD

4.1