Citation
Effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college supervisors

Material Information

Title:
Effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by secondary school cooperating teachers
Creator:
Rothman, Louise Sundberg, 1940-
Publication Date:
Language:
English
Physical Description:
xii, 160 leaves : ; 28 cm.

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
College instruction ( jstor )
College students ( jstor )
Colleges ( jstor )
Cooperating teachers ( jstor )
Schools ( jstor )
Student teachers ( jstor )
Student teaching ( jstor )
Teacher supervision ( jstor )
Teachers ( jstor )
Universities ( jstor )
Student teachers -- Supervision of -- Florida ( lcsh )
Teachers -- Training of -- Florida ( lcsh )
Genre:
bibliography ( marcgt )
theses ( marcgt )
non-fiction ( marcgt )

Notes

Thesis:
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Florida, 1981.
Bibliography:
Includes bibliographical references (leaves 148-158).
General Note:
Typescript.
General Note:
Vita.
Statement of Responsibility:
by Louise Sundberg Rothman.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
Copyright [name of dissertation author]. Permission granted to the University of Florida to digitize, archive and distribute this item for non-profit research and educational purposes. Any reuse of this item in excess of fair use or other copyright exemptions requires permission of the copyright holder.
Resource Identifier:
028119590 ( ALEPH )
ABS1150 ( NOTIS )
07803514 ( OCLC )

Downloads

This item has the following downloads:


Full Text













EFFECTIVE AND INEFFECTIVE SUPERVISORY BEHAVIORS
OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS AS PERCEIVED BY
SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING TEACHERS









BY


LOUISE SUNDBERG ROTHMAN


A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1981

























to Jane M. Sundberg












ACKNOWLEDGMENTS


It is with deep appreciation that the author would like to express

thanks to the following persons who have contributed their suggestions

and encouragement towards the completion of this dissertation. First,

Dr. Arthur J. Lewis, Professor of Instructional Leadership and Support

and committee chairman, for the many hours he spent sharing ideas,

reading the manuscript, and lending his support to its conclusion.

Dr. Charles A. Henderson, Associate Professor of Subject Specialization

Teacher Education, and committee member, was particularly helpful in

obtaining the sample used in the study. The other committee member,

Dr. Phillip A. Clark, Professor of Educational Administration and

Supervision, was helpful in suggestions made at the inception of the

idea used in this study. The author would also like to express appre-

ciation to Dr. William H. Drummond, Professor of Instructional Leader-

ship and Support, for the considerable time and help he gave the author

during the writing of the manuscript.

Special thanks are due to Dr. Eugene A. Todd, Professor and

Department Chairman of Subject Specialization Teacher Education, for

lending his support and encouragement from the inception to the con-

clusion of the dissertation. The author spent several years as a

teaching associate in this department. The experience gained was most

rewarding.

Finally, the author would like to thank Mrs. Marjorie Pace, who

typed this manuscript, and Dr. Leslie K. Rothman, husband of the

author, and sons, Torsten and Britt, for their patience in seeing

this dissertation to its conclusion.




















I suspect that the most important result of a systematic and

many-sided study of conflict would be the changes which such a study

could effect in ourselves, the conscious and unconscious, the willing

and unwilling participants in conflicts. Thus, the rewards to be

realistically hoped for are the indirect ones, as was the case with

the sons who were told to dig for buried treasure in the vineyard.

They found no treasure, but they improved the soil.


Anatol Rapoport














TABLE OF CONTENTS


ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS . .

PREFACE . .

LIST OF TABLES ................... ...

LIST OF FIGURES . ... .


Page

iii

iv

viii

ix


ABSTRACT

CHAPTER


I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY .


The Purpose of the Study
The Problem .
Need for the Study .


Rationale for the Study of Conflict


in the


College Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher
Relationship ..
Procedures . .
Limitations of the Study .
Definitions of Terms .

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE .


Introduction .
Studies Related to the Interpersonal
Relationship Between the Cooperating
Teacher and the Student Teacher .
Studies Related to the Role of the
College Supervisor and the Inter-
personal Relationship Between the
College Supervisor and the Student
Teacher .
Studies Related to the Interpersonal
Relationship Among Members of the
Student Teaching Triad: The College
Supervisor, Cooperating Teacher and
Student Teacher .. ..
Studies Related to Communications Among


the College Supervisor, the Cooperating
Teacher, and Student Teacher .


. . 0 .


. .



























Page


A Survey of the Literature in Conflict
Communication Appropriate to the Focus
of Behaviors of College Supervisors
During Student Teacher Supervision 47
Review of the Literature in Education
Using the Critical Incident Technique. .. 60
Studies About Educational Objectives,
Educational Evaluation and Research 61
Studies About Educational Administration
and Supervisory Functions ... 65
Studies About Students .. 67
Studies About Teachers .. 68

III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES 70

Introduction. . 70
The Critical Incident Technique 70
Studies About Student Teaching: The
College Supervisor, Cooperating Teacher
and Student Teacher ... 76
The General Aim of the College Supervisor .. 79
Design of the Critical Incident Instrument
Used for Reporting Critical Incidents .. 81
The Specifications and Criteria Used in
Designing the Critical Incidents in
Supervision Instrument ... 82
Method of Subject Selection and Data
Gathering .. 87

IV. RESULTS .... .. 90

Introduction .. 90
Descriptive Data of Sample ........ 90
Procedure for Analyzing the Critical
Incident Reports .. 92
Answers to the Research Questions ... 97
The Effective and Ineffective Behaviors
of College Supervisors 97
The College Supervisor Effects on the
Functioning of the Cooperating Teacher. .. 113
The Needs of the Cooperating Teacher 122
The Influence of the Relationship on the
Production of Student Teacher Learning
Experiences . 124
The Role of Conflict During Times of
Interpersonal Interaction Between the
College Supervisor and the Cooperating
Teacher ... 129











Page


The Role of Interpersonal Conflict in
the Judgment of Behaviors of College
Supervisors and the Functioning of the
College Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher
Relationship ... 131
Summary .. 133

V. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS ... 135

APPENDIX . .. 142

BIBLIOGRAHPY . ... ... 148

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH .... .159














LIST OF TABLES


TABLE PAGE

4-1 COOPERATING TEACHERS BY ACADEMIC DEGREE,
SEX, AND NUMBER WHO COMPLETED CRITICAL
INCIDENT FORMS . .. 93

4-2 COOPERATING TEACHERS BY RANGE AND MEDIAN
OF AGE, YEARS TEACHING, AND NUMBER OF
STUDENT TEACHERS SUPERVISED 94

4-3 FORTY-SIX SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING
TEACHERS' PERCEPTIONS OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS'
BEHAVIORS .. 101

4-4 EFFECT ON THE SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING
TEACHER'S FUNCTIONING OF THE COLLEGE SUPERVISOR'S
BEHAVIORS . 114

4-5 ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT SUPPORTED
THE EXPRESSED NEEDS OF COOPERATING TEACHERS RANKED
BY FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS FROM MOST TO LEAST 123

4-6 ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT INFLUENCED
THE RELATIONSHIP ON THE PRODUCTION OF STUDENT
TEACHER SUCCESSFUL OR UNSUCCESSFUL LEARNING
EXPERIENCES RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS
FROM MOST TO LEAST ... 126


viii

















LIST OF FIGURES


FIGURE PAGE

4-1 EFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION 98

4-2 INEFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION 99

















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the
Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy


EFFECTIVE AND INEFFECTIVE SUPERVISORY BEHAVIORS OF
COLLEGE SUPERVISORS AS PERCEIVED BY
SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING TEACHERS

By

Louise Sundberg Rothman

March, 1981

Chairman: Dr. Arthur J. Lewis
Major Department: Instructional Leadership and Support

The purpose of this study was to identify through the use of the

critical incident technique, supervisory behaviors of college super-

visors perceived as effective or ineffective by secondary school

cooperating teachers. The results of the study were used to identify

some appropriate and some inappropriate ways for college supervisors to

respond to the situational needs of cooperating teachers during the

period of student teacher supervision. The investigator utilized

insights gained from studying the literature on conflict in inter-

personal communication in analyzing and interpreting the data.

The subjects selected for the study were Florida secondary school

cooperating teachers from all program areas who had supervised or were

currently supervising a student teacher. Forty-six cooperating teachers

identified forty-one effective and thirty-four ineffective critical

behaviors of college supervisors. In addition, the cooperating teacher











indicated how the identified critical behavior of the college super-

visor affected his or her functioning as a cooperating teacher. Nine

activities of college supervisors that supported cooperating teachers'

needs during student teacher supervision were extracted from the

critical incident reports. Nine statements of successful influence and

five statements of unsuccessful influence of college supervisors upon

the learning experiences of student teachers were written.

The most effective behavior of college supervisors identified by

cooperating teachers was the college supervisor's participation in a

conference with the cooperating teacher and/or student teacher about

some aspect of the student teaching experience. The most ineffective

behavior of college supervisors was identified by cooperating teachers

as the lack of or few visits made by college supervisors to the school

to observe and supervise student teachers. The results also indicated

that effective behaviors of college supervisors elicited cognitive

changes in cooperating teachers' insights about student teaching super-

vision more than twice as often as did the ineffective behaviors of

college supervisors while the ineffective behaviors of college super-

visors elicited more direct action by cooperating teachers.

Two major areas of interpersonal conflict between college super-

visors and cooperating teachers were identified. These areas were in

conflicts over goals of student teaching and conflicts over the role

or task expectations of the college supervisor. The findings also

indicated that competition between the college supervisor and cooperating

teacher was not a cause for conflict but was a result of conflict. One

result of interpersonal conflict between college supervisors and












cooperating teachers was that cooperating teachers resolved conflict

in three ways and managed conflict in five ways. Resolution of conflict

was achieved most often by the cooperating teacher's refusal to parti-

cipate in the student teaching program. Management of conflict was

made most often by cooperating teachers recognizing that they would

have to work alone with and take responsibility for the professional

development of the student teacher.

Based on the results of this study, it was recommended that college

supervisors re-establish and maintain stronger ties with schools that

participate in the student teaching program, make weekly visits to the

school and hold weekly conferences with members of the student teaching

triad. Expectations and professional goals for the student teacher

should be agreed upon in conference with members of the student teaching

triad prior to the beginning of the student teacher's assignment. It

was also recommended that future research in supervision be conducted

in the area of conflict communication between college supervisors and

cooperating teachers. Training for college supervisors in human relations

and communication skills was also suggested in order to strengthen and

provide support for continuous collaboration by college supervisors and

cooperating teachers in the professional development of student teachers.


xii
















CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY


The Purpose of the Study

The major purpose of this study was to identify through the use of

the critical incident technique supervisory behaviors of college super-

visors perceived as effective or ineffective by selected secondary

school cooperating teachers. The results were used to identify some

appropriate and some inappropriate ways for college supervisors to re-

spond to the situational needs of cooperating teachers during the period

of student teacher supervision. The researcher utilized insights gained

from studying the literature on conflict in interpersonal communications

in analyzing and interpreting the data.

The following questions were asked in this study:

1. What were the effective and ineffective supervisory
behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by
secondary school cooperating teachers using the critical
incident technique?

2. How did the behaviors of college supervisors as perceived
by cooperating teachers as being effective or ineffective
affect the functioning of the cooperating teacher during
student teacher supervision?

3.. How did the college supervisor become aware of and
respond to the needs of the cooperating teacher during
the period of student teacher supervision?

4. Was the supervisory relationship established between the
college supervisor and cooperating teacher influential
in determining the success or lack of success of learning
experiences provided to the student teacher during
student teaching?









2


5. In what ways did conflict occur during times of inter-
personal interaction between the college supervisor and
the cooperating teacher?

6. If the perceived effective and ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors were a function of the college super-
visor-cooperating teacher supervisory relationship, what
part if any did interpersonal conflict play in those
judgments?

In a study by Yee (1969), student teaching at selected off-campus

school sites was considered by student teachers to be the most important

learning experience of all the experiences offered in their total pro-

fessional preparation. In order to understand the situation in which

student teaching is conducted, the reader is reminded that three persons

play key roles in student teaching experiences: the student teacher,

the cooperating teacher, and the college supervisor. The student

teachers are participating in an educational experience to learn how to

teach by using their background of theory and content together with their

practical knowledge of the classroom. The cooperating teachers, while

continuing to have the responsibilities and duties for their own class-

room, take on the primary responsibility for directing the learning

experiences of the student teachers. The college supervisors represent

the college or university in the off-campus preservice student teaching

experience. Periodic visits to the school site to monitor, observe,

confer, and evaluate the student teacher are traditional functions for

a college supervisor.

The college supervisor and the cooperating teacher are professional

educators who have the primary responsibility of supervising the teaching

and learning experiences of the student teacher. Because of the nature

of the cooperating teacher's role at the school site, and the amount of












personal and professional time that the cooperating teacher is able to

spend with the student teacher, it is assumed that the cooperating

teacher will effectively assist the college supervisor by providing

information to him or her about the classroom teaching performance of

the student teacher. If the cooperating teacher is to perform this role,

then a cooperative working relationship between the two supervisors

should be developed within the framework of the mutually conceived task

of supervising the student teacher.

In providing information to the college supervisor about the

classroom teaching performance of the student teacher, it is assumed

that the cooperating teacher interprets to the college supervisor events,

problems, or concerns about the student teacher and the student teacher's

experiences. Much of the communication that passes between the college

supervisor and cooperating teacher is of a positive nature as the two

supervisors cooperate together in establishing successful experiences

for the student teacher. Some communication that passes between the

college supervisor and cooperating teacher, however, may be the cause or

the result of conflicts that develop between the two supervisors. Con-

sequently, the college supervisor needs to be cognizant of how the

cooperating teacher views both the cooperative and conflictive parts of

the supervisory relationship in order to develop an understanding of

how this relationship may affect the situational needs of the cooperating

teacher during joint ventures of supervision.1



It should be noted that this position is also reversed. The
cooperating teacher needs to be cognizant of how the college supervisor
views this relationship and how behaviors may affect the situational
needs of the college supervisor during student teacher supervision.
This study, however, is only concerned with the first position cited in
the text above.











The knowledge obtained by the college supervisor about the super -

visory relationship should aid in the interpretation of and response to

the needs of cooperating teachers during the period of student teacher

supervision. It is assumed by the investigator that an understanding

of the needs of cooperating teachers by college supervisors during

periods of student teacher supervision should lead to a better under--

standing of the role of supervision. This partnership in supervision

should help the student teacher to achieve a more successful off-campus

learning experience.


The Problem

The college supervisor of student teaching has served as a link

between the schools and colleges of education ever since the beginning of

off-campus student teaching. Although this relationship was described

as weak (Smith, 1965), redundant (Moser & Bebb, 1970), and non-significant

(Morris, 1974), in dealing with the performance and adjustment of student

teachers, some studies reviewed (Bennie, 1964, 1972; Frenzel, 1977; Neal,

Kraft & Kracht, 1968) supported the importance of and the need for a

college supervisor to provide a strong link between the college of

education and the school. With the evidence established that conflicting

views about the need and importance for a college supervisor of student

teachers did exist, the writer reviewed the literature on human communi-

cation processes and generalizations (Burgoon & Ruffner, 1978; Littlejohn,

1978; Steinfatt, 1974), in order to further select areas in conflict

communication theory that could be applied to the study of existing

supervisory relationships between the college supervisor and cooperating

teacher. Several theories of interpersonal communication were further











reviewed. The area of conflict in interpersonal communication was

selected for further study and application to the findings that were

obtained in the study on the effective and ineffective supervisory

behaviors of college supervisors.


Need for the Study

*Preservice teacher education has been undergoing significant changes

in recent years (Ryan, 1975). State departments of education have

proposed and in some states instituted new guidelines and laws that

will significantly change the emphasis of teacher education from on-

campus to off-campus types of learning experiences. For example, a

year's internship for Florida teacher certification is required for educa-

tion majors in Florida after July 1981. Consequently, the partnership

between college and school will be affected. As the student teacher

begins to spend more time in off-campus activities, it appears that one

requirement for an effective program will be a link of trust and mutual

cooperation between the college and school. Lieberman (1977) recommended

that linkage efforts are needed to connect ". .. people, institutions,

agencies, and the like in such a way that they exchange information and

resources (both human and material) to help solve their problems" (p.

150). Only through such effort can those interested in school improvement

be influential in developing collaborative relationships.

Collaborative relationships, however, are difficult to achieve.

Inlow (1956), for example, viewed the functions that a college supervisor

performed in a student teaching supervisory role as myriad and complex.

Other studies have been made delineating the responsibilities of












supervisor, and a number of roles and behaviors have been identified as

contributing toward a successful or unsuccessful student teaching

experience for both the student teacher and cooperating teacher (Hackley,

1976; Johnson, 1964; Neal, Kraft & Kracht, 1967). While most studies

focused on the relationships between the student teacher and cooperating

teacher or the student teacher and college supervisor, few examined the

interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and the

cooperating teacher except as part of a larger study including student

teachers and other school and college administrators.2

Role studies of college supervisors indicated that the experienced

college supervisor of student teachers was expected to be able to respond

to the uniqueness of each student teacher's site situation and to adjust

supervisory techniques to compensate for problems that arose in the

student teacher's learning environment. This learning environment,

situated in an institutional setting, was a school. While supervising

student teachers in a number of different school settings, the college

supervisor would encounter a number of situations. Some situations would

be unique to a specific school. Other situations would have general

application across most school sites. Occurrences within the school site

therefore, needed to be interpreted and integrated into meaningful

learning experiences for the student teacher.

In order for the college supervisor to help translate these

situations into meaningful experiences for the student teacher, the



2
Three excellent sources that direct themselves to the issues of
student teaching: The roles, responsibilities, and the problems of
those key persons involved, are The Association for Student Teaching Year-
book, Volumes 1-47, The Association for Student Teaching Bulletin, No.
1-30, and the Association for Student Teaching Research Bulletin, No. 1-7.











college supervisor needs knowledge of the variety of situational factors

occurring within the student teaching environment. Such awareness would

enable the college supervisor to move from situation to situation with

an understanding of specific and general weaknesses and strengths of

each student teacher's situation. Grumet (1978) defined this situation

as an environment in which action rather than intention or observation

took place as a result of direct human intervention within that environ-

ment. Situations were active with people working at their centers.

According to Grumet's definition, the student teaching environment was

not considered synonymous with a student teaching situation until human

action occurred. The college supervisor and cooperating teacher,in ask-

ing questions about their relationship, transform a neutral environment

into an active situation. Grumet concluded that the way questions were

posited would help to shape the answers that were received. This in turn

aided the interpretation of events and concerns by those persons directly

involved in student teacher supervision.

Dewey (1938) interpreted events or concerns not as isolated singular

objects, but as part of a contextual whole. A situation was an "environ-

ing experienced world" where observations of events or concerns of human

beings were part of the environment. Observations were made in order

to find out ". .. what that field is with reference to some active

adaptive response to be made in carrying forward a course of behavior"

(p. 67).

Coupled with the need to understand and interpret events that occur

within situations, it is also desirable that the college supervisor and

the cooperating teacher establish a collegial relationship, in other

words, a communication link of trust, understanding, and friendliness.











Traditionally the communication linkage between these two has been

strained and has served as a platform for criticism of each other's

base of operation, source of power, and role responsibilities (Corrigan

& Garland, 1966; Hytrek, 1973; Pfeiffer, 1964). The college supervisor's

and cooperating teacher's goals of supervision are often not in accord.

Hawes and Smith (1973) stated that the prospective goals or intentions

of persons directed and explained their behavior. If the goals of

individuals were not complementary or were in conflict with one another,

the subsequent behaviors of the individuals would also be in conflict.

Thus the supervisory task was made more difficult due in part to the

nature of the diverse supervisory practices or norms in student

teaching situations. Both the college supervisor and the cooperating

teacher brought to the student teacher's learning environment experiences

and attitudes about teacher education, each representative of his or

her educational institution. Mutual agreements or understandings as to

the needs for cooperation were strained or lacking because most schools

and colleges did not have a defined educational goal for student teachers

(Huddle, 1973). Often the student teaching program was viewed as a

vehicle to help prospective teachers complete their preservice education

and to qualify for a teaching position. Because of this view, the need

for mutual cooperation and influence between the school and college was

not considered to be an important one. By the very nature of the

organizational boundaries that encompass a public or private school site,

college supervisors and the cooperating teachers have little influence

outside their own institutions and the student teacher becomes torn

between allegiance to the college and the school (Smith, 1965). Both

hosts and guests go their own way, tread lightly so as not to offend,












and are polite to all in one another's company. Few barriers to communi-

cation are overcome when such situations occur. Human energy applied to

the task of preparing the novice teacher to teach in a classroom setting

loses its focus and goal when the partnership is strained, broken or

nonexistent.

Another supervisory problem reported concerns the number of hours

cooperating teachers and college supervisors spend working with the

student teachers. Several studies found that cooperating teachers spent

many hours per week working directly with the student teacher while the

college supervisors contact was limited to one or two hours per week

(Ashby, 1973; Bennie, 1964; Frenzel, 1977). Less time was spent by

the college supervisor discussing the student teacher's experience with

the cooperating teacher. Too often the cooperating teacher was ignored

during the college supervisor's visit, further weakening communication

contacts between the two supervisors.

The number of contact hours that the cooperating teacher has with

the student teacher would enable the cooperating teacher to evaluate

most aspects of the student teaching experience including incidents that

translated into effective or ineffective behaviors of college supervisors

during student teaching supervision at a school. The focus of this

study was upon the identification of those incidents of effective and

ineffective behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by cooperating

teachers, that affected the supervisory relationship between the college

supervisor and the cooperating teacher. It was realistic to suppose

that some of the interpersonal communication that passed between members

of the supervisory team was rooted in conflicts that arose from incompatible

interpersonal interaction between the college supervisor and the cooper-

ating teacher.












Deutsch (1969, 1973) included in his definition of conflict the

incompatibility factor that created conflict situations. Such in-

compatibility could be between persons, groups, or nations. Conflicts

caused by the factor of incompatibility could have either constructive

or destructive consequences. Deutsch found that when constructive

consequences of conflicts emerged the participants were satisfied with

the outcome of the conflict. Conversely, destructive consequences of

conflicts emerged when participants were dissatisfied with the outcomes

and a feeling of loss was a result. Lying somewhere on the continuum

between the two poles of constructive and destructive consequences of

conflict were the consequences of conflict that satisfied or dissatisfied

one party to a degree more than the other party. Total satisfaction or

dissatisfaction was easier to identify and measure, however, in simple

situations than in more difficult in complex social situations. Yet

Deutsch believed that it was not impossible to compare conflicts in

terms of their constructive or destructive outcomes, and by highlighting

these differences of outcomes, the processes by which the outcomes were

derived would also be emphasized.

In the present study under investigation, it was assumed that the

cooperating teacher could identify supervisory behaviors of college

supervisors that contributed to an incompatible interpersonal communica-

tion situation or a conflict. It was also assumed that the cooperating

teacher would be able to identify those conflicts that had destructive

consequences for members of the student teaching triad. Secondly, it

was assumed that the cooperating teacher would identify situations of

interpersonal communication in which compatibility and cooperation

existed between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Although












the identification of effective incidents or situations of behavior

was viewed as an important contribution to the study of the interpersonal

relationship between the two supervisors, the major collateral focus to

the study was to relate, if found, critical incidents of behavior to the

research findings in the literature on conflict in interpersonal communi-

cation in order to explain why such incidents occurred and how those

identified critical incidents affected the interpersonal relationship

between the college supervisor and the cooperating teacher.


Rationale for the Study of Conflict in the College
Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher Relationship

Several assumptions are made about the nature of conflict between

college supervisors and cooperating teachers that served as the conditions

for the study on conflict in interpersonal communication. The first

assumption is that conflict exists wherever there is human interaction.

Kelley (1979) stated that conflict was inevitable and could not be

suppressed. Citing research from the literature, Kelley made several

suppositions that further supported the need to study conflict in super-

vision. Like Deutsch (1969, 1973), Kelley believed that conflicts could

have constructive or destructive outcomes. Conflicts could also

initiate change which could be beneficial to all parties intent on

maintaining the status quo. Lastly, conflict increases whenever there

is an increased interdependence between individuals, agencies, or

institutions. Because of the very nature of the adult triad, the college

supervisor, the cooperating teacher, and the student teacher, and the

nature of student teaching supervision by two persons representing two

different institutions, interdependence between members of the student

teaching triad is inevitable.











The second assumption is that conflicts in supervision do occur

between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Such evidence

was produced by reviewing the literature on student teaching supervision.

One study in particular conducted by Lipton and Lesser (1978), concluded

that while tensions inherent in supervision could not be eliminated,

there were means by which the student teaching triad could reduce the

amount of conflict that existed between the triad members. The authors

identified a number of generalized areas of conflict between supervisors.

Although specific critical behaviors of college supervisors and cooperating

teachers were not specified, the areas of conflict identified served as

further evidence that critical behaviors of college supervisors can be

identified by cooperating teachers.

Lipton and Lesser (1978) identified the following areas of conflict

in the college supervisor-cooperating teacher relationship. (1) There

is an interaction in a "triangle of adults" none of whom are generally

regarded as effective autonomous leaders or creative thinkers. Yet two

of the adult members are viewed as authority figures. (2) There is a

difference of philosophy about student teaching between the school and

the university. This difference is not necessarily undesirable because

an atmosphere of harmony between the two institutions could possibly

lead to a closed system that discourages any form of change in educa-

tional practices. (3) The philosophy of the college supervisor and

cooperating teacher toward the goals of student teaching are often in

conflict. On the psychological level, competition to be best liked

and approved by the student teacher and other fringe members of the

student teaching triad, e.g. university and school administrators, can

result. (4) There appears to be conflict between the college supervisor












and cooperating teacher over the perceived prestige and status of the

university duties versus the duties of school personnel. It is believed

that unresolved issues of prestige, role, and favoritism often have a

great impact on the student teacher in the assigning of grades and future

job opportunities. (5) Conflict between the triad members exists in

both covert and overt types of communication.

Lipton and Lesser (1978) concluded that conflicts could not be

eliminated but suggested several alternatives that could help reduce

tensions. The alternative suggestions were made after the authors noted

that ego strengthening of the triad would not be possible. Instead

the authors suggested that the members of the triad select each other

and then be permitted to change triad members if the new relationship

did not work out. A second suggestion made was to reduce the power of

influence by assigning a pass/fail grade to the student teacher. Another

means of reducing potential conflict was to have the college supervisor

observe the student teacher by video-tape, entering the classroom only

for sporadic visits. Greater role differentiation for the college

supervisor and cooperating teacher were suggested, giving primary

training duties to the cooperating teacher, and consultant-counselor

tasks tothe college supervisor. Lastly, it was suggested that the

student teacher should be viewed as a neophyte professional,with

responsibilities and autonomy provided as early as possible in the

student teacher's training program.

The third assumption made for this study of conflict in inter-

personal communication is that it would be beneficial for the college

supervisor to know and understand the nature of conflict between the











two supervisors. Tjosvold (1978) cited several benefits for the

understanding of conflict between teachers and school administrators

that has application to the relationship between the college supervisor

and cooperating teacher. Effectively managed, conflict can increase a

commitment to a shared purpose. If ineffectively managed, conflict can

undermine the effectiveness of purpose between parties. While

Tjosvold focused mainly on role differentiation between teachers and

school administrators, both groups he observed had competitive and

cooperative interests. Relating such observations to the study of the

relationship between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher, it

can be stated that cooperation between the college supervisor and

cooperating teacher exists when there is a goal to promote student

teacher competence. Competition results because of the sharing of the

benefits and burdens between the two supervisors. Knowing the benefits

of conflicts should allow the college supervisor to participate in more

effective decision making by collecting more information about the

situation, by exploring alternatives to bring about a more satisfactory

relationship, and by exchanging ideas, opinions and feelings, thereby

reaffirming the commitment to supervision. Supervisors need to under-

stand that the mutual influence of the college supervisor and cooperating

teacher is viewed as a more desirable goal than a goal where a hierarchy

of supervisory influence prevails.

The college supervisor communicates in general and specific ways

with the cooperating teacher about situations, problems, and issues

concerning the student teacher assigned to a cooperating teacher for

a specified time of student teaching. A major role that the college

supervisor assumes in working with the cooperating teacher and student











teacher is that of developing and maintaining good interpersonal

relationships with members of the student teaching team and the

cooperating school. The attitudes that the college supervisor brings

from the college to the school site could very well influence the types

of communication that pass among the student teaching team. Stratemeyer

and Lindsey (1958) concluded that much of the communication involved the

seeking of information or the solving of problems pertaining to the

student teacher's situation. With better understanding on the part of

college supervisors and cooperating teachers of the needs and concerns

for each other, it is reasoned that the student teaching experience

could be significantly improved for the college supervisor, the cooperating

teacher, and the student teacher.


Procedures

The critical incident technique developed by John C. Flanagan (1954)

and others was the method of research used but modified for the purposes

of this study. The critical incident technique is a set of procedures

for collecting self-reported observations of effective or ineffective

behaviors about specific jobs in which persons are engaged. For the

purposes of this study, a critical incident is an observable human

activity that is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences

and predictions to be made about the person performing the act (Flanagan,

1954). Moreover, this human activity is an indication of unusual

competence or lack of competence on the part of the persons) engaged in

the activity (Good, 1973). Critical behaviors are those identified

effective or ineffective behaviors that appear to have the most influence

on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of achieving the aim or purpose

of the job or task.











The subjects selected for the study on critical behaviors of

college supervisors were secondary school teachers who had supervised

or were currently supervising a student teacher sent from one of three

major state universities in Florida. All the participants were presently

employed in the Florida school system and were asked by university area

coordinators or assistant principals to volunteer for the study.

One hundred and ninety-two cooperating teachers were given the

critical incident forms to report effective or ineffective behaviors of

college supervisors during student teacher supervision. The questions on

the critical incident forms were developed to elicit from cooperating

teachers the critical behaviors of college supervisors. Once the forms

were returned to the investigator, the contents were read and analyzed

in order to provide the data used to answer the questions posited in

this study.


Limitations of the Study

The following limitations of the study were established

(1) The data to be collected were limited to those effective

and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college supervisors as

perceived by cooperating teachers using the critical incident technique.

At the time that the data were collected, the subjects who volunteered

were cooperating teachers who had supervised a student teacher assigned

to them through a preservice teacher education program from a university

or college. The sample of volunteers consisted of cooperating teachers

in the state of Florida.












(2) Cooperating teachers who participated in the study

supervised student teachers at the secondary school level (Grades 7-12)

for a minimum of one quarter, or nine weeks. Each student teacher was

assigned to a college supervisor for the same period of time.

(3) The two types of institutions that participated in the study

were Florida public schools where the cooperating teachers were employed,

and three state universities that sponsored and supervised the student

teachers.

(4) The critical behaviors of college supervisors were those

behaviors which were identified by cooperating teachers as critical to

the interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and cooper-

ating teacher and which were perceived by the cooperating teacher to

affect their functioning as a cooperating teacher. Although many

critical behaviors of college supervisors were directed toward the

student teacher, those behaviors were not considered important to the

study unless the cooperating teacher was affected by the college super-

visor-student teacher interpersonal relationship.


Definitions of Terms

The following terms are central to this study and therefore

require definitions:

College Supervisor a designated person who represents the institution
of higher learning in the task of supervising a student teacher in a
public or private school. The major responsibility of the college
supervisor is to observe the student teacher in a classroom setting, to
confer with the student teacher about his performance, and to evaluate
the student teacher's performance.













Cooperating Teacher -- the classroom teacher who volunteers or is
assigned to aid and direct the teaching experiences of a student teacher
in addition to the regular duties assigned to the classroom teacher in a
public, private, or laboratory school. The major task of the cooperating
teacher is to help the student teacher plan appropriate lessons, collect
instructional materials, and to suggest ways to present the materials
to the pupils. Another function of the cooperating teacher is to evaluate
the student teacher.

Student Teacher the college student engaged in a practice teaching
experience usually termed student teaching under the guidance and super-
vision of a college supervisor and cooperating teacher in a planned
period of educational experiences in which the student teacher moves
from the role of observer-helper, to full participant in performing the
duties of a classroom teacher.

Dyad -- two persons who are involved in social interaction. For the
purposes of this study, a dyad is identified as any two of the following
three persons; college supervisor, cooperating teacher, or student teacher
engaged in some form of social interaction between each other.

Triad -- three persons who are involved in social interaction. For the
purposes of this study, a triad will be identified as the college super-
visor, cooperating teacher, and the student teacher engaged in some form
of social interaction among each other.

Situation -- a contextual or environmental condition or circumstance in
which there exists a component of human intervention or interaction where
experiences and interpretations of events takes place.

Incident any observable human activity that is sufficiently complete
in itself to permit inferences and predictions to be made about the
person performing the act. To be critical, an incident must occur in a
situation in which the purpose or intent of the act seems fairly clear
to the observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite to
leave little doubt concerning its effects (Flanagan, 1954, p. 327).

Critical Incident -- some occurrence involving a person which is taken
to indicate unusual competence or lack of competence on his part; has been
used as a basis for defining job requirements and for developing pro-
ficiency tests (Dictionary of Education, 1973, p. 154).

Conflict -- some incident that occurs between the college supervisor and
cooperating teacher in which the cooperating teacher perceives that
incident as creating an incompatible situation between himself and the
college supervisor.
















CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Introduction

The literature is replete with scholarly concerns for a meaning-

ful student teaching experience as part of the preservice teacher

education program. Roles, behaviors, attitudes, concerns and problems

of key individuals engaged in the student teaching collaborative effort

have been studied and recommendations for change in this preservice

teacher education component have been made. Despite the large numbers

of student teaching studies available, Heitzmann (1977) reported that

much of the research on student teaching has been conducted by doctoral

students in graduate schools of education. Several factors are stated

to support his thesis. Many faculty members of colleges of education

view the college supervisor as a low status faculty position. Because

the college supervisor's work is more field oriented and less research

oriented, such activities do not carry the weight for merit increases

or faculty advancement. Furthermore, many faculty are reluctant to

return to the classroom after teaching a homogeneous group of college

students. Accordingly, doctoral students are frequently used to super-

vise student teachers and those who accept the assignment of supervision

find that they have a population available for their doctoral disserta-

tion research.

A large number of studies in preservice teacher education student

teaching focus on the student teachers. Stress, anxieties, problems,











attitudes, beliefs, successes and failures are fully reported in the

literature (Anderson, 1960; Coates & Thoreson, 1976; Fuller, 1969;

Garrard, 1966; Halpert, 1966; Harrow, 1973; Sorenson & Halpert, 1968).

Fewer studies,however, are conducted in the areas of studying the inter-

personal relationship between the student teacher and the cooperating

teacher, the student teacher and the college supervisor, or the coopera-

ting teacher and the college supervisor. Only one study, by Lipton and

Lesser (1978), related directly to the study of conflict in the teaching

triad. In order to understand the nature of the interpersonal relation-

ship between college supervisors and cooperating teachers, it was

necessary to review the literature on the relationships that exist

between the members of the student teaching triad; the college super-

visor, cooperating teacher, and the student teacher.

The recent professional literature appropriate to the present

study being conducted is reviewed under six headings. The first section

reports studies related to the interpersonal relationship between the

cooperating teacher and the student teacher. The second section des-

cribes studies related to the role of the college supervisor and the

interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and the

student teacher. The third section contains studies related to the

interpersonal relationship among members of the student teaching triad.

The fourth section reports studies related to communication among the

college supervisor, the cooperating teacher, and the student teacher.

The fifth section is a review of the literature on conflict communica-

tion that was judged by the investigator to be appropriately related

to this study on the effective and ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors. The sixth section contains a review of the literature in

education using the critical incident technique method.













Studies Related to the Interpersonal Relationship Between
the Cooperating Teacher and the Student Teacher

At the time of the Steeves (1952) study, the most important person

in the preservice professional life of the student teacher was the

cooperating teacher to whom the student teacher was assigned. However,

the only criterion used in the selection of cooperating teachers was

reported to be the availability and willingness of teachers to take on

the extra duties of this role.

Although the influences on student teachers by other key individuals

wereidentified by Karmos and Jacko (1977) and Manning (1977), the

cooperating teacher remained,according to Lowther (1970),the most signi-

ficant influence upon the beliefs, attitudes and behaviors of the student

teacher.

In a study of the most successful and least successful experiences

in student teaching as perceived by the student teacher, Lowther (1970),

concluded that the interpersonal relationship established between the

student teacher and cooperating teacher was a major factor in determining

thesuccess of the student teaching experience. The need for more investi-

gation into the interpersonal dynamics of the student teacher--

cooperating teacher relationship was cited. According to this study

four important questions remained unanswered: (1) What constitutes a

good or bad interpersonal relationship between the student teacher and

cooperating teacher? (2) What are the outcomes of a good or bad rela--

tionship? (3) Can variables be identified that contribute to the

structuring of the student teacher-cooperating teacher relationship

along with each participant's role? (4) Why is it difficult for the










cooperating teacher to provide feedback on teaching performance to the

student teacher? Lowther's study found that too often student teachers

were given little or no feedback on teaching performance, were given

little personal or professional support, and were unable to satisfy the

cooperating teachers' expectations. Student teachers viewed those

experiences where there was personal satisfaction gained on the student

teacher's part in working with the pupils as more successful than those

experiences related to achieving the instructional objectives.

Nicholson (1971) used the critical incident technique to identify

and categorize behaviors of cooperating teachers that student teachers

viewed as critical to their success or failure in student teaching. More

behaviors were identified in the affective than the cognitive domains

of teaching behaviors. Nicholson concluded that there exists a rela-

tionship between effective teaching by the student teacher and the super-

visory behavior of the cooperating teacher.

Hackley (1976) found twenty-three effective behaviors and fifteen

ineffective behaviors of cooperating teachers as perceived by student

teachers in both the affective and cognitive domains of teaching be-

haviors. These behaviors were then translated into twenty behavioral

criteria to be used for the selection and development of effective

secondary school cooperating teachers. Although many effective behaviors

of cooperating teachers were related to the classroom instructional

component of student teaching, a number of effective behaviors were

identified as interpersonal behaviors between the cooperating teacher

and the student teacher. Effective interpersonal behaviors of coopera-

ting teachers included: the ability of the cooperating teacher to

provide confidence and support to the student teacher, to criticize the












student teacher constructively and in private, to treat the student

teacher as a colleague and not as a student, to display and translate

to the student teacher a professional attitude toward teaching, and to

help the student teacher overcome the frustrations of teaching. Examples

given byHackley of ineffective interpersonal behaviors of cooperating

teachers included communicating a lack of faith in the student teacher,

increasing the insecurity of the student teacher, interrupting the

student teacher at inappropriate times, rejecting the student teacher's

ideas about instructional techniques and materials, and criticizing the

student teacher excessively and in front of other persons.

In support of the Lowther (1970) and Nicholson (1971) studies,

Campbell and Williams (1973) found that a successful student teaching

experience is determined by the quality of the relationship between the

student teacher and the cooperating teacher, not by the school, class,

or grade level assigned. They identified fourteen problems commonly

encountered by student teachers with the cooperating teachers to whom

they were assigned. Two major deterrents to a successful student

teaching experience were identified: inconsistent levels of expectations

for the student teachers, and the reluctance of the cooperating teacher

to "let go" of the class in order to allow the student teacher the

opportunity to use different teaching methods and learning materials.

Heitzmann (1977) reviewed eighty studies on student teaching and

concluded that the student teaching experience was the decisive factor

for continuing in or terminating the choice of teaching as a career. It

was the cooperating teacher who promoted creativity and high morale,

and established a mature relationship and understanding between the two












partners as to expectations, accomplishments and goals. The role of the

cooperating teacher was viewed as that of a key leader, who suggested,

guided, demonstrated, conferred, counseled, and evaluated the student

teacher during a stressful period of adjustment. Teaching skill develop-

ment to the student teacher, rather than using the student teacher as a

source of free labor or as a personal assistant, was viewed by McAteer

(1976) as the most important function of the cooperating teacher's role.

Elkin (1958) identified effective and ineffective behaviors of

cooperating teachers as perceived by student teachers and cooperating

teachers and found major differences in how the two groups perceived

the role of the cooperating teacher. Cooperating teachers viewed their

role as one of induction of the student teacher into the mechanics of

teaching and lesson preparation while student teachers viewed the major

roleof the cooperating teacher as one of encouraging the student

teacher to assume increased responsibility for classroom instruction

by providing the opportunity for the student to grow in professional

responsibilities. The personal relationship that developed between

the cooperating teacher and student teacher appeared to be a significant

factor for the success or failure of the student teacher's performance.

Price (1961) found that the attitudes held by student teachers

changed after the student teaching experience and moved in the direction

of attitudes held by the classroom teacher. Correlation between the

cooperating teacher and student teacher classroom performance indicated

that student teachers appeared to acquire many of the teaching practices

of their cooperating teachers. This study supported McAulay's (1960),

conclusion that colleges of education method class techniques and

materials were not used by a majority of beginning first year teachers.













All teachers, however, used the materials they had prepared in the

classroom in which they had had their student teaching experience. It

must be noted that the cooperating teachers who participated in this

study identified as successful, teachers who were themselves strong

positive influences on their student teachers.

The effect of the cooperating teacher's personality on the student

teacher was not considered in the studies reviewed above. However,

Yee (1969) tested the hypothesis that cooperating teachers are a signi-

ficant source of influence and concluded that student teacher-held

attitudes about their pupils reflected the influence of their coopera-

ting teachers. Although congruent influences characteristic of a positive

relationship between the attitudes of cooperating teachers and student

teachers were most common, the study also revealed that a number of

incongruent influences operated. Negative influences of cooperating

teachers also contributed to attitudes held by student teachers not in

accord with cooperating teachers.

Mahan and Lacefield (1978) reported two studies that extended the

knowledge about the effects of year-long student teaching experiences

with multiple role models (cooperating teachers) upon student teacher

value orientation toward education and schooling. It was concluded

that the values held and expressed vocally and/or concretely by coopera-

ting teachers were a powerful influence upon the student teachers' value

orientation toward teaching. The studies revealed that student teachers

would adjust their attitudes and values to minimize disparity between

the cooperating teachers and themselves. This shift would occur toward

the first assigned cooperating teacher and would shift again toward the











values and beliefs held by the second assigned cooperating teacher. In

both studies the assumption was made that the cooperating teachers'

experiences would change little as a result of the interaction with and

influence of the student teacher assigned to them. It was concluded that

many cooperating teachers viewed the cooperating teacher-student teacher

relationship as one of the teacher-learner. Cooperating teachers were

usually older, more highly trained, and more experienced than student

teachers. While both parties were influenced by the dyad relationship,

the student teacher was influenced to a more significant degree by the

cooperating teacher than by vice versa.

Communication links between the cooperating teacher and student

teacher were studied by Edmund and Hemink (1960). They found that

cooperating teachers and student teachers agreed most frequently on

areas of successful student teacher experience. There existed negligible

differences between areas of least success. However, the low percent

of agreement about the least successful student teaching experiences led

the investigators to conclude that poor communication links existed

between the cooperating teacher and the student teacher. More signi-

ficantly, little or no attention was given by the subjects to the student

teacher's success or failure in teaching course content. Evidence of

poor communication and low agreement of success were also found by the

investigators in the areas of class discipline, lesson planning, and

other in-class related activities.

Soares and Soares (1968) in a study focusing on the nature of

the student teacher's self concept during student teaching found that

although there was agreement that student teaching was the most meaning-

ful preservice teacher education experience, an unrevealed facet of













student teaching was that the experience appeared less significant than

it could or should be. Results from the study indicated that student

teachers did not seem to gain as much as they should from their associa-

tion with the cooperating teacher when measured against three alterna-

tive image factors; how the student teacher viewed himself as a teacher,

how the student teacher viewed the college supervisor's image of him as

a teacher, and how the student teacher viewed the cooperating teacher's

image of him as a teacher. The results indicated that the image of the

cooperating teacher's opinion of the student teacher as a teacher was the

most important factor for the student teacher's professional development.

Soares and Soares' (1968) study supported Thompson (1963) in his

findings which identified anxieties experienced by student teachers.

One-third of the subjects in the Soares and Soares study were elementary

school student teachers and two-thirds of the subjects were secondary

school student teachers. The results showed that over three-quarters

of the sample identified anxieties that were concerned with the student

teacher's relationship with the cooperating teacher. The student

teachers indicated that they were given little information by their

individual cooperating teacher about the expectations for the student

teacher to meet.

Southall and King (1979) conducted a survey of college supervisors'

perceptions of critical incidents; situations that occurred which could

have or did have an impact upon the student teacher's completion or

success in the student teaching experience. The authors found that lack

of communication between the cooperating teacher and student teacher













was the most common cause of critical incidents during student teaching.

The second most common cause for critical incidents to occur was per-

ceived by the college supervisor to be the student teacher's inability

to live up to the expectations of the cooperating teacher. This failure

was reported to affect the relationship between the student teacher and

cooperating teacher. The third most often perceived cause or critical

incident was the student teacher's not being prepared to teach, or not

knowing methods and techniques of teaching. The major implication drawn

from the results of the study was the suggestion that college supervisors

must be skilled in dealing with interpersonal relationships, particularly

in facilitating and encouraging communication between the cooperating

teacher and student teacher.

Lowther (1968) attempted to answer the question of the degree of

quality in the cooperating teacher's supervisory performance by using

student teacher descriptors of the most helpful and least helpful

activities of the cooperating teacher. A questionnaire was developed

on which the student teachers described the most and least helpful

activities. There were 480 most helpful activities and 325 least

helpful activities cited. Four categories of most helpful activities

were identified: types of behavior allowed student teachers in

the classroom, counseling and advice, support and understanding

of the student teacher's concerns, and performance evaluation. Least

helpful activities were identified as the following: the small

amount of performance evaluation, the small amount of help and counsel

offered, poor or rigid supervision, the lack of advice and help in the

teaching environment, and the small amount of actual teaching time












allotted the student teacher. Low communication linkage between the

cooperating teacher and student teacher as to the needs and professional

help desired by the student teacher was evident by the responses.

Simms (1975) suggested that the lack of communication and pro-

fessional help provided to the student teacher could be due to the feel-

ings of inadequacy felt by the cooperating teacher. Although most

cooperating teachers viewed themselves as adequate classroom teachers,

they perceived their ability to supervise a student teacher and to work

with sponsoring personnel from a university as inadequate. The coopera-

ting teachers stated that leadership on the part of the university in

sponsoring programs, and special training sessions for working with

student teachers were weak or non-existent. Moreover, content and

methods of instruction in some professional education courses were

designed to prepare student teachers to teach a student body that no

longer existed in the schools. According to Bosse (1973), cooperating

teachers stated that their perceived inability to work with a student

teacher was a result of the implementation policies of the student

teaching program by the colleges and universities. Earp (1975) con-

cluded that participatory collaborative supervision (teams of student

teachers and cooperating teachers) caused significant gains in the

cooperating teacher's positive attitudes toward their supervisory jobs

and on their evaluation of fellow teachers, student teachers, and class-

room supervisors as sources of new instructional ideas.

It is important to note that the influence of interpersonal

behaviors between cooperating teachers and student teachers was

reciprocal. A majority of the studies noted previously by Yee (1969)












studied cooperating teacher attitudes and influences on the student

teacher. Rich (1971) found that influence was reciprocal with the

student teacher becoming both a learner and a change agent during the

student teaching period. Seven categories describing student teachers

as providers of beneficial experiences for pupils, student teachers,

cooperating teachers, and cooperating schools were established and

defined by cooperating teachers who served as subjects in the study.

Educational experiences were identified as a two-way process in which

the flow of new ideas, outlooks and approaches to educational learning

and teaching outcomes not only moved from the cooperating school and

the cooperating teacher to the student teacher, but moved from the

college or university through the student teacher to the cooperating

school and the cooperating teacher. The two categories of educational

experiences that cooperating teachers ranked as the most important

contribution by the student teacher were the contributions of new

knowledge and the co-functioning or human relations of cooperating

teachers and student teachers in the classroom. This study, however,

appeared to contradict the later findings cited previously of Mahan

and Lacefield (1978) about the influence of the cooperating teachers'

values on the cooperating teacher-student teacher dyad.

A review of the literature of studies related to the interpersonal

relationship between the cooperating teacher and student teacher indi-

cates that the cooperating teacher is the major influence upon the

learning outcomes of student teaching by the student teacher. The

interpersonal relationship that develops between the cooperating teacher

and the student teacher has a significant impact upon the perceived












positive and negative attitudes that a student teacher holds toward

teaching. The studies also reveal that effective and ineffective

behaviors of cooperating teachers as perceived by student teachers

contributed to positive and negative attitudes toward teaching held by

the student teachers.

Studies Related to the Role of the College Supervisor and the Inter-
personal Relationship Between the College Supervisor
and the Student Teacher

College supervision of the student teacher is acknowledged as an

important factor in the student teaching experience. Numerous studies

have been conducted and articles published on the role and function of

the college supervisor and the variety of participatory arrangements

among colleges of education with public and private schools. Varied

supervisory practices among college supervisors and the degree of their

commitment to student teaching experiences have been scrutinized, debated,

praised, and criticized (Stratemeyer & Lindsey, 1958). Problems

occurring during student teaching, and concerns of college supervisors

about the student teaching experience have been reported by Clarke (1961)

and Pfeiffer (1964).

Blanchard (1968) identified the professional problems of college

supervisors and categorized the problems through a review of the litera-

ture on supervision. Four of the six problem areas that concerned

college supervisors related directly to the student teacher: (1) the

selection, assignment and induction of the student teacher into the

school, (2) guiding the student teacher in student teaching activities,

(3) evaluating the student teacher, and (4) follow-up guidance of the

student teacher. The fifth problem area concerned the college supervisor's

relationship with the cooperating teacher and other aspects of the student











teacher's school setting, and the sixth problem area dealt with the

college supervisor and college faculty membership. On a questionnaire,

college supervisors identified three problems in each of the six problem

areas. Ten concerns representing 110 problem statements were recognized

by more than twenty-five percent of the respondents. Eight of the ten

concerns related directly to some aspect of supervision,working with

student teachers, or evaluating student teachers. The two remaining

concerns focused on the adequacy of college supervisors' supervision,

curriculum theory, and practice in teacher education.

Strebel (1936),in his survey of the state of college supervisory

practices forty years ago, wrote of the same concerns that college

supervisors hold today. He found that while college supervisors were

expected to evaluate student teachers in the cooperating school, the

colleges of education had little or no control over the teacher education

programs and practices in those participating schools. Student teachers

were expected to adapt to the curriculum, methods, and philosophy of

the cooperating school. There was little consistent effort to coordinate

the supervision of the student teacher by the college supervisor and the

cooperating teacher which resulted in confusion on the part of the

student teacher and an overlapping of supervising duties on the part of

the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Calling for closer

collaborative efforts by colleges and schools, Strebel noted their need

to coordinate functions, to interpret the major outcomes of student

teaching, and to delineate supervisory roles and functions for the college

supervisor and cooperating teacher.













Some educators have attacked the college supervisors's position

as redundant, and have suggested better use of the college supervisor's

time by training cooperating teachers through inservice education to

assume major responsibilities of the student teacher (Moser & Bebb, 1970).

Most studies reviewed, however, supported the need for the continuous

support and services of the college supervisor in the student teaching

program (Johnson, 1964). Bennie (1964) analyzed the effectiveness of

college supervisors and found that a random selection of first year

teachers reported that the college supervisor had given more help to them

as a student teacher than did the cooperating teacher to whom they had

been assigned. Categories of areas of most help to the student teacher

were identified. The most important were those of evaluating student

teacher performance, helping in planning long range instruction, writing

lesson plans and lesson objectives, helping the student teacher to

adjust to the teaching role, and helping the student teacher to under-

stand the purposes of education. Regular conferences with the student

teacher were viewed as the most valuable activity of the college

supervisor. The first year teachers also rated classroom visitations as

a high priority although this activity was utilized on a regular basis

by the smallest number of college supervisors. The first year teachers

stated that the college supervisor gave the least help in the planning

aspects of teaching and in the personal adjustment of the student teacher

to classroom teaching.

Neal, Kraft, and Kracht (1967) used a free response questionnaire

to gain answers from student teachers, cooperating teachers, college

supervisors, and school administrators to the question of why a university











should provide personnel to supervise student teachers. Eleven roles

for the college supervisor were identified which supported the need for

college personnel to form a liaison or a cooperative linkage between

college and school. Other roles focused on establishing a helping rela-

tionship between the college supervisor and student teacher; working

with the cooperating teacher to define role responsibilities; providing

continuity and structure to the student teacher program; evaluating the

program and student teacher; and acting as a resource person for the

student teacher, cooperating teacher, and school administrators. Although

the liaison role was viewed as the most important function of the college

supervisor, the college supervisor's traditional role of giving direc-

tion and critical evaluation to the student teacher was not identified

as an important role by any of the four groups in the study.

Other studies on the role and function of the college supervisor

identified varied tasks that may be assigned to this position. Clearly,

the label of a jack-of-all-trades can be used in describing the eclectic

approach to supervision. Building good relationships (Edwards, 1961),

counseling (Smith, 1960), supervision and evaluation of student teachers

(Ashby, 1973; Frenzel, 1977; Kunde, 1973; Morris, 1974), supportive

roles (Freed, 1976), and a "teacher education consultant" (J.A. Johnson,

1974), were all important role functions identified for college super-

visors of student teachers.

Establishing good interpersonal relationships between the college

supervisor and student teacher was cited frequently as a major criterion

for effective supervision. Effective and ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors as perceived by student teachers were revealed in two studies











as important in developing a positive interpersonal relationship

between the college supervisor and student teacher. One study (Carr,

1967) dealt with the situational and personal variables that influenced

the interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and

student teacher at the elementary school level. The second study

(McElroy, 1972), identified twenty-six effective and twenty-eight

ineffective practices of college supervisors of secondary student

teachers that were important in accessing student teachers' teaching and/

or attitudes toward teaching.

The McElroy (1972) study is reviewed more extensively because the

results of that study apply to the establishment of an effective inter-

personal relationship between the college supervisor and the student

teacher. The research technique, the critical incident technique used

by McElroy, will be discussed in Chapter III because the technique was

used to obtain the outcomes of the present study.

In his study on the effective and ineffective practices of college

supervisors as perceived by secondary school student teachers, McElroy

(1972) found a number of common factors that could help identify effec-

tive and ineffective behaviors of college supervisors. Effective be-

haviors were those behaviors identified as practices where the college

supervisor provided suggestions and information, where they offered

praise and support, and where they provided the opportunity for the

student teacher and the college supervisor to discuss all aspects of

the student teaching experience. Ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors were those identified by student teachers when the college

supervisor failed to praise the student teacher, were derelict in their












duties, and when they did not allow student teachers the opportunity

to discuss the student teaching experience.

McElroy (1972) collected 734 usable incidents of college super-

visors' behaviors which he used to classify the critical behaviors of

college supervisors into four areas. The four areas were (1) methods

of supervision, (2) content of supervision, (3) interpersonal communi-

cation in supervision, and (4) qualifications of the college supervisor.

The critical incidents from which critical behaviors were drawn and

categorized under one of the four areas listed above, were then used

to identify the effective and ineffective practices of college super-

visors. These practices constituted the final step in establishing

categories for fifty-four different types of critical behaviors or

practices of college supervisors.

In the third area, labeled by McElroy (1972) "interpersonal

communication in supervision," seven categories of critical behaviors were

identified. The first category dealt with incidents when the college

supervisor intervened in conflicts between the student teacher and the

cooperating teacher by attempting to re-establish communication.

Student teachers cited such practices as effective because they helped

to relieve the tension between themselves and the cooperating teacher

and also encouraged the student teacher to do the best possible job

despite conflict with the cooperating teacher.

The second category dealt with the college supervisor defending

the actions of the student teacher to the cooperating teacher and the

pupils. Such practices by the college supervisor increased the con-

fidence of the student teacher and helped to change the situation so












that student teachers no longer had to take action which needed to be

defended. The third category dealt with incidents in which the college

supervisor listened to the problems of the student teacher. Such

practices by college supervisors were reported by student teachers to

aid them in facing up to their problems and to realize that their

problems were not unique.

The last four categories under the area of "interpersonal communi-

cation in supervision" identified ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors. The first of these categories of ineffective behaviors

were recorded incidents in which the college supervisor did not listen

to the problems of the student teacher. Student teachers reported that

such behavior discouraged them by making the student teachers believe

that they were on their own and could not expect any support from their

college supervisor. The second category dealt with incidents where the

college supervisor did not talk to the student teacher. Little meaning-

ful conversation existed, and conferences between the two were not

important to the student teacher's learning experience. The third

category dealt with incidents when the college supervisor told the

student teacher that his problems were not important. Student teachers

reported that as a result of such college supervisor behavior, they

stopped talking with the college supervisor and only listened to any

comment that the college supervisor chose to make. The last category

recorded incidents where the college supervisor failed to encourage the

student teacher to continue teaching when he became depressed or indi-

cated a desire not to continue teaching. Those student teachers

reported that they hoped that the college supervisor would have encouraged












them to continue teaching but instead they accepted the college super-

visor's recommendation to stop.

A total of fifty-nine critical behaviors were recorded in the

seven categories of area three, "interpersonal communication in super-

vision," out of a total of 734 critical behaviors reported for all

categories in the four areas. McElroy's (1972) summary of the findings

in the area of interpersonal communication indicates that the college

supervisor is seen by student teachers as one who will come to their

defense when it is justified, will encourage student teachers and listen

to their problems and will help to reduce conflict when it arises between

the student teachers and cooperating teachers. The importance of communi-

cation between the student teacher and the college supervisor is viewed

as an essential link in the supervisory functions of the college super-

visor.


Studies Related to the Interpersonal Relationship Among Members
of the Student Teaching Triad: The College Supervisor,
Cooperating Teacher and Student Teacher

Ideally, the college supervisor, cooperating teacher, and student

teacher should be viewed as members of a team whose common goal is the

professional educational development of the student teacher.

Student teaching, as the most intensive professional
laboratory experience in the teacher education program,
is intended to provide prospective teachers the oppor-
tunity (1) to discover their abilities and needs, (2) to
clarify and test theoretical concepts, and (3) to
increase their understanding and skill in a practical
situation. It is for the student a learning experience.
For this reason the chief function of all those who work
with the student teacher is to guide him in his learning
through various activities. (Stratemeyer & Lindsey, 1958,
p. 93)











It would appear that communication between the three partners is

the weakest link in the interpersonal relationship of the triad members.

The college supervisor needs to know what the cooperating teacher

expects of him in terms of administrative and supervisory duties and

the ways the college supervisor can carry out the liaison role (Hytrek,

1973). Too often the college supervisor is criticized for not fulfill-

ing the expected role. The cooperating teacher and student teacher

expect the college supervisor to bring to the student teaching triad

relationships a fund of knowledge that does not exist.

With so many unfulfilled expectations, unless the supervisor
is very adept at public relations and impression management,
it is not surprising to find a great deal of "triadic
imbalance." (Diamonti, 1977, p. 484)

Because expectations of the college supervisor appear unfulfilled, the

student teacher sees the cooperating teacher more often as having the

greater influence in the supervision of the student teacher.

One way to overcome the imbalance within the triad is the proposal

by Deakins (1977) for the formation of on-site supervisory teams of

cooperating teachers and college supervisors who are viewed to be repre-

sentatives of the real and theoretical worlds respectively. Deakins

suggests that cooperating teachers commonly misinterpret the teaching of

methods to represent the theoretical world of the university of which

little or no use of knowledge and skills gained can be incorporated into

the classrooms. Deakins challenged whether these attitudes toward the

perceived theoretical world of the university actually had any basis.

More often cooperating teachers incorporated knowledge and skills gained

in their own undergraduate preparation. Deakins concludes that coopera-

ting teachers need to look on the university as a community and academic












support site where their own professional growth is viewed as continu-

ing education through the association of supervising student teachers.

Bennie (1966) described the college supervisor's role, and stated

that cooperating teachers needed to overcome their suspicions relating

to the supervision of student teachers. Much of the doubt resulted from

authoritarian past practices of college supervisors coupled with coopera-

ting teachers' insecurity in working with a college "expert." The per-

sonality of the college supervisors along with their ability to maintain

good public relations between the college and the school, were identi-

fied as vital criteria for the selection of college supervisors for

student teachers.

Competitive rather than cooperative relationships were found by

Yee (1967, 1968) in studies of the interpersonal relationships and

behaviors in the student teaching triad. Attitudes of each triad member

were obtained by inventories and questionnaires specially prepared for

the study. The results revealed that over time, as the triad members

worked longer and became more familiar with each other, coalitions of

dyads were formed. Dyads formed with more positive balance occurred

between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher while the most

negative dyads arose between the college supervisor and student teacher,

or the cooperating teacher and student teacher.

The studies also revealed that triad relationships were more often

competitive than cooperative. In those triads that exhibited competi-

tiveness, members perceived each other as working against interdepend-

ence with respect to common goals of student teaching and supervision.

Competitive triad members saw themselves as representing different levels

of power within student teaching and could not be cooperative as a result













of this perception. Competitive relationships may have evolved because

student teaching programs and practices did not provide purposeful

opportunities for triadic interaction.

Influence was found by Yee (1967, 1968) in his two studies to

be a key factor in working against triadic cooperativeness. The college

supervisor is most often identified as the key person in the triad who

had the greatest potential to influence the outcomes of the behavior of

the triad. Obtaining more knowledge on leadership styles of the college

supervisor and the cooperating teacher is suggested in order to upgrade

the professional development of the members of the student teaching triad.

Cross (1969) found that as student teachers perceived positive

professional support from the cooperating teacher, college supervisor,

and school administrators, their perceptions of the total experience

were improved. Cross concluded that ". the approval and encourage-

ment of positive behavior and the ability to sustain confidence and to

advocate growth support is viewed as a dimension of helping that has a

positive effect on the becoming process of teaching" (p. 1). Cross

also concluded that professional support was a product of the inter-

personal relationship between colleagues and was not influenced by

extraneous variables measured in the study; class size, urban-suburban

school settings, grade level assigned to student teacher, sex of

student teacher, the student teacher's perceptions of pupils' reading

levels, or the student teacher's perceptions of the pupils' inter-

personal relations structure.

Wheeler (1977) examined each member of the triad to determine the

probable effect on college seniors, cooperating teachers, and college













supervisors of the student teaching experience on three affective

dimensions; open-mindedness, the self-concept, and teacher-student

rapport. Wheeler examined each member of the student teaching triad's

influence on the three affective dimensions on the other members. The

results showed that college seniors who had participated in student

teaching were more closed-minded about the ability of secondary school

pupils for self control in the classroom than were college seniors not

participating in student teaching. However, the participation of cooper-

ating teachers and college supervisors as members of the student teaching

triad did not affect their open-mindedness, self concept, or student-

teacher rapport with the triad. The college supervisor was cited as

the most frequent probable source of influence in change occurring

within the three affective dimensions among the triad members. The

college supervisor, lacking information about the personal and profes-

sional deficiencies of the student teacher, appeared to foster closed-

mindedness of the student teacher and to decrease the student teacher's

learning potential. Wheeler stated that the college supervisor's role

was so influential that open-minded individuals with positive self

concepts and warm teacher-student rapport should be selected for this

role and contacts between the members of the triad should be increased,

not reduced.

Studies Related to Communications Among the College Supervisor,
the Cooperating Teacher, and Student Teacher

A number of studies of key personnel in student teaching cited

problems of communication as a variable contributing toward a poor

interpersonal relationship between members of the student teaching triad,












and failures of meaningful student teacher experiences. Investiga-

tions into student teacher-cooperating teacher communication were

cited by Lipsey (1972), Lowther (1964), Poole (1972), Southall and

King (1979), and Stillers and Kniep (1973). The studies indicated

that a communication gap exists and was evidenced by the student

teacher's reluctance to ask questions of the cooperating teacher or to

participate more than minimally in the classroom. Student teachers

were hesitant to ask for help in lesson planning, in providing stimu-

lating lessons for the pupils, and in developing subject content.

Cooperating teachers were found to be reluctant in providing feedback to

student teachers on teaching performance, and often were criticized

for interrupting class when the student teacher was teaching. A sum-

mary of the findings indicated that human interaction in a supportive

situation was the most important yet the most difficult goal to achieve.

Coupled with the evidence previously cited by Edmund and Hemink (1960),

the findings indicated that cooperating teachers and student teachers

did not communicate effectively, and many times did not agree on the

evaluation criteria for the student teacher's performance.

Communication studies involving student teachers, cooperating

teachers, and college supervisors were conducted by Ellis (1975),

Lock (1977), and Stagg (1968). Clear, two-way lines of communication

between the college and the school, and between the various members

of the student teaching triad were found to be lacking in regard to

what each institution and each triad member was trying to accomplish and

how they were trying to achieve their goals. The lack of supervisory

feedback on the student teacher's performance, lack of clarity about the












cooperating teacher's expectations, and unclear communication about

regulations or policies of the school and college were all cited as

specific communication problems.

Dickson (1953),using a free response questionnaire,identified

problems of human relations common in the student teaching situation.

Student teacher-cooperating teacher dissatisfaction toward the college

supervisor appeared to arise from a misunderstanding of the role of the

college supervisor in providing opportunities for student-supervisor

contacts. Dickson found that ineffective lines of communication between

cooperating teachers and college supervisors created hostility, insecur-

ity, and anxiety on the part of the cooperating teacher. However, the

cooperating teacher and college supervisor appeared mutually anxious to

feel wanted and secure with each other. Feedback from cooperating

teachers indicated that college supervisors often did not communicate to

cooperating teachers that a job was well done. College supervisors many

times failed to mask their critical feelings concerning cooperating

teachers and their teaching situations. This failure stimulated antagon-

ism which resulted in an unfriendly and non-cooperative human relationship.

Moreover, the college supervisor's desire for the student teacher to

achieve a successful teaching model was seen as being thwarted by the

insecurity of the cooperating teacher. As a result, college supervisors

expressed hostility and disagreement toward cooperating teachers over

supervision of the student teacher.

In this same study, it was found that cooperating teachers rejected

college supervisors' ideas and displayed hostility or disagreement when

the cooperating teachers felt that the college supervisors were criticizing












the methods of teaching as being too traditional or the cooperating

teachers' work with student teachers as being unsatisfactory. Cooperating

teachers also expressed negative feelings toward student teachers who

adopted superior attitudes toward cooperating teachers. Yet in cooperating

teacher-student teacher dyads that developed into a close interpersonal

relationship, both members expressed negative feelings toward college

supervisors who did not recognize the close alignment. In such instances,

the dyad more often would reject the ideas of the college supervisor.

Moreover, the failure of the college supervisor to provide democratic

leadership in the student teaching situation and maintain open lines of

communication led to increased hostility, insecurity, and anxiety on

the part of the student teacher and the cooperating teacher.

Rousseau (1970) cited findings that showed college supervisors

used different verbal behaviors with teachers of different status. In

conferences between college supervisors and student teachers, it was

found that the college supervisor gave more praise, asked more informa-

tion from, and was more verbally indirect with student teachers than in

conferences held between college supervisors and cooperating teachers.

In these conferences, the college supervisor gave more information to the

cooperating teacher, talked more directly with the cooperating teacher

and gave less praise.

College supervisors rated student teachers more successful when the

student teacher perceived himself as a good communicator according to

Hochel (1973). Five areas were identified as effective communication

skill areas; small group communication, public speaking, listening,

effective use of words (language), and subject matter content. Using











the "Index of Self-concept as a Communicator" (ISCC), to examine the

relationship between student teachers' self-concepts of communication

ability and the selected criteria of communication areas listed above,

Hochel concluded that a positive and significant relationship existed

between the self-concept of communication ability and evaluations of

student teaching effectiveness. Student teachers who perceived them-

selves as good communicators were judged by their supervisors as being

able to function effectively in a student teaching situation. One

implication which was drawn from the study was that the way in which

one sees himself or herself as a communicator, could determine the

success of that communication.

Methods of communicating were studied by Tannenbaum (1977),who

concluded that college supervisors trained in Transactional Analysis

facilitated more open communication in conferences with student

teachers. Tannenbaum also found that open communication patterns in

conferences were characterized by a strong dominance of adult to adult

level transactions which accounted for over ninety percent of open

communication in the conference period. Kimsey (1969) developed a

model, a system of categories which could be used to identify and

classify actions taken, operations performed, and topics discussed

during the college supervisor-cooperating teacher supervisory confer-

ence. By analyzing conference tapes, the investigator established

sets of categories in three dimensions which enabled the verbal

behavior of supervisors to be described quantitatively. The quantitative

findings were then interpreted as to the functions or objects of the

conference. It was hypothesized that a knowledge of the behavior











variables identified in the conference would be useful in improving

the interpersonal relationship between college supervisors and cooperating

teachers. This knowledge would help the two supervisors work more

effectively together.

A review of the literature on communication and human interaction

between members of the student teaching triad indicated that one of the

weakest links in the student teaching experience is the inability of

college supervisors, cooperating teachers and student teachers to communi-

cate with each other. The three members found it difficult not only to

express their problems and concerns openly to each other, but found it

difficult as well to provide positive feedback to fellow members of the

triad.

The student teacher is viewed as the major reason for the student

teaching triad to exist. It may be assumed that the student teacher

will be most affected by the outcomes of the patterns of human relations

that were formed. An understanding of the quality and quantity of

behaviors that passed between members of the student teaching triad was

an important step toward helping each member of the student teaching

triad to achieve a positive interpersonal relationship with the other

members. Therefore, a review of the literature on conflict communica-

tion was made to help provide some explanation about why conflict

existed and in what ways conflict manifested itself between the college

supervisor and the cooperating teacher.


A Survey of the Literature in Conflict Communication Appropriate
to the Focus of Behaviors of College Supervisors During
Student Teacher Supervision

A review of the literature on conflict communication indicated

that the area of conflict communication was very broad and diverse in












theoretical constructs and the conceptualization of the application of

conflict theory. Ellis and Fisher (1975) stated that the study of the

role of communication was necessary to understand the nature of con-

flict. However, the researchers concluded that while conflict had been

examined as central to the most important social problems: Interpersonal,

intergroup, and interorganizational relations, war, peace, ideological,

labor, management, and negotiations, it appeared that there had been a

lot of research activity, but little knowledge generated about conflict

communication.

The literature on conflict communication was reviewed by this

writer in a number of areas. However, the studies on typology of

conflict reviewed by Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) and Deutsch (1973),

and those on theoretical models (Hawes & Smith, 1973; Hilyard, 1973;

Littlejohn, 1978; Pearce, 1974; Steinfatt, 1974), did not lend them-

selves to the focus of the study undertaken by this writer. However,

other areas of conflict communication were judged to be significant

to the focus of this study, and the literature in these areas will be

reviewed in order to make significant application of conflict communi-

cation to the findings of this study.

According to a majority of the studies reviewed, there is a

general agreement by researchers in communication theory that conflict

in one form or another exists wherever there is human interaction or

interdependence among individuals, groups, organizations and institu-

tions, and nations. Moreover, it is believed that a society advances

when conflict is recognized as a healthy part of human interaction and

when the communication process is valued as a means for managing











conflict (Burgoon & Ruffner, 1978; Ellis & Fisher, 1975; Kelley, 1979).

Nor is conflict to be considered bad or evil (Jandt, 1973).

The importance of communication to the process of understanding

the nature of conflict was noted by Johnson (1974). Through the com-

munication process individuals can work to resolve problems, provide

information and feedback concerning their position and intentions,

reason and bargain together, influence other individuals, and work at

settling differences. However, the basic problem to understanding

conflict communication was noted by Johnson to be the need to properly

or clearly define the concept of communication either within a con-

ceptual definitional or an operational definitional framework, for

". .. without clarification of the concept 'communication,' no theory

of effective communication in conflict situations can be built" (p. 77).

Harpole (1974) stated that

Conflict is one of the most basic aspects of human inter-
change. It is also one of the most complex since it
involves both reason and emotion, shared interests and
differences, and varying levels of information among the
persons or groups in conflict. In all interpersonal and
intergroup conflict, however, communication is a key to
the resolution or management of the differences (p. 353).

A major problem confronting conflict communication theorists

is the definitional problem (Littlejohn, 1978). Deutsch (1969)

defined conflict as incompatible activities within people, groups, or

nations. Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) defined conflict as incompatible

activities which gave rise to threats or frustrations over nonshared

goals or perceptions of those goals. According to Coser (1956),

conflict was ". a struggle over values and claims to scarce status,

power, and resources in which the aims of the opponents are to













neutralize, injure, or eliminate their rivals" (p. 8). Hilyard (1973)

defined conflict as a process of reducing alternatives in the process

of making choices. The difficulty in studying conflict was in the

recognition that actions of individuals, groups, or institutions did

not necessarily provide sufficient identification as to whether or not

a situation was one of conflict or cooperation. In another study

using information processing as a way to predict the ability of an

individual to perceive and rate the severity of conflict, Saine (1974)

cautioned that the ability to identify conflict and the ability to

access the extent that conflict existed, were two different cognitive

processes. Thus, the judgment of conflict occurrence did not imply

a correct judgment of the severity of that conflict. In conclusion,

Saine used the results of the study to show that information processing

theory is a suitable context in which to place the perception of

conflict severity.

In another way of looking at the definitional problem of conflict,

Watkins (1974) outlined an analytic model of conflict which included

six essential conditions of conflict that provided an operational

definition of the concept, conflict.

1. Conflict requires at least two parties capable of invoking
sanctions on each other.

2. Conflicts arise due to the existence of a mutually desired
but mutually unobtainable objective.

3. Each party in conflict has four possible types of action
alternatives:
a. to obtain the mutually desired objective,
b. to end the conflict,
c. to invoke sanctions against the opponent,
d. to communicate something to the opponent.












4. Parties in conflict may have different value or perceptual
systems.

5. Each party has resources which may be increased or diminished
by implementation of action alternatives.

6. Conflict terminates only when each party is satisfied that
it has won or lost or believes probable costs of continuing
the conflict outweigh probable costs of ending the
conflict. (p. 1-2)

Watkins (1974) further stated that the conflict situation was an

important context in which to view the communication act. He identi-

fied within the analytic model certain terms that were important in

understanding the context of the conflict. These terms were threats,

policies, messages, credibility, and reliability.

Harris and Smith (1973) defined conflict as a struggle over

scarce status, power and resources where conflict behavior was termed

a strategy of bargaining, and the resolution of the conflict was

viewed as a negotiated resolution. However, a conflict could occur even

when shared mutual goals existed. This situation introduced a new con-

cept of mixed-motives where competition and cooperation existed within

the same conflict situation. Three types of conflict and communication

settings in which conflict resolution could be achieved were identified

by the researchers. Tacit communication occurred when participants were

engaged in achieving a mutual goal. Agreement or success in achieving

that goal depended upon the interacting factors of the cultural frame-

work within which the participants moved and the knowledge of the

other's probable response. Anticipation or knowledge of this response

influenced the resolution of the conflict. Implicit communication

occurred when there was an intent to perform some act which resulted in













bargaining in order to resolve the conflict situation. Thus influence

and persuasion could result in a resolution that would involve variables,

for example, of trust, defection, agreement, negotiation, or commit-

ment in order to resolve the conflict. The final type of conflict and

communication was explicit communication; the ideal type manifested by

expressed confidence between participants and correct interpretations

of acts or motives, or the imperfect type-where attitudes of distrust

and misinterpretation of acts or motives existed between the parties

in conflict.

Hawes and Smith (1973) presented in a paper on the diverse assump-

tions of conflict theories, three questions to be considered in viewing

the underlying assumptions of conflict as a process in communication.

The questions posed in the research undertaken dealt with definitional,

operational and theoretical model assumptions. This important work

was cited as a major study in several literature reviews by researchers

in conflict communication. Therefore the key elements of the first

two questions, the conceptual-definitional and the operational-procedural

questions are reviewed. The third question dealt with theoretical

models, which was outside the focus of the study undertaken.

The contributions of Hawes and Smith (1973) to the study of

conflict and communication are organized under three key questions

whose dimensions provided an organizational way of viewing the

constructs of conflict. The first question deals with the three

dimensions of the conceptual-definitional question of conflict.

These dimensions are goals, strategies, and time. The dimension

of goal conflict, is stated as "goals direct behavior." Thus









53

conflict exists when the goals of two or more persons are not comple--

mentary. Goals are defined as prospective goals where persons have

intentions about goals and behave to achieve their predefined goals,

or retrospective goals which are goals that do not define behavior or

direct or explain a person's action but only become meaningful after

the behaviors of the person are revealed or understood. The researchers

stated that although a choice between prospective and retrospective

goals did not have to be made, the differing positions of the goal dimen-

sion would create differences in the way the conceptual-definitional

question was answered. Those differences in turn could lead to differ-

ences in research results.

The second dimension of the conceptual definitional question of

conflict are identified by Hawes and Smith (1973) to be one of strategy.

Two different theories of strategy are reviewed by the researchers;

resolution of the conflict by compromise, mediation, or conciliation,

which usually include the question of cooperation versus competition,

or a second and more recent definition of strategy, the management of

conflict.

Although not couched as a definitional question, the need to dis-

tinguish between conflict and competition was made by Burgoon and

Ruffner (1978),who defined competition as a mutual rivalry, the purpose

of which is to obtain a non-divisible goal. Although conflict could

introduce an element of resolve, competition suggests a win-lose type

of situation.

The difference between conflict and competition was the thesis of

Deutsch's (1969, 1973) studies on the productive and destructive out-

comes of conflict. The major difference between conflict and












competition according to Deutsch was that conflict could occur within

either a cooperative or competitive context. In competition, the goal

attainment is viewed possible for one of the parties in conflict, but

not for the otherss, while cooperation results in some type of goal

attainment for all parties. The consequences of cooperation or competi-

tion in resolving or managing conflict situations is widely discussed

by Deutsch because of the researcher's interest in the constructive and

destructive outcomes of conflict. Conflict resolution is influenced by

the context within which the conflict occurred. The major question

posed by Deutsch was how to resolve the conflict so that the outcome

is perceived by those engaged in conflict to be productive or effective.

After summarizing the effects of cooperation and competition, Deutsch

noted that competition in conflict is not always destructive and that

many competitive conflict situations end in encouragement by one or

more parties to cooperate.

The dimension of conflict resolution versus conflict management

was raised by Hawes and Smith (1973) as part of the definitional ques-

tion. Conflict management assumes that all resolutions of conflicts

are not necessarily productive means to an end. In their review of

several studies in the area of conflict management, the researchers

showed that a number of theorists in conflict communication believed

that resolution, although viewed as an ideal end, could suppress new

and important information and ideas. Moreover, the discussion of

problems and conditions is not necessarily explored by conflict

resolution, and submerged feelings of resentment, hostility, or un-

expressed alternatives to the solutions can result. Harpole (1974)













stated that recent research has focused on conflict management as a

strategy for viewing a construct of conflict. Early theories of

conflict that emphasized resolution only, failed because researchers

considered all types of conflict as negative conflicts. Few serious

human conflicts can be resolved with any assurance of finality.

Conflict management indicated,according to Hawes and Smith (1973),

that the finality or resolve associated with conflict resolution was

not always in the best interests of the parties in conflict and that

at times, a state of diminished intensity or maintenance was more

desirable than resolution. Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) offered a number

of strategies for more effective managed conflict. The use of any one

of the seven identified strategies necessitates an understanding of

the types of conflict that are present, and the level on which the

conflict situation is operating. Roark (1978) cited four approaches to

conflict management and presented three models of management that could

provide for constructive outcomes for conflict situations. The models

are based upon the idea that conflicts produce opportunities for change

where relationships can be realigned, boredom and stagnation alleviated,

and interaction between the principals in conflict can undergo con-

tinuous reassessment. Roark placed conflict issues on a continuum of

real or realistic conflicts to imaginary conflicts. Information and

perceptions held by the parties about the conflict issue determined

the position of the conflict along the continuum.

The third dimension of the conceptual definition question of

conflict discussed by Hawes and Smith (1973) is the time dimension.

Time deals with the question of conflict either as a continuous

process, or as a process that was interspersed with episodes. The













studies reviewed by the researchers on the time question indicated

that the perception of time as an episodic phenomena means that within

the framework of time, there are disruptions that needed to be elimina-

ted or terminated by a return to a stable, harmonious state. Other

researchers, however, believe that conflict is a continuous condition

that is normal and integrating in numerous human associations. The

latter position is supported for example by some who believe ". ..

that world conflict is inevitable, if not inherent, and that peace is

nothing more than an idealized hypothetical state" (p. 425).

These three dimensions of the conceptual-definitional question

of conflict, goals, strategies, and time, were viewed by Hawes and

Smith (1973) to be the key dimensions of conflict that arranged in

various sets, can contribute to the answer pertaining to the conceptual -

definitional question of how one perceives the constructs of conflict.

Continuing their discussion on the assumptions underlying

conflict communication theory, Hawes and Smith (1973) identified five

dimensions of the second key question which was how to address the

problem of operationalizing the concept of conflict. The operational-

procedural question deals with five dimensions; rules, act, outcome,

abstractness, and salience.

The rules dimension refers to the way conflict tasks or activities

are structured. The structure in turn gives rise to various degrees of

conflict behavior. In operationalizing conflict, behaviors, it was

stated, would vary along a cooperative competitive continuum, with

various ratios of cooperation and competition needed to complete the

activity successfully. In summarizing the rules dimension, the researchers












stated that the activity selected to be completed by the participants

influences the type of communication behaviors that pass between them.

The act dimension refers to the type and amount of communication

that the conflict activity requires. Activities may take on a variety

of forms of verbal and non-verbal, active or inactive types of behavior.

The third dimension to the question of operationalizing the pro-

cedural question of conflict was the outcome dimension. This dimension

deals with the end result of the activity. Activities can have correct

or problem-solving outcomes and creative or discussion outcomes in which

there is not one correct answer and the outcomes of the conflict are

reached through the process of interaction with the other participants.

The assumption to be considered according to Hawes and Smith (1973)

is that the end result of an activity can generate different forms of

behavior outcomes for the parties in conflict.

The abstractness dimension of conflict is the fourth dimension and

deals with the abstract or concrete quality of the activity responsible

for the conflict behavior where information processing being undertaken

by the participants can require degrees of abstract or concrete informa-

tion processing. In turn, this processing can generate different types

of conflict.

The final dimension of the operational-procedural question about

conflict is the dimension of salience, or the amount of involvement

each participant is perceived to have in the activity. The extent to

which each participant feels that he or she is a close participant or

a distant observer to the activity can generate different forms of

conflict behavior.












In summary, the five dimensions identified as rules, act, outcome,

abstractness, and salience were, according to Hawes and Smith (1973),

important assumptions that had to be considered in the question on how

to operationalize the concept of conflict.

The conclusions of the Hawes and Smith (1973) study relating to

assumptions stated in question form about theoretical constructs in

conflict communication theory indicated that it would be difficult to

obtain any easy or simple description about conflict and communication.

Littlejohn (1978) held that an understanding of conflict in communica-

tion would best be served by holding a multitheoretical view. He

concluded that the study of conflict involves many complex relation-

ships that differ in degree and intensity as differing assumptions are

entered into the theoretical framework of conflict-communication.

Hilyard (1973) summarized the application of inter-relatedness in devel-

oping conflict models, by stating that more than the behaviors and/or

attitudes identifying focal conflict must be considered. It is not

enough to study just the reciprocal grievances of the parties in con-

flict but it is also important to study the interpersonal relationship

of those in conflict within the socio-cultural rules or contexts.

Barnlund (1968) in an extensive review of the literature in role

theory, discussed the relationship of role ambiguity and conflict and

cited three sources of tension that were produced by the lack of role

definition. The lack of role definition for many persons in conflict

is ascribed to the notion that persons occupy ambiguous positions and

that the resulting role uncertainty can produce emotional stress.

Persons who occupy new positions also might not know what is expected of

them due to ignorance or inexperience in the role behavior that belongs to













a specific task. Thus the interpersonal functions and standards of

conduct can be unclear. For example, some researchers made a dis-

tinction between role expectations. These expectations were the

anticipation of certain conduct or role performance, and the actual

performance of a role based on the occupant of a certain status.

Another consideration in trying to sort out the ambuiguity of roles

was the recognition of multiple role performances associated with a

single position as opposed to previously held assumptions that roles

are singular in nature.

Barnlund (1968) cited three sources of role tension or strain.

Role confusion results when there is a lack of consensus or a mis-

understanding of the appropriate acts associated with the role assigned

to the individual or group. Role collision occurs when there is compe-

tition between two persons occupying the same role. Role incompatibility

is the result of inconsistent behaviors demanded of the same person at

the same time. Barnlund suggested resolutions to the problems of role

conflict by the simplistic means of delegating power and functions, of

blocking further expansion of responsibility, or of avoiding all but

the simplest contacts in human relations. However, Barnlund concluded

that role conflict could not be avoided. The consequences of avoidance

would lead to further reduction of role efficiency.

Tjosvold (1978) noted in a study on role differentiation between

teachers and school administrators as it pertained to the academic prep-

aration of each group, that conflicts over role differentiation could in-

crease competition; each group thought its ideas were more valid although

teachers avoided clarifying their opinions and professed conformity to

the administrators' opinions. Moreover, school administrators viewed












themselves in a superior role to teachers, leading to the conclusion

that the role system could intensify conflicts over goals. The study

shows that both teachers and administrators have competitive and

cooperative interests. Effectively managed, role conflict can increase

the commitment to a shared goal, but ineffectively managed, task conflict

can undermine the effectiveness of purpose of the task.

This investigator believes that the areas of conflict communication

reviewed in the preceding literature will contribute to a more thorough

understanding of the findings on ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors as perceived by cooperating teachers. The areas in conflict

communication on the definitional problem and the questions on the

conceptual definition and the operational-procedural question, conflict

over roles and goals, the management of conflict, and conflict within

the cooperative-competitive context, are appropriate areas related to

the focus of this study.


Review of the Literature in Education Using
the Critical Incident Technique

A review of the literature in educational research indicated that

the critical incident technique has been used to measure critical

behaviors of persons and critical requirements of activities in a

number of areas of education. Therefore it was judged by the investi-

gator of the present study that a thorough review of the literature using

the critical incident technique could be appropriately included in the

literature review.

Studies conducted in the areas of elementary, secondary, and

higher education using the critical incident technique are reviewed









61

under four headings: Studies conducted in identifying educational

objectives, educational evaluation, and research; studies conducted

in the areas of educational administration and supervision, and

personnel; studies involving students; and studies conducted in the

areas of teaching.


Studies About Educational Objectives, Educational Evaluation and
Research

As early as 1947, Flanagan (1947a, 1947b) proposed that the

critical incident technique was an appropriate method to systematically

collect and analyze data that could be used to establish goals,

policies, and objectives in education. More specifically, the purpose

in using the technique was to establish critical requirements for

successful behavior in certain adult activities which would be used as

goals in education. By establishing criteria that would measure success-

ful behavior, Flanagan believed that it would be possible to develop in

the broader sense, a science of education.

Several years later, Flanagan (1950) explored the use of the critical

incident technique in developing a list of educational objectives. He

outlined the steps in developing a set of critical requirements needed

to gather data on educational objectives. Five types of adult activities

appropriate to the establishment of educational objectives were outlined

and the five conditions to determine critical requirements were sum-

marized. Lastly, four areas where the critical incident technique had

not been used in assisting in the definition of educational objectives

were identified and discussed. These areas were (1) human knowledge

and the arts, to explore the possibility of establishing a definition

of a well-educated, cultured individual, (2) citizenship, to explore the










62

establishment of a definition of a good citizen, (3) parental

behavior, to explore the development of children, and (4) friendship,

to explore attitudes of likes and dislikes of individual behavior.

Flanagan hoped that the collection of such data as are summarized in the

categories above, would help in curriculum development and educational

evaluation. The development of educational objectives would enable

educators to make decisions concerning what the schools should teach,

what learning outcomes were desirable, and what individual behaviors

were essential to take ones place as an adult in the community.

Corbally (1956) reviewed the use of the critical incident

technique for its advantages and disadvantages in educational research

particularly in studies that measured behavior. Corbally stated four

cautions for the investigator when using the critical incident

technique for studies in education. (1) The critical incident technique

should be used only in situations where the job or task to be studied

is not so complex nor the number of variables so great as to invalidate

the technique. (2) The aims and outcomes of a particular task in

education must be clearly recognizable to the respondent or observer

participating in the study. The selection and training of the observers

who will report critical incidents is important in order to minimize

the problem of inadequate reporting. (3) The investigator should

remember that the technique does not measure behaviors as to their

degree of criticalness, only that a reported behavior is critical or

non-critical, effective or ineffective. (4) The investigator should

remember that the method depends on the subjective judgment of competent

observers as to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a particular

behavior. Although the objectivity of data collected is viewed most












desirable in statistical analysis, the use of subjective methods

of data collection needs to be encouraged and improved upon. In a note

of caution Corbally warned the investigator to carefully define and

clarify terms that may appear confusing to the respondent or observer.

Continuing in his discussion, Corbally discussed the advantages of

the critical incident technique for research in education. Studies

concerned with behaviors particular to the areas of teaching and

administration are cited as the most promising areas for the use of

the critical incident technique. The advantages of the technique in

educational research are in its use as a means of gathering data about

behaviors in actual situations that can be immediately translated to

practitioners in the field. However, it was noted by Flanagan (1954)

that raw data collected by the observers did not automatically supply

solutions to the problems or activities that were being investigated.

Mayhew (1956) discussed the results of and the implications for

the use of the critical incident technique in educational evaluation.

Summarizing the use made of the critical incident technique in helping

to establish a communication measurement instrument in the Cooperative

Study of Evaluation in General Education (Dressel & Mayhew, 1953),

three areas of dissatisfaction by the teacher respondents participating

in the cooperative study were reviewed. College teachers of communica-

tion skills collected incidents and episodes of college students

speeches or written themes that were judged effective or ineffective

incidents of communication. Thirteen hundred incidents of communication

were collected and categorized into effective and ineffective categories

of communication. It was reported that three problems arose during the











collection of incidents by the communication teachers. A number of

incidents were not reported objectively but were reported with personal

evaluative comments made by the teacher. It was difficult for the

communication teachers to establish criteria for writing, speaking or

communicating effectiveness. Collection of incidents from both the

written and spoken word of the students proved difficult for some

teachers trained in speech communication only. Mayhew concluded in his

summary of other studies of students conducted by the Cooperative Study

Project in critical thinking, critical analysis, dignity and worth of

individuals, and personality, that three general difficulties in

collecting critical incidents existed. These difficulties were:(1)

The respondents reported more ineffective than effective incidents of

behavior. It appeared that ineffective behaviors were more outstanding

or had more impact on the observers than effective behaviors. (2)

Respondents tended to write personal evaluative judgments of behavior

rather than descriptive behaviors. (3) Many reports were not incidents

that were judged truly critical; an effective or ineffective incident

that made the difference between success or failure in communication.

It was thought that such difficulties could be overcome with more care-

ful planning and with clear directions to the respondents. Lastly,

Mayhew cited five areas in education in which the critical technique

could be applied in determining categories of affective traits, success-

ful behavior, cognitive behavior, student behavior in non-academic areas,

and student grades.

Leles (1968) used the critical incident technique to collect data

in order to develop an operational theory of educational professionalism.

By obtaining an operational definition of professionalism, Leles believed

that it would be possible to clarify those performances of educators












who would perform effective educational services and meet education's

social obligations to society.

Leles used the critical incident technique in order that his

definitions of educational professionalism might be derived from educa-

tors at work, rather than from professional organizations or literature

reviews. Thirteen categories of professional concerns were identified

from 129 reported critical incidents. Limitations to the study were

discussed. A number of incidents reported turned out to be personal

gripes of individuals involved in unsatisfactory interpersonal relation-

ships with other educators. Such reports were excluded from the study.

A recommendation was made at the conclusion of the study to have the

reporting of critical incidents follow a more structured format rather

than leaving the reports open-ended.

The studies reviewed in the category about educational objectives,

evaluation and research using the critical incident technique offer

suggestions for further research and discuss important advantages and

disadvantages for the use of the technique in education. The use of the

technique includes a statement of the aim of the activity, a care-

fully worded questionnaire, and subjects well prepared and informed

on the procedure for gathering critical incidents. The studies show

that terms needed to be clearly defined and that procedures to record

incidents in an objective rather than in evaluative language are essen-

tial to the validity of the critical incident technique.


Studies About Educational Administration and Supervisory Functions


The critical incident technique has been used in administration

studies involving large numbers of respondents and pieces of data.












Most studies were made to measure the effectiveness of a certain job

performed by persons in educational administration or supervision.

Flanagan (1954) reported on Barnhart's 1952 study of establishing

critical requirements for school board membership. Measurements of

effective roles by school board members were made by Whalen (1953)

and Wright (1975). The latter study analyzed critical incidents in

the interpersonal relationship between district school superintendents

and school board members.

Critical requirements of public school principals were established

by Cooper (1956) and recommendations were made for the selection, evalua-

tion, and preservice and inservice training of principals. Clark (1963)

identified seven major behavior areas of secondary school principals

by collecting incidents of effective and ineffective behaviors of

secondary school principals as perceived by superintendents, secondary

school teachers and secondary school principals. Of the three groups

of respondents, superintendents and teachers most often agreed on the

three most effective behaviors of principals in order of importance.

Lee (1975) found that perceptions of the supervisory functions of

principals differed between teachers and principals. Principals

recorded fewer perceived ineffective supervisory behaviors than

teachers.

Behaviors of curriculum directors perceived by teachers, princi-

pals, and curriculum directors as most effective and ineffective

revealed that the curriculum director viewed his role differently than

did teachers and principals (Dean, 1966).












Peterson (1975) collected 112 critical incidents of experienced

and inexperienced college and university presidents and discussed the

implications for new and experienced presidents in higher education

institutions.

Studies of effective and ineffective behaviors of school super-

visors were conducted by Foster (1959) and Colbert (1967). Foster

found considerable agreement about the critical competencies of elemen-

tary school curriculum supervisors and identified specific effective

supervisory behaviors of this group. Foster also established the

reliability of the classification system of supervisory behaviors.

Three-quarters of the behaviors judged by independent jurors were

placed in the same categories of behaviors. Colbert's study identified

effective and ineffective behaviors of supervisors by secondary school

teachers. Colbert reported that the analysis of data derived from

classifying incidents of supervisory behavior indicated that teachers

were able to agree upon effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors.


Studies About Students

The critical incident technique was used primarily for studies

involving college students. Critical incidents in the lives of

female college students living in two different cultures were collected

by Espin (1974). Incidents of motivational effects of college students'

grades were reported by Norton and Wims (1974) and the predicted per-

formance of dental students was reported by Flanagan (1954). Flanagan

also reported on a study conducted on the interpersonal behaviors of













high school students perceived by their peers to be behaviors judged

likeable or unlikeable in a friendship relationship. A study previously

reported (Mayhew, 1956) used college students as subjects to identify

effective and ineffective incidents of communication.

Studies About Teachers

Several critical incident studies about teachers and teaching

were reported by Flanagan (1954). The studies reported by Flanagan

explored the use of the critical incident technique in measuring

teacher effectiveness and teacher competence. Jensen (1951) collected

reports on teacher behaviors and from the reports formulated a set of

teacher behaviors that appeared to contribute to effective or ineffec-

tive teaching. It was suggested that the use of specific examples of

teacher behaviors recorded by persons in teaching or preparing to teach,

would yield sufficient empirical data to define what constituted good

or bad teaching. From approximately 1,500 observations of critical

incidents in teaching of elementary and secondary teachers, a list

of critical requirements for teaching was classified in three general

categories: personal qualities, professional qualities, and social

qualities of good and bad teaching. It was suggested by Jensen that

the critical incident technique could be used at the local school

level to aid educators in developing valid criteria for teacher

evaluation and inservice growth.

Ingram and Blackhurst (1975) identified teaching and advising

competencies of special education professors and related their import-

ance to educational accountability for special education faculties and

programs.












Hamrick (1969) explored the philosophical position of classroom

teachers by developing and testing within a theoretical framework how

teachers act or make decisions with respect to the purposes of educa-

tion, the nature of the curriculum, the functions of teaching, and the

role of the school in society. Teacher responses to critical incidents

of decision making were classified into categories of progressive,

essentialist, perennialist, existentialist, and expedient views toward

education.

Corsini and Howard (1964) used critical incidents identified as

classroom crises to study the difficult interpersonal classroom situa-

tions that elementary teachers could expect to encounter. The reporting

of critical incidents was expected to aid teacher, parents, and admin-

istrators in recognizing crisis situations and responding to them

effectively.

















CHAPTER III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES


Introduction


The purpose of this chapter is to present the methods and pro-

cedures used to identify the effective and ineffective supervisory

behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by secondary cooperating

teachers. The discussion is organized under five sections. The first

section is an introduction to and a discussion of the critical incident

technique used as the method to identify the effective and ineffective

supervisory behaviors of college supervisors. The next section is a

review of the studies conducted in the field of student teaching that

used the critical incident technique. The third section is a discussion

of the general aim of supervision. The method used to establish the

aim of supervision is also outlined. The fourth section contains a

description of the design of the critical incident instrument used for

the purposes of this study. The last section is a presentation of the

method used for the selectionof the participants in the study and a

description of the procedures used to gather data and to analyze the

data.


The Critical Incident Technique

The critical incident technique is the method chosen to gather

data about the effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of

college supervisors of student teachers as perceived by secondary school












cooperating teachers. The critical incident technique developed by

Flanagan (1954) and others forms a set of procedures for collecting

self-reported observations of behavior that are determined to be

effective or ineffective in accomplishing the aim or purpose of an

activity, job, or event. Fox (1969) stated that unlike the question-

naire or interview which is used when the researcher expects to gather

a broad range of data or information, the critical incident technique

is an objective measure that is used to gather empirical data about

actual incidents of a specific nature. The reporting of an incident

is in response to a highly structured question or a set of questions

posed by the researcher. Thus, the reported incidents should have

special significance to an activity or situation and should occur in

specific behavioral situations.

The critical incident technique consists of a set of pro-
cedures for collecting direct observations of human behavior
in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness
in solving practical problems and developing broad psychologi-
cal principles. The critical incident technique outlines
procedures for collecting observed incidents having special
significance and meeting systematically defined criteria.

By an incident is meant any observable human activity that
is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences and
predictions to be made about the person performing the act.
To be critical, an incident must occur in a situation where
the purpose or intent to the act seems fairly clear to the
observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite
to leave little doubt concerning its effects. (Flanagan, 1954,
p. 327)

The critical incident technique is viewed as a method for objectively

reporting especially effective and ineffective incidences of behaviors of

people and their activities in specific situations. McElroy (1972)

in establishing the rationale for using the technique in a major study

of college supervisor behaviors as perceived by student teachers, stated












that the descriptions of situations made by the observer were incidents

where some form of action had taken place, where important decisions

had been made, problems solved, or conflicts resolved. The task of the

observer was to report behaviors of persons in situations that resulted

in effective or ineffective outcomes. These outcomes marked the success

or failure of the persons) in meeting the aims or purposes of the job

or activity.

For the purposes of this study, a critical incident is a report

made by a cooperating teacher who has supervised a student teacher or is

presently doing so, telling what the college supervisor said or did

during the period of student teaching that had either a positive or

negative effect, stating the effect of the action in terms of the aims of

supervision, and stating how the effects of the action affected the

functioning of the cooperating teacher. Thus the action of the college

supervisor could have made the difference between success or failure in

developing a positive supervisory relationship between the college

supervisor and the cooperating teacher during periods of student

teacher supervision.

It is not the intent of the observer to subjectively evaluate or

judge the behaviors of persons other than to report the specific

behaviors as being effective, ineffective, successful, unsuccessful,

critical or non-critical. To insure objectivity of the observations,

Flanagan (1950, 1954) outlined specific steps that needed to be fol-

lowed before the data could be collected. (1) The behavior reported

must be observed by the respondent and the situation in which the

respondent recorded his observations must be clearly defined. (2) A











general aim or purpose of the activity which is being observed must be

defined for the respondent in sufficient detail so as to leave no

question as to the appropriateness of the situation and its effect on

the general aim. (3) The respondent must have a clear definition of

important aspects of the behavior or activity under study in order for

levels of effective and ineffective behavior to be determined in the

activities reported. (4) The respondent must be qualified to make

and report judgments about the behaviors in the activity under study.

(5) The respondent needs to be knowledgeable or trained about the methods

of reporting to insure accuracy in reporting specific behaviors.

There are a number of advantages cited for the use of the critical

incident technique in the study of effective and ineffective behaviors

(Fox, 1969). The technique is particularly valuable in collecting

large amounts of data pertaining to a narrow area in which the researcher

is interested. Anonymity of the subjects and respondents is observed.

McElroy (1972) stated that reports made with a minimum amount of pre-

conceived assumptions or influences about the personal traits of the

subject helped to eliminate subjectivity in reporting. Observers need

only to report a specific behavior as effective or ineffective in the

accomplishment of a job or activity and to separate those behaviors

viewed as critical toward contributing to a specific task or activity

from those behaviors that have little effect on the activity. When the

critical incident instrument design is highly structured, the researcher

is able to collect reports of reality that have great depth and detail.

Mayhew (1956) concluded that the significance of the technique ". ..

lies chiefly in providing empirically derived classifications of

behavior which can then be used either as a framework for subsequent









74
measurement or as material out of which evaluation instruments can

be developed" (p. 598).

Burns (1956) cautioned against the indiscriminate use of the

critical incident technique in establishing success criteria in studies

in education. A researcher employing the critical incident technique

needs to understand that the data collected using the critical incident

technique can reveal through description, the perceptions of the observer

and can contribute to studies where perceptions of observed external

behaviors are desired. The data collected using the critical incident

technique, however, cannot be used to explain why such perceived

behavior, e.g.,verbal or non-verbal takes place, nor can the researcher

make inferences about the internal motives of the subject's behavior.

Behavior is described as existing. To describe the behavior

other than as an existence, said Burns (1956), is to place a value

judgment upon the behavior. Thus the critical incident technique is

a method used to verify not evaluate behavior phenomena. While Burns

argued against subjective evaluation in the treatment of the data, most

researchers using the critical incident technique discussed caution

in placing value judgments upon observed behaviors. They did not,

however, rule out the analytical nature of such reports of specific

behaviors (Flanagan, 1954; Jensen, 1951).

Most researchers employing the critical incident technique, used

critical incidences to report accurately the behavior of the subject

engaged in a specific job, role, or task. Only a simple judgment

needs to be made by the observer according to McElroy (1972). This

judgment permits the observer to state whether a specific behavior is













effective or ineffective in a particular job performance. In the

present study, the investigator asked the observer, the cooperating

teacher, to report the consequences of the college supervisor's behavior

upon the functioning of the cooperating teacher during periods of

student teacher supervision.

A description of the consequences of the college supervisor's

behavior upon the functioning of the cooperating teacher, should help

to form the basis for deciding whether a specific behavior of the

college supervisor is to be judged effective or ineffective, critical

or non-critical to the task of supervising student teachers. If the

observed behavior does not result in the cooperating teacher reporting

a consequence for such behavior, the behavior is not judged as having

an especially effective or ineffective impact upon the functioning of

the cooperating teacher.

It is believed by this investigator that based upon the works of

Deutsch (1969, 1973) who had studied the characteristics of destructive

and constructive conflicts and the conditions that give rise to such

outcomes of conflicts, that the critical incident technique can be used

to yield incidents of conflicts between college supervisors and

cooperating teachers as one consequence of ineffective behaviors of

college supervisors. This belief is founded in the assumption that

cooperating teachers will identify ineffective behaviors of college

supervisors as behaviors that had conflict consequences for the inter-

personal relationship between college supervisors and cooperating

teachers.












Studies About Student Teaching: The College Supervisor,
Cooperating Teacher and Student Teacher


Most of the studies about student teaching identified specific

behaviors of one or more members of the student teaching triad as

effective or ineffective in job or role performance. Critical job

requirements for elementary school cooperating teachers were identified

by Farbstein (1965). Those specific behaviors of secondary school

cooperating teachers that would aid in their selection and professional

development as cooperating teachers were identified by Hackley (1976)

and discussed in more detail in Chapter II.

Elkin (1959) collected descriptions of effective and ineffective

behaviors of secondary cooperating teachers and identified those

critical behaviors which contributed to the success or failure of

supervising student teachers. The perceptions of role responsibilities

of the cooperating teacher were viewed differently by student teachers

and cooperating teachers in Elkin's study.

Helpful and hindering behaviors of cooperating teachers identified

by student teachers as being critical to their successful completion of

student teaching, were collected by Nicholson (1971). These incidents

were used to establish the criteria for the development of a student

teacher checklist for on-the-job performance. Conclusions reached by

the investigator indicated that the role and behaviors expected of

cooperating teachers might be too complex and numerous to entrust the

supervision of student teachers to one person.

The Southall and King (1979) study of college supervisors' per-

ceptions of critical incidents that could have or did have an impact upon










77

the student teacher's completion or success in the student teaching

experience was reviewed in Chapter II. The authors devised ten cate-

gories as possibilities for critical incidents. College supervisors

categorized each critical incident that they identified as contributing

to a stressful student teaching experience. College supervisors also

identified themselves as generalist or specialist supervisors. A total

of sixty-one college supervisors participated in the study and categor-

ized 661 critical incidents in the ten categories. The results indicated

that the three major problems perceived by college supervisors as hinder-

ing the completion or success of the student teaching experience were

the lack of communication between cooperating teacher and student

teacher, the inability of the student teacher to live up to the cooper-

ating teacher's expectations, and the student teacher not being prepared

or not knowing methods and teaching techniques.

Carr (1967) in a study designed to identify and define those

factors that influence the interpersonal relationship between college

supervisors and student teachers, reported that more effective inter-

personal relationships existed between the two groups when the college

supervisor spent more time with the student teacher in both observation

and conference situations. Incidents of effective supervision were

identified in situational and personal variables attributed to the

college supervisor.

Practices of college supervisors perceived by student teachers to

be effective and ineffective in improving their teaching and attitudes

toward teaching were studied by McElroy (1972) and discussed in

depth in Chapter II. In a two-part study of supervisors of student












teachers, Nicklas (1960) collected effective supervisory techniques

of college supervisors and cooperating teachers identified by members

of the student teaching triad. The results indicated that there was

general agreement among the triad members that conferences, demonstra-

tive teaching, and compliments of student teacher performance were

effective supervisory behaviors. Negative practices included classroom

disruptive behavior, excessive criticism, and withdrawal of help to

the student teacher.

The studies reviewed in education using the critical incident

technique indicated that the method can be used to study effective and

ineffective interpersonal behaviors, job performance and role require-

ments, educational objectives and evaluation, and attitudes and

philosophical positions of persons in education. The validity and

reliability of the critical incident technique as a method of research

was established in a number of studies (Flanagan, 1954; McElroy, 1972).

The advantages and limitations for the use of the critical incident

technique were discussed and the use of the critical incident technique

in appropriate studies in education was suggested.

The present study under investigation will contribute to another

dimension of studying behaviors of the student teaching triad. Identi-

fying those effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college

supervisors by cooperating teachers during supervision of student

teachers should aid in establishing an effective professional relation-

ship that will enable college supervisors and cooperating teachers to

cooperatively supervise student teachers.












The General Aim of the
College Supervisor

As reported by Flanagan (1954), "A basic condition necessary for

any work on the formulation of a functional description of an activity

is a fundamental orientation in terms of the general aims of the

activity. No planning and no evaluation of specific behaviors are

possible without a general statement of objectives" (p. 336). Flanagan

added that the stated general aim of an activity should be written as a

functional description of the activity that is observed. In conclusion,

the general aim is a brief description made by authorities knowledgeable

about the area under study which expresses in simple objective terms

the aim or purpose of the activity.

From the brief descriptions gathered, a definition for the aim of

the activity is obtained and used to convey a uniform idea of the aim

to the observers recording the behaviors of persons engaged in the

activity. Defining the aim or purpose of the activity, job, or event

in this way, enables the observer to record specific behaviors that are

relevant only to the general aim. Thus the observer decides how

important an observed behavior is to the general aim and if the observed

behavior has a degree of criticalness that will have a positive or

negative effect on the activity.

McElroy (1972) in his study identifying behaviors of college

supervisors perceived as being effective or ineffective by student

teachers, reviewed the supervision literature for descriptions of the

general aim or purpose of supervision. Agreement was found among the

authorities in supervision that the aim of supervision was to improve












instruction. A questionnaire developed by Flanagan (1954) was used

in the McElroy study to obtain general statements of the aim of super-

visors by selecting participants in the study. The general aim state-

ment was then revised and agreed upon by those participants. The

statement of the general aim of the college supervisor used in the McElroy

study became: "The general aim of the college supervisor of secondary

student teachers is to improve the teaching and attitude toward teaching

of the student teacher" (p. 187). This definition appears to be con-

sistent with definitions of the aim of supervision appearing later in the

literature. Blumberg (1974) identified the goals of supervision in

education as "the improvement of instruction, and the enhancement of the

personal and professional growth of teachers." (p. 11) Lewis and Miel

(1972) viewed supervision as a monitoring function "enhancing the quality

of instruction" (p. 43).

After reviewing the literature on the aim of supervision that was

appropriate to the study, this investigator wrote an aim of supervision

statement which would be written on the two critical incident question-

naire forms as a statement of critical behavior of a college supervisor

during student teacher supervision. This statement read: "The aim of

supervision is to help the professional development of the student

teacher." The placement of this aim statement on the two forms of the

critical incident questionnaire will be discussed more fully in the

discussion on the specifications and criteria used in designing the

critical incidents in supervision instrument.












Design of the Critical Incident Instrument
Used for Reporting Critical Incidents

The design of the questionnaire used to gather reports of

critical incidents follows the specifications of the form laid down

by Flanagan (1954) and the criteria applied to the designing of the

questions used to collect critical incidents by McElroy (1972). Two

forms were used to gather critical incidents in supervision. Form I

was designed to be used to record effective incidents in supervision,

and Form II to record ineffective incidents in supervision. Each form

contained the following items: the general aims statement, a state-

ment delimiting the situation to be observed, and ten questions

relating directly to the incident that was observed by the cooperating

teacher. The third part of the instrument was a brief biographical

data questionnaire with the request that each respondent complete the

questions anonymously.

Accompanying the Critical Incidents in Supervision questionnaire

and biographical form was a short letter addressed to the cooperating

teachers requesting their participation in the study. A second page

provided the respondent with a definition and explanation of a critical

incident and the directions for completing Form I entitled "Effective

Incident in Supervision," and Form II entitled "Ineffective Incident

in Supervision." The directions were written by the investigator

in order to leave as little doubt as possible with the respondent

regarding the procedures to be used in recording critical incidents.

Flanagan's (1954) definition of a critical incident stated an incident

is critical if it makes a 'significant' contribution, either positively












or negatively, to the general aim of the activity" (p. 338). In the

present study under investigation, the discussion of the "criticalness"

of an incident was presented in the directions to the participants.

Included in the directions were the rules for reporting critical

incidents.

The Specifications and Criteria Used in Designing the Critical
Incidents in Supervision Instrument

The first specification for Forms I and II of Critical Incidents

in Supervision is a statement of the general aim of the job or task

that was under observation. The purpose of a general aim statement

when using the critical incident technique is to give the observer

a brief but clear definition of the job or activity in which specific

behaviors will be observed and recorded (Flanagan, 1954). In the

present study under investigation, the general aims statement, written

by the investigator, was written as a description of an effective

critical incident on Form I. The aims statement on Form I, Effective

Critical Incident in Supervision read as follows:

An effective critical incident in supervision is an
action by the college supervisor that helps the
professional development of the student teacher.

The aims statement on Form II, Ineffective Critical Incident in

Supervision was written identical to Form I except the word hinders

was substituted for the word helps. The general aims statement was the

first item to be placed on Forms I and II in order for the respondents

to continuously refer to the aim of the task or activity statement they

were recording as a critical incident in supervision.

The second specification needed prior to collecting the incidents

of observed behavior as reported by Flanagan (1954) was to be ". ..










a delimitation of the situation to be observed. This specification

must include information about the place, the persons, the conditions,

and the activities" (p. 338).

The delimitation of the situation statement immediately followed

the aims of supervision statement on Form I and Form II. The statement

read as follows on Form I.

Think of an instance when you were engaged with the
college supervisor in supervising a student teacher.
This instance may have resulted in a positive exper-
ience for you.

The statement on Form II is identical to Form II except that the word

negative was substituted for the word positive.

The purpose of the statement delimiting the situation to be

observed by the cooperating teacher was to provide structure to the

situation in which the cooperating teacher was asked to record the

behaviors of college supervisors. This statement delimiting the

situation required the cooperating teacher to record observations

occurring when the cooperating teacher and college supervisor were

engaged in the supervision of a student teacher. A second part of the

delimitation of the situation statement further limited the conditions

of recording of incidences by stating that such a behavior had to result

in a positive or negative experience for the cooperating teacher. This

would eliminate the tendency for cooperating teachers to record

incidents that were judged as neutral in affecting the supervisory

relationships.

The third specification in designing the critical incident instru-

ment used in the present study was the wording of the questions stated

on Form I and Form II. Flanagan (1954) reported that a slight change

in the wording of a question could produce substantial change in the









84
type of incident reported. McElroy (1972) listed nine criteria to

be used as a guide in constructing the questions for the critical

incident instrument. The questions designed for the present study

were written to elicit from the cooperating teacher specific critical

behaviors of college supervisors. These behaviors were ones that were

perceived by cooperating teachers as being effective or ineffective and

thereby affecting the functioning of the cooperating teacher during

periods of student teacher supervision. The ten questions that appear

on Form I: Effective Incident in Supervision, and Form II: Ineffective

Incident in Supervision,are identical. A brief description of the ten

questions that were designed for the study under investigation follows.

Questions one through four on Form I and Form II were written to

further delimit the situation to be observed by the respondent. Ques-

tion one asked the cooperating teacher, the observer, to record when the

incident occurred. This question was left open-ended because some

respondents might not be able to give specific dates and times if so

asked, and would therefore leave the question blank. Question two

asked the observer to describe what happened prior to the incident that

was perceived as being effective or ineffective by the cooperating

teacher. This question allowed the cooperating teacher to describe

the events) leading up to the incident. Question three asked the

respondent to further delimit the prior events) by recording the

physical location of the incident's occurrence. Question four asked

the respondent to name the persons involved in this incident but to

identify them only by title, not by proper name. By giving only the

title of those persons involved in the incident the anonymity of the









85

persons would be preserved. This question was also included in order

to identify persons other than the cooperating teacher and college

supervisor who were involved in the incident.

Question five requested the respondent to describe briefly but

exactly what the college supervisor said or did that resulted in the

incident that was being recorded. The question did not ask the respon-

dent to place any judgment upon the action taken or statement made by

the college supervisor other than the judgment that such action or

statement resulted in a positive or negative experience for the coopera-

ting teacher. In this way, it was expected that an evaluational feeling

of the cooperating teacher would be greatly limited.

Questions six and seven asked the respondents to record what they

perceived as the attitude of the college supervisor when the incident

took place and what the consequences or outcomes of the incident were

ror the cooperating teacher as a result of the incident. The recording

of the perceived attitude of the college supervisor at the time of

the incident's occurrence was viewed as important in some situations

where the attitude of the college supervisor contributed to an outcome

that might have been different if such an attitude had not existed.

Question eight was a behavioral question in that it asked the

cooperating teacher to state how the consequences of the effective or

ineffective behavior of the college supervisor affected the cooperating

teacher's functioning as a supervisor of a student teacher. In order

to eliminate as much bias, opinion or evaluation judgment as possible

on the part of the cooperating teacher, the respondents were asked to

underline in the report of the consequences of the incident, that part












of the incident that affected their functioning as a cooperating teacher.

The report of the consequences of the incident as asked in question

eight could then be used by the investigator to state ways in which

the situational needs of cooperating teachers could be met by college

supervisors.

Questions nine and ten asked the respondents to state their

reaction to the incident recorded and to state how they felt toward the

college supervisor in relation to the incident. These questions

were designed to obtain a behavioral description of attitudes toward

the college supervisor and the incident and to further clarify why

specific incidents were judged as being effective or ineffective. The

questions would also give clues as to the perceived interpersonal

relationship that existed between the cooperating teacher and college

supervisor during student teacher supervision.

The ten questions were designed to form the critical incident

instrument. The intent was to obtain descriptions of events or activities

leading up to the critical incident, to effect the recording of the

effective or ineffective incident by stating what the college supervisor

said or did that was perceived as critical by the cooperating teacher,

and to determine the consequences of the incident upon the functioning

of the cooperating teacher during student teacher supervision.

The last section of the critical incident instrument was a brief

biography to be filled out by the participants in the study. The

instructions for the biographical questionnaire as stated previously

asked the respondents to remain anonymous. The purpose for the bio-

graphical questionnaire was to provide personal and professional












information to enable the investigator to obtain a profile about the

respondents participating in the study.

Method of Subject Selection and Data Gathering

The subjects selected for this study were secondary school

cooperating teachers who had supervised or were currently supervising

a student teacher. All the subjects were teachers in the state of

Florida and the student teachers assigned to them came from the colleges

of education of three Florida state universities.

The selection of cooperating teachers was made informally on a

volunteer basis. Several methods for requesting participation by the

cooperating teachers were used. In a number of secondary schools, the

assistant principal for curriculum was contacted by the investigator.

The study was explained to the assistant principal and request for

participation was made. The assistant principals agreed to identify

the teachers who had supervised student teachers, and to distribute

the instrument packet to each teacher who agreed to participate in the

study. The assistant principals were requested by the investigator to

obtain participation from all subject areas, physical education, art,

music and vocational programs, as well as special education programs.

Feedback indicated that this request was honored.

In two of the secondary schools, the investigator was asked to

meet with the teachers who had volunteered to participate in the study.

These meetings took place after school during the teachers' planning

period.

The cooperating teachers were asked by the assistant principal

and the investigator to return the completed instrument packets to the









88

assistant principal's office at their earliest convenience. The

investigator made several trips to each school to insure that all

completed packets were picked up.

Two other groups of persons assisted in the distribution of the

instrument packets to the cooperating teachers. The area coordinators

for the student teachers from one university, and the director of

student teaching at another university were contacted by phone and

letter with the request to distribute the instrument packets to second-

ary school cooperating teachers who supervised student teachers sent

from the participating universities. The contact with the individual

schools was made by the area coordinators and the director of student

teaching. Because of the time and distance involved, the investigator

could not go personally to these schools to pick up the completed

instruments. A self-addressed stamped envelope was provided with each

packet in order for each cooperating teacher to mail the completed

instruments directly to the investigator.

A total of 192 instrument packets, each containing a letter to the

cooperating teacher, directions for recording critical incidents, Form I

to record an effective incident in supervision, Form II to record an

ineffective incident in supervision, and a biographical data page,were

delivered or sent by mail to the contact people identified above. Seven

weeks were allowed for the distribution and collection of the critical

incidents instruments.

At the end of seven weeks, each contact person was approached by

phone or letter in order for the investigator to obtain help in

gathering data from respondents who had not completed the critical




Full Text

PAGE 1

())(&7,9( $1' ,1())(&7,9( 683(59,625< %(+$9,256 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256 $6 3(5&(,9(' %< 6(&21'$5< 6&+22/ &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 %< /28,6( 681'%(5* 527+0$1 $ ',66(57$7,21 35(6(17(' 72 7+( *5$'8$7( &281&,/ 2) 7+( 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$ ,1 3$57,$/ )8/),//0(17 2) 7+( 5(48,5(0(176 )25 7+( '(*5(( 2) '2&725 2) 3+,/2623+< 81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$

PAGE 2

WR -DQH 0 6XQGEHUJ

PAGE 3

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n FLDWLRQ WR 'U :LOOLDP + 'UXPPRQG 3URIHVVRU RI ,QVWUXFWLRQDO /HDGHUn VKLS DQG 6XSSRUW IRU WKH FRQVLGHUDEOH WLPH DQG KHOS KH JDYH WKH DXWKRU GXULQJ WKH ZULWLQJ RI WKH PDQXVFULSW 6SHFLDO WKDQNV DUH GXH WR 'U (XJHQH $ 7RGG 3URIHVVRU DQG 'HSDUWPHQW &KDLUPDQ RI 6XEMHFW 6SHFLDOL]DWLRQ 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ IRU OHQGLQJ KLV VXSSRUW DQG HQFRXUDJHPHQW IURP WKH LQFHSWLRQ WR WKH FRQn FOXVLRQ RI WKH GLVVHUWDWLRQ 7KH DXWKRU VSHQW VHYHUDO \HDUV DV D WHDFKLQJ DVVRFLDWH LQ WKLV GHSDUWPHQW 7KH H[SHULHQFH JDLQHG ZDV PRVW UHZDUGLQJ )LQDOO\ WKH DXWKRU ZRXOG OLNH WR WKDQN 0UV 0DUMRULH 3DFH ZKR W\SHG WKLV PDQXVFULSW DQG 'U /HVOLH 5RWKPDQ KXVEDQG RI WKH DXWKRU DQG VRQV 7RUVWHQ DQG %ULWW IRU WKHLU SDWLHQFH LQ VHHLQJ WKLV GLVVHUWDWLRQ WR LWV FRQFOXVLRQ LLL

PAGE 4

, VXVSHFW WKDW WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW UHVXOW RI D V\VWHPDWLF DQG PDQ\VLGHG VWXG\ RI FRQIOLFW ZRXOG EH WKH FKDQJHV ZKLFK VXFK D VWXG\ FRXOG HIIHFW LQ RXUVHOYHV WKH FRQVFLRXV DQG XQFRQVFLRXV WKH ZLOOLQJ DQG XQZLOOLQJ SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ FRQIOLFWV 7KXV WKH UHZDUGV WR EH UHDOLVWLFDOO\ KRSHG IRU DUH WKH LQGLUHFW RQHV DV ZDV WKH FDVH ZLWK WKH VRQV ZKR ZHUH WROG WR GLJ IRU EXULHG WUHDVXUH LQ WKH YLQ\DUG 7KH\ IRXQG QR WUHDVXUH EXW WKH\ LPSURYHG WKH VRLO $QDWRO 5DSRSRUW LY

PAGE 5

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n SHUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS %HWZHHQ WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU DQG WKH 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 6WXGLHV 5HODWHG WR WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS $PRQJ 0HPEHUV RI WKH 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 7ULDG 7KH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU DQG 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 6WXGLHV 5HODWHG WR &RPPXQLFDWLRQV $PRQJ WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU WKH &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU DQG 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU

PAGE 6

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

PAGE 7

3DJH 7KH 5ROH RI ,QWHUSHUVRQDO &RQIOLFW LQ WKH -XGJPHQW RI %HKDYLRUV RI &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV DQG WKH )XQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU&RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU 5HODWLRQVKLS 6XPPDU\ 9 6800$5< $1' ,03/,&$7,216 $33(1',; %,%/,2*5$+3< %,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ YLL

PAGE 8

/,67 2) 7$%/(6 7$%/( 3$*( &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 %< $&$'(0,& '(*5(( 6(; $1' 180%(5 :+2 &203/(7(' &5,7,&$/ ,1&,'(17 )2506 &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 %< 5$1*( $1' 0(',$1 2) $*( <($56 7($&+,1* $1' 180%(5 2) 678'(17 7($&+(56 683(59,6(' )257<6,; 6(&21'$5< 6&+22/ &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56f 3(5&(37,216 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256f %(+$9,256 ())(&7 21 7+( 6(&21'$5< 6&+22/ &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(5n6 )81&7,21,1* 2) 7+( &2//(*( 683(59,625n6 %(+$9,256 $&7,9,7,(6 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256 7+$7 6833257(' 7+( (;35(66(' 1(('6 2) &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 5$1.(' %< )5(48(1&< 2) 67$7(0(176 )520 0267 72 /($67 $&7,9,7,(6 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256 7+$7 ,1)/8(1&(' 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 21 7+( 352'8&7,21 2) 678'(17 7($&+(5 68&&(66)8/ 25 8168&&(66)8/ /($51,1* (;3(5,(1&(6 5$1.(' %< )5(48(1&< 2) 67$7(0(176 )520 0267 72 /($67 YLLL

PAGE 9

/,67 2) ),*85(6 ),*85( 3$*( ())(&7,9( ,1&,'(17 ,1 683(59,6,21 ,1())(&7,9( ,1&,'(17 ,1 683(59,6,21

PAGE 10

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n YLVRUV SHUFHLYHG DV HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH E\ VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ ZHUH XVHG WR LGHQWLI\ VRPH DSSURSULDWH DQG VRPH LQDSSURSULDWH ZD\V IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WR UHVSRQG WR WKH VLWXDWLRQDO QHHGV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GXULQJ WKH SHULRG RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRU XWLOL]HG LQVLJKWV JDLQHG IURP VWXG\LQJ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRQIOLFW LQ LQWHUn SHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQ DQDO\]LQJ DQG LQWHUSUHWLQJ WKH GDWD 7KH VXEMHFWV VHOHFWHG IRU WKH VWXG\ ZHUH )ORULGD VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV IURP DOO SURJUDP DUHDV ZKR KDG VXSHUYLVHG RU ZHUH FXUUHQWO\ VXSHUYLVLQJ D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU )RUW\VL[ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LGHQWLILHG IRUW\RQH HIIHFWLYH DQG WKLUW\IRXU LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU [

PAGE 11

LQGLFDWHG KRZ WKH LGHQWLILHG FULWLFDO EHKDYLRU RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU DIIHFWHG KLV RU KHU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 1LQH DFWLYLWLHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WKDW VXSSRUWHG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn QHHGV GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ ZHUH H[WUDFWHG IURP WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW UHSRUWV 1LQH VWDWHPHQWV RI VXFFHVVIXO LQIOXHQFH DQG ILYH VWDWHPHQWV RI XQVXFFHVVIXO LQIOXHQFH RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV XSRQ WKH OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH ZULWWHQ 7KH PRVW HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZDV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ D FRQIHUHQFH ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQGRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH PRVW LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZDV LGHQWLILHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV WKH ODFN RI RU IHZ YLVLWV PDGH E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WR WKH VFKRRO WR REVHUYH DQG VXSHUYLVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 7KH UHVXOWV DOVR LQGLFDWHG WKDW HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV HOLFLWHG FRJQLWLYH FKDQJHV LQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn LQVLJKWV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUn YLVLRQ PRUH WKDQ WZLFH DV RIWHQ DV GLG WKH LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKLOH WKH LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV HOLFLWHG PRUH GLUHFW DFWLRQ E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7ZR PDMRU DUHDV RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG 7KHVH DUHDV ZHUH LQ FRQIOLFWV RYHU JRDOV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DQG FRQIOLFWV RYHU WKH UROH RU WDVN H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH ILQGLQJV DOVR LQGLFDWHG WKDW FRPSHWLWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV QRW D FDXVH IRU FRQIOLFW EXW ZDV D UHVXOW RI FRQIOLFW 2QH UHVXOW RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG [L

PAGE 12

FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZDV WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHVROYHG FRQIOLFW LQ WKUHH ZD\V DQG PDQDJHG FRQIOLFW LQ ILYH ZD\V 5HVROXWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW ZDV DFKLHYHG PRVW RIWHQ E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV UHIXVDO WR SDUWLn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nV DVVLJQPHQW ,W ZDV DOVR UHFRPPHQGHG WKDW IXWXUH UHVHDUFK LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ EH FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHD RI FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7UDLQLQJ IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQ KXPDQ UHODWLRQV DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VNLOOV ZDV DOVR VXJJHVWHG LQ RUGHU WR VWUHQJWKHQ DQG SURYLGH VXSSRUW IRU FRQWLQXRXV FROODERUDWLRQ E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV [LL

PAGE 13

&+$37(5 ,1752'8&7,21 72 7+( 678'< 7KH 3XUSRVH RI WKH 6WXG\ 7KH PDMRU SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR LGHQWLI\ WKURXJK WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV SHUFHLYHG DV HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH E\ VHOHFWHG VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH UHVXOWV ZHUH XVHG WR LGHQWLI\ VRPH DSSURSULDWH DQG VRPH LQDSSURSULDWH ZD\V IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WR UHn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

PAGE 14

,Q ZKDW ZD\V GLG FRQIOLFW RFFXU GXULQJ WLPHV RI LQWHUn SHUVRQDO LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU" ,I WKH SHUFHLYHG HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH D IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS ZKDW SDUW LI DQ\ GLG LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW SOD\ LQ WKRVH MXGJPHQWV" ,Q D VWXG\ E\
PAGE 15

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fV H[SHULHQFHV 0XFK RI WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKDW SDVVHV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LV RI D SRVLWLYH QDWXUH DV WKH WZR VXSHUYLVRUV FRRSHUDWH WRJHWKHU LQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ VXFFHVVIXO H[SHULHQFHV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 6RPH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKDW SDVVHV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU KRZHYHU PD\ EH WKH FDXVH RU WKH UHVXOW RI FRQIOLFWV WKDW GHYHORS EHWZHHQ WKH WZR VXSHUYLVRUV &RQn VHTXHQWO\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU QHHGV WR EH FRJQL]DQW RI KRZ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU YLHZV ERWK WKH FRRSHUDWLYH DQG FRQIOLFWLYH SDUWV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS LQ RUGHU WR GHYHORS DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI KRZ WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS PD\ DIIHFW WKH VLWXDWLRQDO QHHGV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GXULQJ MRLQW YHQWXUHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQnrn ,W VKRXOG EH QRWHG WKDW WKLV SRVLWLRQ LV DOVR UHYHUVHG 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU QHHGV WR EH FRJQL]DQW RI KRZ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU YLHZV WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS DQG KRZ EHKDYLRUV PD\ DIIHFW WKH VLWXDWLRQDO QHHGV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV VWXG\ KRZHYHU LV RQO\ FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH ILUVW SRVLWLRQ FLWHG LQ WKH WH[W DERYH

PAGE 16

7KH NQRZOHGJH REWDLQHG E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DERXW WKH VXSHU YLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS VKRXOG DLG LQ WKH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI DQG UHVSRQVH WR WKH QHHGV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GXULQJ WKH SHULRG RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ ,W LV DVVXPHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU WKDW DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH QHHGV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV GXULQJ SHULRGV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ VKRXOG OHDG WR D EHWWHU XQGHUn VWDQGLQJ RI WKH UROH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV SDUWQHUVKLS LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ VKRXOG KHOS WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR DFKLHYH D PRUH VXFFHVVIXO RIIFDPSXV OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH 3UREOHP 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ KDV VHUYHG DV D OLQN EHWZHHQ WKH VFKRROV DQG FROOHJHV RI HGXFDWLRQ HYHU VLQFH WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI RIIFDPSXV VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ $OWKRXJK WKLV UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV GHVFULEHG DV ZHDN 6PLWK f UHGXQGDQW 0RVHU t %HEE f DQG QRQVLJQLILFDQW 0RUULV f LQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK WKH SHUIRUPDQFH DQG DGMXVWPHQW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV VRPH VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG %HQQLH )UHQ]HO 1HDO .UDIW t .UDFKW f VXSSRUWHG WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI DQG WKH QHHG IRU D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR SURYLGH D VWURQJ OLQN EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH RI HGXFDWLRQ DQG WKH VFKRRO :LWK WKH HYLGHQFH HVWDEOLVKHG WKDW FRQIOLFWLQJ YLHZV DERXW WKH QHHG DQG LPSRUWDQFH IRU D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV GLG H[LVW WKH ZULWHU UHYLHZHG WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ KXPDQ FRPPXQLn FDWLRQ SURFHVVHV DQG JHQHUDOL]DWLRQV %XUJRRQ t 5XIIQHU /LWWOHMRKQ 6WHLQIDWW f LQ RUGHU WR IXUWKHU VHOHFW DUHDV LQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKHRU\ WKDW FRXOG EH DSSOLHG WR WKH VWXG\ RI H[LVWLQJ VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 6HYHUDO WKHRULHV RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZHUH IXUWKHU

PAGE 17

UHYLHZHG 7KH DUHD RI FRQIOLFW LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV VHOHFWHG IRU IXUWKHU VWXG\ DQG DSSOLFDWLRQ WR WKH ILQGLQJV WKDW ZHUH REWDLQHG LQ WKH VWXG\ RQ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 1HHG IRU WKH 6WXG\ 3UHVHUYLFH WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ KDV EHHQ XQGHUJRLQJ VLJQLILFDQW FKDQJHV LQ UHFHQW \HDUV 5\DQ f 6WDWH GHSDUWPHQWV RI HGXFDWLRQ KDYH SURSRVHG DQG LQ VRPH VWDWHV LQVWLWXWHG QHZ JXLGHOLQHV DQG ODZV WKDW ZLOO VLJQLILFDQWO\ FKDQJH WKH HPSKDVLV RI WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ IURP RQ FDPSXV WR RIIFDPSXV W\SHV RI OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV )RU H[DPSOH D \HDUnV LQWHUQVKLS IRU )ORULGD WHDFKHU FHUWLILFDWLRQ LV UHTXLUHG IRU HGXFDn WLRQ PDMRUV LQ )ORULGD DIWHU -XO\ &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKH SDUWQHUVKLS EHWZHHQ FROOHJH DQG VFKRRO ZLOO EH DIIHFWHG $V WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU EHJLQV WR VSHQG PRUH WLPH LQ RIIFDPSXV DFWLYLWLHV LW DSSHDUV WKDW RQH UHTXLUHPHQW IRU DQ HIIHFWLYH SURJUDP ZLOO EH D OLQN RI WUXVW DQG PXWXDO FRRSHUDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH DQG VFKRRO /LHEHUPDQ f UHFRPPHQGHG WKDW OLQNDJH HIIRUWV DUH QHHGHG WR FRQQHFW SHRSOH LQVWLWXWLRQV DJHQFLHV DQG WKH OLNH LQ VXFK D ZD\ WKDW WKH\ H[FKDQJH LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG UHVRXUFHV ERWK KXPDQ DQG PDWHULDOf WR KHOS VROYH WKHLU SUREOHPV S f 2QO\ WKURXJK VXFK HIIRUW FDQ WKRVH LQWHUHVWHG LQ VFKRRO LPSURYHPHQW EH LQIOXHQWLDO LQ GHYHORSLQJ FROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV &ROODERUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV KRZHYHU DUH GLIILFXOW WR DFKLHYH ,QORZ f IRU H[DPSOH YLHZHG WKH IXQFWLRQV WKDW D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU SHUIRUPHG LQ D VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVRU\ UROH DV P\ULDG DQG FRPSOH[ 2WKHU VWXGLHV KDYH EHHQ PDGH GHOLQHDWLQJ WKH UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV RI

PAGE 18

VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG D QXPEHU RI UROHV DQG EHKDYLRUV KDYH EHHQ LGHQWLILHG DV FRQWULEXWLQJ WRZDUG D VXFFHVVIXO RU XQVXFFHVVIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH IRU ERWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU +DFNOH\ -RKQVRQ 1HDO .UDIW t .UDFKW f :KLOH PRVW VWXGLHV IRFXVHG RQ WKH UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU IHZ H[DPLQHG WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU H[FHSW DV SDUW RI D ODUJHU VWXG\ LQFOXGLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG RWKHU VFKRRO DQG FROOHJH DGPLQLVWUDWRUV 5ROH VWXGLHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH H[SHULHQFHG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZDV H[SHFWHG WR EH DEOH WR UHVSRQG WR WKH XQLTXHQHVV RI HDFK VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VLWH VLWXDWLRQ DQG WR DGMXVW VXSHUYLVRU\ WHFKQLTXHV WR FRPSHQVDWH IRU SUREOHPV WKDW DURVH LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV OHDUQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW 7KLV OHDUQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW VLWXDWHG LQ DQ LQVWLWXWLRQDO VHWWLQJ ZDV D VFKRRO :KLOH VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LQ D QXPEHU RI GLIIHUHQW VFKRRO VHWWLQJV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZRXOG HQFRXQWHU D QXPEHU RI VLWXDWLRQV 6RPH VLWXDWLRQV ZRXOG EH XQLTXH WR D VSHFLILF VFKRRO 2WKHU VLWXDWLRQV ZRXOG KDYH JHQHUDO DSSOLFDWLRQ DFURVV PRVW VFKRRO VLWHV 2FFXUUHQFHV ZLWKLQ WKH VFKRRO VLWH WKHUHIRUH QHHGHG WR EH LQWHUSUHWHG DQG LQWHJUDWHG LQWR PHDQLQJIXO OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q RUGHU IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR KHOS WUDQVODWH WKHVH VLWXDWLRQV LQWR PHDQLQJIXO H[SHULHQFHV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKH 7KUHH H[FHOOHQW VRXUFHV WKDW GLUHFW WKHPVHOYHV WR WKH LVVXHV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 7KH UROHV UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV DQG WKH SUREOHPV RI WKRVH NH\ SHUVRQV LQYROYHG DUH 7KH $VVRFLDWLRQ IRU 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ
PAGE 19

FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU QHHGV NQRZOHGJH RI WKH YDULHW\ RI VLWXDWLRQDO IDFWRUV RFFXUULQJ ZLWKLQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ HQYLURQPHQW 6XFK DZDUHQHVV ZRXOG HQDEOH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR PRYH IURP VLWXDWLRQ WR VLWXDWLRQ ZLWK DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI VSHFLILF DQG JHQHUDO ZHDNQHVVHV DQG VWUHQJWKV RI HDFK VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VLWXDWLRQ *UXPHW f GHILQHG WKLV VLWXDWLRQ DV DQ HQYLURQPHQW LQ ZKLFK DFWLRQ UDWKHU WKDQ LQWHQWLRQ RU REVHUYDWLRQ WRRN SODFH DV D UHVXOW RI GLUHFW KXPDQ LQWHUYHQWLRQ ZLWKLQ WKDW HQYLURQn PHQW 6LWXDWLRQV ZHUH DFWLYH ZLWK SHRSOH ZRUNLQJ DW WKHLU FHQWHUV $FFRUGLQJ WR *UXPHWIV GHILQLWLRQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ HQYLURQPHQW ZDV QRW FRQVLGHUHG V\QRQ\PRXV ZLWK D VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VLWXDWLRQ XQWLO KXPDQ DFWLRQ RFFXUUHG 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LQ DVNn LQJ TXHVWLRQV DERXW WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS WUDQVIRUP D QHXWUDO HQYLURQPHQW LQWR DQ DFWLYH VLWXDWLRQ *UXPHW FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH ZD\ TXHVWLRQV ZHUH SRVLWHG ZRXOG KHOS WR VKDSH WKH DQVZHUV WKDW ZHUH UHFHLYHG 7KLV LQ WXUQ DLGHG WKH LQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI HYHQWV DQG FRQFHUQV E\ WKRVH SHUVRQV GLUHFWO\ LQYROYHG LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 'HZH\ f LQWHUSUHWHG HYHQWV RU FRQFHUQV QRW DV LVRODWHG VLQJXODU REMHFWV EXW DV SDUW RI D FRQWH[WXDO ZKROH $ VLWXDWLRQ ZDV DQ HQYLURQn LQJ H[SHULHQFHG ZRUOG ZKHUH REVHUYDWLRQV RI HYHQWV RU FRQFHUQV RI KXPDQ EHLQJV ZHUH SDUW RI WKH HQYLURQPHQW 2EVHUYDWLRQV ZHUH PDGH LQ RUGHU WR ILQG RXW ZKDW WKDW ILHOG LV ZLWK UHIHUHQFH WR VRPH DFWLYH DGDSWLYH UHVSRQVH WR EH PDGH LQ FDUU\LQJ IRUZDUG D FRXUVH RI EHKDYLRU S f &RXSOHG ZLWK WKH QHHG WR XQGHUVWDQG DQG LQWHUSUHW HYHQWV WKDW RFFXU ZLWKLQ VLWXDWLRQV LW LV DOVR GHVLUDEOH WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU HVWDEOLVK D FROOHJLDO UHODWLRQVKLS LQ RWKHU ZRUGV D FRPPXQLFDWLRQ OLQN RI WUXVW XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG IULHQGOLQHVV

PAGE 20

7UDGLWLRQDOO\ WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ OLQNDJH EHWZHHQ WKHVH WZR KDV EHHQ VWUDLQHG DQG KDV VHUYHG DV D SODWIRUP IRU FULWLFLVP RI HDFK RWKHUnV EDVH RI RSHUDWLRQ VRXUFH RI SRZHU DQG UROH UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV &RUULJDQ t *DUODQG +\WUHN 3IHLIIHU f 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV JRDOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DUH RIWHQ QRW LQ DFFRUG +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f VWDWHG WKDW WKH SURVSHFWLYH JRDOV RU LQWHQWLRQV RI SHUVRQV GLUHFWHG DQG H[SODLQHG WKHLU EHKDYLRU ,I WKH JRDOV RI LQGLYLGXDOV ZHUH QRW FRPSOHPHQWDU\ RU ZHUH LQ FRQIOLFW ZLWK RQH DQRWKHU WKH VXEVHTXHQW EHKDYLRUV RI WKH LQGLYLGXDOV ZRXOG DOVR EH LQ FRQIOLFW 7KXV WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ WDVN ZDV PDGH PRUH GLIILFXOW GXH LQ SDUW WR WKH QDWXUH RI WKH GLYHUVH VXSHUYLVRU\ SUDFWLFHV RU QRUPV LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VLWXDWLRQV %RWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU EURXJKW WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV OHDUQLQJ HQYLURQPHQW H[SHULHQFHV DQG DWWLWXGHV DERXW WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ HDFK UHSUHVHQWDWLYH RI KLV RU KHU HGXFDWLRQDO LQVWLWXWLRQ 0XWXDO DJUHHPHQWV RU XQGHUVWDQGLQJV DV WR WKH QHHGV IRU FRRSHUDWLRQ ZHUH VWUDLQHG RU ODFNLQJ EHFDXVH PRVW VFKRROV DQG FROOHJHV GLG QRW KDYH D GHILQHG HGXFDWLRQDO JRDO IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV +XGGOH f 2IWHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP ZDV YLHZHG DV D YHKLFOH WR KHOS SURVSHFWLYH WHDFKHUV FRPSOHWH WKHLU SUHVHUYLFH HGXFDWLRQ DQG WR TXDOLI\ IRU D WHDFKLQJ SRVLWLRQ %HFDXVH RI WKLV YLHZ WKH QHHG IRU PXWXDO FRRSHUDWLRQ DQG LQIOXHQFH EHWZHHQ WKH VFKRRO DQG FROOHJH ZDV QRW FRQVLGHUHG WR EH DQ LPSRUWDQW RQH %\ WKH YHU\ QDWXUH RI WKH RUJDQL]DWLRQDO ERXQGDULHV WKDW HQFRPSDVV D SXEOLF RU SULYDWH VFKRRO VLWH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV KDYH OLWWOH LQIOXHQFH RXWVLGH WKHLU RZQ LQVWLWXWLRQV DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU EHFRPHV WRUQ EHWZHHQ DOOHJLDQFHV WR WKH FROOHJH DQG WKH VFKRRO 6PLWK f %RWK KRVWV DQG JXHVWV JR WKHLU RZQ ZD\ WUHDG OLJKWO\ VR DV QRW WR RIIHQG

PAGE 21

DQG DUH SROLWH WR DOO LQ RQH DQRWKHUfV FRPSDQ\ )HZ EDUULHUV WR FRPPXQLn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f /HVV WLPH ZDV VSHQW E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU GLVFXVVLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV H[SHULHQFH ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7RR RIWHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV LJQRUHG GXULQJ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV YLVLW IXUWKHU ZHDNHQLQJ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ FRQWDFWV EHWZHHQ WKH WZR VXSHUYLVRUV 7KH QXPEHU RI FRQWDFW KRXUV WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU KDV ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZRXOG HQDEOH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR HYDOXDWH PRVW DVSHFWV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH LQFOXGLQJ LQFLGHQWV WKDW WUDQVODWHG LQWR HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ DW D VFKRRO 7KH IRFXV RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV XSRQ WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI WKRVH LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKDW DIIHFWHG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,W ZDV UHDOLVWLF WR VXSSRVH WKDW VRPH RI WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKDW SDVVHG EHWZHHQ PHPEHUV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ WHDP ZDV URRWHG LQ FRQIOLFWV WKDW DURVH IURP LQFRPSDWLEOH LQWHUSHUVRQDO LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU

PAGE 22

'HXWVFK f LQFOXGHG LQ KLV GHILQLWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW WKH LQFRPSDWLELOLW\ IDFWRU WKDW FUHDWHG FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV 6XFK LQn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
PAGE 23

WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RU VLWXDWLRQV RI EHKDYLRU ZDV YLHZHG DV DQ LPSRUWDQW FRQWULEXWLRQ WR WKH VWXG\ RI WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH WZR VXSHUYLVRUV WKH PDMRU FROODWHUDO IRFXV WR WKH VWXG\ ZDV WR UHODWH LI IRXQG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI EHKDYLRU WR WKH UHVHDUFK ILQGLQJV LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRQIOLFW LQ LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLn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f VWDWHG WKDW FRQIOLFW ZDV LQHYLWDEOH DQG FRXOG QRW EH VXSSUHVVHG &LWLQJ UHVHDUFK IURP WKH OLWHUDWXUH .HOOH\ PDGH VHYHUDO VXSSRVLWLRQV WKDW IXUWKHU VXSSRUWHG WKH QHHG WR VWXG\ FRQIOLFW LQ VXSHUn YLVLRQ /LNH 'HXWVFK f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

PAGE 24

7KH VHFRQG DVVXPSWLRQ LV WKDW FRQIOLFWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ GR RFFXU EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 6XFK HYLGHQFH ZDV SURGXFHG E\ UHYLHZLQJ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ 2QH VWXG\ LQ SDUWLFXODU FRQGXFWHG E\ /LSWRQ DQG /HVVHU f FRQFOXGHG WKDW ZKLOH WHQVLRQV LQKHUHQW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ FRXOG QRW EH HOLPLQDWHG WKHUH ZHUH PHDQV E\ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG FRXOG UHGXFH WKH DPRXQW RI FRQIOLFW WKDW H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH WULDG PHPEHUV 7KH DXWKRUV LGHQWLILHG D QXPEHU RI JHQHUDOL]HG DUHDV RI FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ VXSHUYLVRUV $OWKRXJK VSHFLILF FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH QRW VSHFLILHG WKH DUHDV RI FRQIOLFW LGHQWLILHG VHUYHG DV IXUWKHU HYLGHQFH WKDW FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FDQ EH LGHQWLILHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV /LSWRQ DQG /HVVHU f LGHQWLILHG WKH IROORZLQJ DUHDV RI FRQIOLFW LQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHODWLRQVKLS f 7KHUH LV DQ LQWHUDFWLRQ LQ D WULDQJOH RI DGXOWV QRQH RI ZKRP DUH JHQHUDOO\ UHJDUGHG DV HIIHFWLYH DXWRQRPRXV OHDGHUV RU FUHDWLYH WKLQNHUV
PAGE 25

DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RYHU WKH SHUFHLYHG SUHVWLJH DQG VWDWXV RI WKH XQLYHUVLW\ GXWLHV YHUVXV WKH GXWLHV RI VFKRRO SHUVRQQHO ,W LV EHOLHYHG WKDW XQUHVROYHG LVVXHV RI SUHVWLJH UROH DQG IDYRULWLVP RIWHQ KDYH D JUHDW LPSDFW RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQ WKH DVVLJQLQJ RI JUDGHV DQG IXWXUH MRE RSSRUWXQLWLHV f &RQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKH WULDG PHPEHUV H[LVWV LQ ERWK FRYHUW DQG RYHUW W\SHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ /LSWRQ DQG /HVVHU f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}ZLWK UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV DQG DXWRQRP\ SURYLGHG DV HDUO\ DV SRVVLEOH LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV WUDLQLQJ SURJUDP 7KH WKLUG DVVXPSWLRQ PDGH IRU WKLV VWXG\ RI FRQIOLFW LQ LQWHUn SHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LV WKDW LW ZRXOG EH EHQHILFLDO IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR NQRZ DQG XQGHUVWDQG WKH QDWXUH RI FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKH

PAGE 26

WZR VXSHUYLVRUV 7MRVYROG f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n VWDQG WKDW WKH PXWXDO LQIOXHQFH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LV YLHZHG DV D PRUH GHVLUDEOH JRDO WKDQ D JRDO ZKHUH D KLHUDUFK\ RI VXSHUYLVRU\ LQIOXHQFH SUHYDLOV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRPPXQLFDWHV LQ JHQHUDO DQG VSHFLILF ZD\V ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DERXW VLWXDWLRQV SUREOHPV DQG LVVXHV FRQFHUQLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DVVLJQHG WR D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU IRU D VSHFLILHG WLPH RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ $ PDMRU UROH WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DVVXPHV LQ ZRUNLQJ ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW

PAGE 27

WHDFKHU LV WKDW RI GHYHORSLQJ DQG PDLQWDLQLQJ JRRG LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV ZLWK PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WHDP DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ VFKRRO 7KH DWWLWXGHV WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EULQJV IURP WKH FROOHJH WR WKH VFKRRO VLWH FRXOG YHU\ ZHOO LQIOXHQFH WKH W\SHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKDW SDVV DPRQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WHDP 6WUDWHPH\HU DQG /LQGVH\ f FRQFOXGHG WKDW PXFK RI WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQYROYHG WKH VHHNLQJ RI LQIRUPDWLRQ RU WKH VROYLQJ RI SUREOHPV SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VLWXDWLRQ :LWK EHWWHU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RQ WKH SDUW RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV RI WKH QHHGV DQG FRQFHUQV IRU HDFK RWKHU LW LV UHDVRQHG WKDW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH FRXOG EH VLJQLILFDQWO\ LPSURYHG IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 3URFHGXUHV 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH GHYHORSHG E\ -RKQ & )ODQDJDQ f DQG RWKHUV ZDV WKH PHWKRG RI UHVHDUFK XVHG EXW PRGLILHG IRU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LV D VHW RI SURFHGXUHV IRU FROOHFWLQJ VHOIUHSRUWHG REVHUYDWLRQV RI HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV DERXW VSHFLILF MREV LQ ZKLFK SHUVRQV DUH HQJDJHG )RU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ D FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LV DQ REVHUYDEOH KXPDQ DFWLYLW\ WKDW LV VXIILFLHQWO\ FRPSOHWH LQ LWVHOI WR SHUPLW LQIHUHQFHV DQG SUHGLFWLRQV WR EH PDGH DERXW WKH SHUVRQ SHUIRUPLQJ WKH DFW )ODQDJDQ f 0RUHRYHU WKLV KXPDQ DFWLYLW\ LV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ RI XQXVXDO FRPSHWHQFH RU ODFN RI FRPSHWHQFH RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH SHUVRQVf HQJDJHG LQ WKH DFWLYLW\ *RRG f &ULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV DUH WKRVH LGHQWLILHG HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV WKDW DSSHDU WR KDYH WKH PRVW LQIOXHQFH RQ WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RU LQHIIHFWLYHQHVV RI DFKLHYLQJ WKH DLP RU SXUSRVH RI WKH MRE RU WDVN

PAGE 28

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f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

PAGE 29

f &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH VWXG\ VXSHUYLVHG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DW WKH VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO OHYHO *UDGHV f IRU D PLQLPXP RI RQH TXDUWHU RU QLQH ZHHNV (DFK VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV DVVLJQHG WR D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU IRU WKH VDPH SHULRG RI WLPH f 7KH WZR W\SHV RI LQVWLWXWLRQV WKDW SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH VWXG\ ZHUH )ORULGD SXEOLF VFKRROV ZKHUH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH HPSOR\HG DQG WKUHH VWDWH XQLYHUVLWLHV WKDW VSRQVRUHG DQG VXSHUYLVHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV f 7KH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH WKRVH EHKDYLRUV ZKLFK ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV FULWLFDO WR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHU DWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG ZKLFK ZHUH SHUFHLYHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR DIIHFW WKHLU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU $OWKRXJK PDQ\ FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH GLUHFWHG WRZDUG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKRVH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH QRW FRQVLGHUHG LPSRUWDQW WR WKH VWXG\ XQOHVV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV DIIHFWHG E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn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nV SHUIRUPDQFH

PAGE 30

&RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU f§ WKH FODVVURRP WHDFKHU ZKR YROXQWHHUV RU LV DVVLJQHG WR DLG DQG GLUHFW WKH WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFHV RI D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQ DGGLWLRQ WR WKH UHJXODU GXWLHV DVVLJQHG WR WKH FODVVURRP WHDFKHU LQ D SXEOLF SULYDWH RU ODERUDWRU\ VFKRRO 7KH PDMRU WDVN RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LV WR KHOS WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU SODQ DSSURSULDWH OHVVRQV FROOHFW LQVWUXFWLRQDO PDWHULDOV DQG WR VXJJHVW ZD\V WR SUHVHQW WKH PDWHULDOV WR WKH SXSLOV $QRWKHU IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LV WR HYDOXDWH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU f§ WKH FROOHJH VWXGHQW HQJDJHG LQ D SUDFWLFH WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH XVXDOO\ WHUPHG VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ XQGHU WKH JXLGDQFH DQG VXSHUn YLVLRQ RI D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LQ D SODQQHG SHULRG RI HGXFDWLRQDO H[SHULHQFHV LQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU PRYHV IURP WKH UROH RI REVHUYHUKHOSHU WR IXOO SDUWLFLSDQW LQ SHUIRUPLQJ WKH GXWLHV RI D FODVVURRP WHDFKHU '\DG f§ WZR SHUVRQV ZKR DUH LQYROYHG LQ VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ )RU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ D G\DG LV LGHQWLILHG DV DQ\ WZR RI WKH IROORZLQJ WKUHH SHUVRQV FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RU VWXGHQW WHDFKHU HQJDJHG LQ VRPH IRUP RI VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ HDFK RWKHU 7ULDG f§ WKUHH SHUVRQV ZKR DUH LQYROYHG LQ VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ )RU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ D WULDG ZLOO EH LGHQWLILHG DV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU HQJDJHG LQ VRPH IRUP RI VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ DPRQJ HDFK RWKHU 6LWXDWLRQ f§ D FRQWH[WXDO RU HQYLURQPHQWDO FRQGLWLRQ RU FLUFXPVWDQFH LQ ZKLFK WKHUH H[LVWV D FRPSRQHQW RI KXPDQ LQWHUYHQWLRQ RU LQWHUDFWLRQ ZKHUH H[SHULHQFHV DQG LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV RI HYHQWV WDNHV SODFH ,QFLGHQW f§ DQ\ REVHUYDEOH KXPDQ DFWLYLW\ WKDW LV VXIILFLHQWO\ FRPSOHWH LQ LWVHOI WR SHUPLW LQIHUHQFHV DQG SUHGLFWLRQV WR EH PDGH DERXW WKH SHUVRQ SHUIRUPLQJ WKH DFW 7R EH FULWLFDO DQ LQFLGHQW PXVW RFFXU LQ D VLWXDWLRQ LQ ZKLFK WKH SXUSRVH RU LQWHQW RI WKH DFW VHHPV IDLUO\ FOHDU WR WKH REVHUYHU DQG ZKHUH LWV FRQVHTXHQFHV DUH VXIILFLHQWO\ GHILQLWH WR OHDYH OLWWOH GRXEW FRQFHUQLQJ LWV HIIHFWV )ODQDJDQ S f &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW f§ VRPH RFFXUUHQFH LQYROYLQJ D SHUVRQ ZKLFK LV WDNHQ WR LQGLFDWH XQXVXDO FRPSHWHQFH RU ODFN RI FRPSHWHQFH RQ KLV SDUW KDV EHHQ XVHG DV D EDVLV IRU GHILQLQJ MRE UHTXLUHPHQWV DQG IRU GHYHORSLQJ SURn ILFLHQF\ WHVWV 'LFWLRQDU\ RI (GXFDWLRQ S f &RQIOLFW f§ VRPH LQFLGHQW WKDW RFFXUV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LQ ZKLFK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU SHUFHLYHV WKDW LQFLGHQW DV FUHDWLQJ DQ LQFRPSDWLEOH VLWXDWLRQ EHWZHHQ KLPVHOI DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU

PAGE 31

&+$37(5 ,, 5(9,(: 2) 7+( /,7(5$785( ,QWURGXFWLRQ 7KH OLWHUDWXUH LV UHSOHWH ZLWK VFKRODUO\ FRQFHUQV IRU D PHDQLQJn IXO VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH DV SDUW RI WKH SUHVHUYLFH WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ SURJUDP 5ROHV EHKDYLRUV DWWLWXGHV FRQFHUQV DQG SUREOHPV RI NH\ LQGLYLGXDOV HQJDJHG LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ FROODERUDWLYH HIIRUW KDYH EHHQ VWXGLHG DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV IRU FKDQJH LQ WKLV SUHVHUYLFH WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ FRPSRQHQW KDYH EHHQ PDGH 'HVSLWH WKH ODUJH QXPEHUV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VWXGLHV DYDLODEOH +HLW]PDQQ f UHSRUWHG WKDW PXFK RI WKH UHVHDUFK RQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ KDV EHHQ FRQGXFWHG E\ GRFWRUDO VWXGHQWV LQ JUDGXDWH VFKRROV RI HGXFDWLRQ 6HYHUDO IDFWRUV DUH VWDWHG WR VXSSRUW KLV WKHVLV 0DQ\ IDFXOW\ PHPEHUV RI FROOHJHV RI HGXFDWLRQ YLHZ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DV D ORZ VWDWXV IDFXOW\ SRVLWLRQ %HFDXVH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV ZRUN LV PRUH ILHOG RULHQWHG DQG OHVV UHVHDUFK RULHQWHG VXFK DFWLYLWLHV GR QRW FDUU\ WKH ZHLJKW IRU PHULW LQFUHDVHV RU IDFXOW\ DGYDQFHPHQW )XUWKHUPRUH PDQ\ IDFXOW\ DUH UHOXFWDQW WR UHWXUQ WR WKH FODVVURRP DIWHU WHDFKLQJ D KRPRJHQHRXV JURXS RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWV $FFRUGLQJO\ GRFWRUDO VWXGHQWV DUH IUHTXHQWO\ XVHG WR VXSHUn YLVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG WKRVH ZKR DFFHSW WKH DVVLJQPHQW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ILQG WKDW WKH\ KDYH D SRSXODWLRQ DYDLODEOH IRU WKHLU GRFWRUDO GLVVHUWDn WLRQ UHVHDUFK $ ODUJH QXPEHU RI VWXGLHV LQ SUHVHUYLFH WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ IRFXV RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 6WUHVV DQ[LHWLHV SUREOHPV

PAGE 32

DWWLWXGHV EHOLHIV VXFFHVVHV DQG IDLOXUHV DUH IXOO\ UHSRUWHG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH $QGHUVRQ &RDWHV t 7KRUHVRQ )XOOHU *DUUDUG +DOSHUW +DUURZ 6RUHQVRQ t +DOSHUW f )HZHU VWXGLHVKRZHYHU DUH FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHDV RI VWXG\LQJ WKH LQWHUn SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RU WKH FRRSHUDn WLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 2QO\ RQH VWXG\ E\ /LSWRQ DQG /HVVHU f UHODWHG GLUHFWO\ WR WKH VWXG\ RI FRQIOLFW LQ WKH WHDFKLQJ WULDG ,Q RUGHU WR XQGHUVWDQG WKH QDWXUH RI WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQn VKLS EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LW ZDV QHFHVVDU\ WR UHYLHZ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ WKH UHODWLRQVKLSV WKDW H[LVW EHWZHHQ WKH PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH UHFHQW SURIHVVLRQDO OLWHUDWXUH DSSURSULDWH WR WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ EHLQJ FRQGXFWHG LV UHYLHZHG XQGHU VL[ KHDGLQJV 7KH ILUVW VHFWLRQ UHSRUWV VWXGLHV UHODWHG WR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH VHFRQG VHFWLRQ GHVn FULEHV VWXGLHV UHODWHG WR WKH UROH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH WKLUG VHFWLRQ FRQWDLQV VWXGLHV UHODWHG WR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS DPRQJ PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG 7KH IRXUWK VHFWLRQ UHSRUWV VWXGLHV UHODWHG WR FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DPRQJ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH ILIWK VHFWLRQ LV D UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDn WLRQ WKDW ZDV MXGJHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU WR EH DSSURSULDWHO\ UHODWHG WR WKLV VWXG\ RQ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 7KH VL[WK VHFWLRQ FRQWDLQV D UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQ HGXFDWLRQ XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH PHWKRG

PAGE 33

6WXGLHV 5HODWHG WR WKH ,QWHUSHUVRQDO 5HODWLRQVKLS %HWZHHQ WKH &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU DQG WKH 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU $W WKH WLPH RI WKH 6WHHYHV f VWXG\ WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW SHUVRQ LQ WKH SUHVHUYLFH SURIHVVLRQDO OLIH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR ZKRP WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV DVVLJQHG +RZHYHU WKH RQO\ FULWHULRQ XVHG LQ WKH VHOHFWLRQ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZDV UHSRUWHG WR EH WKH DYDLODELOLW\ DQG ZLOOLQJQHVV RI WHDFKHUV WR WDNH RQ WKH H[WUD GXWLHV RI WKLV UROH $OWKRXJK WKH LQIOXHQFHV RQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV E\ RWKHU NH\ LQGLYLGXDOV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ .DUPRV DQG -DFNR f DQG 0DQQLQJ f WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHPDLQHG DFFRUGLQJ WR /RZWKHU fWKH PRVW VLJQLn ILFDQW LQIOXHQFH XSRQ WKH EHOLHIV DWWLWXGHV DQG EHKDYLRUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q D VWXG\ RI WKH PRVW VXFFHVVIXO DQG OHDVW VXFFHVVIXO H[SHULHQFHV LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DV SHUFHLYHG E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU /RZWKHU f FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS HVWDEOLVKHG EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV D PDMRU IDFWRU LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ WKHVXFFHVV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH QHHG IRU PRUH LQYHVWLn JDWLRQ LQWR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO G\QDPLFV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHODWLRQVKLS ZDV FLWHG $FFRUGLQJ WR WKLV VWXG\ IRXU LPSRUWDQW TXHVWLRQV UHPDLQHG XQDQVZHUHG f :KDW FRQVWLWXWHV D JRRG RU EDG LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU" f :KDW DUH WKH RXWFRPHV RI D JRRG RU EDG UHOD WLRQVKLS" f &DQ YDULDEOHV EH LGHQWLILHG WKDW FRQWULEXWH WR WKH VWUXFWXULQJ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHODWLRQVKLS DORQJ ZLWK HDFK SDUWLFLSDQWfV UROH" f :K\ LV LW GLIILFXOW IRU WKH

PAGE 34

FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR SURYLGH IHHGEDFN RQ WHDFKLQJ SHUIRUPDQFH WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU" /RZWKHUnV VWXG\ IRXQG WKDW WRR RIWHQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH JLYHQ OLWWOH RU QR IHHGEDFN RQ WHDFKLQJ SHUIRUPDQFH ZHUH JLYHQ OLWWOH SHUVRQDO RU SURIHVVLRQDO VXSSRUW DQG ZHUH XQDEOH WR VDWLVI\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn H[SHFWDWLRQV 6WXGHQW WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKRVH H[SHULHQFHV ZKHUH WKHUH ZDV SHUVRQDO VDWLVIDFWLRQ JDLQHG RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SDUW LQ ZRUNLQJ ZLWK WKH SXSLOV DV PRUH VXFFHVVIXO WKDQ WKRVH H[SHULHQFHV UHODWHG WR DFKLHYLQJ WKH LQVWUXFWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV 1LFKROVRQ f XVHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH WR LGHQWLI\ DQG FDWHJRUL]H EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV YLHZHG DV FULWLFDO WR WKHLU VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 0RUH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG LQ WKH DIIHFWLYH WKDQ WKH FRJQLWLYH GRPDLQV RI WHDFKLQJ EHKDYLRUV 1LFKROVRQ FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKHUH H[LVWV D UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ HIIHFWLYH WHDFKLQJ E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WKH VXSHUn YLVRU\ EHKDYLRU RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU +DFNOH\ f IRXQG WZHQW\WKUHH HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV DQG ILIWHHQ LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LQ ERWK WKH DIIHFWLYH DQG FRJQLWLYH GRPDLQV RI WHDFKLQJ EHn KDYLRUV 7KHVH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH WKHQ WUDQVODWHG LQWR WZHQW\ EHKDYLRUDO FULWHULD WR EH XVHG IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ DQG GHYHORSPHQW RI HIIHFWLYH VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV $OWKRXJK PDQ\ HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH UHODWHG WR WKH FODVVURRP LQVWUXFWLRQDO FRPSRQHQW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ D QXPEHU RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV LQWHUSHUVRQDO EHKDYLRUV EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU (IIHFWLYH LQWHUSHUVRQDO EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDn WLQJ WHDFKHUV LQFOXGHG WKH DELOLW\ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR SURYLGH FRQILGHQFH DQG VXSSRUW WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR FULWLFL]H WKH

PAGE 35

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nV LGHDV DERXW LQVWUXFWLRQDO WHFKQLTXHV DQG PDWHULDOV DQG FULWLFL]LQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU H[FHVVLYHO\ DQG LQ IURQW RI RWKHU SHUVRQV ,Q VXSSRUW RI WKH /RZWKHU f DQG 1LFKROVRQ f VWXGLHV &DPSEHOO DQG :LOOLDPV f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f UHYLHZHG HLJKW\ VWXGLHV RQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DQG FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ZDV WKH GHFLVLYH IDFWRU IRU FRQWLQXLQJ LQ RU WHUPLQDWLQJ WKH FKRLFH RI WHDFKLQJ DV D FDUHHU ,W ZDV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZKR SURPRWHG FUHDWLYLW\ DQG KLJK PRUDOH DQG HVWDEOLVKHG D PDWXUH UHODWLRQVKLS DQG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ EHWZHHQ WKH WZR

PAGE 36

SDUWQHUV DV WR H[SHFWDWLRQV DFFRPSOLVKPHQWV DQG JRDOV 7KH UROH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV YLHZHG DV WKDW RI D NH\ OHDGHU ZKR VXJJHVWHG JXLGHG GHPRQVWUDWHG FRQIHUUHG FRXQVHOHG DQG HYDOXDWHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU GXULQJ D VWUHVVIXO SHULRG RI DGMXVWPHQW 7HDFKLQJ VNLOO GHYHORSn PHQW WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU UDWKHU WKDQ XVLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DV D VRXUFH RI IUHH ODERU RU DV D SHUVRQDO DVVLVWDQW ZDV YLHZHG E\ 0F$WHHU f DV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUfV UROH (ONLQ f LGHQWLILHG HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG IRXQG PDMRU GLIIHUHQFHV LQ KRZ WKH WZR JURXSV SHUFHLYHG WKH UROH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKHLU UROH DV RQH RI LQGXFWLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQWR WKH PHFKDQLFV RI WHDFKLQJ DQG OHVVRQ SUHSDUDWLRQ ZKLOH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKH PDMRU UROH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV RQH RI HQFRXUDJLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR DVVXPH LQFUHDVHG UHVSRQVLELOLW\ IRU FODVVURRP LQVWUXFWLRQ E\ SURYLGLQJ WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ IRU WKH VWXGHQW WR JURZ LQ SURIHVVLRQDO UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV 7KH SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS WKDW GHYHORSHG EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DSSHDUHG WR EH D VLJQLILFDQW IDFWRU IRU WKH VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH 3ULFH f IRXQG WKDW WKH DWWLWXGHV KHOG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FKDQJHG DIWHU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH DQG PRYHG LQ WKH GLUHFWLRQ RI DWWLWXGHV KHOG E\ WKH FODVVURRP WHDFKHU &RUUHODWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FODVVURRP SHUIRUPDQFH LQGLFDWHG WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DSSHDUHG WR DFTXLUH PDQ\ RI WKH WHDFKLQJ SUDFWLFHV RI WKHLU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KLV VWXG\ VXSSRUWHG 0F$XOD\nV f FRQFOXVLRQ WKDW FROOHJHV RI HGXFDWLRQ PHWKRG FODVV WHFKQLTXHV DQG PDWHULDOV ZHUH QRW XVHG E\ D PDMRULW\ RI EHJLQQLQJ ILUVW \HDU WHDFKHUV

PAGE 37

$OO WHDFKHUV KRZHYHU XVHG WKH PDWHULDOV WKH\ KDG SUHSDUHG LQ WKH FODVVURRP LQ ZKLFK WKH\ KDG KDG WKHLU VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ,W PXVW EH QRWHG WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ LGHQWLILHG DV VXFFHVVIXO WHDFKHUV ZKR ZHUH WKHPVHOYHV VWURQJ SRVLWLYH LQIOXHQFHV RQ WKHLU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 7KH HIIHFW RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV SHUVRQDOLW\ RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV QRW FRQVLGHUHG LQ WKH VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG DERYH +RZHYHU
PAGE 38

YDOXHV DQG EHOLHIV KHOG E\ WKH VHFRQG DVVLJQHG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q ERWK VWXGLHV WKH DVVXPSWLRQ ZDV PDGH WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn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f 7KH\ IRXQG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DJUHHG PRVW IUHTXHQWO\ RQ DUHDV RI VXFFHVVIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKHU H[SHULHQFH 7KHUH H[LVWHG QHJOLJLEOH GLIIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ DUHDV RI OHDVW VXFFHVV +RZHYHU WKH ORZ SHUFHQW RI DJUHHPHQW DERXW WKH OHDVW VXFFHVVIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFHV OHG WKH LQYHVWLJDWRUV WR FRQFOXGH WKDW SRRU FRPPXQLFDWLRQ OLQNV H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 0RUH VLJQLn ILFDQWO\ OLWWOH RU QR DWWHQWLRQ ZDV JLYHQ E\ WKH VXEMHFWV WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH LQ WHDFKLQJ FRXUVH FRQWHQW (YLGHQFH RI SRRU FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG ORZ DJUHHPHQW RI VXFFHVV ZHUH DOVR IRXQG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRUV LQ WKH DUHDV RI FODVV GLVFLSOLQH OHVVRQ SODQQLQJ DQG RWKHU LQFODVV UHODWHG DFWLYLWLHV 6RDUHV DQG 6RDUHV f LQ D VWXG\ IRFXVLQJ RQ WKH QDWXUH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VHOI FRQFHSW GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ IRXQG WKDW DOWKRXJK WKHUH ZDV DJUHHPHQW WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ ZDV WKH PRVW PHDQLQJn IXO SUHVHUYLFH WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ H[SHULHQFH DQ XQUHYHDOHG IDFHW RI

PAGE 39

VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ ZDV WKDW WKH H[SHULHQFH DSSHDUHG OHVV VLJQLILFDQW WKDQ LW FRXOG RU VKRXOG EH 5HVXOWV IURP WKH VWXG\ LQGLFDWHG WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV GLG QRW VHHP WR JDLQ DV PXFK DV WKH\ VKRXOG IURP WKHLU DVVRFLDn WLRQ ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZKHQ PHDVXUHG DJDLQVW WKUHH DOWHUQDn WLYH LPDJH IDFWRUV KRZ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU YLHZHG KLPVHOI DV D WHDFKHU KRZ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU YLHZHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV LPDJH RI KLP DV D WHDFKHU DQG KRZ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU YLHZHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV LPDJH RI KLP DV D WHDFKHU 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH LPDJH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV RSLQLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DV D WHDFKHU ZDV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW IDFWRU IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW 6RDUHV DQG 6RDUHVn f VWXG\ VXSSRUWHG 7KRPSVRQ f LQ KLV ILQGLQJV ZKLFK LGHQWLILHG DQ[LHWLHV H[SHULHQFHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 2QHWKLUG RI WKH VXEMHFWV LQ WKH 6RDUHV DQG 6RDUHV VWXG\ ZHUH HOHPHQWDU\ VFKRRO VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG WZRWKLUGV RI WKH VXEMHFWV ZHUH VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 7KH UHVXOWV VKRZHG WKDW RYHU WKUHHTXDUWHUV RI WKH VDPSOH LGHQWLILHG DQ[LHWLHV WKDW ZHUH FRQFHUQHG ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ ZHUH JLYHQ OLWWOH LQIRUPDWLRQ E\ WKHLU LQGLYLGXDO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DERXW WKH H[SHFWDWLRQV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR PHHW 6RXWKDOO DQG .LQJ f FRQGXFWHG D VXUYH\ RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUVn SHUFHSWLRQV RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV VLWXDWLRQV WKDW RFFXUUHG ZKLFK FRXOG KDYH RU GLG KDYH DQ LPSDFW XSRQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV FRPSOHWLRQ RU VXFFHVV LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH DXWKRUV IRXQG WKDW ODFN RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU

PAGE 40

ZDV WKH PRVW FRPPRQ FDXVH RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 7KH VHFRQG PRVW FRPPRQ FDXVH IRU FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV WR RFFXU ZDV SHUn FHLYHG E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR EH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV LQDELOLW\ WR OLYH XS WR WKH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KLV IDLOXUH ZDV UHSRUWHG WR DIIHFW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KH WKLUG PRVW RIWHQ SHUFHLYHG FDXVH RU FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW ZDV WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV QRW EHLQJ SUHSDUHG WR WHDFK RU QRW NQRZLQJ PHWKRGV DQG WHFKQLTXHV RI WHDFKLQJ 7KH PDMRU LPSOLFDWLRQ GUDZQ IURP WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ ZDV WKH VXJJHVWLRQ WKDW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV PXVW EH VNLOOHG LQ GHDOLQJ ZLWK LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ IDFLOLWDWLQJ DQG HQFRXUDJLQJ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU /RZWKHU f DWWHPSWHG WR DQVZHU WKH TXHVWLRQ RI WKH GHJUHH RI TXDOLW\ LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV VXSHUYLVRU\ SHUIRUPDQFH E\ XVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU GHVFULSWRUV RI WKH PRVW KHOSIXO DQG OHDVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU r $ TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV GHYHORSHG RQ ZKLFK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV GHVFULEHG WKH PRVW DQG OHDVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV 7KHUH ZHUH PRVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV DQG OHDVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV FLWHG )RXU FDWHJRULHV RI PRVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG W\SHV RI EHKDYLRU DOORZHG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LQ WKH FODVVURRP FRXQVHOLQJ DQG DGYLFH VXSSRUW DQG XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV FRQFHUQV DQG SHUIRUPDQFH HYDOXDWLRQ /HDVW KHOSIXO DFWLYLWLHV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV WKH IROORZLQJ WKH VPDOO DPRXQW RI SHUIRUPDQFH HYDOXDWLRQ WKH VPDOO DPRXQW RI KHOS DQG FRXQVHO RIIHUHG SRRU RU ULJLG VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH ODFN RI DGYLFH DQG KHOS LQ WKH WHDFKLQJ HQYLURQPHQW DQG WKH VPDOO DPRXQW RI DFWXDO WHDFKLQJ WLPH

PAGE 41

DOORWWHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU /RZ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ OLQNDJH EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DV WR WKH QHHGV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO KHOS GHVLUHG E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV HYLGHQW E\ WKH UHVSRQVHV 6LPPV f VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH ODFN RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG SURn IHVVLRQDO KHOS SURYLGHG WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRXOG EH GXH WR WKH IHHOn LQJV RI LQDGHTXDF\ IHOW E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU $OWKRXJK PRVW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKHPVHOYHV DV DGHTXDWH FODVVURRP WHDFKHUV WKH\ SHUFHLYHG WKHLU DELOLW\ WR VXSHUYLVH D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WR ZRUN ZLWK VSRQVRULQJ SHUVRQQHO IURP D XQLYHUVLW\ DV LQDGHTXDWH 7KH FRRSHUDn WLQJ WHDFKHUV VWDWHG WKDW OHDGHUVKLS RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH XQLYHUVLW\ LQ VSRQVRULQJ SURJUDPV DQG VSHFLDO WUDLQLQJ VHVVLRQV IRU ZRUNLQJ ZLWK VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH ZHDN RU QRQH[LVWHQW 0RUHRYHU FRQWHQW DQG PHWKRGV RI LQVWUXFWLRQ LQ VRPH SURIHVVLRQDO HGXFDWLRQ FRXUVHV ZHUH GHVLJQHG WR SUHSDUH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WR WHDFK D VWXGHQW ERG\ WKDW QR ORQJHU H[LVWHG LQ WKH VFKRROV $FFRUGLQJ WR %RVVH f FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV VWDWHG WKDW WKHLU SHUFHLYHG LQDELOLW\ WR ZRUN ZLWK D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV D UHVXOW RI WKH LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ SROLFLHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP E\ WKH FROOHJHV DQG XQLYHUVLWLHV (DUS f FRQn FOXGHG WKDW SDUWLFLSDWRU\ FROODERUDWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ WHDPV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVf FDXVHG VLJQLILFDQW JDLQV LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV SRVLWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WKHLU VXSHUYLVRU\ MREV DQG RQ WKHLU HYDOXDWLRQ RI IHOORZ WHDFKHUV VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG FODVVn URRP VXSHUYLVRUV DV VRXUFHV RI QHZ LQVWUXFWLRQDO LGHDV ,W LV LPSRUWDQW WR QRWH WKDW WKH LQIOXHQFH RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO EHKDYLRUV EHWZHHQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZDV UHFLSURFDO $ PDMRULW\ RI WKH VWXGLHV QRWHG SUHYLRXVO\ E\
PAGE 42

VWXGLHG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DWWLWXGHV DQG LQIOXHQFHV RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 5LFK f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f DERXW WKH LQIOXHQFH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn YDOXHV RQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVWXGHQW WHDFKHU G\DG $ UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RI VWXGLHV UHODWHG WR WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQGLn FDWHV WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LV WKH PDMRU LQIOXHQFH XSRQ WKH OHDUQLQJ RXWFRPHV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS WKDW GHYHORSV EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU KDV D VLJQLILFDQW LPSDFW XSRQ WKH SHUFHLYHG

PAGE 43

SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WKDW D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU KROGV WRZDUG WHDFKLQJ 7KH VWXGLHV DOVR UHYHDO WKDW HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRQWULEXWHG WR SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WHDFKLQJ KHOG E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 6WXGLHV 5HODWHG WR WKH 5ROH RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU DQG WKH ,QWHUn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t /LQGVH\ f 3UREOHPV RFFXUULQJ GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DQG FRQFHUQV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH KDYH EHHQ UHSRUWHG E\ &ODUNH f DQG 3IHLIIHU f %ODQFKDUG f LGHQWLILHG WKH SURIHVVLRQDO SUREOHPV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FDWHJRUL]HG WKH SUREOHPV WKURXJK D UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDn WXUH RQ VXSHUYLVLRQ )RXU RI WKH VL[ SUREOHP DUHDV WKDW FRQFHUQHG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV UHODWHG GLUHFWO\ WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU f WKH VHOHFWLRQ DVVLJQPHQW DQG LQGXFWLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQWR WKH VFKRRO f JXLGLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DFWLYLWLHV f HYDOXDWLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG f IROORZXS JXLGDQFH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH ILIWK SUREOHP DUHD FRQFHUQHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG RWKHU DVSHFWV RI WKH VWXGHQW

PAGE 44

WHDFKHUn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f VXSHUYLVLRQ FXUULFXOXP WKHRU\ DQG SUDFWLFH LQ WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ 6WUHEHO f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

PAGE 45

6RPH HGXFDWRUV KDYH DWWDFNHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUVnV SRVLWLRQ DV UHGXQGDQW DQG KDYH VXJJHVWHG EHWWHU XVH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV WLPH E\ WUDLQLQJ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKURXJK LQVHUYLFH HGXFDWLRQ WR DVVXPH PDMRU UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 0RVHU t %HEE f 0RVW VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG KRZHYHU VXSSRUWHG WKH QHHG IRU WKH FRQWLQXRXV VXSSRUW DQG VHUYLFHV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP -RKQVRQ f %HQQLH f DQDO\]HG WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG IRXQG WKDW D UDQGRP VHOHFWLRQ RI ILUVW \HDU WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KDG JLYHQ PRUH KHOS WR WKHP DV D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKDQ GLG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR ZKRP WKH\ KDG EHHQ DVVLJQHG &DWHJRULHV RI DUHDV RI PRVW KHOS WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZHUH LGHQWLILHG 7KH PRVW LPSRUWDQW ZHUH WKRVH RI HYDOXDWLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU SHUIRUPDQFH KHOSLQJ LQ SODQQLQJ ORQJ UDQJH LQVWUXFWLRQ ZULWLQJ OHVVRQ SODQV DQG OHVVRQ REMHFWLYHV KHOSLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR DGMXVW WR WKH WHDFKLQJ UROH DQG KHOSLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR XQGHUn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f XVHG D IUHH UHVSRQVH TXHVWLRQQDLUH WR JDLQ DQVZHUV IURP VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG VFKRRO DGPLQLVWUDWRUV WR WKH TXHVWLRQ RI ZK\ D XQLYHUVLW\

PAGE 46

VKRXOG SURYLGH SHUVRQQHO WR VXSHUYLVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV (OHYHQ UROHV IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZHUH LGHQWLILHG ZKLFK VXSSRUWHG WKH QHHG IRU FROOHJH SHUVRQQHO WR IRUP D OLDLVRQ RU D FRRSHUDWLYH OLQNDJH EHWZHHQ FROOHJH DQG VFKRRO 2WKHU UROHV IRFXVHG RQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ D KHOSLQJ UHODn WLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZRUNLQJ ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR GHILQH UROH UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV SURYLGLQJ FRQWLQXLW\ DQG VWUXFWXUH WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU SURJUDP HYDOXDWLQJ WKH SURJUDP DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG DFWLQJ DV D UHVRXUFH SHUVRQ IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VFKRRO DGPLQLVWUDWRUV $OWKRXJK WKH OLDLVRQ UROH ZDV YLHZHG DV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV WUDGLWLRQDO UROH RI JLYLQJ GLUHFn WLRQ DQG FULWLFDO HYDOXDWLRQ WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV QRW LGHQWLILHG DV DQ LPSRUWDQW UROH E\ DQ\ RI WKH IRXU JURXSV LQ WKH VWXG\ 2WKHU VWXGLHV RQ WKH UROH DQG IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LGHQWLILHG YDULHG WDVNV WKDW PD\ EH DVVLJQHG WR WKLV SRVLWLRQ &OHDUO\ WKH ODEHO RI D MDFNRIDOOWUDGHV FDQ EH XVHG LQ GHVFULELQJ WKH HFOHFWLF DSSURDFK WR VXSHUYLVLRQ %XLOGLQJ JRRG UHODWLRQVKLSV (GZDUGV f FRXQVHOLQJ 6PLWK f VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG HYDOXDWLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV $VKE\ )UHQ]HO .XQGH 0RUULV f VXSSRUWLYH UROHV )UHHG f DQG D WHDFKHU HGXFDWLRQ FRQVXOWDQW -$ -RKQVRQ f ZHUH DOO LPSRUWDQW UROH IXQFWLRQV LGHQWLILHG IRU FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV (VWDEOLVKLQJ JRRG LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV FLWHG IUHTXHQWO\ DV D PDMRU FULWHULRQ IRU HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ (IIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH UHYHDOHG LQ WZR VWXGLHV

PAGE 47

DV LPSRUWDQW LQ GHYHORSLQJ D SRVLWLYH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 2QH VWXG\ &DUU f GHDOW ZLWK WKH VLWXDWLRQDO DQG SHUVRQDO YDULDEOHV WKDW LQIOXHQFHG WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DW WKH HOHPHQWDU\ VFKRRO OHYHO 7KH VHFRQG VWXG\ 0F(OUR\ f LGHQWLILHG WZHQW\VL[ HIIHFWLYH DQG WZHQW\HLJKW LQHIIHFWLYH SUDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV RI VHFRQGDU\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WKDW ZHUH LPSRUWDQW LQ DFFHVVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUVn WHDFKLQJ DQG RU DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WHDFKLQJ 7KH 0F(OUR\ f VWXG\ LV UHYLHZHG PRUH H[WHQVLYHO\ EHFDXVH WKH UHVXOWV RI WKDW VWXG\ DSSO\ WR WKH HVWDEOLVKPHQW RI DQ HIIHFWLYH LQWHUn SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH UHVHDUFK WHFKQLTXH WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH XVHG E\ 0F(OUR\ ZLOO EH GLVFXVVHG LQ &KDSWHU ,,, EHFDXVH WKH WHFKQLTXH ZDV XVHG WR RKWDLQ WKH RXWFRPHV RI WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ,Q KLV VWXG\ RQ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH SUDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 0F(OUR\ f IRXQG D QXPKHU RI FRPPRQ IDFWRUV WKDW FRXOG KHOS LGHQWLI\ HIIHFn WLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV (IIHFWLYH EHn KDYLRUV ZHUH WKRVH EHKDYLRUV LGHQWLILHG DV SUDFWLFHV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU SURYLGHG VXJJHVWLRQV DQG LQIRUPDWLRQ ZKHUH WKH\ RIIHUHG SUDLVH DQG VXSSRUW DQG ZKHUH WKH\ SURYLGHG WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR GLVFXVV DOO DVSHFWV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ,QHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH WKRVH LGHQWLILHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU IDLOHG WR SUDLVH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZHUH GHUHOLFW LQ WKHLU

PAGE 48

GXWLHV DQG ZKHQ WKH\ GLG QRW DOORZ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR GLVFXVV WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 0F(OUR\ f FROOHFWHG XVDEOH LQFLGHQWV RI FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUVf EHKDYLRUV ZKLFK KH XVHG WR FODVVLI\ WKH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQWR IRXU DUHDV 7KH IRXU DUHDV ZHUH f PHWKRGV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ f FRQWHQW RI VXSHUYLVLRQ f LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLn FDWLRQ LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG f TXDOLILFDWLRQV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV IURP ZKLFK FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV ZHUH GUDZQ DQG FDWHJRUL]HG XQGHU RQH RI WKH IRXU DUHDV OLVWHG DERYH ZHUH WKHQ XVHG WR LGHQWLI\ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH SUDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV 7KHVH SUDFWLFHV FRQVWLWXWHG WKH ILQDO VWHS LQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ FDWHJRULHV IRU ILIW\IRXU GLIIHUHQW W\SHV RI FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RU SUDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ,Q WKH WKLUG DUHD ODEHOHG E\ 0F(OUR\ f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n ILGHQFH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG KHOSHG WR FKDQJH WKH VLWXDWLRQ VR

PAGE 49

WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV QR ORQJHU KDG WR WDNH DFWLRQ ZKLFK QHHGHG WR EH GHIHQGHG 7KH WKLUG FDWHJRU\ GHDOW ZLWK LQFLGHQWV LQ ZKLFK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU OLVWHQHG WR WKH SUREOHPV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 6XFK SUDFWLFHV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH UHSRUWHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WR DLG WKHP LQ IDFLQJ XS WR WKHLU SUREOHPV DQG WR UHDOL]H WKDW WKHLU SUREOHPV ZHUH QRW XQLTXH 7KH ODVW IRXU FDWHJRULHV XQGHU WKH DUHD RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLn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n IXO FRQYHUVDWLRQ H[LVWHG DQG FRQIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH WZR ZHUH QRW LPSRUWDQW WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUn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n FDWHG D GHVLUH QRW WR FRQWLQXH WHDFKLQJ 7KRVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ KRSHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZRXOG KDYH HQFRXUDJHG

PAGE 50

WKHP WR FRQWLQXH WHDFKLQJ EXW LQVWHDG WKH\ DFFHSWHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUnV UHFRPPHQGDWLRQ WR VWRS $ WRWDO RI ILIW\QLQH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV ZHUH UHFRUGHG LQ WKH VHYHQ FDWHJRULHV RI DUHD WKUHH LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQ VXSHUn YLVLRQ RXW RI D WRWDO RI FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV UHSRUWHG IRU DOO FDWHJRULHV LQ WKH IRXU DUHDV 0F(OUR\fV f VXPPDU\ RI WKH ILQGLQJV LQ WKH DUHD RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQGLFDWHV WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LV VHHQ E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DV RQH ZKR ZLOO FRPH WR WKHLU GHIHQVH ZKHQ LW LV MXVWLILHG ZLOO HQFRXUDJH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG OLVWHQ WR WKHLU SUREOHPV DQG ZLOO KHOS WR UHGXFH FRQIOLFW ZKHQ LW DULVHV EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI FRPPXQLn FDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LV YLHZHG DV DQ HVVHQWLDO OLQN LQ WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ IXQFWLRQV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn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n WXQLW\ f WR GLVFRYHU WKHLU DELOLWLHV DQG QHHGV f WR FODULI\ DQG WHVW WKHRUHWLFDO FRQFHSWV DQG f WR LQFUHDVH WKHLU XQGHUVWDQGLQJ DQG VNLOO LQ D SUDFWLFDO VLWXDWLRQ ,W LV IRU WKH VWXGHQW D OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFH )RU WKLV UHDVRQ WKH FKLHI IXQFWLRQ RI DOO WKRVH ZKR ZRUN ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LV WR JXLGH KLP LQ KLV OHDUQLQJ WKURXJK YDULRXV DFWLYLWLHV 6WUDWHPH\HU t /LQGVH\ S f

PAGE 51

,W ZRXOG DSSHDU WKDW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH WKUHH SDUWQHUV LV WKH ZHDNHVW OLQN LQ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS RI WKH WULDG PHPEHUV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU QHHGV WR NQRZ ZKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU H[SHFWV RI KLP LQ WHUPV RI DGPLQLVWUDWLYH DQG VXSHUYLVRU\ GXWLHV DQG WKH ZD\V WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FDQ FDUU\ RXW WKH OLDLVRQ UROH +\WUHN f 7RR RIWHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LV FULWLFL]HG IRU QRW IXOILOOn LQJ WKH H[SHFWHG UROH 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU H[SHFW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WR KULQJ WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG UHODWLRQVKLSV D IXQG RI NQRZOHGJH WKDW GRHV QRW H[LVW :LWK VR PDQ\ XQIXOILOOHG H[SHFWDWLRQV XQOHVV WKH VXSHUYLVRU LV YHU\ DGHSW DW SXEOLF UHODWLRQV DQG LPSUHVVLRQ PDQDJHPHQW LW LV QRW VXUSULVLQJ WR ILQG D JUHDW GHDO RI WULDGLF LPEDODQFH 'LDPRQWL S f %HFDXVH H[SHFWDWLRQV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DSSHDU XQIXOILOOHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VHHV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU PRUH RIWHQ DV KDYLQJ WKH JUHDWHU LQIOXHQFH LQ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 2QH ZD\ WR RYHUFRPH WKH LPEDODQFH ZLWKLQ WKH WULDG LV WKH SURSRVDO E\ 'HDNLQV f IRU WKH IRUPDWLRQ RI RQVLWH VXSHUYLVRU\ WHDPV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR DUH YLHZHG WR EH UHSUHn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n WLQJ WHDFKHUV QHHG WR ORRN RQ WKH XQLYHUVLW\ DV D FRPPXQLW\ DQG DFDGHPLF

PAGE 52

VXSSRHW VLWH ZKHUH WKHLU RZQ SURIHVVLRQDO JURZWK LV YLHZHG DV FRQWLQXn LQJ HGXFDWLRQ WKURXJK WKH DVVRFLDWLRQ RI VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV %HQQLH f GHVFULEHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV UROH DQG VWDWHG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV QHHGHG WR RYHUFRPH WKHLU VXVSLFLRQV UHODWLQJ WR WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 0XFK RI WKH GRXEW UHVXOWHG IURP DXWKRULWDULDQ SDVW SUDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FRXSOHG ZLWK FRRSHUDn WLQJ WHDFKHUVn LQVHFXULW\ LQ ZRUNLQJ ZLWK D FROOHJH H[SHUW 7KH SHUn VRQDOLW\ RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DORQJ ZLWK WKHLU DELOLW\ WR PDLQWDLQ JRRG SXEOLF UHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH DQG WKH VFKRRO ZHUH LGHQWL ILHG DV YLWDO FULWHULD IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV &RPSHWLWLYH UDWKHU WKDQ FRRSHUDWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV ZHUH IRXQG E\
PAGE 53

RI WKLV SHUFHSWLRQ &RPSHWLWLYH UHODWLRQVKLSV PD\ KDYH HYROYHG EHFDXVH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDPV DQG SUDFWLFHV GLG QRW SURYLGH SXUSRVHIXO RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU WULDGLF LQWHUDFWLRQ ,QIOXHQFH ZDV IRXQG E\
PAGE 54

VXSHUYLVRUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH RQ WKUHH DIIHFWLYH GLPHQVLRQV RSHQPLQGHGQHVV WKH VHOIFRQFHSW DQG WHDFKHUVWXGHQW UDSSRUW :KHHOHU H[DPLQHG HDFK PHPEHU RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDGnV LQIOXHQFH RQ WKH WKUHH DIIHFWLYH GLPHQVLRQV RQ WKH RWKHU PHPEHUV 7KH UHVXOWV VKRZHG WKDW FROOHJH VHQLRUV ZKR KDG SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ ZHUH PRUH FORVHGPLQGHG DERXW WKH DELOLW\ RI VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO SXSLOV IRU VHOI FRQWURO LQ WKH FODVVURRP WKDQ ZHUH FROOHJH VHQLRUV QRW SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ +RZHYHU WKH SDUWLFLSDWLRQ RI FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG GLG QRW DIIHFW WKHLU RSHQPLQGHGQHVV VHOI FRQFHSW RU VWXGHQW WHDFKHU UDSSRUW ZLWK WKH WULDG 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV FLWHG DV WKH PRVW IUHTXHQW SUREDEOH VRXUFH RI LQIOXHQFH LQ FKDQJH RFFXUULQJ ZLWKLQ WKH WKUHH DIIHFWLYH GLPHQVLRQV DPRQJ WKH WULDG PHPEHUV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ODFNLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH SHUVRQDO DQG SURIHVn VLRQDO GHILFLHQFLHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DSSHDUHG WR IRVWHU FORVHGn PLQGHGQHVV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG WR GHFUHDVH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV OHDUQLQJ SRWHQWLDO :KHHOHU VWDWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUn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

PAGE 55

DQG IDLOXUHV RI PHDQLQJIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKHU H[SHULHQFHV ,QYHVWLJDn WLRQV LQWR VWXGHQW WHDFKHUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZHUH FLWHG E\ /LSVH\ f /RZWKHU f 3RROH f 6RXWKDOO DQG .LQJ f DQG 6WLOOHUV DQG .QLHS f 7KH VWXGLHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW D FRPPXQLFDWLRQ JDS H[LVWV DQG ZDV HYLGHQFHG E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV UHOXFWDQFH WR DVN TXHVWLRQV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RU WR SDUWLFLSDWH PRUH WKDQ PLQLPDOO\ LQ WKH FODVVURRP 6WXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH KHVLWDQW WR DVN IRU KHOS LQ OHVVRQ SODQQLQJ LQ SURYLGLQJ VWLPXn ODWLQJ OHVVRQV IRU WKH SXSLOV DQG LQ GHYHORSLQJ VXEMHFW FRQWHQW &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH IRXQG WR EH UHOXFWDQW LQ SURYLGLQJ IHHGEDFN WR VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV RQ WHDFKLQJ SHUIRUPDQFH DQG RIWHQ ZHUH FULWLFL]HG IRU LQWHUUXSWLQJ FODVV ZKHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV WHDFKLQJ $ VXPn PDU\ RI WKH ILQGLQJV LQGLFDWHG WKDW KXPDQ LQWHUDFWLRQ LQ D VXSSRUWLYH VLWXDWLRQ ZDV WKH PRVW LPSRUWDQW \HW WKH PRVW GLIILFXOW JRDO WR DFKLHYH &RXSOHG ZLWK WKH HYLGHQFH SUHYLRXVO\ FLWHG E\ (GPXQG DQG +HPLQN f WKH ILQGLQJV LQGLFDWHG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV GLG QRW FRPPXQLFDWH HIIHFWLYHO\ DQG PDQ\ WLPHV GLG QRW DJUHH RQ WKH HYDOXDWLRQ FULWHULD IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH &RPPXQLFDWLRQ VWXGLHV LQYROYLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG E\ (OOLV f /RFN f DQG 6WDJJ f &OHDU WZRZD\ OLQHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH DQG WKH VFKRRO DQG EHWZHHQ WKH YDULRXV PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG ZHUH IRXQG WR EH ODFNLQJ LQ UHJDUG WR ZKDW HDFK LQVWLWXWLRQ DQG HDFK WULDG PHPEHU ZDV WU\LQJ WR DFFRPSOLVK DQG KRZ WKH\ ZHUH WU\LQJ WR DFKLHYH WKHLU JRDOV 7KH ODFN RI VXSHUYLVRU\ IHHGEDFN RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH ODFN RI FODULW\ DERXW WKH

PAGE 56

FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG XQFOHDU FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DERXW UHJXODWLRQV RU SROLFLHV RI WKH VFKRRO DQG FROOHJH ZHUH DOO FLWHG DV VSHFLILF FRPPXQLFDWLRQ SUREOHPV 'LFNVRQ f XVLQJ D IUHH UHVSRQVH TXHVWLRQQDLUHLGHQWLILHG SUREOHPV RI KXPDQ UHODWLRQV FRPPRQ LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VLWXDWLRQ 6WXGHQW WHDFKHUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ WRZDUG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DSSHDUHG WR DULVH IURP D PLVXQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH UROH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LQ SURYLGLQJ RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU VWXGHQWVXSHUYLVRU FRQWDFWV 'LFNVRQ IRXQG WKDW LQHIIHFWLYH OLQHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FUHDWHG KRVWLOLW\ LQVHFXUn LW\ DQG DQ[LHW\ RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU +RZHYHU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DSSHDUHG PXWXDOO\ DQ[LRXV WR IHHO ZDQWHG DQG VHFXUH ZLWK HDFK RWKHU )HHGEDFN IURP FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQGLFDWHG WKDW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV RIWHQ GLG QRW FRPPXQLFDWH WR FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKDW D MRE ZDV ZHOO GRQH &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV PDQ\ WLPHV IDLOHG WR PDVN WKHLU FULWLFDO IHHOLQJV FRQFHUQLQJ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG WKHLU WHDFKLQJ VLWXDWLRQV 7KLV IDLOXUH VWLPXODWHG DQWDJRQn LVP ZKLFK UHVXOWHG LQ DQ XQIULHQGO\ DQG QRQFRRSHUDWLYH KXPDQ UHODWLRQVKLS 0RUHRYHU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV GHVLUH IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR DFKLHYH D VXFFHVVIXO WHDFKLQJ PRGHO ZDV VHHQ DV EHLQJ WKZDUWHG E\ WKH LQVHFXULW\ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU $V D UHVXOW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV H[SUHVVHG KRVWLOLW\ DQG GLVDJUHHPHQW WRZDUG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV RYHU VXSHUYLVLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q WKLV VDPH VWXG\ LW ZDV IRXQG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHMHFWHG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUVn LGHDV DQG GLVSOD\HG KRVWLOLW\ RU GLVDJUHHPHQW ZKHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV IHOW WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH FULWLFL]LQJ

PAGE 57

WKH PHWKRGV RI WHDFKLQJ DV EHLQJ WRR WUDGLWLRQDO RU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn ZRUN ZLWK VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DV EHLQJ XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DOVR H[SUHVVHG QHJDWLYH IHHOLQJV WRZDUG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZKR DGRSWHG VXSHULRU DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV
PAGE 58

WKH LQGH[ RI 6HOIFRQFHSW DV D &RPPXQLFDWRU ,6&&f WR H[DPLQH WKH UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUVn VHOIFRQFHSWV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DELOLW\ DQG WKH VHOHFWHG FULWHULD RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DUHDV OLVWHG DERYH +RFKHO FRQFOXGHG WKDW D SRVLWLYH DQG VLJQLILFDQW UHODWLRQVKLS H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH VHOIFRQFHSW RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DELOLW\ DQG HYDOXDWLRQV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ HIIHFWLYHQHVV 6WXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZKR SHUFHLYHG WKHPn VHOYHV DV JRRG FRPPXQLFDWRUV ZHUH MXGJHG E\ WKHLU VXSHUYLVRUV DV EHLQJ DEOH WR IXQFWLRQ HIIHFWLYHO\ LQ D VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VLWXDWLRQ 2QH LPSOLFDWLRQ ZKLFK ZDV GUDZQ IURP WKH VWXG\ ZDV WKDW WKH ZD\ LQ ZKLFK RQH VHHV KLPVHOI RU KHUVHOI DV D FRPPXQLFDWRU FRXOG GHWHUPLQH WKH VXFFHVV RI WKDW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ 0HWKRGV RI FRPPXQLFDWLQJ ZHUH VWXGLHG E\ 7DQQHQEDXP fZKR FRQFOXGHG WKDW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WUDLQHG LQ 7UDQVDFWLRQDO $QDO\VLV IDFLOLWDWHG PRUH RSHQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQ FRQIHUHQFHV ZLWK VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 7DQQHQEDXP DOVR IRXQG WKDW RSHQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ SDWWHUQV LQ FRQIHUHQFHV ZHUH FKDUDFWHUL]HG E\ D VWURQJ GRPLQDQFH RI DGXOW WR DGXOW OHYHO WUDQVDFWLRQV ZKLFK DFFRXQWHG IRU RYHU QLQHW\ SHUFHQW RI RSHQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQ WKH FRQIHUHQFH SHULRG .LPVH\ f GHYHORSHG D PRGHO D V\VWHP RI FDWHJRULHV ZKLFK FRXOG EH XVHG WR LGHQWLI\ DQG FODVVLI\ DFWLRQV WDNHQ RSHUDWLRQV SHUIRUPHG DQG WRSLFV GLVFXVVHG GXULQJ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVRU\ FRQIHUn HQFH %\ DQDO\]LQJ FRQIHUHQFH WDSHV WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU HVWDEOLVKHG VHWV RI FDWHJRULHV LQ WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV ZKLFK HQDEOHG WKH YHUEDO EHKDYLRU RI VXSHUYLVRUV WR EH GHVFULEHG TXDQWLWDWLYHO\ 7KH TXDQWLWDWLYH ILQGLQJV ZHUH WKHQ LQWHUSUHWHG DV WR WKH IXQFWLRQV RU REMHFWV RI WKH FRQIHUHQFH ,W ZDV K\SRWKHVL]HG WKDW D NQRZOHGJH RI WKH EHKDYLRU

PAGE 59

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n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n WLRQ ZDV PDGH WR KHOS SURYLGH VRPH H[SODQDWLRQ DERXW ZK\ FRQIOLFW H[LVWHG DQG LQ ZKDW ZD\V FRQIOLFW PDQLIHVWHG LWVHOI EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU $ 6XUYH\ RI WKH /LWHUDWXUH LQ &RQIOLFW &RPPXQLFDWLRQ $SSURSULDWH WR WKH )RFXV RI %HKDYLRUV RI &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV 'XULQJ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 6XSHUYLVLRQ $ UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH DUHD RI FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV YHU\ EURDG DQG GLYHUVH LQ

PAGE 60

WKHRUHWLFDO FRQVWUXFWV DQG WKH FRQFHSWXDOL]DWLRQ RI WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW WKHRU\ (OOLV DQG )LVKHU f VWDWHG WKDW WKH VWXG\ RI WKH UROH RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV QHFHVVDU\ WR XQGHUVWDQG WKH QDWXUH RI FRQn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f DQG 'HXWVFK f DQG WKRVH RQ WKHRUHWLFDO PRGHOV +DZHV t 6PLWK +LO\DUG /LWWOHMRKQ 3HDUFH 6WHLQIDWW f GLG QRW OHQG WKHPn VHOYHV WR WKH IRFXV RI WKH VWXG\ XQGHUWDNHQ E\ WKLV ZULWHU +RZHYHU RWKHU DUHDV RI FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZHUH MXGJHG WR EH VLJQLILFDQW WR WKH IRFXV RI WKLV VWXG\ DQG WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQ WKHVH DUHDV ZLOO EH UHYLHZHG LQ RUGHU WR PDNH VLJQLILFDQW DSSOLFDWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLn FDWLRQ WR WKH ILQGLQJV RI WKLV VWXG\ $FFRUGLQJ WR D PDMRULW\ RI WKH VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG WKHUH LV D JHQHUDO DJUHHPHQW E\ UHVHDUFKHUV LQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKHRU\ WKDW FRQIOLFW LQ RQH IRUP RU DQRWKHU H[LVWV ZKHUHYHU WKHUH LV KXPDQ LQWHUDFWLRQ RU LQWHUGHSHQGHQFH DPRQJ LQGLYLGXDOV JURXSV RUJDQL]DWLRQV DQG LQVWLWXn WLRQV DQG QDWLRQV 0RUHRYHU LW LV EHOLHYHG WKDW D VRFLHW\ DGYDQFHV ZKHQ FRQIOLFW LV UHFRJQL]HG DV D KHDOWK\ SDUW RI KXPDQ LQWHUDFWLRQ DQG ZKHQ WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ SURFHVV LV YDOXHG DV D PHDQV IRU PDQDJLQJ

PAGE 61

FRQIOLFW %XUJRRQ t 5XIIQHU (OOLV t )LVKHU .HOOH\ f 1RU LV FRQIOLFW WR EH FRQVLGHUHG EDG RU HYLO -DQGW f 7KH LPSRUWDQFH RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WR WKH SURFHVV RI XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH QDWXUH RI FRQIOLFW ZDV QRWHG E\ -RKQVRQ f 7KURXJK WKH FRPn PXQLFDWLRQ SURFHVV LQGLYLGXDOV FDQ ZRUN WR UHVROYH SUREOHPV SURYLGH LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG IHHGEDFN FRQFHUQLQJ WKHLU SRVLWLRQ DQG LQWHQWLRQV UHDVRQ DQG EDUJDLQ WRJHWKHU LQIOXHQFH RWKHU LQGLYLGXDOV DQG ZRUN DW VHWWOLQJ GLIIHUHQFHV +RZHYHU WKH EDVLF SUREOHP WR XQGHUVWDQGLQJ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV QRWHG E\ -RKQVRQ WR EH WKH QHHG WR SURSHUO\ RU FOHDUO\ GHILQH WKH FRQFHSW RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ HLWKHU ZLWKLQ D FRQn FHSWXDO GHILQLWLRQDO RU DQ RSHUDWLRQDO GHILQLWLRQDO IUDPHZRUN IRU ZLWKRXW FODULILFDWLRQ RI WKH FRQFHSW nFRPPXQLFDWLRQn QR WKHRU\ RI HIIHFWLYH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LQ FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV FDQ EH EXLOW S f +DUSROH f VWDWHG WKDW &RQIOLFW LV RQH RI WKH PRVW EDVLF DVSHFWV RI KXPDQ LQWHUn FKDQJH ,W LV DOVR RQH RI WKH PRVW FRPSOH[ VLQFH LW LQYROYHV ERWK UHDVRQ DQG HPRWLRQ VKDUHG LQWHUHVWV DQG GLIIHUHQFHV DQG YDU\LQJ OHYHOV RI LQIRUPDWLRQ DPRQJ WKH SHUVRQV RU JURXSV LQ FRQIOLFW ,Q DOO LQWHUSHUVRQDO DQG LQWHUJURXS FRQIOLFW KRZHYHU FRPPXQLFDWLRQ LV D NH\ WR WKH UHVROXWLRQ RU PDQDJHPHQW RI WKH GLIIHUHQFHV S f $ PDMRU SUREOHP FRQIURQWLQJ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKHRULVWV LV WKH GHILQLWLRQDO SUREOHP /LWWOHMRKQ f 'HXWVFK f GHILQHG FRQIOLFW DV LQFRPSDWLEOH DFWLYLWLHV ZLWKLQ SHRSOH JURXSV RU QDWLRQV %XUJRRQ DQG 5XIIQHU f GHILQHG FRQIOLFW DV LQFRPSDWLEOH DFWLYLWLHV ZKLFK JDYH ULVH WR WKUHDWV RU IUXVWUDWLRQV RYHU QRQVKDUHG JRDOV RU SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKRVH JRDOV $FFRUGLQJ WR &RVHU f FRQIOLFW ZDV D VWUXJJOH RYHU YDOXHV DQG FODLPV WR VFDUFH VWDWXV SRZHU DQG UHVRXUFHV LQ ZKLFK WKH DLPV RI WKH RSSRQHQWV DUH WR

PAGE 62

QHXWUDOL]H LQMXUH RU HOLPLQDWH WKHLU ULYDOV S f +LO\DUG f GHILQHG FRQIOLFW DV D SURFHVV RI UHGXFLQJ DOWHUQDWLYHV LQ WKH SURFHVV RI PDNLQJ FKRLFHV 7KH GLIILFXOW\ LQ VWXG\LQJ FRQIOLFW ZDV LQ WKH UHFRJQLWLRQ WKDW DFWLRQV RI LQGLYLGXDOV JURXSV RU LQVWLWXWLRQV GLG QRW QHFHVVDULO\ SURYLGH VXIILFLHQW LGHQWLILFDWLRQ DV WR ZKHWKHU RU QRW D VLWXDWLRQ ZDV RQH RI FRQIOLFW RU FRRSHUDWLRQ ,Q DQRWKHU VWXG\ XVLQJ LQIRUPDWLRQ SURFHVVLQJ DV D ZD\ WR SUHGLFW WKH DELOLW\ RI DQ LQGLYLGXDO WR SHUFHLYH DQG UDWH WKH VHYHULW\ RI FRQIOLFW 6DLQ f FDXWLRQHG WKDW WKH DELOLW\ WR LGHQWLI\ FRQIOLFW DQG WKH DELOLW\ WR DFFHVV WKH H[WHQW WKDW FRQIOLFW H[LVWHG ZHUH WZR GLIIHUHQW FRJQLWLYH SURFHVVHV 7KXV WKH MXGJPHQW RI FRQIOLFW RFFXUUHQFH GLG QRW LPSO\ D FRUUHFW MXGJPHQW RI WKH VHYHULW\ RI WKDW FRQIOLFW ,Q FRQFOXVLRQ 6DLQ XVHG WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ WR VKRZ WKDW LQIRUPDWLRQ SURFHVVLQJ WKHRU\ LV D VXLWDEOH FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WR SODFH WKH SHUFHSWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW VHYHULW\ ,Q DQRWKHU ZD\ RI ORRNLQJ DW WKH GHILQLWLRQDO SUREOHP RI FRQIOLFW :DWNLQV f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

PAGE 63

3DUWLHV LQ FRQIOLFW PD\ KDYH GLIIHUHQW YDOXH RU SHUFHSWXDO V\VWHPV (DFK SDUW\ KDV UHVRXUFHV ZKLFK PD\ EH LQFUHDVHG RU GLPLQLVKHG E\ LPSOHPHQWDWLRQ RI DFWLRQ DOWHUQDWLYHV &RQIOLFW WHUPLQDWHV RQO\ ZKHQ HDFK SDUW\ LV VDWLVILHG WKDW LW KDV ZRQ RU ORVW RU EHOLHYHV SUREDEOH FRVWV RI FRQWLQXLQJ WKH FRQIOLFW RXWZHLJK SUREDEOH FRVWV RI HQGLQJ WKH FRQIOLFW S f :DWNLQV f IXUWKHU VWDWHG WKDW WKH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQ ZDV DQ LPSRUWDQW FRQWH[W LQ ZKLFK WR YLHZ WKH FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DFW +H LGHQWLn ILHG ZLWKLQ WKH DQDO\WLF PRGHO FHUWDLQ WHUPV WKDW ZHUH LPSRUWDQW LQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ WKH FRQWH[W RI WKH FRQIOLFW 7KHVH WHUPV ZHUH WKUHDWV SROLFLHV PHVVDJHV FUHGLELOLW\ DQG UHOLDELOLW\ +DUULV DQG 6PLWK f GHILQHG FRQIOLFW DV D VWUXJJOH RYHU VFDUFH VWDWXV SRZHU DQG UHVRXUFHV ZKHUH FRQIOLFW EHKDYLRU ZDV WHUPHG D VWUDWHJ\ RI EDUJDLQLQJ DQG WKH UHVROXWLRQ RI WKH FRQIOLFW ZDV YLHZHG DV D QHJRWLDWHG UHVROXWLRQ +RZHYHU D FRQIOLFW FRXOG RFFXU HYHQ ZKHQ VKDUHG PXWXDO JRDOV H[LVWHG 7KLV VLWXDWLRQ LQWURGXFHG D QHZ FRQn FHSW RI PL[HGPRWLYHV ZKHUH FRPSHWLWLRQ DQG FRRSHUDWLRQ H[LVWHG ZLWKLQ WKH VDPH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQ 7KUHH W\SHV RI FRQIOLFW DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VHWWLQJV LQ ZKLFK FRQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ FRXOG EH DFKLHYHG ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHUV 7DFLW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ RFFXUUHG ZKHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV ZHUH HQJDJHG LQ DFKLHYLQJ D PXWXDO JRDO $JUHHPHQW RU VXFFHVV LQ DFKLHYLQJ WKDW JRDO GHSHQGHG XSRQ WKH LQWHUDFWLQJ IDFWRUV RI WKH FXOWXUDO IUDPHn ZRUN ZLWKLQ ZKLFK WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV PRYHG DQG WKH NQRZOHGJH RI WKH RWKHUnV SUREDEOH UHVSRQVH $QWLFLSDWLRQ RU NQRZOHGJH RI WKLV UHVSRQVH LQIOXHQFHG WKH UHVROXWLRQ RI WKH FRQIOLFW ,PSOLFLW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKHUH ZDV DQ LQWHQW WR SHUIRUP VRPH DFW ZKLFK UHVXOWHG LQ

PAGE 64

EDUJDLQLQJ LQ RUGHU WR UHVROYH WKH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQ 7KXV LQIOXHQFH DQG SHUVXDVLRQ FRXOG UHVXOW LQ D UHVROXWLRQ WKDW ZRXOG LQYROYH YDULDEOHV IRU H[DPSOH RI WUXVW GHIHFWLRQ DJUHHPHQW QHJRWLDWLRQ RU FRPPLWn PHQW LQ RUGHU WR UHVROYH WKH FRQIOLFW 7KH ILQDO W\SH RI FRQIOLFW DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV H[SOLFLW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKH LGHDO W\SH PDQLIHVWHG E\ H[SUHVVHG FRQILGHQFH EHWZHHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV DQG FRUUHFW LQWHUSUHWDWLRQV RI DFWV RU PRWLYHV RU WKH LPSHUIHFW W\SHZKHUH DWWLWXGHV RI GLVWUXVW DQG PLVLQWHUSUHWDWLRQ RI DFWV RU PRWLYHV H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH SDUWLHV LQ FRQIOLFW +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f SUHVHQWHG LQ D SDSHU RQ WKH GLYHUVH DVVXPSn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f WR WKH VWXG\ RI FRQIOLFW DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ DUH RUJDQL]HG XQGHU WKUHH NH\ TXHVWLRQV ZKRVH GLPHQVLRQV SURYLGHG DQ RUJDQL]DWLRQDO ZD\ RI YLHZLQJ WKH FRQVWUXFWV RI FRQIOLFW 7KH ILUVW TXHVWLRQ GHDOV ZLWK WKH WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV RI WKH FRQFHSWXDOGHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW 7KHVH GLPHQVLRQV DUH JRDOV VWUDWHJLHV DQG WLPH 7KH GLPHQVLRQ RI JRDO FRQIOLFW LV VWDWHG DV JRDOV GLUHFW EHKDYLRU 7KXV

PAGE 65

FRQIOLFW H[LVWV ZKHQ WKH JRDOV RI WZR RU PRUH SHUVRQV DUH QRW FRPSOH PHQWDU\ *RDOV DUH GHILQHG DV SURVSHFWLYH JRDOV ZKHUH SHUVRQV KDYH LQWHQWLRQV DERXW JRDOV DQG EHKDYH WR DFKLHYH WKHLU SUHGHILQHG JRDOV RU UHWURVSHFWLYH JRDOV ZKLFK DUH JRDOV WKDW GR QRW GHILQH EHKDYLRU RU GLUHFW RU H[SODLQ D SHUVRQnV DFWLRQ EXW RQO\ EHFRPH PHDQLQJIXO DIWHU WKH EHKDYLRUV RI WKH SHUVRQ DUH UHYHDOHG RU XQGHUVWRRG 7KH UHVHDUFKHUV VWDWHG WKDW DOWKRXJK D FKRLFH EHWZHHQ SURVSHFWLYH DQG UHWURVSHFWLYH JRDOV GLG QRW KDYH WR EH PDGH WKH GLIIHULQJ SRVLWLRQV RI WKH JRDO GLPHQn VLRQ ZRXOG FUHDWH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WKH ZD\ WKH FRQFHSWXDOGHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ ZDV DQVZHUHG 7KRVH GLIIHUHQFHV LQ WXUQ FRXOG OHDG WR GLIIHUn HQFHV LQ UHVHDUFK UHVXOWV 7KH VHFRQG GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH FRQFHSWXDO GHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW DUH LGHQWLILHG E\ +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f WR EH RQH RI VWUDWHJ\ 7ZR GLIIHUHQW WKHRULHV RI VWUDWHJ\ DUH UHYLHZHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHUV UHVROXWLRQ RI WKH FRQIOLFW E\ FRPSURPLVH PHGLDWLRQ RU FRQFLOLDWLRQ ZKLFK XVXDOO\ LQFOXGH WKH TXHVWLRQ RI FRRSHUDWLRQ YHUVXV FRPSHWLWLRQ RU D VHFRQG DQG PRUH UHFHQW GHILQLWLRQ RI VWUDWHJ\ WKH PDQDJHPHQW RI FRQIOLFW $OWKRXJK QRW FRXFKHG DV D GHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ WKH QHHG WR GLVn WLQJXLVK EHWZHHQ FRQIOLFW DQG FRPSHWLWLRQ ZDV PDGH E\ %XUJRRQ DQG 5XIIQHU f ZKR GHILQHG FRPSHWLWLRQ DV D PXWXDO ULYDOU\ WKH SXUSRVH RI ZKLFK LV WR REWDLQ D QRQGLYLVLEOH JRDO $OWKRXJK FRQIOLFW FRXOG LQWURGXFH DQ HOHPHQW RI UHVROYH FRPSHWLWLRQ VXJJHVWV D ZLQORVH W\SH RI VLWXDWLRQ 7KH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ FRQIOLFW DQG FRPSHWLWLRQ ZDV WKH WKHVLV RI 'HXWVFKnV f VWXGLHV RQ WKH SURGXFWLYH DQG GHVWUXFWLYH RXWn FRPHV RI FRQIOLFW 7KH PDMRU GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ FRQIOLFW DQG

PAGE 66

FRPSHWLWLRQ DFFRUGLQJ WR 'HXWVFK ZDV WKDW FRQIOLFW FRXOG RFFXU ZLWKLQ HLWKHU D FRRSHUDWLYH RU FRPSHWLWLYH FRQWH[W ,Q FRPSHWLWLRQ WKH JRDO DWWDLQPHQW LV YLHZHG SRVVLEOH IRU RQH RI WKH SDUWLHV LQ FRQIOLFW EXW QRW IRU WKH RWKHUVf ZKLOH FRRSHUDWLRQ UHVXOWV LQ VRPH W\SH RI JRDO DWWDLQPHQW IRU DOO SDUWLHV 7KH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI FRRSHUDWLRQ RU FRPSHWL WLRQ LQ UHVROYLQJ RU PDQDJLQJ FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV LV ZLGHO\ GLVFXVVHG E\ 'HXWVFK EHFDXVH RI WKH UHVHDUFKHUnV LQWHUHVW LQ WKH FRQVWUXFWLYH DQG GHVWUXFWLYH RXWFRPHV RI FRQIOLFW &RQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ LV LQIOXHQFHG E\ WKH FRQWH[W ZLWKLQ ZKLFK WKH FRQIOLFW RFFXUUHG 7KH PDMRU TXHVWLRQ SRVHG E\ 'HXWVFK ZDV KRZ WR UHVROYH WKH FRQIOLFW VR WKDW WKH RXWFRPH LV SHUFHLYHG E\ WKRVH HQJDJHG LQ FRQIOLFW WR EH SURGXFWLYH RU HIIHFWLYH $IWHU VXPPDUL]LQJ WKH HIIHFWV RI FRRSHUDWLRQ DQG FRPSHWLWLRQ 'HXWVFK QRWHG WKDW FRPSHWLWLRQ LQ FRQIOLFW LV QRW DOZD\V GHVWUXFWLYH DQG WKDW PDQ\ FRPSHWLWLYH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV HQG LQ HQFRXUDJHPHQW E\ RQH RU PRUH SDUWLHV WR FRRSHUDWH 7KH GLPHQVLRQ RI FRQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ YHUVXV FRQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW ZDV UDLVHG E\ +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f DV SDUW RI WKH GHILQLWLRQDO TXHVn WLRQ &RQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW DVVXPHV WKDW DOO UHVROXWLRQV RI FRQIOLFWV DUH QRW QHFHVVDULO\ SURGXFWLYH PHDQV WR DQ HQG ,Q WKHLU UHYLHZ RI VHYHUDO VWXGLHV LQ WKH DUHD RI FRQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW WKH UHVHDUFKHUV VKRZHG WKDW D QXPEHU RI WKHRULVWV LQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHOLHYHG WKDW UHVROXWLRQ DOWKRXJK YLHZHG DV DQ LGHDO HQG FRXOG VXSSUHVV QHZ DQG LPSRUWDQW LQIRUPDWLRQ DQG LGHDV 0RUHRYHU WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RI SUREOHPV DQG FRQGLWLRQV LV QRW QHFHVVDULO\ H[SORUHG E\ FRQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ DQG VXEPHUJHG IHHOLQJV RI UHVHQWPHQW KRVWLOLW\ RU XQU H[SUHVVHG DOWHUQDWLYHV WR WKH VROXWLRQV FDQ UHVXOW +DUSROH f

PAGE 67

VWDWHG WKDW UHFHQW UHVHDUFK KDV IRFXVHG RQ FRQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW DV D VWUDWHJ\ IRU YLHZLQJ D FRQVWUXFW RI FRQIOLFW (DUO\ WKHRULHV RI FRQIOLFW WKDW HPSKDVL]HG UHVROXWLRQ RQO\ IDLOHG EHFDXVH UHVHDUFKHUV FRQVLGHUHG DOO W\SHV RI FRQIOLFW DV QHJDWLYH FRQIOLFWV )HZ VHULRXV KXPDQ FRQIOLFWV FDQ EH UHVROYHG ZLWK DQ\ DVVXUDQFH RI ILQDOLW\ &RQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW LQGLFDWHG DFFRUGLQJ WR +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f WKDW WKH ILQDOLW\ RU UHVROYH DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK FRQIOLFW UHVROXWLRQ ZDV QRW DOZD\V LQ WKH EHVW LQWHUHVWV RI WKH SDUWLHV LQ FRQIOLFW DQG WKDW DW WLPHV D VWDWH RI GLPLQLVKHG LQWHQVLW\ RU PDLQWHQDQFH ZDV PRUH GHVLUDEOH WKDQ UHVROXWLRQ %XUJRRQ DQG 5XIIQHU f RIIHUHG D QXPEHU RI VWUDWHJLHV IRU PRUH HIIHFWLYH PDQDJHG FRQIOLFW 7KH XVH RI DQ\ RQH RI WKH VHYHQ LGHQWLILHG VWUDWHJLHV QHFHVVLWDWHV DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH W\SHV RI FRQIOLFW WKDW DUH SUHVHQW DQG WKH OHYHO RQ ZKLFK WKH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQ LV RSHUDWLQJ 5RDUN f FLWHG IRXU DSSURDFKHV WR FRQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW DQG SUHVHQWHG WKUHH PRGHOV RI PDQDJHPHQW WKDW FRXOG SURYLGH IRU FRQVWUXFWLYH RXWFRPHV IRU FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV 7KH PRGHOV DUH EDVHG XSRQ WKH LGHD WKDW FRQIOLFWV SURGXFH RSSRUWXQLWLHV IRU FKDQJH ZKHUH UHODWLRQVKLSV FDQ EH UHDOLJQHG ERUHGRP DQG VWDJQDWLRQ DOOHYLDWHG DQG LQWHUDFWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH SULQFLSDOV LQ FRQIOLFW FDQ XQGHUJR FRQn WLQXRXV UHDVVHVVPHQW 5RDUN SODFHG FRQIOLFW LVVXHV RQ D FRQWLQXXP RI UHDO RU UHDOLVWLF FRQIOLFWV WR LPDJLQDU\ FRQIOLFWV ,QIRUPDWLRQ DQG SHUFHSWLRQV KHOG E\ WKH SDUWLHV DERXW WKH FRQIOLFW LVVXH GHWHUPLQHG WKH SRVLWLRQ RI WKH FRQIOLFW DORQJ WKH FRQWLQXXP 7KH WKLUG GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH FRQFHSWXDO GHILQLWLRQ TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW GLVFXVVHG E\ +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f LV WKH WLPH GLPHQVLRQ 7LPH GHDOV ZLWK WKH TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW HLWKHU DV D FRQWLQXRXV SURFHVV RU DV D SURFHVV WKDW ZDV LQWHUVSHUVHG ZLWK HSLVRGHV 7KH

PAGE 68

VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHUV RQ WKH WLPH TXHVWLRQ LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH SHUFHSWLRQ RI WLPH DV DQ HSLVRGLF SKHQRPHQD PHDQV WKDW ZLWKLQ WKH IUDPHZRUN RI WLPH WKHUH DUH GLVUXSWLRQV WKDW QHHGHG WR EH HOLPLQDn WHG RU WHUPLQDWHG E\ D UHWXUQ WR D VWDEOH KDUPRQLRXV VWDWH 2WKHU UHVHDUFKHUV KRZHYHU EHOLHYH WKDW FRQIOLFW LV D FRQWLQXRXV FRQGLWLRQ WKDW LV QRUPDO DQG LQWHJUDWLQJ LQ QXPHURXV KXPDQ DVVRFLDWLRQV 7KH ODWWHU SRVLWLRQ LV VXSSRUWHG IRU H[DPSOH E\ VRPH ZKR EHOLHYH WKDW ZRUOG FRQIOLFW LV LQHYLWDEOH LI QRW LQKHUHQW DQG WKDW SHDFH LV QRWKLQJ PRUH WKDQ DQ LGHDOL]HG K\SRWKHWLFDO VWDWH S f 7KHVH WKUHH GLPHQVLRQV RI WKH FRQFHSWXDOGHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW JRDOV VWUDWHJLHV DQG WLPH ZHUH YLHZHG E\ +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f WR EH WKH NH\ GLPHQVLRQV RI FRQIOLFW WKDW DUUDQJHG LQ YDULRXV VHWV FDQ FRQWULEXWH WR WKH DQVZHU SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH FRQFHSWXDO GHILQLWLRQDO TXHVWLRQ RI KRZ RQH SHUFHLYHV WKH FRQVWUXFWV RI FRQIOLFW &RQWLQXLQJ WKHLU GLVFXVVLRQ RQ WKH DVVXPSWLRQV XQGHUO\LQJ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKHRU\ +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f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

PAGE 69

VWDWHG WKDW WKH DFWLYLW\ VHOHFWHG WR EH FRPSOHWHG E\ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQIOXHQFHV WKH W\SH RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHKDYLRUV WKDW SDVV EHWZHHQ WKHP 7KH DFW GLPHQVLRQ UHIHUV WR WKH W\SH DQG DPRXQW RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKDW WKH FRQIOLFW DFWLYLW\ UHTXLUHV $FWLYLWLHV PD\ WDNH RQ D YDULHW\ RI IRUPV RI YHUEDO DQG QRQYHUEDO DFWLYH RU LQDFWLYH W\SHV RI EHKDYLRU 7KH WKLUG GLPHQVLRQ WR WKH TXHVWLRQ RI RSHUDWLRQDOL]LQJ WKH SURn FHGXUDO TXHVWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW ZDV WKH RXWFRPH GLPHQVLRQ 7KLV GLPHQVLRQ GHDOV ZLWK WKH HQG UHVXOW RI WKH DFWLYLW\ $FWLYLWLHV FDQ KDYH FRUUHFW RU SUREOHPVROYLQJ RXWFRPHV DQG FUHDWLYH RU GLVFXVVLRQ RXWFRPHV LQ ZKLFK WKHUH LV QRW RQH FRUUHFW DQVZHU DQG WKH RXWFRPHV RI WKH FRQIOLFW DUH UHDFKHG WKURXJK WKH SURFHVV RI LQWHUDFWLRQ ZLWK WKH RWKHU SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH DVVXPSWLRQ WR EH FRQVLGHUHG DFFRUGLQJ WR +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f LV WKDW WKH HQG UHVXOW RI DQ DFWLYLW\ FDQ JHQHUDWH GLIIHUHQW IRUPV RI EHKDYLRU RXWFRPHV IRU WKH SDUWLHV LQ FRQIOLFW 7KH DEVWUDFWQHVV GLPHQVLRQ RI FRQIOLFW LV WKH IRXUWK GLPHQVLRQ DQG GHDOV ZLWK WKH DEVWUDFW RU FRQFUHWH TXDOLW\ RI WKH DFWLYLW\ UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKH FRQIOLFW EHKDYLRU ZKHUH LQIRUPDWLRQ SURFHVVLQJ EHLQJ XQGHUWDNHQ E\ WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV FDQ UHTXLUH GHJUHHV RI DEVWUDFW RU FRQFUHWH LQIRUPDn WLRQ SURFHVVLQJ ,Q WXUQ WKLV SURFHVVLQJ FDQ JHQHUDWH GLIIHUHQW W\SHV RI FRQIOLFW 7KH ILQDO GLPHQVLRQ RI WKH RSHUDWLRQDOSURFHGXUDO TXHVWLRQ DERXW FRQIOLFW LV WKH GLPHQVLRQ RI VDOLHQFH RU WKH DPRXQW RI LQYROYHPHQW HDFK SDUWLFLSDQW LV SHUFHLYHG WR KDYH LQ WKH DFWLYLW\ 7KH H[WHQW WR ZKLFK HDFK SDUWLFLSDQW IHHOV WKDW KH RU VKH LV D FORVH SDUWLFLSDQW RU D GLVWDQW REVHUYHU WR WKH DFWLYLW\ FDQ JHQHUDWH GLIIHUHQW IRUPV RI FRQIOLFW EHKDYLRU

PAGE 70

,Q VXPPDU\ WKH ILYH GLPHQVLRQV LGHQWLILHG DV UXOHV DFW RXWFRPH DEVWUDFWQHVV DQG VDOLHQFH ZHUH DFFRUGLQJ WR +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f LPSRUWDQW DVVXPSWLRQV WKDW KDG WR EH FRQVLGHUHG LQ WKH TXHVWLRQ RQ KRZ WR RSHUDWLRQDOL]H WKH FRQFHSW RI FRQIOLFW 7KH FRQFOXVLRQV RI WKH +DZHV DQG 6PLWK f VWXG\ UHODWLQJ WR DVVXPSWLRQV VWDWHG LQ TXHVWLRQ IRUP DERXW WKHRUHWLFDO FRQVWUXFWV LQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ WKHRU\ LQGLFDWHG WKDW LW ZRXOG EH GLIILFXOW WR REWDLQ DQ\ HDV\ RU VLPSOH GHVFULSWLRQ DERXW FRQIOLFW DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ /LWWOHMRKQ f KHOG WKDW DQ XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI FRQIOLFW LQ FRPPXQLFDn WLRQ ZRXOG EHVW EH VHUYHG E\ KROGLQJ D PXOWLWKHRUHWLFDO YLHZ +H FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH VWXG\ RI FRQIOLFW LQYROYHV PDQ\ FRPSOH[ UHODWLRQn VKLSV WKDW GLIIHU LQ GHJUHH DQG LQWHQVLW\ DV GLIIHULQJ DVVXPSWLRQV DUH HQWHUHG LQWR WKH WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUN RI FRQIOLFWFRPPXQLFDWLRQ +LO\DUG f VXPPDUL]HG WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ RI LQWHUUHODWHGQHVV LQ GHYHOn RSLQJ FRQIOLFW PRGHOV E\ VWDWLQJ WKDW PRUH WKDQ WKH EHKDYLRUV DQGRU DWWLWXGHV LGHQWLI\LQJ IRFDO FRQIOLFW PXVW EH FRQVLGHUHG ,W LV QRW HQRXJK WR VWXG\ MXVW WKH UHFLSURFDO JULHYDQFHV RI WKH SDUWLHV LQ FRQn IOLFW EXW LW LV DOVR LPSRUWDQW WR VWXG\ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS RI WKRVH LQ FRQIOLFW ZLWKLQ WKH VRFLRFXOWXUDO UXOHV RU FRQWH[WV %DUQOXQG f LQ DQ H[WHQVLYH UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQ UROH WKHRU\ GLVFXVVHG WKH UHODWLRQVKLS RI UROH DPELJXLW\ DQG FRQIOLFW DQG FLWHG WKUHH VRXUFHV RI WHQVLRQ WKDW ZHUH SURGXFHG E\ WKH ODFN RI UROH GHILQLWLRQ 7KH ODFN RI UROH GHILQLWLRQ IRU PDQ\ SHUVRQV LQ FRQIOLFW LV DVFULEHG WR WKH QRWLRQ WKDW SHUVRQV RFFXS\ DPELJXRXV SRVLWLRQV DQG WKDW WKH UHVXOWLQJ UROH XQFHUWDLQW\ FDQ SURGXFH HPRWLRQDO VWUHVV 3HUVRQV ZKR RFFXS\ QHZ SRVLWLRQV DOVR PLJKW QRW NQRZ ZKDW LV H[SHFWHG RI WKHP GXH WR LJQRUDQFH RU LQH[SHULHQFH LQ WKH UROH EHKDYLRU WKDW EHORQJV WR

PAGE 71

D VSHFLILF WDVN 7KXV WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO IXQFWLRQV DQG VWDQGDUGV RI FRQGXFW FDQ EH XQFOHDU )RU H[DPSOH VRPH UHVHDUFKHUV PDGH D GLVn WLQFWLRQ EHWZHHQ UROH H[SHFWDWLRQV 7KHVH H[SHFWDWLRQV ZHUH WKH DQWLFLSDWLRQ RI FHUWDLQ FRQGXFW RU UROH SHUIRUPDQFH DQG WKH DFWXDO SHUIRUPDQFH RI D UROH EDVHG RQ WKH RFFXSDQW RI D FHUWDLQ VWDWXV $QRWKHU FRQVLGHUDWLRQ LQ WU\LQJ WR VRUW RXW WKH DPEXLJXLW\ RI UROHV ZDV WKH UHFRJQLWLRQ RI PXOWLSOH UROH SHUIRUPDQFHV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK D VLQJOH SRVLWLRQ DV RSSRVHG WR SUHYLRXVO\ KHOG DVVXPSWLRQV WKDW UROHV DUH VLQJXODU LQ QDWXUH %DUQOXQG f FLWHG WKUHH VRXUFHV RI UROH WHQVLRQ RU VWUDLQ 5ROH FRQIXVLRQ UHVXOWV ZKHQ WKHUH LV D ODFN RI FRQVHQVXV RU D PLVn XQGHUVWDQGLQJ RI WKH DSSURSULDWH DFWV DVVRFLDWHG ZLWK WKH UROH DVVLJQHG WR WKH LQGLYLGXDO RU JURXS 5ROH FROOLVLRQ RFFXUV ZKHQ WKHUH LV FRPSHn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f QRWHG LQ D VWXG\ RQ UROH GLIIHUHQWLDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WHDFKHUV DQG VFKRRO DGPLQLVWUDWRUV DV LW SHUWDLQHG WR WKH DFDGHPLF SUHSn DUDWLRQ RI HDFK JURXS WKDW FRQIOLFWV RYHU UROH GLIIHUHQWLDWLRQ FRXOG LQn FUHDVH FRPSHWLWLRQ HDFK JURXS WKRXJKW LWV LGHDV ZHUH PRUH YDOLG DOWKRXJK WHDFKHUV DYRLGHG FODULI\LQJ WKHLU RSLQLRQV DQG SURIHVVHG FRQIRUPLW\ WR WKH DGPLQLVWUDWRUVn RSLQLRQV 0RUHRYHU VFKRRO DGPLQLVWUDWRUV YLHZHG

PAGE 72

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n JDWRU RI WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WKDW D WKRURXJK UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH FRXOG EH DSSURSULDWHO\ LQFOXGHG LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZ 6WXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHDV RI HOHPHQWDU\ VHFRQGDU\ DQG KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH DUH UHYLHZHG

PAGE 73

XQGHU IRXU KHDGLQJV 6WXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ LGHQWLI\LQJ HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV HGXFDWLRQDO HYDOXDWLRQ DQG UHVHDUFK VWXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHDV RI HGXFDWLRQDO DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ DQG VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG SHUVRQQHO VWXGLHV LQYROYLQJ VWXGHQWV DQG VWXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH DUHDV RI WHDFKLQJ 6WXGLHV $ERXW (GXFDWLRQDO 2EMHFWLYHV (GXFDWLRQDO (YDOXDWLRQ DQG 5HVHDUFK $V HDUO\ DV )ODQDJDQ D Ef SURSRVHG WKDW WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH ZDV DQ DSSURSULDWH PHWKRG WR V\VWHPDWLFDOO\ FROOHFW DQG DQDO\]H GDWD WKDW FRXOG EH XVHG WR HVWDEOLVK JRDOV SROLFLHV DQG REMHFWLYHV LQ HGXFDWLRQ 0RUH VSHFLILFDOO\ WKH SXUSRVH LQ XVLQJ WKH WHFKQLTXH ZDV WR HVWDEOLVK FULWLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU VXFFHVVIXO EHKDYLRU LQ FHUWDLQ DGXOW DFWLYLWLHV ZKLFK ZRXOG EH XVHG DV JRDOV LQ HGXFDWLRQ %\ HVWDEOLVKLQJ FULWHULD WKDW ZRXOG PHDVXUH VXFFHVVn IXO EHKDYLRU )ODQDJDQ EHOLHYHG WKDW LW ZRXOG EH SRVVLEOH WR GHYHORS LQ WKH EURDGHU VHQVH D VFLHQFH RI HGXFDWLRQ 6HYHUDO \HDUV ODWHU )ODQDJDQ f H[SORUHG WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ GHYHORSLQJ D OLVW RI HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV +H RXWOLQHG WKH VWHSV LQ GHYHORSLQJ D VHW RI FULWLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV QHHGHG WR JDWKHU GDWD RQ HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV )LYH W\SHV RI DGXOW DFWLYLWLHV DSSURSULDWH WR WKH HVWDEOLVKPHQW RI HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV ZHUH RXWOLQHG DQG WKH ILYH FRQGLWLRQV WR GHWHUPLQH FULWLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV ZHUH VXPn PDUL]HG /DVWO\ IRXU DUHDV ZKHUH WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH KDG QRW EHHQ XVHG LQ DVVLVWLQJ LQ WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DQG GLVFXVVHG 7KHVH DUHDV ZHUH f KXPDQ NQRZOHGJH DQG WKH DUWV WR H[SORUH WKH SRVVLELOLW\ RI HVWDEOLVKLQJ D GHILQLWLRQ RI D ZHOOHGXFDWHG FXOWXUHG LQGLYLGXDO f FLWL]HQVKLS WR H[SORUH WKH

PAGE 74

HVWDEOLVKPHQW RI D GHILQLWLRQ RI D JRRG FLWL]HQ f SDUHQWDO EHKDYLRU WR H[SORUH WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI FKLOGUHQ DQG f IULHQGVKLS WR H[SORUH DWWLWXGHV RI OLNHV DQG GLVOLNHV RI LQGLYLGXDO EHKDYLRU )ODQDJDQ KRSHG WKDW WKH FROOHFWLRQ RI VXFK GDWD DV DUH VXPPDUL]HG LQ WKH FDWHJRULHV DERYH ZRXOG KHOS LQ FXUULFXOXP GHYHORSPHQW DQG HGXFDWLRQDO HYDOXDWLRQ 7KH GHYHORSPHQW RI HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV ZRXOG HQDEOH HGXFDWRUV WR PDNH GHFLVLRQV FRQFHUQLQJ ZKDW WKH VFKRROV VKRXOG WHDFK ZKDW OHDUQLQJ RXWFRPHV ZHUH GHVLUDEOH DQG ZKDW LQGLYLGXDO EHKDYLRUV ZHUH HVVHQWLDO WR WDNH RQHV SODFH DV DQ DGXOW LQ WKH FRPPXQLW\ &RUEDOO\ f UHYLHZHG WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH IRU LWV DGYDQWDJHV DQG GLVDGYDQWDJHV LQ HGXFDWLRQDO UHVHDUFK SDUWLFXODUO\ LQ VWXGLHV WKDW PHDVXUHG EHKDYLRU &RUEDOO\ VWDWHG IRXU FDXWLRQV IRU WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU ZKHQ XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH IRU VWXGLHV LQ HGXFDWLRQ f 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH VKRXOG EH XVHG RQO\ LQ VLWXDWLRQV ZKHUH WKH MRE RU WDVN WR EH VWXGLHG LV QRW VR FRPSOH[ QRU WKH QXPEHU RI YDULDEOHV VR JUHDW DV WR LQYDOLGDWH WKH WHFKQLTXH f 7KH DLPV DQG RXWFRPHV RI D SDUWLFXODU WDVN LQ HGXFDWLRQ PXVW EH FOHDUO\ UHFRJQL]DEOH WR WKH UHVSRQGHQW RU REVHUYHU SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKH VWXG\ 7KH VHOHFWLRQ DQG WUDLQLQJ RI WKH REVHUYHUV ZKR ZLOO UHSRUW FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LV LPSRUWDQW LQ RUGHU WR PLQLPL]H WKH SUREOHP RI LQDGHTXDWH UHSRUWLQJ f 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRU VKRXOG UHPHPEHU WKDW WKH WHFKQLTXH GRHV QRW PHDVXUH EHKDYLRUV DV WR WKHLU GHJUHH RI FULWLFDOQHVV RQO\ WKDW D UHSRUWHG EHKDYLRU LV FULWLFDO RU QRQFULWLFDO HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH f 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRU VKRXOG UHPHPEHU WKDW WKH PHWKRG GHSHQGV RQ WKH VXEMHFWLYH MXGJPHQW RI FRPSHWHQW REVHUYHUV DV WR WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RU LQHIIHFWLYHQHVV RI D SDUWLFXODU EHKDYLRU $OWKRXJK WKH REMHFWLYLW\ RI GDWD FROOHFWHG LV YLHZHG PRVW

PAGE 75

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f WKDW UDZ GDWD FROOHFWHG E\ WKH REVHUYHUV GLG QRW DXWRPDWLFDOO\ VXSSO\ VROXWLRQV WR WKH SUREOHPV RU DFWLYLWLHV WKDW ZHUH EHLQJ LQYHVWLJDWHG 0D\KHZ f GLVFXVVHG WKH UHVXOWV RI DQG WKH LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ HGXFDWLRQDO HYDOXDWLRQ 6XPPDUL]LQJ WKH XVH PDGH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ KHOSLQJ WR HVWDEOLVK D FRPPXQLFDWLRQ PHDVXUHPHQW LQVWUXPHQW LQ WKH &RRSHUDWLYH 6WXG\ RI (YDOXDWLRQ LQ *HQHUDO (GXFDWLRQ 'UHVVHO t 0D\KHZ f WKUHH DUHDV RI GLVVDWLVIDFWLRQ E\ WKH WHDFKHU UHVSRQGHQWV SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLYH VWXG\ ZHUH UHYLHZHG &ROOHJH WHDFKHUV RI FRPPXQLFDn WLRQ VNLOOV FROOHFWHG LQFLGHQWV DQG HSLVRGHV RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWV VSHHFKHV RU ZULWWHQ WKHPHV WKDW ZHUH MXGJHG HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ 7KLUWHHQ KXQGUHG LQFLGHQWV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZHUH FROOHFWHG DQG FDWHJRUL]HG LQWR HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH FDWHJRULHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ,W ZDV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKUHH SUREOHPV DURVH GXULQJ WKH

PAGE 76

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f 7KH UHVSRQGHQWV UHSRUWHG PRUH LQHIIHFWLYH WKDQ HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI EHKDYLRU ,W DSSHDUHG WKDW LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH PRUH RXWVWDQGLQJ RU KDG PRUH LPSDFW RQ WKH REVHUYHUV WKDQ HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV f 5HVSRQGHQWV WHQGHG WR ZULWH SHUVRQDO HYDOXDWLYH MXGJPHQWV RI EHKDYLRU UDWKHU WKDQ GHVFULSWLYH EHKDYLRUV f 0DQ\ UHSRUWV ZHUH QRW LQFLGHQWV WKDW ZHUH MXGJHG WUXO\ FULWLFDO DQ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQW WKDW PDGH WKH GLIIHUHQFH EHWZHHQ VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH LQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ,W ZDV WKRXJKW WKDW VXFK GLIILFXOWLHV FRXOG EH RYHUFRPH ZLWK PRUH FDUHn IXO SODQQLQJ DQG ZLWK FOHDU GLUHFWLRQV WR WKH UHVSRQGHQWV /DVWO\ 0D\KHZ FLWHG ILYH DUHDV LQ HGXFDWLRQ LQ ZKLFK WKH FULWLFDO WHFKQLTXH FRXOG EH DSSOLHG LQ GHWHUPLQLQJ FDWHJRULHV RI DIIHFWLYH WUDLWV VXFFHVVn IXO EHKDYLRU FRJQLWLYH EHKDYLRU VWXGHQW EHKDYLRU LQ QRQDFDGHPLF DUHDV DQG VWXGHQW JUDGHV /HOHV f XVHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH WR FROOHFW GDWD LQ RUGHU WR GHYHORS DQ RSHUDWLRQDO WKHRU\ RI HGXFDWLRQDO SURIHVVLRQDOLVP %\ REWDLQLQJ DQ RSHUDWLRQDO GHILQLWLRQ RI SURIHVVLRQDOLVP /HOHV EHOLHYHG WKDW LW ZRXOG EH SRVVLEOH WR FODULI\ WKRVH SHUIRUPDQFHV RI HGXFDWRUV

PAGE 77

ZKR ZRXOG SHUIRUP HIIHFWLYH HGXFDWLRQDO VHUYLFHV DQG PHHW HGXFDWLRQnV VRFLDO REOLJDWLRQV WR VRFLHW\ /HOHV XVHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ RUGHU WKDW KLV GHILQLWLRQV RI HGXFDWLRQDO SURIHVVLRQDOLVP PLJKW EH GHULYHG IURP HGXFDn WRUV DW ZRUN UDWKHU WKDQ IURP SURIHVVLRQDO RUJDQL]DWLRQV RU OLWHUDWXUH UHYLHZV 7KLUWHHQ FDWHJRULHV RI SURIHVVLRQDO FRQFHUQV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG IURP UHSRUWHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV /LPLWDWLRQV WR WKH VWXG\ ZHUH GLVFXVVHG $ QXPEHU RI LQFLGHQWV UHSRUWHG WXUQHG RXW WR EH SHUVRQDO JULSHV RI LQGLYLGXDOV LQYROYHG LQ XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQn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n IXOO\ ZRUGHG TXHVWLRQQDLUH DQG VXEMHFWV ZHOO SUHSDUHG DQG LQIRUPHG RQ WKH SURFHGXUH IRU JDWKHULQJ FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV 7KH VWXGLHV VKRZ WKDW WHUPV QHHGHG WR EH FOHDUO\ GHILQHG DQG WKDW SURFHGXUHV WR UHFRUG LQFLGHQWV LQ DQ REMHFWLYH UDWKHU WKDQ LQ HYDOXDWLYH ODQJXDJH DUH HVVHQn WLDO WR WKH YDOLGLW\ RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH 6WXGLHV $ERXW (GXFDWLRQDO $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ DQG 6XSHUYLVRU\ )XQFWLRQV 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH KDV EHHQ XVHG LQ DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ VWXGLHV LQYROYLQJ ODUJH QXPEHUV RI UHVSRQGHQWV DQG SLHFHV RI GDWD

PAGE 78

0RVW VWXGLHV ZHUH PDGH WR PHDVXUH WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI D FHUWDLQ MRE SHUIRUPHG E\ SHUVRQV LQ HGXFDWLRQDO DGPLQLVWUDWLRQ RU VXSHUYLVLRQ )ODQDJDQ f UHSRUWHG RQ %DUQKDUWnV VWXG\ RI HVWDEOLVKLQJ FULWLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU VFKRRO ERDUG PHPEHUVKLS 0HDVXUHPHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH UROHV E\ VFKRRO ERDUG PHPEHUV ZHUH PDGH E\ :KDOHQ f DQG :ULJKW f 7KH ODWWHU VWXG\ DQDO\]HG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LQ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ GLVWULFW VFKRRO VXSHULQWHQGHQWV DQG VFKRRO ERDUG PHPEHUV &ULWLFDO UHTXLUHPHQWV RI SXEOLF VFKRRO SULQFLSDOV ZHUH HVWDEOLVKHG E\ &RRSHU f DQG UHFRPPHQGDWLRQV ZHUH PDGH IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ HYDOXDn WLRQ DQG SUHVHUYLFH DQG LQVHUYLFH WUDLQLQJ RI SULQFLSDOV &ODUN f LGHQWLILHG VHYHQ PDMRU EHKDYLRU DUHDV RI VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO SULQFLSDOV E\ FROOHFWLQJ LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO SULQFLSDOV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VXSHULQWHQGHQWV VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO WHDFKHUV DQG VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO SULQFLSDOV 2I WKH WKUHH JURXSV RI UHVSRQGHQWV VXSHULQWHQGHQWV DQG WHDFKHUV PRVW RIWHQ DJUHHG RQ WKH WKUHH PRVW HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI SULQFLSDOV LQ RUGHU RI LPSRUWDQFH /HH f IRXQG WKDW SHUFHSWLRQV RI WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ IXQFWLRQV RI SULQFLSDOV GLIIHUHG EHWZHHQ WHDFKHUV DQG SULQFLSDOV 3ULQFLSDOV UHFRUGHG IHZHU SHUFHLYHG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV WKDQ WHDFKHUV %HKDYLRUV RI FXUULFXOXP GLUHFWRUV SHUFHLYHG E\ WHDFKHUV SULQFLn SDOV DQG FXUULFXOXP GLUHFWRUV DV PRVW HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH UHYHDOHG WKDW WKH FXUULFXOXP GLUHFWRU YLHZHG KLV UROH GLIIHUHQWO\ WKDQ GLG WHDFKHUV DQG SULQFLSDOV 'HDQ f

PAGE 79

3HWHUVRQ f FROOHFWHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI H[SHULHQFHG DQG LQH[SHULHQFHG FROOHJH DQG XQLYHUVLW\ SUHVLGHQWV DQG GLVFXVVHG WKH LPSOLFDWLRQV IRU QHZ DQG H[SHULHQFHG SUHVLGHQWV LQ KLJKHU HGXFDWLRQ LQVWLWXWLRQV 6WXGLHV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI VFKRRO VXSHUn YLVRUV ZHUH FRQGXFWHG E\ )RVWHU f DQG &ROEHUW f )RVWHU IRXQG FRQVLGHUDEOH DJUHHPHQW DERXW WKH FULWLFDO FRPSHWHQFLHV RI HOHPHQn WDU\ VFKRRO FXUULFXOXP VXSHUYLVRUV DQG LGHQWLILHG VSHFLILF HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI WKLV JURXS )RVWHU DOVR HVWDEOLVKHG WKH UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH FODVVLILFDWLRQ V\VWHP RI VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV 7KUHHTXDUWHUV RI WKH EHKDYLRUV MXGJHG E\ LQGHSHQGHQW MXURUV ZHUH SODFHG LQ WKH VDPH FDWHJRULHV RI EHKDYLRUV &ROEHUWn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f ,QFLGHQWV RI PRWLYDWLRQDO HIIHFWV RI FROOHJH VWXGHQWVn JUDGHV ZHUH UHSRUWHG E\ 1RUWRQ DQG :LPV f DQG WKH SUHGLFWHG SHUn IRUPDQFH RI GHQWDO VWXGHQWV ZDV UHSRUWHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f )ODQDJDQ DOVR UHSRUWHG RQ D VWXG\ FRQGXFWHG RQ WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO EHKDYLRUV RI

PAGE 80

KLJK VFKRRO VWXGHQWV SHUFHLYHG E\ WKHLU SHHUV WR EH EHKDYLRUV MXGJHG OLNHDEOH RU XQOLNHDEOH LQ D IULHQGVKLS UHODWLRQVKLS $ VWXG\ SUHYLRXVO\ UHSRUWHG 0D\KHZ f XVHG FROOHJH VWXGHQWV DV VXEMHFWV WR LGHQWLI\ HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ 6WXGLHV $ERXW 7HDFKHUV 6HYHUDO FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW VWXGLHV DERXW WHDFKHUV DQG WHDFKLQJ ZHUH UHSRUWHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f 7KH VWXGLHV UHSRUWHG E\ )ODQDJDQ H[SORUHG WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ PHDVXULQJ WHDFKHU HIIHFWLYHQHVV DQG WHDFKHU FRPSHWHQFH -HQVHQ f FROOHFWHG UHSRUWV RQ WHDFKHU EHKDYLRUV DQG IURP WKH UHSRUWV IRUPXODWHG D VHW RI WHDFKHU EHKDYLRUV WKDW DSSHDUHG WR FRQWULEXWH WR HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFn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f LGHQWLILHG WHDFKLQJ DQG DGYLVLQJ FRPSHWHQFLHV RI VSHFLDO HGXFDWLRQ SURIHVVRUV DQG UHODWHG WKHLU LPSRUWn DQFH WR HGXFDWLRQDO DFFRXQWDELOLW\ IRU VSHFLDO HGXFDWLRQ IDFXOWLHV DQG SURJUDPV

PAGE 81

+DPULFN f H[SORUHG WKH SKLORVRSKLFDO SRVLWLRQ RI FODVVURRP WHDFKHUV E\ GHYHORSLQJ DQG WHVWLQJ ZLWKLQ D WKHRUHWLFDO IUDPHZRUN KRZ WHDFKHUV DFW RU PDNH GHFLVLRQV ZLWK UHVSHFW WR WKH SXUSRVHV RI HGXFDn WLRQ WKH QDWXUH RI WKH FXUULFXOXP WKH IXQFWLRQV RI WHDFKLQJ DQG WKH UROH RI WKH VFKRRO LQ VRFLHW\ 7HDFKHU UHVSRQVHV WR FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI GHFLVLRQ PDNLQJ ZHUH FODVVLILHG LQWR FDWHJRULHV RI SURJUHVVLYH HVVHQWLDOLVW SHUHQQLDOLVW H[LVWHQWLDOLVW DQG H[SHGLHQW YLHZV WRZDUG HGXFDWLRQ &RUVLQL DQG +RZDUG f XVHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LGHQWLILHG DV FODVVURRP FULVHV WR VWXG\ WKH GLIILFXOW LQWHUSHUVRQDO FODVVURRP VLWXDn WLRQV WKDW HOHPHQWDU\ WHDFKHUV FRXOG H[SHFW WR HQFRXQWHU 7KH UHSRUWLQJ RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV ZDV H[SHFWHG WR DLG WHDFKHU SDUHQWV DQG DGPLQ! LVWUDWRUV LQ UHFRJQL]LQJ FULVLV VLWXDWLRQV DQG UHVSRQGLQJ WR WKHP HIIHFWLYHO\

PAGE 82

&+$37(5 ,,, 0(7+2'6 $1' 352&('85(6 ,QWURGXFWLRQ 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV FKDSWHU LV WR SUHVHQW WKH PHWKRGV DQG SURn FHGXUHV XVHG WR LGHQWLI\ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VHFRQGDU\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH GLVFXVVLRQ LV RUJDQL]HG XQGHU ILYH VHFWLRQV 7KH ILUVW VHFWLRQ LV DQ LQWURGXFWLRQ WR DQG D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH XVHG DV WKH PHWKRG WR LGHQWLI\ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 7KH QH[W VHFWLRQ LV D UHYLHZ RI WKH VWXGLHV FRQGXFWHG LQ WKH ILHOG RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WKDW XVHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH 7KH WKLUG VHFWLRQ LV D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH JHQHUDO DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH PHWKRG XVHG WR HVWDEOLVK WKH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV DOVR RXWOLQHG 7KH IRXUWK VHFWLRQ FRQWDLQV D GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH GHVLJQ RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LQVWUXPHQW XVHG IRU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ 7KH ODVW VHFWLRQ LV D SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI WKH PHWKRG XVHG IRU WKH VHOHFWLRQ RI WKH SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH VWXG\ DQG D GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH SURFHGXUHV XVHG WR JDWKHU GDWD DQG WR DQDO\]H WKH GDWD 7KH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW 7HFKQLTXH 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LV WKH PHWKRG FKRVHQ WR JDWKHU GDWD DERXW WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO

PAGE 83

FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH GHYHORSHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f DQG RWKHUV IRUPV D VHW RI SURFHGXUHV IRU FROOHFWLQJ VHOIUHSRUWHG REVHUYDWLRQV RI EHKDYLRU WKDW DUH GHWHUPLQHG WR EH HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQ DFFRPSOLVKLQJ WKH DLP RU SXUSRVH RI DQ DFWLYLW\ MRE RU HYHQW )R[ f VWDWHG WKDW XQOLNH WKH TXHVWLRQn QDLUH RU LQWHUYLHZ ZKLFK LV XVHG ZKHQ WKH UHVHDUFKHU H[SHFWV WR JDWKHU D EURDG UDQJH RI GDWD RU LQIRUPDWLRQ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LV DQ REMHFWLYH PHDVXUH WKDW LV XVHG WR JDWKHU HPSLULFDO GDWD DERXW DFWXDO LQFLGHQWV RI D VSHFLILF QDWXUH 7KH UHSRUWLQJ RI DQ LQFLGHQW LV LQ UHVSRQVH WR D KLJKO\ VWUXFWXUHG TXHVWLRQ RU D VHW RI TXHVWLRQV SRVHG E\ WKH UHVHDUFKHU 7KXV WKH UHSRUWHG LQFLGHQWV VKRXOG KDYH VSHFLDO VLJQLILFDQFH WR DQ DFWLYLW\ RU VLWXDWLRQ DQG VKRXOG RFFXU LQ VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUDO VLWXDWLRQV 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH FRQVLVWV RI D VHW RI SURn FHGXUHV IRU FROOHFWLQJ GLUHFW REVHUYDWLRQV RI KXPDQ EHKDYLRU LQ VXFK D ZD\ DV WR IDFLOLWDWH WKHLU SRWHQWLDO XVHIXOQHVV LQ VROYLQJ SUDFWLFDO SUREOHPV DQG GHYHORSLQJ EURDG SV\FKRORJLn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f 7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LV YLHZHG DV D PHWKRG IRU REMHFWLYHO\ UHSRUWLQJ HVSHFLDOO\ HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQFHV RI EHKDYLRUV RI SHRSOH DQG WKHLU DFWLYLWLHV LQ VSHFLILF VLWXDWLRQV 0F(OUR\ f LQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ WKH UDWLRQDOH IRU XVLQJ WKH WHFKQLTXH LQ D PDMRU VWXG\ RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV VWDWHG

PAGE 84

WKDW WKH GHVFULSWLRQV RI VLWXDWLRQV PDGH E\ WKH REVHUYHU ZHUH LQFLGHQWV ZKHUH VRPH IRUP RI DFWLRQ KDG WDNHQ SODFH ZKHUH LPSRUWDQW GHFLVLRQV KDG EHHQ PDGH SUREOHPV VROYHG RU FRQIOLFWV UHVROYHG 7KH WDVN RI WKH REVHUYHU ZDV WR UHSRUW EHKDYLRUV RI SHUVRQV LQ VLWXDWLRQV WKDW UHVXOWHG LQ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH RXWFRPHV 7KHVH RXWFRPHV PDUNHG WKH VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH RI WKH SHUVRQVf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f RXWOLQHG VSHFLILF VWHSV WKDW QHHGHG WR EH IROn ORZHG EHIRUH WKH GDWD FRXOG EH FROOHFWHG f 7KH EHKDYLRU UHSRUWHG PXVW EH REVHUYHG E\ WKH UHVSRQGHQW DQG WKH VLWXDWLRQ LQ ZKLFK WKH UHVSRQGHQW UHFRUGHG KLV REVHUYDWLRQV PXVW EH FOHDUO\ GHILQHG f $

PAGE 85

JHQHUDO DLP RU SXUSRVH RI WKH DFWLYLW\ ZKLFK LV EHLQJ REVHUYHG PXVW EH GHILQHG IRU WKH UHVSRQGHQW LQ VXIILFLHQW GHWDLO VR DV WR OHDYH QR TXHVWLRQ DV WR WKH DSSURSULDWHQHVV RI WKH VLWXDWLRQ DQG LWV HIIHFW RQ WKH JHQHUDO DLP f 7KH UHVSRQGHQW PXVW KDYH D FOHDU GHILQLWLRQ RI LPSRUWDQW DVSHFWV RI WKH EHKDYLRU RU DFWLYLW\ XQGHU VWXG\ LQ RUGHU IRU OHYHOV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU WR EH GHWHUPLQHG LQ WKH DFWLYLWLHV UHSRUWHG f 7KH UHVSRQGHQW PXVW EH TXDOLILHG WR PDNH DQG UHSRUW MXGJPHQWV DERXW WKH EHKDYLRUV LQ WKH DFWLYLW\ XQGHU VWXG\ f 7KH UHVSRQGHQW QHHGV WR EH NQRZOHGJHDEOH RU WUDLQHG DERXW WKH PHWKRGV RI UHSRUWLQJ WR LQVXUH DFFXUDF\ LQ UHSRUWLQJ VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV 7KHUH DUH D QXPEHU RI DGYDQWDJHV FLWHG IRU WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ WKH VWXG\ RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV )R[ f 7KH WHFKQLTXH LV SDUWLFXODUO\ YDOXDEOH LQ FROOHFWLQJ ODUJH DPRXQWV RI GDWD SHUWDLQLQJ WR D QDUURZ DUHD LQ ZKLFK WKH UHVHDUFKHU LV LQWHUHVWHG $QRQ\PLW\ RI WKH VXEMHFWV DQG UHVSRQGHQWV LV REVHUYHG 0F(OUR\ f VWDWHG WKDW UHSRUWV PDGH ZLWK D PLQLPXP DPRXQW RI SUHn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f FRQFOXGHG WKDW WKH VLJQLILFDQFH RI WKH WHFKQLTXH OLHV FKLHIO\ LQ SURYLGLQJ HPSLULFDOO\ GHULYHG FODVVLILFDWLRQV RI EHKDYLRU ZKLFK FDQ WKHQ EH XVHG HLWKHU DV D IUDPHZRUN IRU VXEVHTXHQW

PAGE 86

PHDVXUHPHQW RU DV PDWHULDO RXW RI ZKLFK HYDOXDWLRQ LQVWUXPHQWV FDQ EH GHYHORSHG S f %XUQV f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nV EHKDYLRU %HKDYLRU LV GHVFULEHG DV H[LVWLQJ 7R GHVFULEH WKH EHKDYLRU RWKHU WKDQ DV DQ H[LVWDQFH VDLG %XUQV f LV WR SODFH D YDOXH MXGJPHQW XSRQ WKH EHKDYLRU 7KXV WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LV D PHWKRG XVHG WR YHULI\ QRW HYDOXDWH EHKDYLRU SKHQRPHQD :KLOH %XUQV DUJXHG DJDLQVW VXEMHFWLYH HYDOXDWLRQ LQ WKH WUHDWPHQW RI WKH GDWD PRVW UHVHDUFKHUV XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH GLVFXVVHG FDXWLRQ LQ SODFLQJ YDOXH MXGJPHQWV XSRQ REVHUYHG EHKDYLRUV 7KH\ GLG QRW KRZHYHU UXOH RXW WKH DQDO\WLFDO QDWXUH RI VXFK UHSRUWV RI VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV )ODQDJDQ -HQVHQ f 0RVW UHVHDUFKHUV HPSOR\LQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH XVHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQFHV WR UHSRUW DFFXUDWHO\ WKH EHKDYLRU RI WKH VXEMHFW HQJDJHG LQ D VSHFLILF MRE UROH RU WDVN 2QO\ D VLPSOH MXGJPHQW QHHGV WR EH PDGH E\ WKH REVHUYHU DFFRUGLQJ WR 0F(OUR\ f 7KLV MXGJPHQW SHUPLWV WKH REVHUYHU WR VWDWH ZKHWKHU D VSHFLILF EHKDYLRU LV

PAGE 87

HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQ D SDUWLFXODU MRE SHUIRUPDQFH ,Q WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU DVNHG WKH REVHUYHU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR UHSRUW WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV EHKDYLRU XSRQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GXULQJ SHULRGV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ $ GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU XSRQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU VKRXOG KHOS WR IRUP WKH EDVLV IRU GHFLGLQJ ZKHWKHU D VSHFLILF EHKDYLRU RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LV WR EH MXGJHG HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO RU QRQFULWLFDO WR WKH WDVN RI VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ,I WKH REVHUYHG EHKDYLRU GRHV QRW UHVXOW LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWLQJ D FRQVHTXHQFH IRU VXFK EHKDYLRU WKH EHKDYLRU LV QRW MXGJHG DV KDYLQJ DQ HVSHFLDOO\ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LPSDFW XSRQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,W LV EHOLHYHG E\ WKLV LQYHVWLJDWRU WKDW EDVHG XSRQ WKH ZRUNV RI 'HXWVFK f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n SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV

PAGE 88

6WXGLHV $ERXW 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 7KH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU DQG 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 0RVW RI WKH VWXGLHV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ LGHQWLILHG VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV RI RQH RU PRUH PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG DV HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQ MRE RU UROH SHUIRUPDQFH &ULWLFDO MRE UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU HOHPHQWDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ )DUEVWHLQ f 7KRVH VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV RI VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKDW ZRXOG DLG LQ WKHLU VHOHFWLRQ DQG SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ +DFNOH\ f DQG GLVFXVVHG LQ PRUH GHWDLO LQ &KDSWHU ,, (ONLQ f FROOHFWHG GHVFULSWLRQV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI VHFRQGDU\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG LGHQWLILHG WKRVH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV ZKLFK FRQWULEXWHG WR WKH VXFFHVV RU IDLOXUH RI VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV 7KH SHUFHSWLRQV RI UROH UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZHUH YLHZHG GLIIHUHQWO\ E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ (ONLQnV VWXG\ +HOSIXO DQG KLQGHULQJ EHKDYLRUV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LGHQWLILHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DV EHLQJ FULWLFDO WR WKHLU VXFFHVVIXO FRPSOHWLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ ZHUH FROOHFWHG E\ 1LFKROVRQ f 7KHVH LQFLGHQWV ZHUH XVHG WR HVWDEOLVK WKH FULWHULD IRU WKH GHYHORSPHQW RI D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FKHFNOLVW IRU RQWKHMRE SHUIRUPDQFH &RQFOXVLRQV UHDFKHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH UROH DQG EHKDYLRUV H[SHFWHG RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PLJKW EH WRR FRPSOH[ DQG QXPHURXV WR HQWUXVW WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WR RQH SHUVRQ 7KH 6RXWKDOO DQG .LQJ f VWXG\ RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUVf SHUn FHSWLRQV RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV WKDW FRXOG KDYH RU GLG KDYH DQ LPSDFW XSRQ

PAGE 89

WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV FRPSOHWLRQ RU VXFFHVV LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ZDV UHYLHZHG LQ &KDSWHU ,, 7KH DXWKRUV GHYLVHG WHQ FDWHn JRULHV DV SRVVLELOLWLHV IRU FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FDWHJRUL]HG HDFK FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WKDW WKH\ LGHQWLILHG DV FRQWULEXWLQJ WR D VWUHVVIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DOVR LGHQWLILHG WKHPVHOYHV DV JHQHUDOLVW RU VSHFLDOLVW VXSHUYLVRUV $ WRWDO RI VL[W\RQH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH VWXG\ DQG FDWHJRUn L]HG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LQ WKH WHQ FDWHJRULHV 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH WKUHH PDMRU SUREOHPV SHUFHLYHG E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV KLQGHUn LQJ WKH FRPSOHWLRQ RU VXFFHVV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ZHUH WKH ODFN RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKH LQDELOLW\ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR OLYH XS WR WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUnV H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU QRW EHLQJ SUHSDUHG RU QRW NQRZLQJ PHWKRGV DQG WHDFKLQJ WHFKQLTXHV &DUU f LQ D VWXG\ GHVLJQHG WR LGHQWLI\ DQG GHILQH WKRVH IDFWRUV WKDW LQIOXHQFH WKH LQWHUSHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLS EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW PRUH HIIHFWLYH LQWHUn SHUVRQDO UHODWLRQVKLSV H[LVWHG EHWZHHQ WKH WZR JURXSV ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VSHQW PRUH WLPH ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQ ERWK REVHUYDWLRQ DQG FRQIHUHQFH VLWXDWLRQV ,QFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVLRQ ZHUH LGHQWLILHG LQ VLWXDWLRQDO DQG SHUVRQDO YDULDEOHV DWWULEXWHG WR WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 3UDFWLFHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV SHUFHLYHG E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WR EH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQ LPSURYLQJ WKHLU WHDFKLQJ DQG DWWLWXGHV WRZDUG WHDFKLQJ ZHUH VWXGLHG E\ 0F(OUR\ f DQG GLVFXVVHG LQ GHSWK LQ &KDSWHU ,, ,Q D WZRSDUW VWXG\ RI VXSHUYLVRUV RI VWXGHQW

PAGE 90

WHDFKHUV 1LFNODV f FROOHFWHG HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ WHFKQLTXHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LGHQWLILHG E\ PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKHUH ZDV JHQHUDO DJUHHPHQW DPRQJ WKH WULDG PHPEHUV WKDW FRQIHUHQFHV GHPRQVWUDn WLYH WHDFKLQJ DQG FRPSOLPHQWV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU SHUIRUPDQFH ZHUH HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV 1HJDWLYH SUDFWLFHV LQFOXGHG FODVVURRP GLVUXSWLYH EHKDYLRU H[FHVVLYH FULWLFLVP DQG ZLWKGUDZDO RI KHOS WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH VWXGLHV UHYLHZHG LQ HGXFDWLRQ XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH PHWKRG FDQ EH XVHG WR VWXG\ HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQWHUSHUVRQDO EHKDYLRUV MRE SHUIRUPDQFH DQG UROH UHTXLUHn PHQWV HGXFDWLRQDO REMHFWLYHV DQG HYDOXDWLRQ DQG DWWLWXGHV DQG SKLORVRSKLFDO SRVLWLRQV RI SHUVRQV LQ HGXFDWLRQ 7KH YDOLGLW\ DQG UHOLDELOLW\ RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH DV D PHWKRG RI UHVHDUFK ZDV HVWDEOLVKHG LQ D QXPEHU RI VWXGLHV )ODQDJDQ 0F(OUR\ f 7KH DGYDQWDJHV DQG OLPLWDWLRQV IRU WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH ZHUH GLVFXVVHG DQG WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH LQ DSSURSULDWH VWXGLHV LQ HGXFDWLRQ ZDV VXJJHVWHG 7KH SUHVHQW VWXG\ XQGHU LQYHVWLJDWLRQ ZLOO FRQWULEXWH WR DQRWKHU GLPHQVLRQ RI VWXG\LQJ EHKDYLRUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG ,GHQWLn I\LQJ WKRVH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GXULQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV VKRXOG DLG LQ HVWDEOLVKLQJ DQ HIIHFWLYH SURIHVVLRQDO UHODWLRQn VKLS WKDW ZLOO HQDEOH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WR FRRSHUDWLYHO\ VXSHUYLVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV

PAGE 91

7KH *HQHUDO $LP RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU $V UHSRUWHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f $ EDVLF FRQGLWLRQ QHFHVVDU\ IRU DQ\ ZRUN RQ WKH IRUPXODWLRQ RI D IXQFWLRQDO GHVFULSWLRQ RI DQ DFWLYLW\ LV D IXQGDPHQWDO RULHQWDWLRQ LQ WHUPV RI WKH JHQHUDO DLPV RI WKH DFWLYLW\ 1R SODQQLQJ DQG QR HYDOXDWLRQ RI VSHFLILF EHKDYLRUV DUH SRVVLEOH ZLWKRXW D JHQHUDO VWDWHPHQW RI REMHFWLYHV S f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f LQ KLV VWXG\ LGHQWLI\LQJ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV SHUFHLYHG DV EHLQJ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH E\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV UHYLHZHG WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ OLWHUDWXUH IRU GHVFULSWLRQV RI WKH JHQHUDO DLP RU SXUSRVH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ $JUHHPHQW ZDV IRXQG DPRQJ WKH DXWKRULWLHV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW WKH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV WR LPSURYH

PAGE 92

LQVWUXFWLRQ $ TXHVWLRQQDLUH GHYHORSHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f ZDV XVHG LQ WKH 0F(OUR\ VWXG\ WR REWDLQ JHQHUDO VWDWHPHQWV RI WKH DLP RI VXSHUn YLVRUV E\ VHOHFWLQJ SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH VWXG\ 7KH JHQHUDO DLP VWDWHn PHQW ZDV WKHQ UHYLVHG DQG DJUHHG XSRQ E\ WKRVH SDUWLFLSDQWV 7KH VWDWHPHQW RI WKH JHQHUDO DLP RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU XVHG LQ WKH 0F(OUR\ VWXG\ EHFDPH 7KH JHQHUDO DLP RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RI VHFRQGDU\ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LV WR LPSURYH WKH WHDFKLQJ DQG DWWLWXGH WRZDUG WHDFKLQJ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU S f 7KLV GHILQLWLRQ DSSHDUV WR EH FRQn VLVWHQW ZLWK GHILQLWLRQV RI WKH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ DSSHDULQJ ODWHU LQ WKH OLWHUDWXUH %OXPEHUJ f LGHQWLILHG WKH JRDOV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LQ HGXFDWLRQ DV WKH LPSURYHPHQW RI LQVWUXFWLRQ DQG WKH HQKDQFHPHQW RI WKH SHUVRQDO DQG SURIHVVLRQDO JURZWK RI WHDFKHUV S f /HZLV DQG 0LHO f YLHZHG VXSHUYLVLRQ DV D PRQLWRULQJ IXQFWLRQ HQKDQFLQJ WKH TXDOLW\ RI LQVWUXFWLRQ S f $IWHU UHYLHZLQJ WKH OLWHUDWXUH RQ WKH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW ZDV DSSURSULDWH WR WKH VWXG\ WKLV LQYHVWLJDWRU ZURWH DQ DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ VWDWHPHQW ZKLFK ZRXOG EH ZULWWHQ RQ WKH WZR FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW TXHVWLRQn QDLUH IRUPV DV D VWDWHPHQW RI FULWLFDO EHKDYLRU RI D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV VWDWHPHQW UHDG 7KH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ LV WR KHOS WKH SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH SODFHPHQW RI WKLV DLP VWDWHPHQW RQ WKH WZR IRUPV RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZLOO EH GLVFXVVHG PRUH IXOO\ LQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RQ WKH VSHFLILFDWLRQV DQG FULWHULD XVHG LQ GHVLJQLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LQVWUXPHQW

PAGE 93

'HVLJQ RI WKH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW ,QVWUXPHQW 8VHG IRU 5HSRUWLQJ &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV 7KH GHVLJQ RI WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH XVHG WR JDWKHU UHSRUWV RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV IROORZV WKH VSHFLILFDWLRQV RI WKH IRUP ODLG GRZQ E\ )ODQDJDQ f DQG WKH FULWHULD DSSOLHG WR WKH GHVLJQLQJ RI WKH TXHVWLRQV XVHG WR FROOHFW FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV E\ 0F(OUR\ f 7ZR IRUPV ZHUH XVHG WR JDWKHU FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ )RUP ZDV GHVLJQHG WR EH XVHG WR UHFRUG HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG )RUP ,, WR UHFRUG LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ (DFK IRUP FRQWDLQHG WKH IROORZLQJ LWHPV WKH JHQHUDO DLPV VWDWHPHQW D VWDWHn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nV f GHILQLWLRQ RI D FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW VWDWHG DQ LQFLGHQW LV FULWLFDO LI LW PDNHV D nVLJQLILFDQWn FRQWULEXWLRQ HLWKHU SRVLWLYHO\

PAGE 94

RU QHJDWLYHO\ WR WKH JHQHUDO DLP RI WKH DFWLYLW\ S f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f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f ZDV WR EH

PAGE 95

D GHOLPLWDWLRQ RI WKH VLWXDWLRQ WR EH REVHUYHG 7KLV VSHFLILFDWLRQ PXVW LQFOXGH LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW WKH SODFH WKH SHUVRQV WKH FRQGLWLRQV DQG WKH DFWLYLWLHV S f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n PHQW XVHG LQ WKH SUHVHQW VWXG\ ZDV WKH ZRUGLQJ RI WKH TXHVWLRQV VWDWHG RQ )RUP DQG )RUP ,, )ODQDJDQ f UHSRUWHG WKDW D VOLJKW FKDQJH LQ WKH ZRUGLQJ RI D TXHVWLRQ FRXOG SURGXFH VXEVWDQWLDO FKDQJH LQ WKH

PAGE 96

W\SH RI LQFLGHQW UHSRUWHG 0F(OUR\ f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n WLRQ RQH DVNHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKH REVHUYHU WR UHFRUG ZKHQ WKH LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG 7KLV TXHVWLRQ ZDV OHIW RSHQHQGHG EHFDXVH VRPH UHVSRQGHQWV PLJKW QRW EH DEOH WR JLYH VSHFLILF GDWHV DQG WLPHV LI VR DVNHG DQG ZRXOG WKHUHIRUH OHDYH WKH TXHVWLRQ EODQN 4XHVWLRQ WZR DVNHG WKH REVHUYHU WR GHVFULEH ZKDW KDSSHQHG SULRU WR WKH LQFLGHQW WKDW ZDV SHUFHLYHG DV EHLQJ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KLV TXHVWLRQ DOORZHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR GHVFULEH WKH HYHQWVf OHDGLQJ XS WR WKH LQFLGHQW 4XHVWLRQ WKUHH DVNHG WKH UHVSRQGHQW WR IXUWKHU GHOLPLW WKH SULRU HYHQWVf E\ UHFRUGLQJ WKH SK\VLFDO ORFDWLRQ RI WKH LQFLGHQWfV RFFXUUHQFH 4XHVWLRQ IRXU DVNHG WKH UHVSRQGHQW WR QDPH WKH SHUVRQV LQYROYHG LQ WKLV LQFLGHQW EXW WR LGHQWLI\ WKHP RQO\ E\ WLWOH QRW E\ SURSHU QDPH %\ JLYLQJ RQO\ WKH WLWOH RI WKRVH SHUVRQV LQYROYHG LQ WKH LQFLGHQW WKH DQRQ\PLW\ RI WKH

PAGE 97

SHUVRQV ZRXOG EH SUHVHUYHG 7KLV TXHVWLRQ ZDV DOVR LQFOXGHG LQ RUGHU WR LGHQWLI\ SHUVRQV RWKHU WKDQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZKR ZHUH LQYROYHG LQ WKH LQFLGHQW 4XHVWLRQ ILYH UHTXHVWHG WKH UHVSRQGHQW WR GHVFULEH EULHIO\ EXW H[DFWO\ ZKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VDLG RU GLG WKDW UHVXOWHG LQ WKH LQFLGHQW WKDW ZDV EHLQJ UHFRUGHG 7KH TXHVWLRQ GLG QRW DVN WKH UHVSRQn GHQW WR SODFH DQ\ MXGJPHQW XSRQ WKH DFWLRQ WDNHQ RU VWDWHPHQW PDGH E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RWKHU WKDQ WKH MXGJPHQW WKDW VXFK DFWLRQ RU VWDWHPHQW UHVXOWHG LQ D SRVLWLYH RU QHJDWLYH H[SHULHQFH IRU WKH FRRSHUDn WLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q WKLV ZD\ LW ZDV H[SHFWHG WKDW DQ HYDOXDWLRQDO IHHOLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZRXOG EH JUHDWO\ OLPLWHG 4XHVWLRQV VL[ DQG VHYHQ DVNHG WKH UHVSRQGHQWV WR UHFRUG ZKDW WKH\ SHUFHLYHG DV WKH DWWLWXGH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZKHQ WKH LQFLGHQW WRRN SODFH DQG ZKDW WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RU RXWFRPHV RI WKH LQFLGHQW ZHUH IRU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV D UHVXOW RI WKH LQFLGHQW 7KH UHFRUGLQJ RI WKH SHUFHLYHG DWWLWXGH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DW WKH WLPH RI WKH LQFLGHQWnV RFFXUUHQFH ZDV YLHZHG DV LPSRUWDQW LQ VRPH VLWXDWLRQV ZKHUH WKH DWWLWXGH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRQWULEXWHG WR DQ RXWFRPH WKDW PLJKW KDYH EHHQ GLIIHUHQW LI VXFK DQ DWWLWXGH KDG QRW H[LVWHG 4XHVWLRQ HLJKW ZDV D EHKDYLRUDO TXHVWLRQ LQ WKDW LW DVNHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR VWDWH KRZ WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKH HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DIIHFWHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D VXSHUYLVRU RI D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q RUGHU WR HOLPLQDWH DV PXFK ELDV RSLQLRQ RU HYDOXDWLRQ MXGJPHQW DV SRVVLEOH RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKH UHVSRQGHQWV ZHUH DVNHG WR XQGHUOLQH LQ WKH UHSRUW RI WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKH LQFLGHQW WKDW SDUW

PAGE 98

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n JUDSKLFDO TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV WR SURYLGH SHUVRQDO DQG SURIHVVLRQDO

PAGE 99

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f SODQQLQJ SHULRG 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH DVNHG E\ WKH DVVLVWDQW SULQFLSDO DQG WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU WR UHWXUQ WKH FRPSOHWHG LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV WR WKH

PAGE 100

DVVLVWDQW SULQFLSDOnV RIILFH DW WKHLU HDUOLHVW FRQYHQLHQFH 7KH LQYHVWLJDWRU PDGH VHYHUDO WULSV WR HDFK VFKRRO WR LQVXUH WKDW DOO FRPSOHWHG SDFNHWV ZHUH SLFNHG XS 7ZR RWKHU JURXSV RI SHUVRQV DVVLVWHG LQ WKH GLVWULEXWLRQ RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH DUHD FRRUGLQDWRUV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV IURP RQH XQLYHUVLW\ DQG WKH GLUHFWRU RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DW DQRWKHU XQLYHUVLW\ ZHUH FRQWDFWHG E\ SKRQH DQG OHWWHU ZLWK WKH UHTXHVW WR GLVWULEXWH WKH LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV WR VHFRQGn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

PAGE 101

LQFLGHQW IRUPV 6HYHQW\HLJKW RXW RI D WRWDO RI SDFNHWV GLVWULEXWHG WR FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ WKH VWDWH RI )ORULGD ZHUH UHWXUQHG WR WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU 2I WKH SDFNHWV UHWXUQHG SDFNHWV FRQWDLQHG UHFRUGHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRU 7KHVH SDFNHWV VXSSOLHG WKH GDWD XVHG LQ WKH VWXG\ (DFK FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW UHSRUW UHWXUQHG E\ WKH SDUWLFLSDWLQJ FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZDV UHDG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU DQG LWV FRQWHQWV DQDO\]HG LQ RUGHU WR H[WUDFW IURP WKH FRQWHQWV DQ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRU RI D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH UHSRUWHG EHKDYLRUV ZHUH WKHQ FDWHJRUL]HG LQWR D FODVVLILFDWLRQ V\VWHP HVWDEOLVKHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU 7KH SURFHGXUH IRU DQDO\]LQJ WKH FRQWHQW RI HDFK FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LV UHSRUWHG LQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH UHVXOWV

PAGE 102

&+$37(5 ,9 5(68/76 ,QWURGXFWLRQ 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ DUH SUHVHQWHG LQ WKLV FKDSWHU 7KH ILUVW VHFWLRQ LV D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH GHVFULSWLYH GDWD RI WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZKR FRPSULVHG WKH VDPSOH RI VXEMHFWV IRU WKH VWXG\ 7KH VHFRQG VHFWLRQ SUHVHQWV D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH SURFHGXUH XVHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU IRU DQDO\]LQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW UHSRUWV 7KH ILQDO VHFWLRQ FRQWDLQV WKH DQVZHUV WR WKH VL[ TXHVWLRQV DVNHG LQ WKH VWXG\ DQG D GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH DSSDUHQW DQVZHUV WR WKH VL[ TXHVWLRQV 'HVFULSWLYH 'DWD RI 6DPSOH 2YHU D SHULRG RI VHYHQ ZHHNV RI WKH LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV GLVn WULEXWHG D WRWDO RI VHYHQW\HLJKW SDFNHWV ZHUH UHWXUQHG E\ PDLO RU SLFNHG XS DW WKH SDUWLFLSDWLQJ VFKRROV E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU 7KLV UHWXUQ UHSUHVHQWHG SHUFHQW RI WKH WRWDO QXPEHU RI SDFNHWV GLVWULEXWHG 2I WKH VHYHQW\HLJKW UHWXUQV IRUW\VL[`RU SHUFHQW RI WKH WRWDO QXPEHU RI SDFNHWV GLVWULEXWHGFRQWDLQHG UHFRUGHG FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH DQGRU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV )RUW\ RQH HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV DQG WKLUW\IRXU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV ZHUH FROOHFWHG LQ WKLV PDQQHU 7KLUWHHQ LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV UHSUHVHQWLQJ SHUFHQW RI WKH SDFNHWV GLVWULEXWHG ZHUH UHWXUQHG ZLWK QRWHV RU OHWWHUV LQGLFDWLQJ WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU FRXOG QRW UHFDOO DQ LQFLGHQW ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH

PAGE 103

VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU ZRXOG PHHW WKH FULWHULD RI FULWLFDOQHVV DV RXWOLQHG LQ WKH LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHW GLUHFWLRQV 7KHVH UHWXUQV ZHUH HOLP LQDWHG IURP WKH VWXG\ 1LQHWHHQ LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHWV UHSUHVHQWLQJ SHUFHQW RI WKH SDFNHWV GLVWULEXWHG ZHUH UHWXUQHG ZLWK QRWHV RU OHWWHUV VWDWLQJ VSHFLILF UHDVRQV ZK\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU FRXOG QRW SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH VWXG\ )RXUn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n SULVHG WKH VDPSOH IRU WKLV VWXG\ ZHUH VHOHFWHG RQ D YROXQWHHU EDVLV WKH QXPEHU RI SDUWLFLSDQWV IURP HDFK RI WKH WKUHH XQLYHUVLW\ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDPV XVHG LQ WKH VWXG\ ZHUH QRW LGHQWLILHG ,W LV SRVVLEOH WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV IURP RQH RI WKH XQLYHUVLWLHV KHOG GLIIHUHQW YLHZV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ EDVHG XSRQ WKHLU H[SHULHQFHV ZLWK RU WKH SROLFLHV RI D SDUWLFXODU XQLYHUVLW\ ,Q DGGLWLRQ

PAGE 104

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n EHKDYLRU WKDW ZRXOG PHHW WKH FULWHULD RI FULWLFDOQHVV DV RXWOLQHG LQ WKH LQVWUXPHQW SDFNHW GLUHFWLRQV GLG QRW UHWXUQ D FRPSOHWHG ELRJUDSKLFDO GDWD IRUP 2I WKH QLQHWHHQ VXEMHFWV ZKR UHWXUQHG WKH LQVWUXPHQWV ZLWK QRWHV RU OHWWHUV VWDWLQJ RWKHU VSHFLILF UHDVRQV ZK\ WKH\ FRXOG QRW SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH VWXG\ WHQ ILOOHG RXW WKH ELRJUDSKLFDO GDWD IRUP +RZHYHU WKRVH VXEMHFWV ZKR ILOOHG RXW WKH ELRJUDSKLFDO GDWD IRUP ZHUH QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKH ELRJUDSKLFDO GDWD WDEOHV EHFDXVH WKHLU UHVSRQVHV ZHUH QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKH VWXG\ 3URFHGXUH IRU $QDO\]LQJ WKH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW 5HSRUWV )RUW\VL[ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHFRUGHG D WRWDO RI VHYHQW\ILYH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WKDW RFFXUUHG GXULQJ WKH SHULRG RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KHVH EHKDYLRUV ZHUH SHUFHLYHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV EHKDYLRUV WKDW DIIHFWHG WKHLU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GXULQJ WKH SHULRG

PAGE 105

7$%/( &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 %< $&$'(0,& '(*5(( 6(; $1' 180%(5 :+2 &203/(7(' &5,7,&$/ ,1&,'(17 )2506 $FDGHPLF 'HJUHH 0DOH )HPDOH 7RWDO %$ 0$ 0$ SOXV JUDGXDWH KRXUV 'RFWRUDWH

PAGE 106

7$%/( &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 %< 5$1*( $1' 0(',$1 2) $*( <($56 7($&+,1* $1' 180%(5 2) 678'(17 7($&+(56 683(59,6(' 1XPEHU RI 6WXGHQW $JH 5DQJH 0HGLDQ
PAGE 107

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f DQG 0F(OUR\ f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f &ODVVLILFDWLRQ RI WKH LQFLGHQWV ZDV REWDLQHG E\ RUJDQL]LQJ WKH GDWD LQWR FDWHJRULHV RI HIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 7KH FDWHJRULHV ZHUH VHOHFWHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU LQ VXFK D ZD\ WKDW WKH\ UHSUHVHQWHG D SUDFWLFH RU SKDVH RI WKH MRE IRU VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV

PAGE 108

7KH WKLUG VWHS LQ DQDO\]LQJ WKH FRQWHQW RI D FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW ZDV WR DEVWUDFW WKH UHSRUWHG EHKDYLRU RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WKDW FRPSULVHG WKH HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KLV ZDV IDLUO\ HDV\ WR GR EHFDXVH TXHVWLRQ ILYH RQ )RUP DQG )RUP ,, DVNHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR 'HVFULEH H[DFWO\ EXW EULHIO\ ZKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VDLG RU GLG WKDW UHVXOWHG LQ WKLV SRVLWLYH QHJDWLYHf H[SHUn LHQFH $OWKRXJK WKH HQWLUH FRQWHQWV RI ERWK )RUPV DQG ,, ZHUH UHDG LQ RUGHU WR EH VXUH WKDW DOO LQIRUPDWLRQ UHOHYDQW WR WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW ZDV LQFOXGHG PRVW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH YHU\ FOHDU DERXW DQG ZHUH DEOH WR FRPPXQLFDWH WR WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU WKH LQFLGHQW RI VXSHUn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n PHQW RI IXQFWLRQ ZDV H[WUDFWHG IURP TXHVWLRQ HLJKW RI )RUP DQG )RUP ,, ZKLFK UHDG+RZ GLG WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV DIIHFW \RXU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU" 8QGHUOLQH WKDW SDUW RI WKH LQFLGHQW WKDW DIIHFWHG \RXU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU )RU FODULW\ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ VWDWHPHQW ZDV DOVR ZULWWHQ LQ WKH ILUVW SHUVRQ RQ WKH WKUHHE\ILYH FDUG 7KH UHVSRQVHV WR TXHVWLRQV ILYH DQG HLJKW RQ )RUPV DQG ,, RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LQVWUXPHQWV FRQWDLQHG WKH GDWD WKDW ZRXOG EH XVHG

PAGE 109

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n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nV f GLVFXVVLRQ RI FDWHJRU\ IRUPXODWLRQ 7KH IRXU FDWHJRULHV RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG WKH IRXU FDWHJRULHV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DUH IRXQG LQ 7DEOH $QVZHUV WR WKH 5HVHDUFK 4XHVWLRQV 7KH (IIHFWLYH DQG ,QHIIHFWLYH %HKDYLRUV RI &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV 4XHVWLRQ DVNHG :KDW ZHUH WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\

PAGE 110

(IIHFWLYH ,QFLGHQW 7KH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV KDYLQJ SUREOHPV DWWHQGDQFH SODQQLQJ LQDFFXUDWH UHSRUWV HWF ,Q D FRQIHUHQFH ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG P\VHOI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FODULILHG WKH UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV VXSSRUWn LYH DQG SRVLWLYH DOWKRXJK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VKRZHG VRPH DQLPRVLW\ WRZDUG PH )XQFWLRQLQJ 0\ GXWLHV DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZHUH FODULILHG DQG P\ UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV NHSW DW D SURIHVVLRQDO OHYHO ZDV DEOH WR FRQWDFW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LI QHHGHG 0\ MRE ZDV PDGH HDVLHU ),*85( ())(&7,9( ,1&,'(17 ,1 683(59,6,21

PAGE 111

,QHIIHFWLYH ,QFLGHQW 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU PDGH RQH YLVLW GXULQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUn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

PAGE 112

VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV XVLQJ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH" 7DEOH LGHQWLILHV E\ FDWHJRU\ WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG LQGLFDWHV WKH QXPEHU RI EHKDYLRUV UHFRUGHG &DWHJRU\ LGHQWLILHG WKRVH LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZLWK D SHUVRQDO SUREOHP UHODWHG WR VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 7KH ILYH HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI EHKDYLRU LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH FRQFHUQHG ZLWK VLWXDWLRQV ZKHUH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV FRQWLQXDWLRQ LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP ZDV LQ MHRSDUG\ GXH WR WKH LQDELOLW\ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR FRSH ZLWK VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH ,Q WKHVH LQFLGHQWV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRXQVHOHG DQG FRQIHUUHG ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 2SHQ FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV YLHZHG DV D SRVLWLYH DVSHFW RI WKH FRXQVHOLQJ VLWXDn WLRQ DQG FULWLFLVP RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH ZDV VWDWHG DV EHLQJ RQH RI FRQVWUXFWLYH FULWLFLVP ,Q IRXU RI WKH ILYH LQFLGHQWV D VROXWLRQ WR HDFK SUREOHP ZDV FROOHFWLYHO\ DUULYHG DW DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRQWLQXHG LQ WKH SURJUDP ,Q WKHVH IRXU LQFLGHQWV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UDWKHU WKDQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV YLHZHG DV SURYLGLQJ WKH PRVW VXSSRUW DQG VXJJHVWLRQV IRU UHPHG\LQJ WKH VSHFLILF SUREOHP $Q H[WUHPH H[DPSOH RI DQ RXWFRPH RI D VLWXDWLRQ ZDV IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU WR IXUQLVK HQRXJK ILQDQFLDO DLG WR KHOS WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRPSOHWH WKH LQWHUQVKLS SURJUDP ,Q WKH ILIWK LQFLGHQW RI &DWHJRU\ WKH VLWXDWLRQ ZDV VR GLIILFXOW WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DVNHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR ZLWKGUDZ IURP WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP

PAGE 113

7$%/( )257<6,; 6(&21'$5< 6&+22/ &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56f 3(5&(37,216 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256n %(+$9,256 (IIHFWLYH %HKDYLRU 1XPEHU RI %HKDYLRUV 5HFRUGHG &DWHJRU\ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZLWK D SHUVRQDO SUREOHP UHODWHG WR VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ &DWHJRU\ ,, 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WR VHW LQVWUXFWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG SURn IHVVLRQDO JRDOV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &DWHJRU\ ,,, 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOG FRQIHUn HQFHV ZLWK RQH RWKHU PHPEHU RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU RU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUf DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH &DWHJRU\ ,9 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOG FRQIHUn HQFHV ZLWK ERWK PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUf DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 727$/

PAGE 114

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

PAGE 115

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n HQFHV ZHUH KHOG EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VL[ FRQIHUHQFHV ZHUH KHOG EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU

PAGE 116

7KUHH RI WKH FRQIHUHQFHV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZHUH KHOG WR GLVFXVV SUREOHPV WKDW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV KDYLQJ LQ WKH FODVVURRP ,Q HDFK RI WKHVH LQFLGHQWV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VKDUHG WKH FRQFHUQV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG ZDV VXSSRUWLYH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV VXJJHVWLRQV IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LPSURYHPHQW ,Q IRXU RWKHU LQFLGHQWV RI FRQIHUHQFHV KHOG EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DVNHG TXHVWLRQV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LQ RUGHU WR REWDLQ IHHGEDFN DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LQGLFDWHG DQ LQWHUHVW DQG D GHVLUH WR EH KHOSIXO WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KH ODVW LQFLGHQW LQ FRQIHUHQFHV KHOG EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHTXHVWHG WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU VSHDN DW WKH VHPLQDU KHOG IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV RQ WKH WRSLF RI JDLQLQJ LQVLJKWV RQ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 7KH VL[ FRQIHUHQFHV RI &DWHJRU\ ,,, KHOG EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV LQFLGHQWV ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU SURYLGHG ERWK SRVLWLYH DQG QHJDWLYH IHHGEDFN DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI D OHVVRQ WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KDG REVHUYHG 7KUHH RI WKH FRQIHUHQFHV ZHUH KHOG WR SURYLGH FRQVWUXFWLYH FULWLFLVP DERXW ZHDNQHVVHV REVHUYHG LQ WKH OHVVRQ WDXJKW E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7ZR RI WKH FRQIHUHQFHV IRFXVHG RQ WKH VWUHQJWKV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV OHVVRQV DQG RQH LQFLGHQW RI D FRQIHUHQFH LQYROYHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FULWLTXLQJ ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU D YLGHR WDSLQJ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV OHVVRQ &DWHJRU\ ,9 LGHQWLILHG WKRVH LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU PHW LQ FRQIHUHQFHV ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KLUWHHQ LQFLGHQWV RI FRQIHUHQFHV DPRQJ

PAGE 117

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nV FRQFHUQ IRU FKDQJH LQ SHUIRUPDQFH RU DWWLWXGH RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q RQH LQFLGHQW WKH FRQIHUHQFH ZDV KHOG EHFDXVH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU UHTXHVWHG KHOS DERXW DQ DVSHFW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU JDYH VSHFLILF VXJJHVWLRQV WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU IRU LPSURYHPHQW 7KH ODVW WKUHH LQFLGHQWV LQYROYHG FRQIHUHQFHV KHOG WR ZRUN RXW VRPH DGPLQLVWUDWLYH SURFHGXUH LQYROYLQJ WKH PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG 2QH LQFLGHQW FHQWHUHG RQ WKH QHHG WR GHFLGH ZKHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZRXOG FRPSOHWH WKH LQWHUQVKLS $ VHFRQG LQFLGHQW IRFXVHG RQ D GHFLVLRQ WKDW FRQFHUQHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WDNLQJ RYHU D GLIILFXOW FODVV WKDW KDG D KLVWRU\ RI GLVFLSOLQH SUREOHPV DQG WKH WKLUG LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FRQIHUHQFH ZDV XVHG DV D PHDQV RI LQWURGXFLQJ VHYHUDO VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q HDFK RI WKH WKUHH LQFLGHQWV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH VXSSRUWLYH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG WKH NLQGV RI H[SHULHQFHV WKH\ ZRXOG HQFRXQWHU $W WKH VDPH WLPH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHFRJQL]HG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV UROH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ

PAGE 118

,Q WKH LGHQWLILFDWLRQ RI WKH IRUW\RQH HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU WKH UHVSRQVHV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH FRRSHUDn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bf LQFLGHQWV WKDW RFFXUUHG LQ WKH FODVVURRP )LYH LQFLGHQWV bf ZHUH UHFRUGHG WKDW RFFXUUHG LQ WKH WHDFKHUnV SODQQLQJ DUHD RU GHSDUWPHQWDO RIILFH IRXU LQFLGHQWV bf RFFXUUHG LQ WKH WHDFKHUnV ORXQJH RQH LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG HDFK LQ WKH KDOO RU RQ WKH WHOHSKRQH (LJKW bf LQFLGHQWV ZHUH QRW FOHDUO\ LGHQWLILHG DV WR WKH ORFDWLRQ )RU D PDMRULW\ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKH FODVVURRP

PAGE 119

UHPDLQHG WKH IRFXV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUVn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nV LQWHUQVKLS &DWHJRU\ 9, LGHQWLILHG WKRVH LQFLGHQWV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU H[KLELWHG SRRU SURIHVVLRQDO MXGJPHQW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ 6HYHQ FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU LQ WKLV FDWHJRU\ ZHUH UHFRUGHG ,Q RQH LQFLGHQW

PAGE 120

WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV QRW LQWHUHVWHG LQ VXSHUYLVLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG LQ DQRWKHU LQFLGHQW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU IHOO DVOHHS ZKLOH REVHUYLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 2QH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV QRW DFDGHPLFDOO\ RU SURIHVVLRQDOO\ TXDOLILHG WR VXSHUYLVH DQG HYDOXDWH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 2QH LQFLGHQW LQYROYHG IHHGEDFN WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKDW D VHPLQDU VHVVLRQ KDG EHHQ XVHG WR GLVFXVV DQG FULWLFL]H WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV KDQGOLQJ RI D SXSLO ZLWKRXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU NQRZLQJ DERXW WKH EDFNJURXQG WR WKH FRQIURQWDWLRQ 7KH ILQDO WKUHH LQFLGHQWV LQ &DWHJRU\ 9, LQYROYHG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV LQVLVWHQFH WKDW KLV SUHVHQFH DQGRU GHPDQGV IRU FHUWDLQ DFWLYLWLHV WR WDNH SODFH VKRXOG VXSHUFHGH FODVVURRP LQVWUXFWLRQ WKDW ZDV RQ JRLQJ DW WKH WLPH &DWHJRU\ 9,, LGHQWLILHG WKRVH LQFLGHQWV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG LQDSSURn SULDWH EHKDYLRU RU SUDFWLFHV RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH VHYHQ LQFLGHQWV UHSRUWHG LQ WKLV FDWHJRU\ LOOXVWUDWHG VHYHQ GLIIHUHQW VLWXDWLRQV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRUV ZHUH SHUFHLYHG DV KLQGUDQFHV WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 2QH LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG EHFDXVH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZKR WROG OHZG DUP\ VWRULHV WR WKH SXSLOV GHVSLWH UHTXHVWV IURP WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG VFKRRO SULQFLSDO WR FHDVH VXFK FRQGXFW ,Q WKLV VLWXDWLRQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZRXOG QRW WDON WR WKH VWXGHQW DERXW KLV FRQGXFW $ VHFRQG LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU XVHG FROOHJH OHFWXUH QRWHV WR WHDFK D FODVV GHVSLWH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV RSLQLRQ WKDW WKH PDWHULDO ZDV WRR DGYDQFHG IRU WKH SXSLOV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU

PAGE 121

VXSSRUWHG WKH XVH RI WKH QRWHV EHFDXVH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU IHOW FRPIRUWDEOH XVLQJ WKLV PHWKRG RI LQVWUXFWLRQ $ WKLUG LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV XVH RI FRUSRUDO SXQLVKPHQW DJDLQVW WKH REMHFWLRQV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q WKLV LQFLGHQW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZDV VHQW WR DQRWKHU VFKRRO WR FRQWLQXH WKH LQWHUQVKLS $ IRXUWK LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHIXVHG WR EHOLHYH WKDW D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZKR ZDV SK\VLFDOO\ KDQGLFDSSHG DQG DFDGHPLFDOO\ LOOSUHSDUHG ZDV EHLQJ WDNHQ DGYDQWDJH RI E\ WKH SXSLOV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHOLHYHG WKH VLWXDWLRQ ZRXOG LPSURYH LQ WLPH GHVSLWH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV EHOLHI WKDW WKH FODVVHV KDG EHFRPH XQPDQDJHDEOH IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU $ ILIWK LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHIXVHG WR FRQIURQW D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZKR KDG VWRSSHG ZRUNLQJ DQG KDG EHFRPH GLVLQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH SXSLOV WZR ZHHNV EHIRUH WKH HQG RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU E\ VWDWLQJ WKDW WKH WZR ZHHNV OHIW LQ WKH LQWHUQVKLS GLG QRW PDWWHU $ VL[WK LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV GHVLUH QRW WR WHDFK IURP WKH FRXQW\ FXUULFXOXP JXLGH DV UHTXLUHG 7KH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VWDWHG WKDW WKH PDWHULDOV ZHUH LUUHOHYDQW WR SXSLO OHDUQLQJ DQG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DJUHHG 7KH VHYHQWK DQG ODVW LQFLGHQW LQ &DWHJRU\ 9,, RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU JDYH D VDWLVIDFWRU\ JUDGH WR D VWXGHQW ZKR KDG QRW PHW WKH UHTXLUHPHQWV IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ KDG ODFNHG FRPPLWPHQW DQG LQWHUHVW LQ WKH SURJUDP DQG KDG UHJXODUO\ PLVVHG GD\V GXULQJ WKH

PAGE 122

LQWHUQVKLS 7KLV JUDGH ZDV JLYHQ GHVSLWH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV UHTXHVW WKDW WKH VWXGHQW QRW SDVV WKH LQWHUQVKLS (DFK LQFLGHQW GHVFULEHG DERYH IRFXVHG RQ D GLIIHUHQW LQFLGHQW RI LQDSSURSULDWH VXSHUYLVRU\ EHKDYLRU DV SHUFHLYHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q HDFK LQFLGHQW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU XVHG D FRQFLOLDWRU\ DSSURDFK WRZDUG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU ZDV YLHZHG E\ HDFK FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR EH RQH RI PDLQWDLQLQJ DQ H[LVWLQJ XQVDWLVIDFWRU\ VLWXDWLRQ UDWKHU WKDQ ZRUNLQJ ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WRZDUG SRVLWLYH SURIHVVLRQDO FKDQJH &DWHJRU\ 9,,, LGHQWLILHG LQFLGHQWV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU WKDW ZHUH YLHZHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV LQFLGHQWV RI UXGHQHVV RU KRVWLOLW\ WRZDUG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU RWKHU QHJDWLYH EHKDYLRU WKDW ZDV GLUHFWHG WRZDUG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU 6L[ LQFLGHQWV ZHUH UHFRUGHG LQ WKLV FDWHJRU\ )RXU RI WKH LQFLGHQWV RFFXUUHG ZKHQ FRQIHUHQFHV ZHUH KHOG WR FULWLTXH WKH REVHUYHG OHVVRQ WDXJKW E\ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q HDFK RI WKHVH LQFLGHQWV WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV VHHQ E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV EHLQJ XQUHDVRQDEO\ FULWLFDO RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU GHVSLWH WKH RSLQLRQ E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKDW HDFK OHVVRQ KDG EHHQ VXFFHVVIXO 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV UHSRUWHG DV EHLQJ UXGH RU EUXVTXH 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV YLHZHG DV GLVSOD\LQJ D QHJDWLYH DWWLWXGH WRZDUG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQGRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG LQ HDFK LQFLGHQW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZRXOG QRW GLVFXVV WKH SRVLWLYH FRQWULEXWLRQV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH ILIWK LQFLGHQW LQ WKLV FDWHJRU\ RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FULWLFL]HG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU LQ IURQW RI WKH SXSLOV ZKLOH

PAGE 123

,OO REVHUYLQJ WKH OHVVRQ EHLQJ WDXJKW ,Q WKLV LQFLGHQW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU WROG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR VHHN RWKHU HPSOR\PHQW 7KH VL[WK LQFLGHQW RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQWLFLSDWLQJ D YLVLW IURP WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KDG FDUHIXOO\ SODQQHG WKH OHVVRQ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV FULWLFDO RI WKH OHVVRQ SODQ EXW UHIXVHG WR PHHW ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DIWHU WKH FODVV REVHUYDWLRQ )RXUWHHQ RI WKH WKLUW\IRXU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV EHKDYLRU ZHUH UHSRUWHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR EH LQFLGHQWV LQYROYLQJ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR GLG QRW YLVLW RU PDGH RQH YLVLW WR WKH VFKRRO 6HYHUDO MXGJPHQWDO VWDWHPHQWV DFFRPSDQLHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW UHSRUW 7KH VWDWHPHQWV PDGH E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQGLFDWHG WKDW WKH\ VDZ WKH ODFN RI YLVLWV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV HYLGHQFH WKDW WKH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV QRW LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH UROH RI VXSHUYLVLQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG ZDV QRW PHHWLQJ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV RI D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ,W ZDV QRWHG SUHYLRXVO\ LQ WKLV UHSRUW WKDW IRXUWHHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV LQ WKH VWXG\ KDG UHWXUQHG WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LQVWUXPHQWV ZLWK QRWHV RU OHWWHUV VWDWLQJ WKDW WKH\ FRXOG QRW SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH VWXG\ EHFDXVH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DVVLJQHG WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU KDG QRW FRPH WR WKH VFKRRO WR VXSHUYLVH WKH VWXGHQW 7KH UHSRUWV RI WKH IRXUWHHQ SDUWLFLSDQWV FRXSOHG ZLWK WKH IRXUWHHQ VXEMHFWV ZKR ZURWH LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV DERXW WKH ODFN RI YLVLWDWLRQV LQGLFDWHG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV YLHZ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV DEVHQFH IURP WKH VFKRRO DV D PDMRU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU 5HDVRQV IRU WKH IUHTXHQF\ RI DEVHQFHV ZHUH QRW LQFOXGHG LQ WKLV VWXG\ ,W ZDV VXJJHVWHG KRZHYHU WKDW FOHDU OLQHV RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ QHHGHG WR EH HVWDEOLVKHG EHWZHHQ WKH XQLYHUVLW\ DQG WKH

PAGE 124

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n DEOH GHPDQGV RQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV WLPH RU IDOOLQJ DVOHHS GXULQJ DQ REVHUYDWLRQ SHULRG &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DOVR VWDWHG WKDW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR VXSSRUWHG LQDSSURSULDWH EHKDYLRUV RU SUDFWLFHV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH YLHZHG DV ODFNLQJ LQ SURIHVVLRQDO MXGJPHQW QHHGHG WR VXSHUYLVH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV $ QXPEHU RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV TXHVn WLRQHG KRZ D SHUVRQ UHVSRQVLEOH IRU WKH HGXFDWLRQDO DQG SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRXOG EH DVVLJQHG WR VXFK D WDVN 7KH ORVV RI UHVSHFW IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV DQ RIWHQ FLWHG FRQn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

PAGE 125

7KH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU (IIHFWV RQ WKH )XQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU 4XHVWLRQ ,, DVNHG +RZ GLG WKH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DV EHLQJ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH DIIHFW WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ" 7DEOH VKRZV WKH VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV VHOI SHUFHLYHG IXQFWLRQLQJ DV LW ZDV DIIHFWHG E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU ZDV FDWHJRUL]HG E\ HIIHFn WLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI EHKDYLRU 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV IXQFWLRQLQJ ZDV LGHQWLILHG ZLWKLQ WKH DUHDV RI FRJQLWLYH DIIHFWLYH DQG EHKDYLRU IXQFWLRQV 7KH UHVXOWV LQGLFDWH WKDW f &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV HOLFLWHG FRJQLWLYH FKDQJHV LQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn LQVLJKWV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ PRUH WKDQ WZLFH DV RIWHQ DV GLG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV f &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV HOLFLWHG RQO\ SHUFHQW DV PDQ\ EHKDYLRUDO FKDQJHV LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV GLG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUVn LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV f /LWWOH RU QR GLIIHUHQFH ZDV REVHUYHG LQ WKH DIIHFWLYH UHVSRQVHV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn LQVLJKWV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUn YLVLRQ UHODWLYH WR HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV f &ROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV FUHDWHG WKRXJKW FRJQLWLYHf FKDQJHV LQ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn LQVLJKWV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ PRUH RIWHQ ZKLOH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQHIIHFWLYH EHn KDYLRUV UHVXOWHG LQ PRUH DFWLRQ EHKDYLRUf FKDQJHV E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ,W VKRXOG DOVR EH QRWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU LQ VRPH LQVWDQFHV UHVXOWHG LQ PXOWLSOH RXWFRPHV RI FKDQJH IRU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ

PAGE 126

7$%/( ())(&7 21 7+( 6(&21'$5< 6&+22/ &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(5n6 )81&7,21,1* 2) 7+( &2//(*( 683(59,625n6 %(+$9,256 &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUnV %HKDYLRU &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUnV )XQFWLRQLQJ ,QHIIHFWLYH (IIHFWLYH ,QFLGHQWV ,QFLGHQWV &RJQLWLYH $IIHFWLYH %HKDYLRU

PAGE 127

WHDFKHU XVXDOO\ LQ DQ DIIHFWLYH WR FRJQLWLYH FKDQJH VHTXHQFH 7KXV WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU ZHUH RIWHQ JUHDWHU WKDQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU QRWHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DIIHFWHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn IXQFWLRQLQJ LQ WKH DUHDV RI FRJQLWLYH DIIHFWLYH DQG EHKDYLRU IXQFWLRQV WKDW FKDQJHG KRZ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WKRXJKW IHOW RU DFWHG GXULQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ DV D UHVXOW RI VRPH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU &RJQLWLYH FKDQJHV LQ WKH IXQFn WLRQLQJ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn VWDWHPHQWV RI WKRXJKWV FRQFHUQV FODULILFDWLRQ LQVLJKWV OHDUQLQJ RU XQGHUVWDQGLQJV WKDW ZHUH D UHVXOW RI VRPHWKLQJ D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VDLG RU GLG GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ $IIHFWLYH FKDQJHV LQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn VWDWHPHQWV RI IHHOLQJV GLVOLNH WUXVW DQJHU UHVSHFW KHOSn OHVVQHVV FUHGLELOLW\ IDLWK RU EHORQJLQJ WKDW ZHUH D UHVXOW RI VRPHWKLQJ D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VDLG RU GLG GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ %HKDYLRU FKDQJHV LQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn VWDWHPHQWV RI DFWLRQV LQSXW UHODWLRQn VKLS SDUWQHUVKLS UHVSRQVLELOLW\ UROH RU FRQIOLFW WKDW ZHUH D UHVXOW RI VRPHWKLQJ D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VDLG RU GLG GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH FRJQLWLYH DIIHFWLYH DQG EHKDYLRU FKDQJHV LQ WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU E\ DQDO\]LQJ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV DQVZHU WR 4XHVWLRQ (LJKW RQ )RUPV DQG ,, DERXW KRZ DQ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQW RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU DIIHFWHG WKHLU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU

PAGE 128

7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH VWXG\ ZHUH YHU\ DZDUH RI KRZ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV EHKDYLRUV DIIHFWHG WKHLU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH LQFLGHQWV RI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQIOXHQFHG KRZ WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU EHKDYHG IHOW RU WKRXJKW DV D UHVXOW RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV DFWLYLWLHV ,Q &DWHJRU\ RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW ZKHQ VROXWLRQV WR VWXGHQW WHDFKHU SUREOHPV ZHUH FROOHFWLYHO\ DUULYHG DW WKH\ KDG JRRG IHHOLQJV DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP DQG JDLQHG FRQILGHQFH LQ WKHLU MXGJPHQWV DV D PHPEHU RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WHDP $OWKRXJK PDQ\ RI WKH VWDWHn PHQWV PDGH E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH DIIHFWLQJ VWDWHPHQWV FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV DOVR UHSRUWHG WKH YDOXH RI VKDUHG WKRXJKWV EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV VLWXDWLRQ 7KH VKDULQJ RI WKRXJKWV ZDV VHHQ E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV DQ LQGLFDWLRQ WKDW D VXSHUYLVRU\ SDUWQHUVKLS H[LVWHG ,Q FDWHJRU\ ,, RI HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WR VHW LQVWUXFWLRQDO H[SHFWDWLRQV DQG SURIHVVLRQDO JRDOV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU E\ FODULI\LQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV WKH\ IHOW SDUW RI WKH VXSHUn YLVLQJ WHDP EHFDXVH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DFFHSWHG VKDUHG UHVSRQVLELOLW\ IRU WKH OHDUQLQJ RXWFRPHV &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKLV VKDUHG UHVSRQVLELOLW\ DV D PHDQV IRU D PRUH REMHFWLYH DSSUDLVDO RI WKH FODVVURRP VLWXDWLRQ E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DOVR UHSRUWHG WKDW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR UHLQIRUFHG WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV FRQFHUQV DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH LQWHUQVKLS FRQn WULEXWHG WR WKH EHOLHI WKDW D VXSHUYLVRU\ SDUWQHUVKLS H[LVWHG 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GHYHORSHG PRUH FRQILGHQFH LQ WKHLU UROH RI

PAGE 129

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nV SRVLWLRQ ZDV UHLQIRUFHG EHFDXVH D VHFRQG RSLQLRQ KHOSHG LQ HYDOXDWLQJ WKH VLWXDWLRQ ZKLOH SURYLGLQJ FRQVLVWHQW IHHGEDFN WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ,Q

PAGE 130

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fV JURZWK DQG JDLQHG JUHDWHU LQVLJKW LQWR QHZ ZD\V RI WHDFKLQJ &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ IHOW JRRG DERXW WKHLU FRQWULEXWLRQV PDGH WR WKH FRQIHUHQFH DQG VDZ WKDW WKHVH FRQWULEXWLRQV UHLQIRUFHG WKHLU UROH DV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q LQFLGHQWV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RIIHUHG KHOS DQG VXSSRUW WR D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZKR ZDV KDYLQJ GLIILFXOWLHV ZLWK VRPH DVSHFW RI WHDFKLQJ DQG UHLQIRUFHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV FRQFHUQV DERXW SUREOHPV DQG D QHHG IRU FKDQJH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ IHOW OHVV LQKLELWHG DERXW WDONLQJ WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DERXW WKH SUREOHPV HQFRXQWHUHG GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ :RUNLQJ WRJHWKHU UHVXOWHG LQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU JDLQLQJ PRUH UHVSHFW IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV UROH LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ &RQILGHQFH LQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG WKH ZLOOLQJQHVV WR VXSHUYLVH PRUH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH RWKHU SRVLWLYH RXWFRPHV IRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV $ ILQDO VWDWHPHQW E\ RQH

PAGE 131

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
PAGE 132

VXSHUYLVRU GLG QRW DSSHDU LQWHUHVWHG LQ VXSHUYLVLQJ D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKH\ ORVW UHVSHFW IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ,Q VXFK LQVWDQFHV FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV NQHZ WKDW WKH\ ZRXOG QRW UHFHLYH JXLGDQFH RU KHOS IURP WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ,Q WKH RQH LQFLGHQW ZKHUH WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV QRW SURIHVVLRQDOO\ RU DFDGHPLFDOO\ TXDOLILHG WR VXSHUYLVH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG WKDW WKHUH ZDV FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKH WZR VXSHUn YLVRUV RYHU PHWKRGRORJ\ DQG LQ SDUWLFXODU WKH HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG IUXVWUDWLRQ ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR LQVLVWHG WKDW FHUWDLQ DFWLYLWLHV VKRXOG WDNH SODFH ZKLFK ZRXOG VXSHUVHGH FODVVURRP LQVWUXFWLRQ SODQQHG IRU WKDW RFFDVLRQ 2QH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG WKDW KH ZDV KHVLWDQW WR RYHUULGH D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV GHFLVLRQ SHUWDLQLQJ WR WKH FODVVURRP VLWXDWLRQ &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GLG QRW DOZD\V KDYH WKH RSSRUWXQLW\ WR GLVFXVV WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SURJUDP ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHIRUH GHFLVLRQV ZHUH PDGH E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH ODFN RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZDV YLHZHG WR EH D PDMRU KLQGUDQFH WR WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ,Q WKH RQH LQFLGHQW ZKHUH D FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU XVHG D VHPLQDU VHVVLRQ WR DOORZ D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR FULWLFL]H D FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV KDQGOLQJ RI D SXSLO WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KDG QRW DFFRUGLQJ WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU REWDLQHG WKH NQRZOHGJH RI WKH EDFNJURXQG WR WKH FRQIURQWDWLRQ 7KH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHSRUWHG D ORVV RI UHVSHFW IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZKR ODFNHG LQ SURIHVVLRQDO MXGJPHQW E\ DOORZLQJ VXFK FULWLFLVP WR WDNH SODFH

PAGE 133

7KH LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV OLVWHG LQ &DWHJRU\ 9,, ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ VHYHQ LQFLGHQWV LQ ZKLFK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG LQDSSURSULDWH EHKDYLRU RU SUDFWLFHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU (DFK LQFLGHQW DIIHFWHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUn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n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

PAGE 134

)RXU RI WKH LQFLGHQWV GHDOW ZLWK VLWXDWLRQV ZKHUH WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU ZDV YLHZHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DV EHLQJ XQUHDVRQDEO\ FULWLFDO RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUn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n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

PAGE 135

7$%/( $&7,9,7,(6 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256 7+$7 6833257(' 7+( (;35(66(' 1(('6 2) &223(5$7,1* 7($&+(56 5$1.(' %< )5(48(1&< 2) 67$7(0(176 )520 0267 72 /($67 $FWLYLW\ )UHTXHQF\ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRXQVHOHG FRQIHUUHG KHOSHG RU JDYH FRQVWUXFWLYH FULWLFLVP WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRQIHUUHG ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU VXSSRUWHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV GHFLVLRQV DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SUREOHPV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHVSHFWHG WKH MXGJPHQW RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU GXULQJ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU SDUWLFLSDWHG LQ WKH HYDOXDWLRQ SURFHVV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU UHLQIRUFHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV HYDOXDWLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SHUIRUPDQFH WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VHW JRDOV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DQG JRW LQSXW IURP WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU RQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU GLG QRW JLYH GHVWUXFWLYH FULWLFLVP RU IHHGEDFN WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU XQOHVV WKHUH ZHUH JURXQGV IRU GRLQJ VR

PAGE 136

WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RI WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV UHSRUWHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV RQ IRUPV DQG ,, RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW TXHVWLRQQDLUH 4XHVWLRQ VHYHQ RQ WKH TXHVWLRQn QDLUH ZDV SDUWLFXODUO\ LPSRUWDQW LQ LGHQWLI\LQJ WKH QHHGV RI WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KLV TXHVWLRQ DVNHG :KDW ZHUH WKH FRQVHTXHQFHV RU RXWFRPHV IRU \RX DV D UHVXOW RI WKLV LQFLGHQW" 7KLV TXHVWLRQ KHOSHG WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU WR SODFH D SDUWLFXODU QHHG RU LPSRUWDQFH WR DQ HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQW RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU 7KH VWDWHPHQWV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHFRUGHG LQ TXHVWLRQ QLQH ZHUH DOVR UHDG E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU LQ REWDLQLQJ DFWLYLWLHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WKDW VXSSRUWHG WKH H[SUHVVHG QHHGV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 4XHVWLRQ QLQH DVNHG :KDW ZDV \RXU UHDFWLRQ WR WKH LQFLGHQW" 7KH WZR TXHVWLRQV VHYHQ DQG QLQH RQ )RUPV DQG ,, SURYLGHG VXIILFLHQW IHHGn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

PAGE 137

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n DWLQJ WHDFKHU WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV UHDFWLRQ WR WKH LQFLGHQW DQG WKH IHHOLQJV RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WRZDUG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LQ UHODWLRQ WR WKH LQFLGHQW 1RW HYHU\ LQFLGHQW UHSRUWHG E\ WKH FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZDV LGHQWLILHG DV LQIOXHQFLQJ WKH OHDUQLQJ RXWFRPHV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ,Q D QXPEHU RI LQFLGHQWV PXOWLSOH OHDUQLQJ RXWn FRPHV IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH UHFRUGHG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ,Q PDQ\ LQVWDQFHV WKH QHHGV VWDWHPHQWV RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH MXGJHG E\ WKHLU SHUFHLYHG UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG KRZ WKH UHODWLRQVKLS LQIOXHQFHG WKH VXFFHVV RU ODFN RI VXFFHVV RI OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV SURYLGHG WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU :KHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV VDZ WKDW WKH UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU PHW WKHLU QHHGV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ WKH VWDWHPHQWV ZRXOG UHODWH WKH QHHGV WR WKH SURYLVLRQ RI OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU )RU H[DPSOH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW DQ LPSRUWDQW QHHG IRU VXSSRUW ZDV PHW ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRXQVHOHG FRQIHUUHG KHOSHG RU JDYH FRQVWUXFWLYH FULWLFLVP WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW D VXFFHVVIXO VWXGHQW WHDFKHU OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFH RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU JDYH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU IHHGEDFN DERXW

PAGE 138

7$%/( $&7,9,7,(6 2) &2//(*( 683(59,6256 7+$7 ,1)/8(1&(' 7+( 5(/$7,216+,3 21 7+( 352'8&7,21 2) 678'(17 7($&+(5 68&&(66)8/ 25 8168&&(66)8/ /($51,1* (;3(5,(1&(6 5$1.(' %< )5(48(1&< 2) 67$7(0(176 )520 0267 72 /($67 &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUVr 6WDWHPHQWV RI 6XFFHVVIXO ,QIOXHQFH RQ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU /HDUQLQJ ([SHULHQFHV )UHTXHQF\ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU FRQIHUUHG ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DERXW WKH VDPH FRQFHUQV KHOG E\ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU JDYH LQVLJKW WR WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DERXW WKH LPSRUWDQFH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU JDYH WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU DSSURSULDWH IHHGEDFN DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV LQWHUHVWHG LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV SUREOHPV DERXW VRPH DVSHFW RI WHDFKLQJ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG PHHW WKH QHHGV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU FRUUHFW WHDFKLQJ ZHDNQHVVHV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR DGMXVW WR GLIILFXOW FODVVHV 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU JURZ SURIHVVLRQDOO\ 7KH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU KHOSHG WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR SODQ OHVVRQV

PAGE 139

7$%/( FRQWLQXHG &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUVf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

PAGE 140

VRPH DVSHFW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DOVR UHSRUWHG WKDW DQ LPSRUWDQW QHHG ZDV PHW ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU VXSSRUWHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUnV GHFLVLRQV DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU UHVSHFWHG WKH MXGJPHQW RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU &RRSHUn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n UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH :KHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZRUNHG WRJHWKHU KRZHYHU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW

PAGE 141

VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DSSHDUHG PRUH UHOD[HG DQG FRQILGHQW DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH 7KH 5ROH RI &RQIOLFW 'XULQJ 7LPHV RI ,QWHUSHUVRQDO ,QWHUDFWLRQ %HWZHHQ WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU DQG WKH &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU 4XHVWLRQ 9 DVNHG ,Q ZKDW ZD\V GLG FRQIOLFW RFFXU GXULQJ WLPHV RI LQWHUn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

PAGE 142

DFWLRQ RQ WKH SDUW RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ,Q VHYHUDO VXFK FDVHV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU UHVROYHG WKH FRQIOLFW E\ UHIXVLQJ WR WDNH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV LQ WKH IXWXUH $ QXPEHU RI FRQIOLFWV RYHU WKH JRDOV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ ZHUH FRPPXQLFDWHG WKURXJK WKH UHFRUGLQJ RI LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI VXSHUn YLVLRQ E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV 7KH DLP RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV WR KHOS WKH SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RQIOLFW RYHU JRDOV IRU VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ RFFXUUHG ZKHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU SHUFHLYHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV EHKDYLRU KLQGHUHG WKLV SURIHVn VLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW 6XFK JRDO FRQIOLFWV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV FRQIOLFW RYHU WKH PHWKRGV DQG FULWHULD WR EH XVHG WR HYDOXDWH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRQIOLFW RYHU WKH DPRXQW RI JXLGDQFH RU KHOS WR VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV H[SHFWHG RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRQIOLFW DERXW H[FHVVLYH FULWLFLVP EXW OLWWOH SUDLVH DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUn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

PAGE 143

VFKRRO WR YLVLW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU RU FDPH VR LQIUHTXHQWO\ WKDW WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU MXGJHG WKH YLVLWV DV EHLQJ LQHIIHFWLYH IRU WKH SXUSRVHV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH QRQIXOILOOPHQW RI WKLV UROH IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FUHDWHG FRQIOLFWV IRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DERXW VWXGHQW WHDFKHU HYDOXDWLRQ SURFHGXUHV FRQIOLFWV DERXW UHWDLQLQJ FUHGLELOLW\ IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRQIOLFWV RYHU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV ODFN RI VXSHUYLVLRQ IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RQVHTXHQWO\ WKH UROH RI EHLQJ DQ DEVHQWHH VXSHUYLVRU FOHDUO\ DIIHFWHG WKH JRDOV IRU VXSHUYLVLRQ WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV KDG LGHQWLILHG DV EHLQJ LPSRUWDQW JRDOV 7KH ODVW WKUHH FDWHJRULHV RI LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH FDWHRJULHV RI LQDSSURSULDWH UROH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV GXULQJ SHULRGV RI VXSHUYLVLRQ 5ROH FRQIOLFWV WKDW RFFXUUHG RQ WKH MRE ZHUH LGHQWLILHG DV DFWV RI SRRU SURIHVVLRQDO MXGJPHQW WKH VXSSRUW RI LQDSSURSULDWH EHKDYLRU RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV DQG KRVWLOLW\ WRZDUG VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV $V D UHVXOW RI WKHVH SHUFHLYHG LQDSSURSULDWH UROH EHKDYLRUV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV FRQIOLFWV DURVH RYHU WKH NLQGV RI PHWKRGV RI LQVWUXFWLRQ WKDW VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV VKRXOG HQJDJH LQ RYHU WUXVW DQG UHVSHFW IRU WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG RYHU WKH DPRXQW RI SHUFHLYHG VXSSRUW E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP 7KH 5ROH RI ,QWHUSHUVRQDO &RQIOLFW LQ WKH -XGJPHQW RI %HKDYLRUV RI &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV DQG WKH )XQFWLRQLQJ RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU 6XSHUYLVRU\ 5HODWLRQVKLS 4XHVWLRQ 9, DVNHG ,I WKH SHUFHLYHG HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZHUH D IXQFWLRQ RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUFRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS ZKDW SDUW LI DQ\ GLG LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW SOD\ LQ WKRVH MXGJPHQWV"

PAGE 144

$V UHSRUWHG LQ WKH GLVFXVVLRQ RQ KRZ WKH DFWLYLWLHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DIIHFW WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ RI FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKH FRRSHUn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n YLVRUV 7KXV RQH DVVXPSWLRQ PDGH E\ WKH LQYHVWLJDWRU ZDV WKDW QHJDWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZRXOG JLYH ULVH WR LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFWV EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV -XGJPHQWV PDGH DERXW LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW DUH DOVR LQIHUUHG IURP 7DEOH 7KHVH LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFWV EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PRUH RIWHQ UHVXOWHG LQ MXGJPHQWV PDGH E\ VWDWLQJ IHHOLQJV DIIHFWLYHf DQG VWDWLQJ DFWLRQV EHKDYLRUf WKDQ LQ FRJQLWLYH MXGJPHQWV PDGH E\ UHDFWLQJ WR D FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQ 2QH UHVXOW RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW ZDV WKDW D MXGJPHQW ZDV PDGH WR UHVROYH WKH FRQIOLFW E\ WDNLQJ VRPH IRUP RI DFWLRQ WR HQG WKH FRQIOLFW RU WR PDQDJH WKH FRQIOLFW E\ GHFUHDVLQJ WKH LQWHQVLW\ RI WKH FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUVn MXGJPHQWV RI LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW UHVXOWHG LQ WKHLU UHVROYLQJ WKH FRQIOLFW LQ RQH RI WKUHH ZD\V %\ UHIXVLQJ WR SDUWLFLSDWH LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP ZLWK WKH VSRQVRULQJ XQLYHUVLW\ E\ UHTXHVWLQJ WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZKR ZDV LQ FRQIOLFW ZLWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU QRW YLVLW WKH FODVVURRP DJDLQ RU E\

PAGE 145

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n OHPV DV EHVW DV SRVVLEOH ZLWK RU ZLWKRXW WKH KHOS RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH WKLUG ZD\ WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PDQDJHG FRQIOLFW ZDV E\ GHFLGLQJ WKDW WKH\ DORQH ZRXOG PDNH GHFLVLRQV DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU ZLWKRXW FRQVXOWLQJ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU )RXUWK WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU ZRXOG DOORZ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUnV GHFLVLRQ DERXW WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU WR WDNH SUHFHGHQFH DQG D ILIWK DQG ILQDO ZD\ LQ ZKLFK FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PDQDJHG FRQIOLFW ZDV E\ GHFLGLQJ WKDW WKH\ ZRXOG QRW GLVFXVV DQ\ SKDVH RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUnV H[SHULHQFH ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU GXULQJ WKH ODWWHUnV YLVLWV 6XPPDU\ ,W DSSHDUV IURP WKH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ WKDW WKRVH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZKR SDUWLFLSDWHG E\ UHFRUGLQJ HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU EHKDYLRU WRRN WKH UROH RI VXSHUYLVLRQ VHULRXVO\

PAGE 146

DQG UHFRJQL]HG WKH VXSSRUW V\VWHP DQG VHQVH RI SDUWQHUVKLS WKDW FRXOG GHYHORS EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH PRVW FULWLFDO RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR GLG QRW IXOILOO WKHLU GXWLHV RI VXSHUYLVLQJ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH PRUH OLNHO\ WR EH FULWLFDO RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV EHKDYLRUV ZKHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZDV QRW D IUHTXHQW YLVLWRU WR WKH VFKRRO WKDQ FULWLFDO RI EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR PDGH UHJXODU YLVLWV 7KXV FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR ZRUNHG UHJXODUO\ ZLWK WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU KHOSHG WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR GHYHORS D PRUH SRVLWLYH YLHZ RI WKH WRWDO VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ H[SHULHQFH &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV GLG QRW LQGLFDWH ZKHWKHU D G\DGLF RU WULDGLF FRQIHUHQFH FRQWULEXWHG PRUH WR WKHLU UROH DV D VXSHUYLVRU DQG WR WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUVn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

PAGE 147

&+$37(5 9 6800$5< $1' ,03/,&$7,216 7KH SXUSRVH RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV WR LGHQWLI\ WKURXJK WKH XVH RI WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH DFWLYLWLHV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV SHUn FHLYHG DV HIIHFWLYH RU LQHIIHFWLYH E\ VHOHFWHG VHFRQGDU\ VFKRRO FRRSHUn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n VKLS EHWZHHQ WZR PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG WKH FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU WR VHH LI HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DIIHFWHG WKH IXQFWLRQLQJ DQG WKH QHHGV RI FRRSHU DWLQJ WHDFKHUV GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 7KH OLWHUDWXUH RQ FRQIOLFW FRPPXQLFDWLRQ ZDV DOVR UHYLHZHG IRU DSSOLFDWLRQ WR WKH ILQGLQJV RQ WKH LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV IRU VRPH H[SODQDWLRQV RI KRZ FRQIOLFW RFFXUUHG GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG KRZ LQWHUSHUVRQDO FRQIOLFW DIIHFWHG WKH MXGJPHQWV PDGH E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DERXW WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS

PAGE 148

7KH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH GHYHORSHG E\ )ODQDJDQ f EXW PRGLILHG IRU WKH SXUSRVHV RI WKLV VWXG\ ZDV XVHG WR DFFHVV WKH HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DV SHUFHLYHG E\ FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV $Q H[WHQVLYH UHYLHZ RI WKH OLWHUDWXUH LQ HGXFDWLRQDO UHVHDUFK VKRZHG WKDW WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW WHFKQLTXH ZDV DQ DSSURSULDWH WHFKQLTXH WR XVH LQ DFFHVVLQJ FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 7ZR IRUPV RI WKH TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZHUH GHYHORSHG )RUP UHFRUGHG HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG )RUP ,, UHFRUGHG LQHIIHFn WLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 6L[ TXHVWLRQV ZHUH DVNHG LQ WKH VWXG\ 7KH VL[ TXHVWLRQV ZHUH DQVZHUHG IURP WKH UHVSRQVHV REWDLQHG IURP WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV UHFRUGHG RQ )RUPV DQG ,, )RUW\VL[ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LGHQWLILHG IRUW\RQH HIIHFWLYH DQG WKLUW\IRXU LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQGLFDWHG KRZ WKH LGHQWLILHG FULWLFDO EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DIIHFWHG WKHLU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV D FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHU 1LQH QHHG VWDWHPHQWV E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH H[WUDFWHG IURP WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV DQG QLQH VWDWHPHQWV RI VXFFHVVIXO LQIOXHQFH DQG ILYH VWDWHPHQWV RI XQVXFFHVVIXO LQIOXHQFH RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV XSRQ WKH OHDUQLQJ H[SHULHQFHV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZHUH ZULWWHQ 7ZR PDMRU DUHDV RI FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG FRRSHUn DWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH LGHQWLILHG E\ WKH ZULWHU 7KHVH DUHDV GHDOW ZLWK FRQIOLFWV RYHU WKH JRDOV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ DQG FRQIOLFWV RYHU WKH UROHV RU WDVN H[SHFWDWLRQV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ,W ZDV DOVR IRXQG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PDGH WZR W\SHV RI MXGJPHQWV DERXW WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ DQ HIIRUW WR

PAGE 149

UHVROYH FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV WR UHVROYH WKH FRQIOLFW E\ WDNLQJ VRPH IRUP RI DFWLRQ WR HQG WKH FRQIOLFW RU WR PDQDJH WKH FRQIOLFW E\ GHFUHDVn LQJ WKH LQWHQVLW\ RI WKH FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU 7KH UHSRUWV RI FULWLFDO LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV VKRZHG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHVROYHG FRQIOLFWV EHWZHHQ WKHPVHOYHV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LQ WKUHH ZD\V &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WHUPLQDWHG WKHLU UHODWLRQVKLS ZLWK WKH XQLYHUVLW\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU RU VWXGHQW WHDFKHU &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW WKH\ PDQDJHG FRQIOLFW LQ ILYH ZD\V &RQIOLFW PDQDJHPHQW UHVXOWHG LQ D GHFUHDVHG LQWHQVLW\ RI FRQIOLFW ZKLOH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV PDLQWDLQHG DQG FRQWLQXHG WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV ZLWK FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 7KH UHVXOWV RI WKH VWXG\ LQGLFDWHG WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZHUH DEOH WR LGHQWLI\ FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DQG ZHUH DEOH WR UHODWH WKRVH EHKDYLRUV WR WKHLU RZQ IXQFWLRQLQJ DQG QHHGV DV FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ,Q DGGLWLRQ LW ZDV SRVVLEOH IRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WR PDNH GHFLVLRQV DERXW WKH FRQWLQXDWLRQ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ H[SHULHQFH ZKHQ FRQIOLFW VLWXDWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKHPVHOYHV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV DURVH ,W LV LPSRUWDQW WR QRWH WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LGHQWLILHG PRUH HIIHFWLYH WKDQ LQHIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV OHQGLQJ VXSSRUW WR WKH QRWLRQ WKDW FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV YLHZHG WKH VXSHUYLVRU\ UHODWLRQVKLS DV DQ LPSRUWDQW RQH 7KH PRVW HIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRU RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LGHQWLILHG E\ FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV RQ WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW TXHVWLRQQDLUH ZDV MXGJHG WR EH WKHLU SDUWLFLSDWLRQ LQ FRQIHUHQFHV ZLWK PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG &RRSHUDWLQJ

PAGE 150

WHDFKHUV ZHUH PRVW FRPSOLPHQWDU\ RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZKR XVHG FRQIHUHQFHV DPRQJ WULDG PHPEHUV IRU IHHGEDFN DQG FRQWLQXRXV GLDORJXH &RRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV UHSRUWHG WKDW FRQIHUHQFHV PRUH RIWHQ WKDQ DQ\ RWKHU PHWKRG RI FRPPXQLFDWLRQ KHOSHG WR HVWDEOLVK D SRVLWLYH UHODWLRQn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£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n LHQFH DQG WR FROODERUDWH ZLWK FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ ZD\V WKDW ZLOO HQKDQFH UDWKHU WKDQ XQGHUPLQH WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ SURFHVV 2QH PHDQV RI HIIHFWLYH FROODERUDWLRQ ZRXOG EH IRU WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG PHPEHUV WR PHHW SULRU WR WKH EHJLQQLQJ RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHUfV DVVLJQPHQW DQG WR GLVFXVV DQG SODFH LQ ZULWLQJ WKH DJUHHG XSRQ JRDOV DQG UHVSRQVLELOLWLHV

PAGE 151

IRU HDFK PHPEHU RI WKH WULDG WR XQGHUWDNH 3XUSRVHIXO JRDO VHWWLQJ ZLOO FRQWULEXWH WR D OHVVHQLQJ RI FRQIOLFW EHWZHHQ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU $OWKRXJK WKH VWXG\ FRQILUPHG WKH FRQWLQXHG LPSRUWDQFH RI DQG QHHG IRU HIIHFWLYH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV VHYHUDO HGXFDn WRUV KDYH TXHVWLRQHG WKH HIIHFWLYHQHVV RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUfV SUHVHQFH DQG ZKHWKHU WKDW SUHVHQFH GRHV PDNH D GLIIHUHQFH LQ WKH SURIHVn VLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU %RZPDQ 0RUULV f 3DWW\ f SUHGLFWHG WKDW WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV ZRXOG EH UHSODFHG E\ FODVVURRP WHDFKHUV EHFDXVH WKH VWDQGDUG UROH PRGHO RI VXSHUYLVLRQ ZDV ZHDN GXH WR LQIUHTXHQW YLVLWV E\ FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV 0RVHU DQG %HEE f VXJJHVWHG WKDW WKH UROH RI WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU QHHGHG WR EH UHGHILQHG DQG FKDQJHG IURP YLVLWRU LQVSHFWRU WR WHDFKHU DQG LQYLWHG FRQVXOWDQW ,Q WKHLU PRGHO WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU ZRXOG EHFRPH D FRQVXOWDQW WR WKH VFKRRO DQG EH UHVSRQVLEOH IRU LQVHUYLFH WUDLQLQJ VHPLQDUV IRU FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV ZLWK WKH SXUSRVHV RI LGHQWLn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

PAGE 152

SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ SURJUDP ,GHDOO\ FROOHJH VXSHUn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n YLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LV QHHGHG 6WXGLHV RI HJR VWUHQJWK LQIOXHQFH DQG WUXVW DPRQJ PHPEHUV RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ WULDG DUH UHFRPPHQGHG XVLQJ FRQIOLFW PRGHOV RI 'HXWVFK f DV JXLGHOLQHV /DVWO\ WKH ZKROH DUHD RI WKH GHILQLWLRQ RI FRQIOLFW DQG KRZ WR FRQFHSWXDOn L]H DQG RSHUDWLRQDOL]H FRQIOLFW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV UHFRPPHQGHG IRU IXWXUH VWXG\ :KDWHYHU WKH RXWFRPH LGHQWLILHG DV WKH UROH IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV LW DSSHDUV WKDW PRVW FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV KDYH QRW EHHQ DGHTXDWHO\ WUDLQHG LQ VWXGHQW WHDFKHU VXSHUYLVLRQ 3DWW\ f :KLOH FDOOV KDYH EHHQ PDGH WR SURYLGH VXSHUYLVRU\ WUDLQLQJ WR FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV WKURXJK LQVHUYLFH HGXFDWLRQ HGXFDWRUV KDYH QRW VXSSRUWHG VLPLODU QHHGV IRU FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV :RUN SDUWLFXODUO\ QHHGV WR EH GRQH LQ WKH DUHDV RI KXPDQ UHODWLRQV DQG FRPPXQLFDWLRQ VNLOOV

PAGE 153

7KH ILQDO UHFRPPHQGDWLRQ DV D UHVXOW RI WKH ILQGLQJV LQ WKLV VWXG\ LV IRU PRGHOV RI LQVHUYLFH WUDLQLQJ IRU ERWK FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV DQG FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV WR EH GHYHORSHG LQ RUGHU WR VWUHQJWKHQ DQG SURYLGH VXSSRUW IRU FRQWLQXRXV VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG FROODERUDWLRQ E\ FROOHJH VXSHUn YLVRUV DQG FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV LQ WKH SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV

PAGE 154

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

PAGE 155

&5,7,&$/ ,1&,'(176 ,1 683(59,6,21
PAGE 156

LQ ZRXOG EH WKRVH WKDW \RX LGHQWLI\ DV EHLQJ WKH PRVW FULWLFDO LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ WKHUHE\ DIIHFWLQJ \RXU IXQFWLRQLQJ DV WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHU LQ WKH VXSHUYLVLRQ RI VWXGHQW WHDFKHUV (QFORVHG DUH WZR W\SHV RI IRUPV 3OHDVH XVH )250 WR UHFRUG LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW HIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ DQG )250 ,, WR UHFRUG LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW LQHIIHFWLYH LQFLGHQWV LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ $ VKRUW ELRJUDSKLFDO IRUP LV DOVR HQFORVHG 3OHDVH FRPSOHWH WKLV IRUP DQG UHWXUQ LW ZLWK WKH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW IRUPV $ UHWXUQ HQYHORSH LV SURYLGHG IRU \RXU FRQYHQLHQFH

PAGE 157

&5,7,&$/ ,1&,'(176 ,1 683(59,6,21 )250 (IIHFWLYH ,QFLGHQW LQ 6XSHUYLVLRQ $Q HIIHFWLYH FULWLFDO LQFLGHQW LQ VXSHUYLVLRQ LV DQ DFWLRQ E\ WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU WKDW KHOSV WKH SURIHVVLRQDO GHYHORSPHQW RI WKH VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KLQN RI DQ LQVWDQFH ZKHQ \RX ZHUH HQJDJHG ZLWK WKH FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRU LQ VXSHUYLVLQJ D VWXGHQW WHDFKHU 7KLV LQVWDQFH PD\ KDYH UHVXOWHG LQ D SRVLWLYH H[SHULHQFH IRU \RX :KHQ GLG WKLV LQFLGHQW RFFXU" :KDW KDSSHQHG SULRU WR WKLV LQFLGHQW" :KHUH GLG WKLV LQFLGHQW RFFXU" FODVVURRP KDOO ORXQJH HWFf :KR ZHUH WKH SHUVRQV LQYROYHG LQ WKLV LQFLGHQW" ,GHQWLI\ WKHP RQO\ E\ WLWOH QRW E\ WKHLU SURSHU QDPHVf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

PAGE 158

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f :KR ZHUH WKH SHUVRQV LQYROYHG LQ WKLV LQFLGHQW" ,GHQWLI\ WKHP RQO\ E\ WLWOH QRW E\ WKHLU SURSHU QDPHVf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

PAGE 159

%,2*5$3+,&$/ ,1)250$7,21 ,Q RUGHU WR HVWDEOLVK D SURILOH RI WKH FRRSHUDWLQJ WHDFKHUV SDUWLFLSDWLQJ LQ WKH VWXG\ RQ HIIHFWLYH DQG LQHIIHFWLYH EHKDYLRUV RI FROOHJH VXSHUYLVRUV GXULQJ VWXGHQW WHDFKLQJ VXSHUYLVLRQ ZRXOG DSSUHFLDWH \RXU WDNLQJ D IHZ PLQXWHV WR ILOO RXW WKH ELRJUDSKLFDO LQIRUPDWLRQ OLVWHG EHORZ 3OHDVH GR QRW LQFOXGH \RXU QDPH RU DQ\ RWKHU LGHQWLI\LQJ SHUVRQDO LQIRUPDWLRQ DERXW \RXUVHOI 0$/( )(0$/( $*( '(*5(( %$ 0$ 0$ SOXV JUDGXDWH KRXUV '2&725$7(
PAGE 160

%,%/,2*5$3+< $QGHUVRQ +6 3URVSHFWLYH 7HDFKHUV +DYH )HDUV &OHDULQJ +RXVH L $VKE\ 0DU\ 7KH 5ROH RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU ([SHFWDWLRQV RI &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUV 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV DQG &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ )RUGKDP 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f %DUQOXQG 'HDQ & ,QWHUSHUVRQDO &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 6XUYH\ DQG 6WXGLHV %RVWRQ +RXJKWRQ 0LIIOLQ &RPSDQ\ %HQQLH :LOOLDP $ &DPSXV 6XSHUYLVLRQ RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ $ &ORVHU /RRN 7HDFKHUV &ROOHJH -RXUQDO B %HQQLH :LOOLDP $ &RRSHUDWLRQ IRU %HWWHU 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 0LQQHVRWD %XUJHVV 3XEOLVKLQJ &RPSDQ\ %HQQLH :LOOLDP $ 6XSHUYLVLQJ &OLQLFDO ([SHULHQFHV LQ WKH &ODVVURRP 1HZ
PAGE 161

%XUQV 5REHUW : 6XFFHVV &ULWHULD DQG WKH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW 7HFKQLTXH 3KL 'HOWD .DSSDQ B &DPSEHOO /OR\G DQG :LOOLDPVRQ -RKQ 3UDFWLFDO 3UREOHPV LQ WKH 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU&RRSHUDWLYH 7HDFKHU 5HODWLRQVKLS (GXFDWLRQ &DUU &DURO\Q -DQH )DFWRUV LQ &RQVWUXFWLYH +XPDQ 5HODWLRQVKLSV %HWZHHQ &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV DQG 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV LQ 6HOHFWHG 3URIHVVLRQDO 6LWXDWLRQV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ &ROXPELD 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO U$ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f &ODUN &KDUOHV 3 $ 6WXG\ RI &ULWLFDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV RI WKH 3XEOLF 6FKRRO 6HFRQGDU\ 6FKRRO 3ULQFLSDOVKLS LQ 3HQQV\OYDQLD 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 3LWWVEXUJ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO B 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f &ODUNH &0 7KH 3DUWQHUVKLS LQ $FWLRQ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ ,Q &0 &ODUNH HGf 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ DQG WKH 3XEOLF 6FKRROV )RUWLHWK
PAGE 162

'HDNOQV .DUHQ 7KH 6FKRRO %DVHG 6XSHUYLVLRQ 7HDP $Q $OWHUQDWLYH :DVKLQJWRQ '& 86 'HSDUWPHQW RI +HDOWK (GXFDWLRQ DQG :HOIDUH 1DWLRQDO ,QVWLWXWH RI (GXFDWLRQ (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (G f 'HDQ %LOO\ &ULWLFDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV RI &XUULFXOXP 'LUHFWRUV LQ 7H[DV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ (DVW 7H[DV 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 'HXWVFK 0RUWRQ &RQIOLFWV 3URGXFWLYH DQG 'HVWUXFWLYH -RXUQDO RI 6RFLDO ,VVXHV B 'HXWVFK 0RUWRQ 7KH 5HVROXWLRQ RI &RQIOLFW &RQVWUXFWLYH DQG 'HVWUXFn WLYH 3URFHVVHV 1HZ +DYHQ
PAGE 163

(OOLV -XQH 7KH 5HODWLRQVKLSV $PRQJ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 3UREOHPV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ WKH 6WXGHQW7HDFKHUV 6XSHUYLVLQJ 7HDFKHUV 'LUHFWLQJ 7HDFKHUV DQG &XUULFXOXP 'LUHFWRUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ )ORULGD 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUn QDWLRQDO A $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f (VSLQ 2OLYD &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV LQ WKH /LYHV RI )HPDOH &ROOHJH 6WXGHQWV $ &RPSDULVRQ %HWZHHQ :RPHQ RI /DWLQ $PHULFD DQG WKH 8QLWHG 6WDWHV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f )DUEVWHLQ 0DUYLQ &ULWLFDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV IRU &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUV $ 6WXG\ RI &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUV DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV LQ WKH 6WDWH RI 1HZ -HUVH\ 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 5XWJHUV 7KH 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO B 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f )ODQDJDQ -RKQ & &RQWULEXWLRQ RI 5HVHDUFK LQ WKH $UP\ $LU )RUFHV WR (GXFDWLRQDO 3ROLF\ (GXFDWLRQDO 5HFRUG 6XSSOHPHQW 1R D )ODQDJDQ -RKQ & 5HVHDUFK 7HFKQLTXHV IRU 'HYHORSLQJ (GXFDWLRQDO 2EMHFWLYHV (GXFDWLRQDO 5HFRUG E B )ODQDJDQ -RKQ & 7KH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW 7HFKQLTXH 3V\FKRORJLFDO %XOOHWLQ )ODQDJDQ -RKQ & 7KH &ULWLFDO 5HTXLUHPHQWV $SSURDFK WR (GXFDWLRQDO 2EMHFWLYHV 6FKRRO DQG 6RFLHW\ )RVWHU /XFLOOH & 3HUFHLYHG &RPSHWHQFLHV 6FKRRO 6XSHUYLVRUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 6WDQIRUG 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO B 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f )R[ 'DYLG 7KH 5HVHDUFK 3URFHVV LQ (GXFDWLRQ 1HZn
PAGE 164

*RRG &DUWHU 9 (Gf 7KH 'LFWLRQDU\ RI (GXFDWLRQ 1HZ
PAGE 165

+RFKHO 6DQGUD / 7KH 5HODWLRQVKLS RI 6HOI&RQFHSW DV D &RPPXQLFDWRU WR (IIHFWLYHQHVV LQ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 3XUGXH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f +XGGOH 'RQDOG 6XSHUYLVLRQ RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV $ 1HZ &RQFHSW (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (G f +\WUHN $QWKRQ\ 7KH 5ROH RI WKH &ROOHJH8QLYHUVLW\ &RQVXOWDQW DV 3HUFHLYHG E\ WKH &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 1RUWKHUQ &RORUDGR f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f ,QJUDP *UHJJ ) DQG %ODFNKXUVW $ (GZDUG 7HDFKLQJ DQG $GYLVLQJ &RPSHWHQFLHV RI 6SHFLDO (GXFDWLRQ 3URIHVVRUV ([FHSWLRQDO &KLOGUHQ ,QORZ *DLO 0 7KH &RPSOH[ 5ROH RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU (GXFDWLRQDO 5HVHDUFK %XOOHWLQ = -DQGW )UHG &RQIOLFW 5HVROXWLRQ 7KURXJK &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 1HZ
PAGE 166

.XQGH 'RURWKHD 7KH 5ROH RI WKH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU $Q $QDO\VLV RI WKHn 3HUFHSWLRQV +HOG E\ 'LUHFWRUV RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUV DQG 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ %RVWRQ &ROOHJH f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFW ,QWHUQDWLRQDO A $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f /HH %LOO\ &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV RI 6XSHUYLVRU\ )XQFWLRQV RI 3ULQFLSDOV LQ 6RXWKHDVWHUQ 1HZ 0H[LFR 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ (DVW 7H[DV 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f /HOHV 6DP 8VLQJ WKH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV 7HFKQLTXH WR 'HYHORS D 7KHRU\ RI (GXFDWLRQDO 3URIHVVLRQDOLVP $Q ([SORUDWRU\ 6WXG\ 7KH -RXUQDO RI 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ /HZLV $UWKXU DQG 0LHO $OLFH 6XSHUYLVLRQ IRU ,PSURYHG ,QVWUXFWLRQ %HOPRQW &DOLIRUQLD :DGVZRUWK 3XEOLVKLQJ &RPSDQ\ ,QF /LHEHUPDQ $QQ /LQNLQJ 3URFHVVHV LQ (GXFDWLRQDO &KDQJH ,Q 1 1DVK DQG &XOEHUWVRQ (GVf /LQNLQJ 3URFHVVHV LQ (GXFDWLRQDO ,PSURYHPHQW 2KLR 8QLYHUVLW\ &RXQFLO IRU (GXFDWLRQDO $GPLQLVWUDn WLRQ /LSVH\ 6DOO\ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV $VN IRU +HOS 7KH 0DWKHPDWLFV 7HDFKHU /LSWRQ $DURQ DQG /HVVHU (OHQD 7HDFKHU 7UDLQLQJ DW 6WRQ\ %URRN $ 0RGHO IRU &RQIOLFW 7KH -RXUQDO RI 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ /RFN &RUH\ 5 3UREOHPV RI 6HFRQGDU\ 6FKRRO 6WXGHQWV 7KH 7HDFKHU (GXFDWRU B /LWWOHMRKQ 6WHSKHQ 7KHRULHV RI +XPDQ &RPPXQLFDWLRQ &ROXPEXV &KDUOHV ( 0HUULOO 3XEOLVKLQJ &RPSDQ\ /RZWKHU 0DOFROP $ 0RVW +HOSIXO DQG /HDVW +HOSIXO $FWLYLWLHV RI 6XSHUYLVLQJ 7HDFKHUV &OHDULQJ +RXVH  /RZWKHU 0DOFROP $ 6RPH &RQFHUQV RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV LQ 6HFRQGDU\ (GXFDWLRQ 7KH 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 0LFKLJDQ 6FKRRO RI (GXFDWLRQ %XOOHWLQ /RZWKHU 0DOFROP $ 6XFFHVVIXO DQG 8QVXFFHVVIXO ([SHULHQFHV RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV LQ 6HFRQGDU\ (GXFDWLRQ &RQWHPSRUDU\ (GXFDWLRQ 0DKDQ -DPHV DQG /DFHILHOG :DUUHQ (GXFDWLRQDO $WWLWXGH &KDQJHV 'XULQJ
PAGE 167

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f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f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f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUn QDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 1LFNODV 0HUULOO 6 $ &RPSDUDWLYH 6WXG\ RI &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV WR 'HWHUPLQH 5HFRPPHQGHG 7HFKQLTXHV IRU 6XSHUYLVRUV RI 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI $UNDQVDV f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 1RUWRQ 6WHYHQ DQG :LPV (DUO : $ &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQW 6WXG\ RI WKH 0RWLYDWLRQDO (IIHFW RI *UDGHV RQ &ROOHJH 6WXGHQWV 3V\FKRORJLFDO 5HSRUWV

PAGE 168

2SHQVKDZ .DUO 3URFHGXUHV IRU 7UDLQLQJ WKHn 3UHVHUYLFH 7HDFKHU 7KH ,QVWUXFWLRQDO 6WUDWHJ\ *DS 3DSHU SUHVHQWHG WR WKH $QQXDO 0HHWLQJ RI WKH $VVRFLDWLRQ RI 7HDFKHU (GXFDWRUV /DV 9HJDV 1HYDGD )HEUXDU\ (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (G f 3DWW\ $+ &ODVVURRP 7HDFKHUV :LOO 5HSODFH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRUV &RQWHPSRUDU\ (GXFDWLRQ 3HDUFH : %DUQHWW 7UXVW LQ ,QWHUSHUVRQDO &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 6SHHFK 0RQRJUDSKV 3HWHUVRQ :LOOLDP &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV IRU 1HZ DQG ([SHULHQFHG &ROOHJH DQG 8QLYHUVLW\ 3UHVLGHQWV 5HVHDUFK LQ +LJKHU (GXFDWLRQ 3IHLIIHU 5REHUW 7 (Gf 7KH &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU &RQIOLFW DQG &KDOOHQJH 7KH $VVRFLDWLRQ IRU 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ )RUW\WKLUG
PAGE 169

6LPPV (DUOLQH 0 7KH 5ROH RI WKH (OHPHQWDU\ DQG 6HFRQGDU\ &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHUV DV 'HWHUPLQHG E\ &XUUHQW 3UDFWLFHV LQ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ .DQVDV 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHU VLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 6PLWK ( %URRNV &RRSHUDWLYH 6WUXFWXUHV LQ 6FKRRO&ROOHJH 5HODWLRQn VKLSV :DVKLQJWRQ '& $PHULFDQ $VVRFLDWLRQ RI &ROOHJHV IRU 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (G f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f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUn QDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 6WHHYHV )UDQN / $ 6XPPDU\ RI WKH /LWHUDWXUH RQ WKH 2II&DPSXV &RRSHUDWLQJ 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQDO $GPLQLVWUDWLRQ DQG 6XSHUYLVLRQ 6WHLQIDWW 7KRPDV 0 &RPPXQLFDWLRQ DQG &RQIOLFW $ 5HYLHZ RI 1HZ 0DWHULDO +XPDQ &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 5HVHDUFK B 6WLOOHUV %UXFH DQG .QLHS :LOODUG 0 $ 3URJUDP WR ,PSURYH 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHU 6XSHUYLVRU &RPPXQLFDWLRQV (5,& 'RFXPHQW 5HSURGXFWLRQ 6HUYLFH 1R (G f 6WUDWHPH\HU )ORUHQFH DQG /LQGVH\ 0DUJDUHW :RUNLQJ ZLWK 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV 1HZ
PAGE 170

7DQQHQEDXP 0LFKDHO $ $Q $QDO\VLV RI &RPPXQLFDWLRQ 3DWWHUQV %HWZHHQ 6WXGHQW7HDFKHUV DQG 8QLYHUVLW\ 6XSHUYLVRUV ZLWK 7UDLQLQJ LQ 7UDQVDFWLRQDO $QDO\VLV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI 2UHJRQ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO $ 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f 7KRPSVRQ 0LFKDHO / ,GHQWLI\LQJ $Q[LHWLHV ([SHULHQFHG E\ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKHUV 7KH -RXUQDO RI 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ 7MRVYROG 'HDQ &RRSHUDWLRQ DQG &RQIOLFW %HWZHHQ $GPLQLVWUDWRUV DQG 7HDFKHUV 7KH -RXUQDO RI 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ :DWHUV (OUHG &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV RI $GPLQLVWUDWLYH %HKDYLRU LQ 8UEDQ 6FKRROV :KHUH 7KHUH +DYH %HHQ 'UDVWLF &KDQJHV LQ %ODFN:KLWH 5DWLRV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f :DWNLQV &KDUOHV $Q $QDO\WLF 0RGHO RI &RQIOLFW 6SHHFK 0RQRJUDSKV B :KDOHQ 5LFKDUG ( (IIHFWLYHQHVV RI (OHFWHG DQG $SSRLQWHG 6FKRRO %RDUG 0HPEHUV 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ ,QGLDQD 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f :KHHOHU &DURO / 2SHQPLQGHGQHVV 6HOI &RQFHSW DQG 7HDFKHU6WXGHQW 5DSSRUW RI WKH &ROOHJH 6HQLRU 6XSHUYLVLQJ 7HDFKHU DQG &ROOHJH 6XSHUYLVRU 'XULQJ 6WXGHQW 7HDFKLQJ 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 2KLR 6WDWH 8QLYHUVLW\ f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f :ULJKW :LOOLH &ULWLFDO ,QFLGHQWV LQ 5HODWLRQVKLSV %HWZHHQ 'LVWULFW 6XSHULQWHQGHQWV DQG 6FKRRO %RDUGV LQ 6HOHFWHG 8UEDQ 6FKRRO 'LVWULFWV LQ )ORULGD 'RFWRUDO 'LVVHUWDWLRQ 8QLYHUVLW\ RI )ORULGD f 'LVVHUWDWLRQ $EVWUDFWV ,QWHUQDWLRQDO 8QLYHUVLW\ 0LFURILOP 1R f
PAGE 171

%,2*5$3+,&$/ 6.(7&+ /RXLVH 6XQGEHUJ 5RWKPDQ ZDV ERUQ RQ WKH WK RI -DQXDU\ LQ %URRNO\Q 1HZ
PAGE 172

,QVWUXFWLRQDO /HDGHUVKLS DQG 6XSSRUW 6KH DOVR KHOG WKH SRVLWLRQ RI JUDGXDWH DVVLVWDQW DQG ODWHU JUDGXDWH WHDFKLQJ DVVRFLDWH LQ WKH 'HSDUWn PHQW RI 6XEMHFW 6SHFLDOL]DWLRQ 7HDFKHU (GXFDWLRQ /RXLVH 6XQGEHUJ 5RWKPDQ LV PDUULHG WR /HVOLH 5RWKPDQ DQG LV WKH PRWKHU RI WZR VRQV 6KH LV D PHPEHU RI 3KL 'HOWD .DSSD DQG WKH $VVRFLDWLRQ IRU 6XSHUYLVLRQ DQG &XUULFXOXP 'HYHORSPHQW

PAGE 173

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L LGFFL0rf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

PAGE 174

81,9(56,7< 2) )/25,'$


xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E2VT7AMZD_MSKB5H INGEST_TIME 2011-08-29T16:51:25Z PACKAGE AA00003458_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
FILES


EFFECTIVE AND INEFFECTIVE SUPERVISORY BEHAVIORS
OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS AS PERCEIVED BY
SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING TEACHERS
BY
LOUISE SUNDBERG ROTHMAN
A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE COUNCIL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
1981

to Jane M. Sundberg

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
It is with deep appreciation that the author would like to express
thanks to the following persons who have contributed their suggestions
and encouragement towards the completion of this dissertation. First,
Dr. Arthur J. Lewis, Professor of Instructional Leadership and Support
and committee chairman, for the many hours he spent sharing ideas,
reading the manuscript, and lending his support to its conclusion.
Dr. Charles A. Henderson, Associate Professor of Subject Specialization
Teacher Education, and committee member, was particularly helpful in
obtaining the sample used in the study. The other committee member,
Dr. Phillip A. Clark, Professor of Educational Administration and
Supervision, was helpful in suggestions made at the inception of the
idea used in this study. The author would also like to express appre¬
ciation to Dr. William H. Drummond, Professor of Instructional Leader¬
ship and Support, for the considerable time and help he gave the author
during the writing of the manuscript.
Special thanks are due to Dr. Eugene A. Todd, Professor and
Department Chairman of Subject Specialization Teacher Education, for
lending his support and encouragement from the inception to the con¬
clusion of the dissertation. The author spent several years as a
teaching associate in this department. The experience gained was most
rewarding.
Finally, the author would like to thank Mrs. Marjorie Pace, who
typed this manuscript, and Dr. Leslie K. Rothman, husband of the
author, and sons, Torsten and Britt, for their patience in seeing
this dissertation to its conclusion.
iii

I suspect that the most important result of a systematic and
many-sided study of conflict would be the changes which such a study
could effect in ourselves, the conscious and unconscious, the willing
and unwilling participants in conflicts. Thus, the rewards to be
realistically hoped for are the indirect ones, as was the case with
the sons who were told to dig for buried treasure in the vinyard.
They found no treasure, but they improved the soil.
Anatol Rapoport
iv

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS iii
PREFACE iv
LIST OF TABLES viii
LIST OF FIGURES ix
ABSTRACT x
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY 1
The Purpose of the Study 1
The Problem 4
Need for the Study 5
Rationale for the Study of Conflict in the
College Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher
Relationship 11
Procedures 15
Limitations of the Study 16
Definitions of Terms 17
II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE 19
Introduction 19
Studies Related to the Interpersonal
Relationship Between the Cooperating
Teacher and the Student Teacher 21
Studies Related to the Role of the
College Supervisor and the Inter¬
personal Relationship Between the
College Supervisor and the Student
Teacher 31
Studies Related to the Interpersonal
Relationship Among Members of the
Student Teaching Triad: The College
Supervisor, Cooperating Teacher and
Student Teacher 38
Studies Related to Communications Among
the College Supervisor, the Cooperating
Teacher, and Student Teacher
42

Page
A Survey of the Literature in Conflict
Communication Appropriate to the Focus
of Behaviors of College Supervisors
During Student Teacher Supervision ....... 47
Review of the Literature in Education
Using the Critical Incident Technique 60
Studies About Educational Objectives,
Educational Evaluation and Research .... 61
Studies About Educational Administration
and Supervisory Functions 65
Studies About Students 67
Studies About Teachers 68
III. METHODS AND PROCEDURES 70
Introduction 70
The Critical Incident Technique 70
Studies About Student Teaching: The
College Supervisor, Cooperating Teacher
and Student Teacher 76
The General Aim of the College Supervisor .... 79
Design of the Critical Incident Instrument
Used for Reporting Critical Incidents 81
The Specifications and Criteria Used in
Designing the Critical Incidents in
Supervision Instrument 82
Method of Subject Selection and Data
Gathering 87
IV. RESULTS 90
Introduction 90
Descriptive Data of Sample 90
Procedure for Analyzing the Critical
Incident Reports 92
Answers to the Research Questions 97
The Effective and Ineffective Behaviors
of College Supervisors 97
The College Supervisor Effects on the
Functioning of the Cooperating Teacher. . . 113
The Needs of the Cooperating Teacher .... 122
The Influence of the Relationship on the
Production of Student Teacher Learning
Experiences 124
The Role of Conflict During Times of
Interpersonal Interaction Between the
College Supervisor and the Cooperating
Teacher 129
vi

Page
The Role of Interpersonal Conflict in
the Judgment of Behaviors of College
Supervisors and the Functioning of the
College Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher
Relationship 131
Summary 133
V. SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS 135
APPENDIX 142
BIBLIOGRAHPY 148
BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH 159
vii

LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
4-1 COOPERATING TEACHERS BY ACADEMIC DEGREE,
SEX, AND NUMBER WHO COMPLETED CRITICAL
INCIDENT FORMS 93
4-2 COOPERATING TEACHERS BY RANGE AND MEDIAN
OF AGE, YEARS TEACHING, AND NUMBER OF
STUDENT TEACHERS SUPERVISED 94
4-3 FORTY-SIX SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING
TEACHERS’ PERCEPTIONS OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS’
BEHAVIORS 101
4-4 EFFECT ON THE SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING
TEACHER'S FUNCTIONING OF THE COLLEGE SUPERVISOR'S
BEHAVIORS 114
4-5 ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT SUPPORTED
THE EXPRESSED NEEDS OF COOPERATING TEACHERS RANKED
BY FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS FROM MOST TO LEAST ... 123
4-6 ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT INFLUENCED
THE RELATIONSHIP ON THE PRODUCTION OF STUDENT
TEACHER SUCCESSFUL OR UNSUCCESSFUL LEARNING
EXPERIENCES RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS
FROM MOST TO LEAST 126
viii

LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE
4-1
4-2
PAGE
EFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION 98
INEFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION 99

Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the
Graduate Council of the University of Florida in Partial
Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
EFFECTIVE AND INEFFECTIVE SUPERVISORY BEHAVIORS OF
COLLEGE SUPERVISORS AS PERCEIVED BY
SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING TEACHERS
By
Louise Sundberg Rothman
March, 1981
Chairman: Dr. Arthur J. Lewis
Major Department: Instructional Leadership and Support
The purpose of this study was to identify through the use of the
critical incident technique, supervisory behaviors of college super¬
visors perceived as effective or ineffective by secondary school
cooperating teachers. The results of the study were used to identify
some appropriate and some inappropriate ways for college supervisors to
respond to the situational needs of cooperating teachers during the
period of student teacher supervision. The investigator utilized
insights gained from studying the literature on conflict in inter¬
personal communication in analyzing and interpreting the data.
The subjects selected for the study were Florida secondary school
cooperating teachers from all program areas who had supervised or were
currently supervising a student teacher. Forty-six cooperating teachers
identified forty-one effective and thirty-four ineffective critical
behaviors of college supervisors. In addition, the cooperating teacher
x

indicated how the identified critical behavior of the college super¬
visor affected his or her functioning as a cooperating teacher. Nine
activities of college supervisors that supported cooperating teachers'
needs during student teacher supervision were extracted from the
critical incident reports. Nine statements of successful influence and
five statements of unsuccessful influence of college supervisors upon
the learning experiences of student teachers were written.
The most effective behavior of college supervisors identified by
cooperating teachers was the college supervisor's participation in a
conference with the cooperating teacher and/or student teacher about
some aspect of the student teaching experience. The most ineffective
behavior of college supervisors was identified by cooperating teachers
as the lack of or few visits made by college supervisors to the school
to observe and supervise student teachers. The results also indicated
that effective behaviors of college supervisors elicited cognitive
changes in cooperating teachers' insights about student teaching super¬
vision more than twice as often as did the ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors while the ineffective behaviors of college super¬
visors elicited more direct action by cooperating teachers.
Two major areas of interpersonal conflict between college super¬
visors and cooperating teachers were identified. These areas were in
conflicts over goals of student teaching and conflicts over the role
or task expectations of the college supervisor. The findings also
indicated that competition between the college supervisor and cooperating
teacher was not a cause for conflict but was a result of conflict. One
result of interpersonal conflict between college supervisors and
xi

cooperating teachers was that cooperating teachers resolved conflict
in three ways and managed conflict in five ways. Resolution of conflict
was achieved most often by the cooperating teacher's refusal to parti¬
cipate in the student teaching program. Management of conflict was
made most often by cooperating teachers recognizing that they would
have to work alone with and take responsibility for the professional
development of the student teacher.
Based on the results of this study, it was recommended that college
supervisors re-establish and maintain stronger ties with schools that
participate in the student teaching program, make weekly visits to the
school and hold weekly conferences with members of the student teaching
triad. Expectations and professional goals for the student teacher
should be agreed upon in conference with members of the student teaching
triad prior to the beginning of the student teacher's assignment. It
was also recommended that future research in supervision be conducted
in the area of conflict communication between college supervisors and
cooperating teachers. Training for college supervisors in human relations
and communication skills was also suggested in order to strengthen and
provide support for continuous collaboration by college supervisors and
cooperating teachers in the professional development of student teachers.
xii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY
The Purpose of the Study
The major purpose of this study was to identify through the use of
the critical incident technique supervisory behaviors of college super¬
visors perceived as effective or ineffective by selected secondary
school cooperating teachers. The results were used to identify some
appropriate and some inappropriate ways for college supervisors to re¬
spond to the situational needs of cooperating teachers during the period
of student teacher supervision. The researcher utilized insights gained
from studying the literature on conflict in interpersonal communications
in analyzing and interpreting the data.
The following questions were asked in this study:
1. What were the effective and ineffective supervisory
behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by
secondary school cooperating teachers using the critical
incident technique?
2. How did the behaviors of college supervisors as perceived
by cooperating teachers as being effective or ineffective
affect the functioning of the cooperating teacher during
student teacher supervision?
3. How did the college supervisor become aware of and
respond to the needs of the cooperating teacher during
the period of student teacher supervision?
4. Was the supervisory relationship established between the
college supervisor and cooperating teacher influential
in determining the success or lack of success of learning
experiences provided to the student teacher during
student teaching?
1

2
5. In what ways did conflict occur during times of inter¬
personal interaction between the college supervisor and
the cooperating teacher?
6. If the perceived effective and ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors were a function of the college super¬
visor-cooperating teacher supervisory relationship, what
part if any did interpersonal conflict play in those
judgments?
In a study by Yee (1969), student teaching at selected off-campus
school sites was considered by student teachers to be the most important
learning experience of all the experiences offered in their total pro¬
fessional preparation. In order to understand the situation in which
student teaching is conducted, the reader is reminded that three persons
play key roles in student teaching experiences: the student teacher,
the cooperating teacher, and the college supervisor. The student
teachers are participating in an educational experience to learn how to
teach by using their background of theory and content together with their
practical knowledge of the classroom. The cooperating teachers, while
continuing to have the responsibilities and duties for their own class¬
room, take on the primary responsibility for directing the learning
experiences of the student teachers. The college supervisors represent
the college or university in the off-campus preservice student teaching
experience. Periodic visits to the school site to monitor, observe,
confer, and evaluate the student teacher are traditional functions for
a college supervisor.
The college supervisor and the cooperating teacher are professional
educators who have the primary responsibility of supervising the teaching
and learning experiences of the student teacher. Because of the nature
of the cooperating teacher's role at the school site, and the amount of

3
personal and professional time that the cooperating teacher is able to
spend with the student teacher, it is assumed that the cooperating
teacher will effectively assist the college supervisor by providing
information to him or her about the classroom teaching performance of
the student teacher. If the cooperating teacher is to perform this role,
then a cooperative working relationship between the two supervisors
should be developed within the framework of the mutually conceived task
of supervising the student teacher.
In providing information to the college supervisor about the
classroom teaching performance of the student teacher, it is assumed
that the cooperating teacher interprets to the college supervisor events,
problems, or concerns about the student teacher and the student teacher’s
experiences. Much of the communication that passes between the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher is of a positive nature as the two
supervisors cooperate together in establishing successful experiences
for the student teacher. Some communication that passes between the
college supervisor and cooperating teacher, however, may be the cause or
the result of conflicts that develop between the two supervisors. Con¬
sequently, the college supervisor needs to be cognizant of how the
cooperating teacher views both the cooperative and conflictive parts of
the supervisory relationship in order to develop an understanding of
how this relationship may affect the situational needs of the cooperating
teacher during joint ventures of supervision.'*'
It should be noted that this position is also reversed. The
cooperating teacher needs to be cognizant of how the college supervisor
views this relationship and how behaviors may affect the situational
needs of the college supervisor during student teacher supervision.
This study, however, is only concerned with the first position cited in
the text above.

4
The knowledge obtained by the college supervisor about the super -
visory relationship should aid in the interpretation of and response to
the needs of cooperating teachers during the period of student teacher
supervision. It is assumed by the investigator that an understanding
of the needs of cooperating teachers by college supervisors during
periods of student teacher supervision should lead to a better under¬
standing of the role of supervision. This partnership in supervision
should help the student teacher to achieve a more successful off-campus
learning experience.
The Problem
The college supervisor of student teaching has served as a link
between the schools and colleges of education ever since the beginning of
off-campus student teaching. Although this relationship was described
as weak (Smith, 1965), redundant (Moser & Bebb, 1970), and non-significant
(Morris, 1974), in dealing with the performance and adjustment of student
teachers, some studies reviewed (Bennie, 1964, 1972; Frenzel, 1977; Neal,
Kraft & Kracht, 1968) supported the importance of and the need for a
college supervisor to provide a strong link between the college of
education and the school. With the evidence established that conflicting
views about the need and importance for a college supervisor of student
teachers did exist, the writer reviewed the literature on human communi¬
cation processes and generalizations (Burgoon & Ruffner, 1978; Littlejohn,
1978; Steinfatt, 1974), in order to further select areas in conflict
communication theory that could be applied to the study of existing
supervisory relationships between the college supervisor and cooperating
teacher. Several theories of interpersonal communication were further

5
reviewed. The area of conflict in interpersonal communication was
selected for further study and application to the findings that were
obtained in the study on the effective and ineffective supervisory
behaviors of college supervisors.
Need for the Study
Preservice teacher education has been undergoing significant changes
in recent years (Ryan, 1975). State departments of education have
proposed and in some states instituted new guidelines and laws that
will significantly change the emphasis of teacher education from on-
campus to off-campus types of learning experiences. For example, a
year's internship for Florida teacher certification is required for educa¬
tion majors in Florida after July 1981. Consequently, the partnership
between college and school will be affected. As the student teacher
begins to spend more time in off-campus activities, it appears that one
requirement for an effective program will be a link of trust and mutual
cooperation between the college and school. Lieberman (1977) recommended
that linkage efforts are needed to connect . . people, institutions,
agencies, and the like in such a way that they exchange information and
resources (both human and material) to help solve their problems" (p.
150). Only through such effort can those interested in school improvement
be influential in developing collaborative relationships.
Collaborative relationships, however, are difficult to achieve.
Inlow (1956), for example, viewed the functions that a college supervisor
performed in a student teaching supervisory role as myriad and complex.
Other studies have been made delineating the responsibilities of

6
supervision, and a number of roles and behaviors have been identified as
contributing toward a successful or unsuccessful student teaching
experience for both the student teacher and cooperating teacher (Hackley,
1976; Johnson, 1964; Neal, Kraft & Kracht, 1967). While most studies
focused on the relationships between the student teacher and cooperating
teacher or the student teacher and college supervisor, few examined the
interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and the
cooperating teacher except as part of a larger study including student
2
teachers and other school and college administrators.
Role studies of college supervisors indicated that the experienced
college supervisor of student teachers was expected to be ab-le to respond
to the uniqueness of each student teacher's site situation and to adjust
supervisory techniques to compensate for problems that arose in the
student teacher's learning environment. This learning environment,
situated in an institutional setting, was a school. While supervising
student teachers in a number of different school settings, the college
supervisor would encounter a number of situations. Some situations would
be unique to a specific school. Other situations would have general
application across most school sites. Occurrences within the school site
therefore, needed to be interpreted and integrated into meaningful
learning experiences for the student teacher.
In order for the college supervisor to help translate these
situations into meaningful experiences for the student teacher, the
Three excellent sources that direct themselves to the issues of
student teaching: The roles, responsibilities, and the problems of
those key persons involved, are The Association for Student Teaching Year¬
book, Volumes 1-47, The Association for Student Teaching Bulletin, No.
1-30, and the Association for Student Teaching Research Bulletin, No. 1-7.

7
college supervisor needs knowledge of the variety of situational factors
occurring within the student teaching environment. Such awareness would
enable the college supervisor to move from situation to situation with
an understanding of specific and general weaknesses and strengths of
each student teacher's situation. Grumet (1978) defined this situation
as an environment in which action rather than intention or observation
took place as a result of direct human intervention within that environ¬
ment. Situations were active with people working at their centers.
According to Grumetfs definition, the student teaching environment was
not considered synonymous with a student teaching situation until human
action occurred. The college supervisor and cooperating teacher, in ask¬
ing questions about their relationship, transform a neutral environment
into an active situation. Grumet concluded that the way questions were
posited would help to shape the answers that were received. This in turn
aided the interpretation of events and concerns by those persons directly
involved in student teacher supervision.
Dewey (1938) interpreted events or concerns not as isolated singular
objects, but as part of a contextual whole. A situation was an "environ¬
ing experienced world" where observations of events or concerns of human
beings were part of the environment. Observations were made in order
to find out ". . . what that field is with reference to some active
adaptive response to be made in carrying forward a course of behavior"
(p. 67).
Coupled with the need to understand and interpret events that occur
within situations, it is also desirable that the college supervisor and
the cooperating teacher establish a collegial relationship, in other
words, a communication link of trust, understanding, and friendliness.

8
Traditionally the communication linkage between these two has been
strained and has served as a platform for criticism of each other's
base of operation, source of power, and role responsibilities (Corrigan
& Garland, 1966; Hytrek, 1973; Pfeiffer, 1964). The college supervisor's
and cooperating teacher's goals of supervision are often not in accord.
Hawes and Smith (1973) stated that the prospective goals or intentions
of persons directed and explained their behavior. If the goals of
individuals were not complementary or were in conflict with one another,
the subsequent behaviors of the individuals would also be in conflict.
Thus the supervisory task %ras made more difficult due in part to the
nature of the diverse supervisory practices or norms in student
teaching situations. Both the college supervisor and the cooperating
teacher brought to the student teacher's learning environment experiences
and attitudes about teacher education, each representative of his or
her educational institution. Mutual agreements or understandings as to
the needs for cooperation were strained or lacking because most schools
and colleges did not have a defined educational goal for student teachers
(Huddle, 1973). Often the student teaching program was viewed as a
vehicle to help prospective teachers complete their preservice education
and to qualify for a teaching position. Because of this view, the need
for mutual cooperation and influence between the school and college was
not considered to be an important one. By the very nature of the
organizational boundaries that encompass a public or private school site,
college supervisors and the cooperating teachers have little influence
outside their own institutions and the student teacher becomes torn
between allegiances to the college and the school (Smith, 1965). Both
hosts and guests go their own way, tread lightly so as not to offend,

9
and are polite to all in one another's company. Few barriers to communi¬
cation are overcome when such situations occur. Human energy applied to
the task of preparing the novice teacher to teach in a classroom setting
loses its focus and goal when the partnership is strained, broken or
nonexistent.
Another supervisory problem reported concerns the number of hours
cooperating teachers and college supervisors spend working with the
student teachers. Several studies found that cooperating teachers spent
many hours per week working directly with the student teacher^ while the
college supervisors contact was limited to one or two hours per week
(Ashby, 1973; Bennie, 1964; Frenzel, 1977). Less time was spent by
the college supervisor discussing the student teacher's experience with
the cooperating teacher. Too often the cooperating teacher was ignored
during the college supervisor's visit, further weakening communication
contacts between the two supervisors.
The number of contact hours that the cooperating teacher has with
the student teacher would enable the cooperating teacher to evaluate
most aspects of the student teaching experience including incidents that
translated into effective or ineffective behaviors of college supervisors
during student teaching supervision at a school. The focus of this
study was upon the identification of those incidents of effective and
ineffective behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by cooperating
teachers, that affected the supervisory relationship between the college
supervisor and the cooperating teacher. It was realistic to suppose
that some of the interpersonal communication that passed between members
of the supervisory team was rooted in conflicts that arose from incompatible
interpersonal interaction between the college supervisor and the cooper¬
ating teacher

10
Deutsch (1969, 1973) included in his definition of conflict the
incompatibility factor that created conflict situations. Such in¬
compatibility could be between persons, groups, or nations. Conflicts
caused by the factor of incompatibility could have either constructive
or destructive consequences. Deutsch found that when constructive
consequences of conflicts emerged the participants were satisfied with
the outcome of the conflict. Conversely, destructive consequences of
conflicts emerged when participants were dissatisfied with the outcomes
and a feeling of loss was a result. Lying somewhere on the continuum
between the two poles of constructive and destructive consequences of
conflict were the consequences of conflict that satisfied or dissatisfied
one party to a degree more than the other party. Total satisfaction or
dissatisfaction was easier to identify and measure, however, in simple
situations than in more difficult in complex social situations. Yet
Deutsch believed that it was not impossible to compare conflicts in
terms of their constructive or destructive outcomes, and by highlighting
these differences of outcomes, the processes by which the outcomes were
derived would also be emphasized.
In the present study under investigation, it was assumed that the
cooperating teacher could identify supervisory behaviors of college
supervisors that contributed to an incompatible interpersonal communica¬
tion situation or a conflict. It was also assumed that the cooperating
teacher would be able to identify those conflicts that had destructive
consequences for members of the student teaching triad. Secondly, it
was assumed that the cooperating teacher would identify situations of
interpersonal communication in which compatibility and cooperation
existed between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Although

11
the identification of effective incidents or situations of behavior
was viewed as an important contribution to the study of the interpersonal
relationship between the two supervisors, the major collateral focus to
the study was to relate, if found, critical incidents of behavior to the
research findings in the literature on conflict in interpersonal communi¬
cation in order to explain why such incidents occurred and how those
identified critical incidents affected the interpersonal relationship
between the college supervisor and the cooperating teacher.
Rationale for the Study of Conflict in the College
Supervisor-Cooperating Teacher Relationship
Several assumptions are made about the nature of conflict between
college supervisors and cooperating teachers that served as the conditions
for the study on conflict in interpersonal communication. The first
assumption is that conflict exists wherever there is human interaction.
Kelley (1979) stated that conflict was inevitable and could not be
suppressed. Citing research from the literature, Kelley made several
suppositions that further supported the need to study conflict in super¬
vision. Like Deutsch (1969, 1973), Kelley believed that conflicts could
have constructive or destructive outcomes. Conflicts could also
initiate change which could be beneficial to all parties intent on
maintaining the status quo. Lastly, conflict increases whenever there
is an increased interdependence between individuals, agencies, or
institutions. Because of the very nature of the adult triad, the college
supervisor, the cooperating teacher, and the student teacher, and the
nature of student teaching supervision by two persons representing two
different institutions, interdependence between members of the student
teaching triad is inevitable.

12
The second assumption is that conflicts in supervision do occur
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Such evidence
was produced by reviewing the literature on student teaching supervision.
One study in particular conducted by Lipton and Lesser (1978), concluded
that while tensions inherent in supervision could not be eliminated,
there were means by which the student teaching triad could reduce the
amount of conflict that existed between the triad members. The authors
identified a number of generalized areas of conflict between supervisors.
Although specific critical behaviors of college supervisors and cooperating
teachers were not specified, the areas of conflict identified served as
further evidence that critical behaviors of college supervisors can be
identified by cooperating teachers.
Lipton and Lesser (1978) identified the following areas of conflict
in the college supervisor-cooperating teacher relationship. (1) There
is an interaction in a "triangle of adults" none of whom are generally
regarded as effective autonomous leaders or creative thinkers. Yet two
of the adult members are viewed as authority figures. (2) There is a
difference of philosophy about student teaching between the school and
the university. This difference is not necessarily undesirable because
an atmosphere of harmony between the two institutions could possibly
lead to a closed system that discourages any form of change in educa¬
tional practices. (3) The philosophy of the college supervisor and
cooperating teacher toward the goals of student teaching are often in
conflict. On the psychological level, competition to be best liked
and approved by the student teacher and other fringe members of the
student teaching triad, e.g. university and school administrators, can
result. (4) There appears to be conflict between the college supervisor

13
and cooperating teacher over the perceived prestige and status of the
university duties versus the duties of school personnel. It is believed
that unresolved issues of prestige, role, and favoritism often have a
great impact on the student teacher in the assigning of grades and future
job opportunities. (5) Conflict between the triad members exists in
both covert and overt types of communication.
Lipton and Lesser (1978) concluded that conflicts could not be
eliminated but suggested several alternatives that could help reduce
tensions. The alternative suggestions were made after the authors noted
that ego strengthening of the triad would not be possible. Instead
the authors suggested that the members of the triad select each other
and then be permitted to change triad members if the new relationship
did not work out. A second suggestion made was to reduce the power of
influence by assigning a pass/fail grade to the student teacher. Another
means of reducing potential conflict was to have the college supervisor
observe the student teacher by video-tape, entering the classroom only
for sporadic visits. Greater role differentiation for the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher were suggested, giving primary
training duties to the cooperating teacher, and consultant-counselor
tasks to the college supervisor. Lastly, it was suggested that the
student teacher should be viewed as a neophyte professional, with
responsibilities and autonomy provided as early as possible in the
student teacher's training program.
The third assumption made for this study of conflict in inter¬
personal communication is that it would be beneficial for the college
supervisor to know and understand the nature of conflict between the

14
two supervisors. Tjosvold (1978) cited several benefits for the
understanding of conflict between teachers and school administrators
that has application to the relationship between the college supervisor
and cooperating teacher. Effectively managed, conflict can increase a
commitment to a shared purpose. If ineffectively managed, conflict can
undermine the effectiveness of purpose between parties. While
Tjosvold focused mainly on role differentiation between teachers and
school administrators, both groups he observed had competitive and
cooperative interests. Relating such observations to the study of the
relationship between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher, it
can be stated that cooperation between the college supervisor and
cooperating teacher exists when there is a goal to promote student
teacher competence. Competition results because of the sharing of the
benefits and burdens between the two supervisors. Knowing the benefits
of conflicts should allow the college supervisor to participate in more
effective decision making by collecting more information about the
situation, by exploring alternatives to bring about a more satisfactory
relationship, and by exchanging ideas, opinions and feelings, thereby
reaffirming the commitment to supervision. Supervisors need to under¬
stand that the mutual influence of the college supervisor and cooperating
teacher is viewed as a more desirable goal than a goal where a hierarchy
of supervisory influence prevails.
The college supervisor communicates in general and specific ways
with the cooperating teacher about situations, problems, and issues
concerning the student teacher assigned to a cooperating teacher for
a specified time of student teaching. A major role that the college
supervisor assumes in working with the cooperating teacher and student

15
teacher is that of developing and maintaining good interpersonal
relationships with members of the student teaching team and the
cooperating school. The attitudes that the college supervisor brings
from the college to the school site could very well influence the types
of communication that pass among the student teaching team. Stratemeyer
and Lindsey (1958) concluded that much of the communication involved the
seeking of information or the solving of problems pertaining to the
student teacher's situation. With better understanding on the part of
college supervisors and cooperating teachers of the needs and concerns
for each other, it is reasoned that the student teaching experience
could be significantly improved for the college supervisor, the cooperating
teacher, and the student teacher.
Procedures
The critical incident technique developed by John C. Flanagan (1954)
and others was the method of research used but modified for the purposes
of this study. The critical incident technique is a set of procedures
for collecting self-reported observations of effective or ineffective
behaviors about specific jobs in which persons are engaged. For the
purposes of this study, a critical incident is an observable human
activity that is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences
and predictions to be made about the person performing the act (Flanagan,
1954). Moreover, this human activity is an indication of unusual
competence or lack of competence on the part of the person(s) engaged in
the activity (Good, 1973). Critical behaviors are those identified
effective or ineffective behaviors that appear to have the most influence
on the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of achieving the aim or purpose
of the job or task.

16
The subjects selected for the study on critical behaviors of
college supervisors were secondary school teachers who had supervised
or were currently supervising a student teacher sent from one of three
major state universities in Florida. All the participants were presently
employed in the Florida school system and were asked by university area
coordinators or assistant principals to volunteer for the study.
One hundred and ninety-two cooperating teachers were given the
critical incident forms to report effective or ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors during student teacher supervision. The questions on
the critical incident forms were developed to elicit from cooperating
teachers the critical behaviors of college supervisors. Once the forms
were returned to the investigator, the contents were read and analyzed
in order to provide the data used to answer the questions posited in
this study.
Limitations of the Study
The following limitations of the study were established:
(1) The data to be collected were limited to those effective
and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college supervisors as
perceived by cooperating teachers using the critical incident technique.
At the time that the data were collected, the subjects who volunteered
were cooperating teachers who had supervised a student teacher assigned
to them through a preservice teacher education program from a university
or college. The sample of volunteers consisted of cooperating teachers
in the state of Florida.

17
(2) Cooperating teachers who participated in the study
supervised student teachers at the secondary school level (Grades 7-12)
for a minimum of one quarter, or nine weeks. Each student teacher was
assigned to a college supervisor for the same period of time.
(3) The two types of institutions that participated in the study
were Florida public schools where the cooperating teachers were employed
and three state universities that sponsored and supervised the student
teachers.
(4) The critical behaviors of college supervisors were those
behaviors which were identified by cooperating teachers as critical to
the interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and cooper
ating teacher and which were perceived by the cooperating teacher to
affect their functioning as a cooperating teacher. Although many
critical behaviors of college supervisors were directed toward the
student teacher, those behaviors were not considered important to the
study unless the cooperating teacher was affected by the college super¬
visor-student teacher interpersonal relationship.
Definitions of Terms
The following terms are central to this study and therefore
require definitions:
College Supervisor - a designated person who represents the institution
of higher learning in the task of supervising a student teacher in a
public or private school. The major responsibility of the college
supervisor is to observe the student teacher in a classroom setting, to
confer with the student teacher about his performance, and to evaluate
the student teacher's performance.

18
Cooperating Teacher — the classroom teacher who volunteers or is
assigned to aid and direct the teaching experiences of a student teacher
in addition to the regular duties assigned to the classroom teacher in a
public, private, or laboratory school. The major task of the cooperating
teacher is to help the student teacher plan appropriate lessons, collect
instructional materials, and to suggest ways to present the materials
to the pupils. Another function of the cooperating teacher is to evaluate
the student teacher.
Student Teacher — the college student engaged in a practice teaching
experience usually termed student teaching under the guidance and super¬
vision of a college supervisor and cooperating teacher in a planned
period of educational experiences in which the student teacher moves
from the role of observer-helper, to full participant in performing the
duties of a classroom teacher.
Dyad — two persons who are involved in social interaction. For the
purposes of this study, a dyad is identified as any two of the following
three persons; college supervisor, cooperating teacher, or student teacher
engaged in some form of social interaction between each other.
Triad — three persons who are involved in social interaction. For the
purposes of this study, a triad will be identified as the college super¬
visor, cooperating teacher, and the student teacher engaged in some form
of social interaction among each other.
Situation — a contextual or environmental condition or circumstance in
which there exists a component of human intervention or interaction where
experiences and interpretations of events takes place.
Incident — any observable human activity that is sufficiently complete
in itself to permit inferences and predictions to be made about the
person performing the act. To be critical, an incident must occur in a
situation in which the purpose or intent of the act seems fairly clear
to the observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite to
leave little doubt concerning its effects (Flanagan, 1954, p. 327).
Critical Incident — some occurrence involving a person which is taken
to indicate unusual competence or lack of competence on his part; has been
used as a basis for defining job requirements and for developing pro¬
ficiency tests (Dictionary of Education, 1973, p. 154).
Conflict — some incident that occurs between the college supervisor and
cooperating teacher in which the cooperating teacher perceives that
incident as creating an incompatible situation between himself and the
college supervisor.

CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE
Introduction
The literature is replete with scholarly concerns for a meaning¬
ful student teaching experience as part of the preservice teacher
education program. Roles, behaviors, attitudes, concerns and problems
of key individuals engaged in the student teaching collaborative effort
have been studied and recommendations for change in this preservice
teacher education component have been made. Despite the large numbers
of student teaching studies available, Heitzmann (1977) reported that
much of the research on student teaching has been conducted by doctoral
students in graduate schools of education. Several factors are stated
to support his thesis. Many faculty members of colleges of education
view the college supervisor as a low status faculty position. Because
the college supervisor's work is more field oriented and less research
oriented, such activities do not carry the weight for merit increases
or faculty advancement. Furthermore, many faculty are reluctant to
return to the classroom after teaching a homogeneous group of college
students. Accordingly, doctoral students are frequently used to super¬
vise student teachers and those who accept the assignment of supervision
find that they have a population available for their doctoral disserta¬
tion research.
A large number of studies in preservice teacher education student
teaching focus on the student teachers. Stress, anxieties, problems,
19

20
attitudes, beliefs, successes and failures are fully reported in the
literature (Anderson, 1960; Coates & Thoreson, 1976; Fuller, 1969;
Garrard, 1966; Halpert, 1966; Harrow, 1973; Sorenson & Halpert, 1968).
Fewer studies,however, are conducted in the areas of studying the inter¬
personal relationship between the student teacher and the cooperating
teacher, the student teacher and the college supervisor, or the coopera¬
ting teacher and the college supervisor. Only one study, by Lipton and
Lesser (1978), related directly to the study of conflict in the teaching
triad. In order to understand the nature of the interpersonal relation¬
ship between college supervisors and cooperating teachers, it was
necessary to review the literature on the relationships that exist
between the members of the student teaching triad; the college super¬
visor, cooperating teacher, and the student teacher.
The recent professional literature appropriate to the present
study being conducted is reviewed under six headings. The first section
reports studies related to the interpersonal relationship between the
cooperating teacher and the student teacher. The second section des¬
cribes studies related to the role of the college supervisor and the
interpersonal relationship between the college supervisor and the
student teacher. The third section contains studies related to the
interpersonal relationship among members of the student teaching triad.
The fourth section reports studies related to communication among the
college supervisor, the cooperating teacher, and the student teacher.
The fifth section is a review of the literature on conflict communica¬
tion that was judged by the investigator to be appropriately related
to this study on the effective and ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors. The sixth section contains a review of the literature in
education using the critical incident technique method.

21
Studies Related to the Interpersonal Relationship Between
the Cooperating Teacher and the Student Teacher
At the time of the Steeves (1952) study, the most important person
in the preservice professional life of the student teacher was the
cooperating teacher to whom the student teacher was assigned. However,
the only criterion used in the selection of cooperating teachers was
reported to be the availability and willingness of teachers to take on
the extra duties of this role.
Although the influences on student teachers by other key individuals
were identified by Karmos and Jacko (1977) and Manning (1977), the
cooperating teacher remained, according to Lowther (1970),the most signi¬
ficant influence upon the beliefs, attitudes and behaviors of the student
teacher.
In a study of the most successful and least successful experiences
in student teaching as perceived by the student teacher, Lowther (1970),
concluded that the interpersonal relationship established between the
student teacher and cooperating teacher was a major factor in determining
thesuccess of the student teaching experience. The need for more investi¬
gation into the interpersonal dynamics of the student teacher--
cooperating teacher relationship was cited. According to this study
four important questions remained unanswered: (1) What constitutes a
good or bad interpersonal relationship between the student teacher and
cooperating teacher? (2) What are the outcomes of a good or bad rela--
tionship? (3) Can variables be identified that contribute to the
structuring of the student teacher-cooperating teacher relationship
along with each participant’s role? (4) Why is it difficult for the

22
cooperating teacher to provide feedback on teaching performance to the
student teacher? Lowther's study found that too often student teachers
were given little or no feedback on teaching performance, were given
little personal or professional support, and were unable to satisfy the
cooperating teachers' expectations. Student teachers viewed those
experiences where there was personal satisfaction gained on the student
teacher's part in working with the pupils as more successful than those
experiences related to achieving the instructional objectives.
Nicholson (1971) used the critical incident technique to identify
and categorize behaviors of cooperating teachers that student teachers
viewed as critical to their success or failure in student teaching. More
behaviors were identified in the affective than the cognitive domains
of teaching behaviors. Nicholson concluded that there exists a rela¬
tionship between effective teaching by the student teacher and the super¬
visory behavior of the cooperating teacher.
Hackley (1976) found twenty-three effective behaviors and fifteen
ineffective behaviors of cooperating teachers as perceived by student
teachers in both the affective and cognitive domains of teaching be¬
haviors. These behaviors were then translated into twenty behavioral
criteria to be used for the selection and development of effective
secondary school cooperating teachers. Although many effective behaviors
of cooperating teachers were related to the classroom instructional
component of student teaching, a number of effective behaviors were
identified as interpersonal behaviors hetween the cooperating teacher
and the student teacher. Effective interpersonal behaviors of coopera¬
ting teachers included: the ability of the cooperating teacher to
provide confidence and support to the student teacher, to criticize the

23
student teacher constructively and in private, to treat the student
teacher as a colleague and not as a student, to display and translate
to the student teacher a professional attitude toward teaching, and to
help the student teacher overcome the frustrations of teaching. Examples
given byHackley of ineffective interpersonal behaviors of cooperating
teachers included communicating a lack of faith in the student teacher,
increasing the insecurity of the student teacher, interrupting the
student teacher at inappropriate times, rejecting the student teacher's
ideas about instructional techniques and materials, and criticizing the
student teacher excessively and in front of other persons.
In support of the Lowther (1970) and Nicholson (1971) studies,
Campbell and Williams (1973) found that a successful student teaching
experience is determined by the quality of the relationship between the
student teacher and the cooperating teacher, not by the school, class,
or grade level assigned. They identified fourteen problems commonly
encountered by student teachers with the cooperating teachers to whom
they were assigned. Two major deterrents to a successful student
teaching experience were identified: inconsistent levels of expectations
for the student teachers, and the reluctance of the cooperating teacher
to "let go" of the class in order to allow the student teacher the
opportunity to use different teaching methods and learning materials.
Heitzmann (1977) reviewed eighty studies on student teaching and
concluded that the student teaching experience was the decisive factor
for continuing in or terminating the choice of teaching as a career. It
was the cooperating teacher who promoted creativity and high morale,
and established a mature relationship and understanding between the two

24
partners as to expectations, accomplishments and goals. The role of the
cooperating teacher was viewed as that of a key leader, who suggested,
guided, demonstrated, conferred, counseled, and evaluated the student
teacher during a stressful period of adjustment. Teaching skill develop¬
ment to the student teacher, rather than using the student teacher as a
source of free labor or as a personal assistant, was viewed by McAteer
(1976) as the most important function of the cooperating teacher’s role.
Elkin (1958) identified effective and ineffective behaviors of
cooperating teachers as perceived by student teachers and cooperating
teachers and found major differences in how the two groups perceived
the role of the cooperating teacher. Cooperating teachers viewed their
role as one of induction of the student teacher into the mechanics of
teaching and lesson preparation while student teachers viewed the major
role of the cooperating teacher as one of encouraging the student
teacher to assume increased responsibility for classroom instruction
by providing the opportunity for the student to grow in professional
responsibilities. The personal relationship that developed between
the cooperating teacher and student teacher appeared to be a significant
factor for the success or failure of the student teacher's performance.
Price (1961) found that the attitudes held by student teachers
changed after the student teaching experience and moved in the direction
of attitudes held by the classroom teacher. Correlation between the
cooperating teacher and student teacher classroom performance indicated
that student teachers appeared to acquire many of the teaching practices
of their cooperating teachers. This study supported McAulay's (1960),
conclusion that colleges of education method class techniques and
materials were not used by a majority of beginning first year teachers.

25
All teachers, however, used the materials they had prepared in the
classroom in which they had had their student teaching experience. It
must be noted that the cooperating teachers who participated in this
study identified as successful, teachers who were themselves strong
positive influences on their student teachers.
The effect of the cooperating teacher's personality on the student
teacher was not considered in the studies reviewed above. However,
Yee (1969) tested the hypothesis that cooperating teachers are a signi¬
ficant source of influence and concluded that student teacher-held
attitudes about their pupils reflected the influence of their coopera¬
ting teachers. Although congruent influences characteristic of a positive
relationship between the attitudes of cooperating teachers and student
teachers were most common, the study also revealed that a number of
incongruent influences operated. Negative influences of cooperating
teachers also contributed to attitudes held by student teachers not in
accord with cooperating teachers.
Mahan and Lacefield (1978) reported two studies that extended the
knowledge about the effects of year-long student teaching experiences
with multiple role models (cooperating teachers) upon student teacher
value orientation toward education and schooling. It was concluded
that the values held and expressed vocally and/or concretely by coopera¬
ting teachers were a powerful influence upon the student teachers' value
orientation toward teaching. The studies revealed that student teachers
would adjust their attitudes and values to minimize disparity between
the cooperating teachers and themselves. This shift would occur toward
the first assigned cooperating teacher and would shift again toward the

26
values and beliefs held by the second assigned cooperating teacher. In
both studies the assumption was made that the cooperating teachers'
experiences would change little as a result of the interaction with and
influence of the student teacher assigned to them. It was concluded that
many cooperating teachers viewed the cooperating teacher-student teacher
relationship as one of the teacher-learner. Cooperating teachers were
usually older, more highly trained, and more experienced than student
teachers. While both parties were influenced by the dyad relationship,
the student teacher was influenced to a more significant degree by the
cooperating teacher than by vice versa.
Communication links between the cooperating teacher and student
teacher were studied by Edmund and Hemink (1960). They found that
cooperating teachers and student teachers agreed most frequently on
areas of successful student teacher experience. There existed negligible
differences between areas of least success. However, the low percent
of agreement about the least successful student teaching experiences led
the investigators to conclude that poor communication links existed
between the cooperating teacher and the student teacher. More signi¬
ficantly, little or no attention was given by the subjects to the student
teacher's success or failure in teaching course content. Evidence of
poor communication and low agreement of success were also found by the
investigators in the areas of class discipline, lesson planning, and
other in-class related activities.
Soares and Soares (1968) in a study focusing on the nature of
the student teacher's self concept during student teaching found that
although there was agreement that student teaching was the most meaning¬
ful preservice teacher education experience, an unrevealed facet of

27
student teaching was that the experience appeared less significant than
it could or should be. Results from the study indicated that student
teachers did not seem to gain as much as they should from their associa¬
tion with the cooperating teacher when measured against three alterna¬
tive image factors; how the student teacher viewed himself as a teacher,
how the student teacher viewed the college supervisor's image of him as
a teacher, and how the student teacher viewed the cooperating teacher's
image of him as a teacher. The results indicated that the image of the
cooperating teacher's opinion of the student teacher as a teacher was the
most important factor for the student teacher's professional development.
Soares and Soares' (1968) study supported Thompson (1963) in his
findings which identified anxieties experienced by student teachers.
One-third of the subjects in the Soares and Soares study were elementary
school student teachers and two-thirds of the subjects were secondary
school student teachers. The results showed that over three-quarters
of the sample identified anxieties that were concerned with the student
teacher's relationship with the cooperating teacher. The student
teachers indicated that they were given little information by their
individual cooperating teacher about the expectations for the student
teacher to meet.
Southall and King (1979) conducted a survey of college supervisors'
perceptions of critical incidents; situations that occurred which could
have or did have an impact upon the student teacher's completion or
success in the student teaching experience. The authors found that lack
of communication between the cooperating teacher and student teacher

28
was the most common cause of critical incidents during student teaching.
The second most common cause for critical incidents to occur was per¬
ceived by the college supervisor to be the student teacher's inability
to live up to the expectations of the cooperating teacher. This failure
was reported to affect the relationship between the student teacher and
cooperating teacher. The third most often perceived cause or critical
incident was the student teacher's not being prepared to teach, or not
knowing methods and techniques of teaching. The major implication drawn
from the results of the study was the suggestion that college supervisors
must be skilled in dealing with interpersonal relationships, particularly
in facilitating and encouraging communication between the cooperating
teacher and student teacher.
Lowther (1968) attempted to answer the question of the degree of
quality in the cooperating teacher's supervisory performance by using
student teacher descriptors of the most helpful and least helpful
activities of the cooperating teacher * A questionnaire was developed
on which the student teachers described the most and least helpful
activities. There were 480 most helpful activities and 325 least
helpful activities cited. Four categories of most helpful activities
were identified: types of behavior allowed student teachers in
the classroom, counseling and advice, support and understanding
of the student teacher's concerns, and performance evaluation. Least
helpful activities were identified as the following: the small
amount of performance evaluation, the small amount of help and counsel
offered, poor or rigid supervision, the lack of advice and help in the
teaching environment, and the small amount of actual teaching time

29
allotted the student teacher. Low communication linkage between the
cooperating teacher and student teacher as to the needs and professional
help desired by the student teacher was evident by the responses.
Simms (1975) suggested that the lack of communication and pro¬
fessional help provided to the student teacher could be due to the feel¬
ings of inadequacy felt by the cooperating teacher. Although most
cooperating teachers viewed themselves as adequate classroom teachers,
they perceived their ability to supervise a student teacher and to work
with sponsoring personnel from a university as inadequate. The coopera¬
ting teachers stated that leadership on the part of the university in
sponsoring programs, and special training sessions for working with
student teachers were weak or non-existent. Moreover, content and
methods of instruction in some professional education courses were
designed to prepare student teachers to teach a student body that no
longer existed in the schools. According to Bosse (1973), cooperating
teachers stated that their perceived inability to work with a student
teacher was a result of the implementation policies of the student
teaching program by the colleges and universities. Earp (1975) con¬
cluded that participatory collaborative supervision (teams of student
teachers and cooperating teachers) caused significant gains in the
cooperating teacher's positive attitudes toward their supervisory jobs
and on their evaluation of fellow teachers, student teachers, and class¬
room supervisors as sources of new instructional ideas.
It is important to note that the influence of interpersonal
behaviors between cooperating teachers and student teachers was
reciprocal. A majority of the studies noted previously by Yee (1969)

30
studied cooperating teacher attitudes and influences on the student
teacher. Rich (1971) found that influence was reciprocal with the
student teacher becoming both a learner and a change agent during the
student teaching period. Seven categories describing student teachers
as providers of beneficial experiences for pupils, student teachers,
cooperating teachers, and cooperating schools were established and
defined by cooperating teachers who served as subjects in the study.
Educational experiences were identified as a two-way process in which
the flow of new ideas, outlooks and approaches to educational learning
and teaching outcomes not only moved from the cooperating school and
the cooperating teacher to the student teacher, but moved from the
college or university through the student teacher to the cooperating
school and the cooperating teacher. The two categories of educational
experiences that cooperating teachers ranked as the most important
contribution by the student teacher were the contributions of new
knowledge and the co-functioning or human relations of cooperating
teachers and student teachers in the classroom. This study, however,
appeared to contradict the later findings cited previously of Mahan
and Lacefield (1978) about the influence of the cooperating teachers'
values on the cooperating teacher-student teacher dyad.
A review of the literature of studies related to the interpersonal
relationship between the cooperating teacher and student teacher indi¬
cates that the cooperating teacher is the major influence upon the
learning outcomes of student teaching by the student teacher. The
interpersonal relationship that develops between the cooperating teacher
and the student teacher has a significant impact upon the perceived

31
positive and negative attitudes that a student teacher holds toward
teaching. The studies also reveal that effective and ineffective
behaviors of cooperating teachers as perceived by student teachers
contributed to positive and negative attitudes toward teaching held by
the student teachers.
Studies Related to the Role of the College Supervisor and the Inter¬
personal Relationship Between the College Supervisor
and the Student Teacher
College supervision of the student teacher is acknowledged as an
important factor in the student teaching experience. Numerous studies
have been conducted and articles published on the role and function of
the college supervisor and the variety of participatory arrangements
among colleges of education with public and private schools. Varied
supervisory practices among college supervisors and the degree of their
commitment to student teaching experiences have been scrutinized, debated,
praised, and criticized (Stratemeyer & Lindsey, 1958). Problems
occurring during student teaching, and concerns of college supervisors
about the student teaching experience have been reported by Clarke (1961)
and Pfeiffer (1964).
Blanchard (1968) identified the professional problems of college
supervisors and categorized the problems through a review of the litera¬
ture on supervision. Four of the six problem areas that concerned
college supervisors related directly to the student teacher: (1) the
selection, assignment and induction of the student teacher into the
school, (2) guiding the student teacher in student teaching activities,
(3) evaluating the student teacher, and (4) follow-up guidance of the
student teacher. The fifth problem area concerned the college supervisor's
relationship with the cooperating teacher and other aspects of the student

32
teacher's school setting, and the sixth problem area dealt with the
college supervisor and college faculty membership. On a questionnaire,
college supervisors identified three problems in each of the six problem
areas. Ten concerns representing 110 problem statements were recognized
by more than twenty-five percent of the respondents. Eight of the ten
concerns related directly to some aspect of supervision, working with
student teachers, or evaluating student teachers. The two remaining
concerns focused on the adequacy of college supervisors’ supervision,
curriculum theory, and practice in teacher education.
Strebel (1936),in his survey of the state of college supervisory
practices forty years ago, wrote of the same concerns that college
supervisors hold today. He found that while college supervisors were
expected to evaluate student teachers in the cooperating school, the
colleges of education had little or no control over the teacher education
programs and practices in those participating schools. Student teachers
were expected to adapt to the curriculum, methods, and philosophy of
the cooperating school. There was little consistent effort to coordinate
the supervision of the student teacher by the college supervisor and the
cooperating teacher which resulted in confusion on the part of the
student teacher and an overlapping of supervising duties on the part of
the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. Calling for closer
collaborative efforts by colleges and schools, Strebel noted their need
to coordinate functions, to interpret the major outcomes of student
teaching, and to delineate supervisory roles and functions for the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher.

33
Some educators have attacked the college supervisors's position
as redundant, and have suggested better use of the college supervisor's
time by training cooperating teachers through inservice education to
assume major responsibilities of the student teacher (Moser & Bebb, 1970).
Most studies reviewed, however, supported the need for the continuous
support and services of the college supervisor in the student teaching
program (Johnson, 1964). Bennie (1964) analyzed the effectiveness of
college supervisors and found that a random selection of first year
teachers reported that the college supervisor had given more help to them
as a student teacher than did the cooperating teacher to whom they had
been assigned. Categories of areas of most help to the student teacher
were identified. The most important were those of evaluating student
teacher performance, helping in planning long range instruction, writing
lesson plans and lesson objectives, helping the student teacher to
adjust to the teaching role, and helping the student teacher to under¬
stand the purposes of education. Regular conferences with the student
teacher were viewed as the most valuable activity of the college
supervisor. The first year teachers also rated classroom visitations as
a high priority although this activity was utilized on a regular basis
by the smallest number of college supervisors. The first year teachers
stated that the college supervisor gave the least help in the planning
aspects of teaching and in the personal adjustment of the student teacher
to classroom teaching.
Neal, Kraft, and Kracht (1967) used a free response questionnaire
to gain answers from student teachers, cooperating teachers, college
supervisors, and school administrators to the question of why a university

34
should provide personnel to supervise student teachers. Eleven roles
for the college supervisor were identified which supported the need for
college personnel to form a liaison or a cooperative linkage between
college and school. Other roles focused on establishing a helping rela¬
tionship between the college supervisor and student teacher; working
with the cooperating teacher to define role responsibilities; providing
continuity and structure to the student teacher program; evaluating the
program and student teacher; and acting as a resource person for the
student teacher, cooperating teacher, and school administrators. Although
the liaison role was viewed as the most important function of the college
supervisor, the college supervisor’s traditional role of giving direc¬
tion and critical evaluation to the student teacher was not identified
as an important role by any of the four groups in the study.
Other studies on the role and function of the college supervisor
identified varied tasks that may be assigned to this position. Clearly,
the label of a jack-of-all-trades can be used in describing the eclectic
approach to supervision. Building good relationships (Edwards, 1961),
counseling (Smith, 1960), supervision and evaluation of student teachers
(Ashby, 1973; Frenzel, 1977; Kunde, 1973; Morris, 1974), supportive
roles (Freed, 1976), and a "teacher education consultant" (J.A. Johnson,
1974), were all important role functions identified for college super¬
visors of student teachers.
Establishing good interpersonal relationships between the college
supervisor and student teacher was cited frequently as a major criterion
for effective supervision. Effective and ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors as perceived by student teachers were revealed in two studies

35
as important in developing a positive interpersonal relationship
between the college supervisor and student teacher. One study (Carr,
1967) dealt with the situational and personal variables that influenced
the interpersonal relationship hetween the college supervisor and
student teacher at the elementary school level. The second study
(McElroy, 1972), identified twenty-six effective and twenty-eight
ineffective practices of college supervisors of secondary student
teachers that were important in accessing student teachers' teaching and/
or attitudes toward teaching.
The McElroy (1972) study is reviewed more extensively because the
results of that study apply to the establishment of an effective inter¬
personal relationship between the college supervisor and the student
teacher. The research technique, the critical incident technique used
by McElroy, will be discussed in Chapter III because the technique was
used to ohtain the outcomes of the present study.
In his study on the effective and ineffective practices of college
supervisors as perceived by secondary school student teachers, McElroy
(1972) found a numher of common factors that could help identify effec¬
tive and ineffective behaviors of college supervisors. Effective be¬
haviors were those behaviors identified as practices where the college
supervisor provided suggestions and information, where they offered
praise and support, and where they provided the opportunity for the
student teacher and the college supervisor to discuss all aspects of
the student teaching experience. Ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors were those identified by student teachers when the college
supervisor failed to praise the student teacher, were derelict in their

36
duties, and when they did not allow student teachers the opportunity
to discuss the student teaching experience.
McElroy (1972) collected 734 usable incidents of college super¬
visors’ behaviors which he used to classify the critical behaviors of
college supervisors into four areas. The four areas were (1) methods
of supervision, (2) content of supervision, (3) interpersonal communi¬
cation in supervision, and (4) qualifications of the college supervisor.
The critical incidents from which critical behaviors were drawn and
categorized under one of the four areas listed above, were then used
to identify the effective and ineffective practices of college super¬
visors. These practices constituted the final step in establishing
categories for fifty-four different types of critical behaviors or
practices of college supervisors.
In the third area, labeled by McElroy (1972) "interpersonal
communication in supervision," seven categories of critical behaviors were
identified. The first category dealt with incidents when the college
supervisor intervened in conflicts between the student teacher and the
cooperating teacher by attempting to re-establish communication.
Student teachers cited such practices as effective because they helped
to relieve the tension between themselves and the cooperating teacher
and also encouraged the student teacher to do the best possible job
despite conflict with the cooperating teacher.
The second category dealt with the college supervisor defending
the actions of the student teacher to the cooperating teacher and the
pupils. Such practices by the college supervisor increased the con¬
fidence of the student teacher and helped to change the situation so

37
that student teachers no longer had to take action which needed to be
defended. The third category dealt with incidents in which the college
supervisor listened to the problems of the student teacher. Such
practices by college supervisors were reported by student teachers to
aid them in facing up to their problems and to realize that their
problems were not unique.
The last four categories under the area of "interpersonal communi¬
cation in supervision" identified ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors. The first of these categories of ineffective behaviors
were recorded incidents in which the college supervisor did not listen
to the problems of the student teacher. Student teachers reported that
such behavior discouraged them by making the student teachers believe
that they were on their own and could not expect any support from their
college supervisor. The second category dealt with incidents where the
college supervisor did not talk to the student teacher. Little meaning¬
ful conversation existed, and conferences between the two were not
important to the student teacher's learning experience. The third
category dealt with incidents when the college supervisor told the
student teacher that his problems were not important. Student teachers
reported that as a result of such college supervisor behavior, they
stopped talking with the college supervisor and only listened to any
comment that the college supervisor chose to make. The last category
recorded incidents where the college supervisor failed to encourage the
student teacher to continue teaching when he became depressed or indi¬
cated a desire not to continue teaching. Those student teachers
reported that they hoped that the college supervisor would have encouraged

38
them to continue teaching but instead they accepted the college super¬
visor's recommendation to stop.
A total of fifty-nine critical behaviors were recorded in the
seven categories of area three, "interpersonal communication in super¬
vision," out of a total of 734 critical behaviors reported for all
categories in the four areas. McElroy’s (1972) summary of the findings
in the area of interpersonal communication indicates that the college
supervisor is seen by student teachers as one who will come to their
defense when it is justified, will encourage student teachers and listen
to their problems and will help to reduce conflict when it arises between
the student teachers and cooperating teachers. The importance of communi¬
cation between the student teacher and the college supervisor is viewed
as an essential link in the supervisory functions of the college super¬
visor.
Studies Related to the Interpersonal Relationship Among Members
of the Student Teaching Triad: The College Supervisor,
Cooperating Teacher and Student Teacher
Ideally, the college supervisor, cooperating teacher, and student
teacher should be viewed as members of a team whose common goal is the
professional educational development of the student teacher.
Student teaching, as the most intensive professional
laboratory experience in the teacher education program,
is intended to provide prospective teachers the oppor¬
tunity (1) to discover their abilities and needs, (2) to
clarify and test theoretical concepts, and (3) to
increase their understanding and skill in a practical
situation. It is for the student a learning experience.
For this reason the chief function of all those who work
with the student teacher is to guide him in his learning
through various activities. (Stratemeyer & Lindsey, 1958,
p. 93)

39
It would appear that communication between the three partners is
the weakest link in the interpersonal relationship of the triad members.
The college supervisor needs to know what the cooperating teacher
expects of him in terms of administrative and supervisory duties and
the ways the college supervisor can carry out the liaison role (Hytrek,
1973). Too often the college supervisor is criticized for not fulfill¬
ing the expected role. The cooperating teacher and student teacher
expect the college supervisor to hring to the student teaching triad
relationships a fund of knowledge that does not exist.
With so many unfulfilled expectations, unless the supervisor
is very adept at public relations and impression management,
it is not surprising to find a great deal of "triadic
imbalance." (Diamonti, 1977, p. 484)
Because expectations of the college supervisor appear unfulfilled, the
student teacher sees the cooperating teacher more often as having the
greater influence in the supervision of the student teacher.
One way to overcome the imbalance within the triad is the proposal
by Deakins (1977) for the formation of on-site supervisory teams of
cooperating teachers and college supervisors who are viewed to be repre¬
sentatives of the real and theoretical worlds respectively. Deakins
suggests that cooperating teachers commonly misinterpret the teaching of
methods to represent the theoretical world of the university of which
little or no use of knowledge and skills gained can be incorporated into
the classrooms. Deakins challenged whether these attitudes toward the
perceived theoretical world of the university actually had any basis.
More often cooperating teachers incorporated knowledge and skills gained
in their own undergraduate preparation. Deakins concludes that coopera¬
ting teachers need to look on the university as a community and academic

40
suppoet site where their own professional growth is viewed as continu¬
ing education through the association of supervising student teachers.
Bennie (1966) described the college supervisor's role, and stated
that cooperating teachers needed to overcome their suspicions relating
to the supervision of student teachers. Much of the doubt resulted from
authoritarian past practices of college supervisors coupled with coopera¬
ting teachers' insecurity in working with a college "expert." The per¬
sonality of the college supervisors along with their ability to maintain
good public relations between the college and the school, were identi- .
fied as vital criteria for the selection of college supervisors for
student teachers.
Competitive rather than cooperative relationships were found by
Yee (1967, 1968) in studies of the interpersonal relationships and
behaviors in the student teaching triad. Attitudes of each triad member
were obtained by inventories and questionnaires specially prepared for
the study. The results revealed that over time, as the triad members
worked longer and became more familiar with each other, coalitions of
dyads were formed. Dyads formed with more positive balance occurred
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher while the most
negative dyads arose between the college supervisor and student teacher,
or the cooperating teacher and student teacher.
The studies also revealed that triad relationships were more often
competitive than cooperative. In those triads that exhibited competi¬
tiveness, members perceived each other as working against interdepend¬
ence with respect to common goals of student teaching and supervision.
Competitive triad members saw themselves as representing different levels
of power within student teaching and could not be cooperative as a result

41
of this perception. Competitive relationships may have evolved because
student teaching programs and practices did not provide purposeful
opportunities for triadic interaction.
Influence was found by Yee (1967, 1968) in his two studies to
be a key factor in working against triadic cooperativeness. The college
supervisor is most often identified as the key person in the triad who
had the greatest potential to influence the outcomes of the behavior of
the triad. Obtaining more knowledge on leadership styles of the college
supervisor and the cooperating teacher is suggested in order to upgrade
the professional development of the members of the student teaching triad.
Cross (1969) found that as student teachers perceived positive
professional support from the cooperating teacher, college supervisor,
and school administrators, their perceptions of the total experience
were improved. Cross concluded that "... the approval and encourage¬
ment of positive behavior and the ability to sustain confidence and to
advocate growth support is viewed as a dimension of helping that has a
positive effect on the becoming process of teaching" (p. 1). Cross
also concluded that professional support was a product of the inter¬
personal relationship between colleagues and was not influenced by
extraneous variables measured in the study; class size, urban-suburban
school settings, grade level assigned to student teacher, sex of
student teacher, the student teacher's perceptions of pupils' reading
levels, or the student teacher's perceptions of the pupils' inter¬
personal relations structure.
Wheeler (1977) examined each member of the triad to determine the
probable effect on college seniors, cooperating teachers, and college

42
supervisors of the student teaching experience on three affective
dimensions; open-mindedness, the self-concept, and teacher-student
rapport. Wheeler examined each member of the student teaching triad's
influence on the three affective dimensions on the other members. The
results showed that college seniors who had participated in student
teaching were more closed-minded about the ability of secondary school
pupils for self control in the classroom than were college seniors not
participating in student teaching. However, the participation of cooper¬
ating teachers and college supervisors as members of the student teaching
triad did not affect their open-mindedness, self concept, or student-
teacher rapport with the triad. The college supervisor was cited as
the most frequent probable source of influence in change occurring
within the three affective dimensions among the triad members. The
college supervisor, lacking information about the personal and profes¬
sional deficiencies of the student teacher, appeared to foster closed¬
mindedness of the student teacher and to decrease the student teacher's
learning potential. Wheeler stated that the college supervisor's role
was so influential that open-minded individuals with positive self
concepts and warm teacher-student rapport should be selected for this
role and contacts between the members of the triad should be increased,
not reduced.
Studies Related to Communications Among the College Supervisor,
the Cooperating Teacher, and Student Teacher
A number of studies of key personnel in student teaching cited
problems of communication as a variable contributing toward a poor
interpersonal relationship between members of the student teaching triad,

43
and failures of meaningful student teacher experiences. Investiga¬
tions into student teacher-cooperating teacher communication were
cited by Lipsey (1972), Lowther (1964), Poole (1972), Southall and
King (1979), and Stillers and Kniep (1973). The studies indicated
that a communication gap exists and was evidenced by the student
teacher's reluctance to ask questions of the cooperating teacher or to
participate more than minimally in the classroom. Student teachers
were hesitant to ask for help in lesson planning, in providing stimu¬
lating lessons for the pupils, and in developing subject content.
Cooperating teachers were found to be reluctant in providing feedback to
student teachers on teaching performance, and often were criticized
for interrupting class when the student teacher was teaching. A sum¬
mary of the findings indicated that human interaction in a supportive
situation was the most important yet the most difficult goal to achieve.
Coupled with the evidence previously cited by Edmund and Hemink (1960),
the findings indicated that cooperating teachers and student teachers
did not communicate effectively, and many times did not agree on the
evaluation criteria for the student teacher's performance.
Communication studies involving student teachers, cooperating
teachers, and college supervisors were conducted by Ellis (1975),
Lock (1977), and Stagg (1968). Clear, two-way lines of communication
between the college and the school, and between the various members
of the student teaching triad were found to be lacking in regard to
what each institution and each triad member was trying to accomplish and
how they were trying to achieve their goals. The lack of supervisory
feedback on the student teacher's performance, lack of clarity about the

44
cooperating teacher's expectations, and unclear communication about
regulations or policies of the school and college were all cited as
specific communication problems.
Dickson (1953), using a free response questionnaire,identified
problems of human relations common in the student teaching situation.
Student teacher-cooperating teacher dissatisfaction toward the college
supervisor appeared to arise from a misunderstanding of the role of the
college supervisor in providing opportunities for student-supervisor
contacts. Dickson found that ineffective lines of communication between
cooperating teachers and college supervisors created hostility, insecur¬
ity, and anxiety on the part of the cooperating teacher. However, the
cooperating teacher and college supervisor appeared mutually anxious to
feel wanted and secure with each other. Feedback from cooperating
teachers indicated that college supervisors often did not communicate to
cooperating teachers that a job was well done. College supervisors many
times failed to mask their critical feelings concerning cooperating
teachers and their teaching situations. This failure stimulated antagon¬
ism which resulted in an unfriendly and non-cooperative human relationship.
Moreover, the college supervisor's desire for the student teacher to
achieve a successful teaching model was seen as being thwarted by the
insecurity of the cooperating teacher. As a result, college supervisors
expressed hostility and disagreement toward cooperating teachers over
supervision of the student teacher.
In this same study, it was found that cooperating teachers rejected
college supervisors' ideas and displayed hostility or disagreement when
the cooperating teachers felt that the college supervisors were criticizing

45
the methods of teaching as being too traditional or the cooperating
teachers' work with student teachers as being unsatisfactory. Cooperating
teachers also expressed negative feelings toward student teachers who
adopted superior attitudes toward cooperating teachers. Yet in cooperating
teacher-student teacher dyads that developed into a close interpersonal
relationship, both members expressed negative feelings toward college
supervisors who did not recognize the close alignment. In such instances,
the dyad more often would reject the ideas of the college supervisor.
Moreover, the failure of the college supervisor to provide democratic
leadership in the student teaching situation and maintain open lines of
communication led to increased hostility, insecurity, and anxiety on
the part of the student teacher and the cooperating teacher.
Rousseau (1970) cited findings that showed college supervisors
used different verbal behaviors with teachers of different status. In
conferences between college supervisors and student teachers, it was
found that the college supervisor gave more praise, asked more informa¬
tion from, and was more verbally indirect with student teachers than in
conferences held between college supervisors and cooperating teachers.
In these conferences, the college supervisor gave more information to the
cooperating teacher, talked more directly with the cooperating teacher
and gave less praise.
College supervisors rated student teachers more successful when the
student teacher perceived himself as a good communicator according to
Hochel (1973). Five areas were identified as effective communication
skill areas; small group communication, public speaking, listening,
effective use of words (language), and subject matter content. Using

46
the "index of Self-concept as a Communicator" (ISCC), to examine the
relationship between student teachers' self-concepts of communication
ability and the selected criteria of communication areas listed above,
Hochel concluded that a positive and significant relationship existed
between the self-concept of communication ability and evaluations of
student teaching effectiveness. Student teachers who perceived them¬
selves as good communicators were judged by their supervisors as being
able to function effectively in a student teaching situation. One
implication which was drawn from the study was that the way in which
one sees himself or herself as a communicator, could determine the
success of that communication.
Methods of communicating were studied by Tannenbaum (1977),who
concluded that college supervisors trained in Transactional Analysis
facilitated more open communication in conferences with student
teachers. Tannenbaum also found that open communication patterns in
conferences were characterized by a strong dominance of adult to adult
level transactions which accounted for over ninety percent of open
communication in the conference period. Kimsey (1969) developed a
model, a system of categories which could be used to identify and
classify actions taken, operations performed, and topics discussed
during the college supervisor-cooperating teacher supervisory confer¬
ence. By analyzing conference tapes, the investigator established
sets of categories in three dimensions which enabled the verbal
behavior of supervisors to be described quantitatively. The quantitative
findings were then interpreted as to the functions or objects of the
conference. It was hypothesized that a knowledge of the behavior

47
variahles identified in the conference would be useful in improving
the interpersonal relationship between college supervisors and cooperating
teachers. This knowledge would help the two supervisors work more
effectively together.
A review of the literature on communication and human interaction
between members of the student teaching triad indicated that one of the
weakest links in the student teaching experience is the inability of
college supervisors, cooperating teachers and student teachers to communi¬
cate with each other. The three members found it difficult not only to
express their problems and concerns openly to each other, but found it
difficult as well to provide positive feedback to fellow members of the
triad.
The student teacher is viewed as the major reason for the student
teaching triad to exist. It may be assumed that the student teacher
will be most affected by the outcomes of the patterns of human relations
that were formed. An understanding of the quality and quantity of
behaviors that passed between members of the student teaching triad was
an important step toward helping each member of the student teaching
triad to achieve a positive interpersonal relationship with the other
members. Therefore, a review of the literature on conflict communica¬
tion was made to help provide some explanation about why conflict
existed and in what ways conflict manifested itself between the college
supervisor and the cooperating teacher.
A Survey of the Literature in Conflict Communication Appropriate
to the Focus of Behaviors of College Supervisors During
Student Teacher Supervision
A review of the literature on conflict communication indicated
that the area of conflict communication was very broad and diverse in

48
theoretical constructs and the conceptualization of the application of
conflict theory. Ellis and Fisher (1975) stated that the study of the
role of communication was necessary to understand the nature of con¬
flict. However, the researchers concluded that while conflict had been
examined as central to the most important social problems: Interpersonal,
intergroup, and interorganizational relations, war, peace, ideological,
labor, management, and negotiations, it appeared that there had been a
lot of research activity, but little knowledge generated about conflict
communication.
The literature on conflict communication was reviewed by this
writer in a number of areas. However, the studies on typology of
conflict reviewed by Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) and Deutsch (1973),
and those on theoretical models (Hawes & Smith, 1973; Hilyard, 1973;
Littlejohn, 1978; Pearce, 1974; Steinfatt, 1974), did not lend them¬
selves to the focus of the study undertaken by this writer. However,
other areas of conflict communication were judged to be significant
to the focus of this study, and the literature in these areas will be
reviewed in order to make significant application of conflict communi¬
cation to the findings of this study.
According to a majority of the studies reviewed, there is a
general agreement by researchers in communication theory that conflict
in one form or another exists wherever there is human interaction or
interdependence among individuals, groups, organizations and institu¬
tions, and nations. Moreover, it is believed that a society advances
when conflict is recognized as a healthy part of human interaction and
when the communication process is valued as a means for managing

49
conflict (Burgoon & Ruffner, 1978; Ellis & Fisher, 1975; Kelley, 1979),
Nor is conflict to be considered bad or evil (Jandt, 1973).
The importance of communication to the process of understanding
the nature of conflict was noted by Johnson (1974). Through the com¬
munication process individuals can work to resolve problems, provide
information and feedback concerning their position and intentions,
reason and bargain together, influence other individuals, and work at
settling differences. However, the basic problem to understanding
conflict communication was noted by Johnson to be the need to properly
or clearly define the concept of communication either within a con¬
ceptual definitional or an operational definitional framework, for
". . . without clarification of the concept 'communication,' no theory
of effective communication in conflict situations can be built" (p. 77).
Harpole (1974) stated that
Conflict is one of the most basic aspects of human inter¬
change. It is also one of the most complex since it
involves both reason and emotion, shared interests and
differences, and varying levels of information among the
persons or groups in conflict. In all interpersonal and
intergroup conflict, however, communication is a key to
the resolution or management of the differences (p. 353).
A major problem confronting conflict communication theorists
is the definitional problem (Littlejohn, 1978). Deutsch (1969)
defined conflict as incompatible activities within people, groups, or
nations. Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) defined conflict as incompatible
activities which gave rise to threats or frustrations over nonshared
goals or perceptions of those goals. According to Coser (1956),
conflict was ". . .a struggle over values and claims to scarce status,
power, and resources in which the aims of the opponents are to

50
neutralize, injure, or eliminate their rivals" (p. 8). Hilyard (1973)
defined conflict as a process of reducing alternatives in the process
of making choices. The difficulty in studying conflict was in the
recognition that actions of individuals, groups, or institutions did
not necessarily provide sufficient identification as to whether or not
a situation was one of conflict or cooperation. In another study
using information processing as a way to predict the ability of an
individual to perceive and rate the severity of conflict, Sainé (1974)
cautioned that the ability to identify conflict and the ability to
access the extent that conflict existed, were two different cognitive
processes. Thus, the judgment of conflict occurrence did not imply
a correct judgment of the severity of that conflict. In conclusion,
Sainé used the results of the study to show that information processing
theory is a suitable context in which to place the perception of
conflict severity.
In another way of looking at the definitional problem of conflict,
Watkins (1974) outlined an analytic model of conflict which included
six essential conditions of conflict that provided an operational
definition of the concept, conflict.
1. Conflict requires at least two parties capable of invoking
sanctions on each other.
2. Conflicts arise due to the existence of a mutually desired
but mutually unobtainable objective.
3. Each party in conflict has four possible types of action
alternatives:
a. to obtain the mutually desired objective,
b. to end the conflict,
c. to invoke sanctions against the opponent,
d. to communicate something to the opponent.

51
4. Parties in conflict may have different value or perceptual
systems.
5. Each party has resources which may be increased or diminished
by implementation of action alternatives.
6. Conflict terminates only when each party is satisfied that
it has won or lost or believes probable costs of continuing
the conflict outweigh probable costs of ending the
conflict. (p. 1-2)
Watkins (1974) further stated that the conflict situation was an
important context in which to view the communication act. He identi¬
fied within the analytic model certain terms that were important in
understanding the context of the conflict. These terms were threats,
policies, messages, credibility, and reliability.
Harris and Smith (1973) defined conflict as a struggle over
scarce status, power and resources where conflict behavior was termed
a strategy of bargaining, and the resolution of the conflict was
viewed as a negotiated resolution. However, a conflict could occur even
when shared mutual goals existed. This situation introduced a new con¬
cept of mixed-motives where competition and cooperation existed within
the same conflict situation. Three types of conflict and communication
settings in which conflict resolution could be achieved were identified
by the researchers. Tacit communication occurred when participants were
engaged in achieving a mutual goal. Agreement or success in achieving
that goal depended upon the interacting factors of the cultural frame¬
work within which the participants moved and the knowledge of the
other's probable response. Anticipation or knowledge of this response
influenced the resolution of the conflict. Implicit communication
occurred when there was an intent to perform some act which resulted in

52
bargaining in order to resolve the conflict situation. Thus influence
and persuasion could result in a resolution that would involve variables,
for example, of trust, defection, agreement, negotiation, or commit¬
ment in order to resolve the conflict. The final type of conflict and
communication was explicit communication; the ideal type manifested by
expressed confidence between participants and correct interpretations
of acts or motives, or the imperfect type-where attitudes of distrust
and misinterpretation of acts or motives existed between the parties
in conflict.
Hawes and Smith (1973) presented in a paper on the diverse assump¬
tions of conflict theories, three questions to be considered in viewing
the underlying assumptions of conflict as a process in communication.
The questions posed in the research undertaken dealt with definitional,
operational and theoretical model assumptions. This important work
was cited as a major study in several literature reviews by researchers
in conflict communication. Therefore the key elements of the first
two questions, the conceptual-definitional and the operational-procedural
questions are reviewed. The third question dealt with theoretical
models, which was outside the focus of the study undertaken.
The contributions of Hawes and Smith (1973) to the study of
conflict and communication are organized under three key questions
whose dimensions provided an organizational way of viewing the
constructs of conflict. The first question deals with the three
dimensions of the conceptual-definitional question of conflict.
These dimensions are goals, strategies, and time. The dimension
of goal conflict, is stated as "goals direct behavior." Thus

53
conflict exists when the goals of two or more persons are not comple--
mentary. Goals are defined as prospective goals where persons have
intentions about goals and behave to achieve their predefined goals,
or retrospective goals which are goals that do not define behavior or
direct or explain a person's action but only become meaningful after
the behaviors of the person are revealed or understood. The researchers
stated that although a choice between prospective and retrospective
goals did not have to be made, the differing positions of the goal dimen¬
sion would create differences in the way the conceptual-definitional
question was answered. Those differences in turn could lead to differ¬
ences in research results.
The second dimension of the conceptual definitional question of
conflict are identified by Hawes and Smith (1973) to be one of strategy.
Two different theories of strategy are reviewed by the researchers;
resolution of the conflict by compromise, mediation, or conciliation,
which usually include the question of cooperation versus competition,
or a second and more recent definition of strategy, the management of
conflict.
Although not couched as a definitional question, the need to dis¬
tinguish between conflict and competition was made by Burgoon and
Ruffner (1978), who defined competition as a mutual rivalry, the purpose
of which is to obtain a non-divisible goal. Although conflict could
introduce an element of resolve, competition suggests a win-lose type
of situation.
The difference between conflict and competition was the thesis of
Deutsch's (1969, 1973) studies on the productive and destructive out¬
comes of conflict. The major difference between conflict and

54
competition according to Deutsch was that conflict could occur within
either a cooperative or competitive context. In competition, the goal
attainment is viewed possible for one of the parties in conflict, but
not for the other(s), while cooperation results in some type of goal
attainment for all parties. The consequences of cooperation or competi
tion in resolving or managing conflict situations is widely discussed
by Deutsch because of the researcher's interest in the constructive and
destructive outcomes of conflict. Conflict resolution is influenced by
the context within which the conflict occurred. The major question
posed by Deutsch was how to resolve the conflict so that the outcome
is perceived by those engaged in conflict to be productive or effective
After summarizing the effects of cooperation and competition, Deutsch
noted that competition in conflict is not always destructive and that
many competitive conflict situations end in encouragement by one or
more parties to cooperate.
The dimension of conflict resolution versus conflict management
was raised by Hawes and Smith (1973) as part of the definitional ques¬
tion. Conflict management assumes that all resolutions of conflicts
are not necessarily productive means to an end. In their review of
several studies in the area of conflict management, the researchers
showed that a number of theorists in conflict communication believed
that resolution, although viewed as an ideal end, could suppress new
and important information and ideas. Moreover, the discussion of
problems and conditions is not necessarily explored by conflict
resolution, and submerged feelings of resentment, hostility, or unr
expressed alternatives to the solutions can result. Harpole (1974)

55
stated that recent research has focused on conflict management as a
strategy for viewing a construct of conflict. Early theories of
conflict that emphasized resolution only, failed because researchers
considered all types of conflict as negative conflicts. Few serious
human conflicts can be resolved with any assurance of finality.
Conflict management indicated, according to Hawes and Smith (1973),
that the finality or resolve associated with conflict resolution was
not always in the best interests of the parties in conflict and that
at times, a state of diminished intensity or maintenance was more
desirable than resolution. Burgoon and Ruffner (1978) offered a number
of strategies for more effective managed conflict. The use of any one
of the seven identified strategies necessitates an understanding of
the types of conflict that are present, and the level on which the
conflict situation is operating. Roark (1978) cited four approaches to
conflict management and presented three models of management that could
provide for constructive outcomes for conflict situations. The models
are based upon the idea that conflicts produce opportunities for change
where relationships can be realigned, boredom and stagnation alleviated,
and interaction between the principals in conflict can undergo con¬
tinuous reassessment. Roark placed conflict issues on a continuum of
real or realistic conflicts to imaginary conflicts. Information and
perceptions held by the parties about the conflict issue determined
the position of the conflict along the continuum.
The third dimension of the conceptual definition question of
conflict discussed by Hawes and Smith (1973) is the time dimension.
Time deals with the question of conflict either as a continuous
process, or as a process that was interspersed with episodes. The

56
studies reviewed by the researchers on the time question indicated
that the perception of time as an episodic phenomena means that within
the framework of time, there are disruptions that needed to be elimina¬
ted or terminated by a return to a stable, harmonious state. Other
researchers, however, believe that conflict is a continuous condition
that is normal and integrating in numerous human associations. The
latter position is supported for example by some who believe "...
that world conflict is inevitable, if not inherent, and that peace is
nothing more than an idealized hypothetical state" (p. 425).
These three dimensions of the conceptual-definitional question
of conflict, goals, strategies, and time, were viewed by Hawes and
Smith (1973) to be the key dimensions of conflict that arranged in
various sets, can contribute to the answer pertaining to the conceptual -
definitional question of how one perceives the constructs of conflict.
Continuing their discussion on the assumptions underlying
conflict communication theory, Hawes and Smith (1973) identified five
dimensions of the second key question which was how to address the
problem of operationalizing the concept of conflict. The operational-
procedural question deals with five dimensions; rules, act, outcome,
abstractness, and salience.
The rules dimension refers to the way conflict tasks or activities
are structured. The structure in turn gives rise to various degrees of
conflict behavior. In operationalizing conflict, behaviors, it was
stated, would vary along a cooperative competitive continuum, with
various ratios of cooperation and competition needed to complete the
activity successfully. In summarizing the rules dimension, the researchers

57
stated that the activity selected to be completed by the participants
influences the type of communication behaviors that pass between them.
The act dimension refers to the type and amount of communication
that the conflict activity requires. Activities may take on a variety
of forms of verbal and non-verbal, active or inactive types of behavior.
The third dimension to the question of operationalizing the pro¬
cedural question of conflict was the outcome dimension. This dimension
deals with the end result of the activity. Activities can have correct
or problem-solving outcomes and creative or discussion outcomes in which
there is not one correct answer and the outcomes of the conflict are
reached through the process of interaction with the other participants.
The assumption to be considered according to Hawes and Smith (1973)
is that the end result of an activity can generate different forms of
behavior outcomes for the parties in conflict.
The abstractness dimension of conflict is the fourth dimension and
deals with the abstract or concrete quality of the activity responsible
for the conflict behavior where information processing being undertaken
by the participants can require degrees of abstract or concrete informa¬
tion processing. In turn, this processing can generate different types
of conflict.
The final dimension of the operational-procedural question about
conflict is the dimension of salience, or the amount of involvement
each participant is perceived to have in the activity. The extent to
which each participant feels that he or she is a close participant or
a distant observer to the activity can generate different forms of
conflict behavior.

58
In summary, the five dimensions identified as rules, act, outcome,
abstractness, and salience were, according to Hawes and Smith (1973),
important assumptions that had to be considered in the question on how
to operationalize the concept of conflict.
The conclusions of the Hawes and Smith (1973) study relating to
assumptions stated in question form about theoretical constructs in
conflict communication theory indicated that it would be difficult to
obtain any easy or simple description about conflict and communication.
Littlejohn (1978) held that an understanding of conflict in communica¬
tion would best be served by holding a multitheoretical view. He
concluded that the study of conflict involves many complex relation¬
ships that differ in degree and intensity as differing assumptions are
entered into the theoretical framework of conflict-communication.
Hilyard (1973) summarized the application of inter-relatedness in devel¬
oping conflict models, by stating that more than the behaviors and/or
attitudes identifying focal conflict must be considered. It is not
enough to study just the reciprocal grievances of the parties in con¬
flict but it is also important to study the interpersonal relationship
of those in conflict within the socio-cultural rules or contexts.
Barnlund (1968) in an extensive review of the literature in role
theory, discussed the relationship of role ambiguity and conflict and
cited three sources of tension that were produced by the lack of role
definition. The lack of role definition for many persons in conflict
is ascribed to the notion that persons occupy ambiguous positions and
that the resulting role uncertainty can produce emotional stress.
Persons who occupy new positions also might not know what is expected of
them due to ignorance or inexperience in the role behavior that belongs to

59
a specific task. Thus the interpersonal functions and standards of
conduct can be unclear. For example, some researchers made a dis¬
tinction between role expectations. These expectations were the
anticipation of certain conduct or role performance, and the actual
performance of a role based on the occupant of a certain status.
Another consideration in trying to sort out the ambuiguity of roles
was the recognition of multiple role performances associated with a
single position as opposed to previously held assumptions that roles
are singular in nature.
Barnlund (1968) cited three sources of role tension or strain.
Role confusion results when there is a lack of consensus or a mis¬
understanding of the appropriate acts associated with the role assigned
to the individual or group. Role collision occurs when there is compe¬
tition between two persons occupying the same role. Role incompatibility
is the result of inconsistent behaviors demanded of the same person at
the same time. Barnlund suggested resolutions to the problems of role
conflict by the simplistic means of delegating power and functions, of
blocking further expansion of responsibility, or of avoiding all but
the simplest contacts in human relations. However, Barnlund concluded
that role conflict could not be avoided. The consequences of avoidance
would lead to further reduction of role efficiency.
Tjosvold (1978) noted in a study on role differentiation between
teachers and school administrators as it pertained to the academic prep¬
aration of each group, that conflicts over role differentiation could in¬
crease competition; each group thought its ideas were more valid although
teachers avoided clarifying their opinions and professed conformity to
the administrators' opinions. Moreover, school administrators viewed

60
themselves in a superior role to teachers, leading to the conclusion
that the role system could intensify conflicts over goals. The study
shows that both teachers and administrators have competitive and
cooperative interests. Effectively managed, role conflict can increase
the commitment to a shared goal, but ineffectively managed, task conflict
can undermine the effectiveness of purpose of the task.
This investigator believes that the areas of conflict communication
reviewed in the preceding literature will contribute to a more thorough
understanding of the findings on ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors as perceived by cooperating teachers. The areas in conflict
communication on the definitional problem and the questions on the
conceptual definition and the operational-procedural question, conflict
over roles and goals, the management of conflict, and conflict within
the cooperative-competitive context, are appropriate areas related to
the focus of this study.
Review of the Literature in Education Using
the Critical Incident Technique
A review of the literature in educational research indicated that
the critical incident technique has been used to measure critical
behaviors of persons and critical requirements of activities in a
number of areas of education. Therefore it was judged by the investi¬
gator of the present study that a thorough review of the literature using
the critical incident technique could be appropriately included in the
literature review.
Studies conducted in the areas of elementary, secondary, and
higher education using the critical incident technique are reviewed

61
under four headings: Studies conducted in identifying educational
objectives, educational evaluation, and research; studies conducted
in the areas of educational administration and supervision, and
personnel; studies involving students; and studies conducted in the
areas of teaching.
Studies About Educational Objectives, Educational Evaluation and
Research
As early as 1947, Flanagan (1947a, 1947b) proposed that the
critical incident technique was an appropriate method to systematically
collect and analyze data that could be used to establish goals,
policies, and objectives in education. More specifically, the purpose
in using the technique was to establish critical requirements for
successful behavior in certain adult activities which would be used as
goals in education. By establishing criteria that would measure success¬
ful behavior, Flanagan believed that it would be possible to develop, in
the broader sense, a science of education.
Several years later, Flanagan (1950) explored the use of the critical
incident technique in developing a list of educational objectives. He
outlined the steps in developing a set of critical requirements needed
to gather data on educational objectives. Five types of adult activities
appropriate to the establishment of educational objectives were outlined
and the five conditions to determine critical requirements were sum¬
marized. Lastly, four areas where the critical incident technique had
not been used in assisting in the definition of educational objectives
were identified and discussed. These areas were (1) human knowledge
and the arts, to explore the possibility of establishing a definition
of a well-educated, cultured individual, (2) citizenship, to explore the

62
establishment of a definition of a good citizen, (3) parental
behavior, to explore the development of children, and (4) friendship,
to explore attitudes of likes and dislikes of individual behavior.
Flanagan hoped that the collection of such data as are summarized in the
categories above, would help in curriculum development and educational
evaluation. The development of educational objectives would enable
educators to make decisions concerning what the schools should teach,
what learning outcomes were desirable, and what individual behaviors
were essential to take ones place as an adult in the community.
Corbally (1956) reviewed the use of the critical incident
technique for its advantages and disadvantages in educational research
particularly in studies that measured behavior. Corbally stated four
cautions for the investigator when using the critical incident
technique for studies in education. (1) The critical incident technique
should be used only in situations where the job or task to be studied
is not so complex nor the number of variables so great as to invalidate
the technique. (2) The aims and outcomes of a particular task in
education must be clearly recognizable to the respondent or observer
participating in the study. The selection and training of the observers
who will report critical incidents is important in order to minimize
the problem of inadequate reporting. (3) The investigator should
remember that the technique does not measure behaviors as to their
degree of criticalness, only that a reported behavior is critical or
non-critical, effective or ineffective. (4) The investigator should
remember that the method depends on the subjective judgment of competent
observers as to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of a particular
behavior. Although the objectivity of data collected is viewed most

63
desirable in statistical analysis, the use of subjective methods
of data collection needs to be encouraged and improved upon. In a note
of caution Corbally warned the investigator to carefully define and
clarify terms that may appear confusing to the respondent or observer.
Continuing in his discussion, Corbally discussed the advantages of
the critical incident technique for research in education. Studies
concerned with behaviors particular to the areas of teaching and
administration are cited as the most promising areas for the use of
the critical incident technique. The advantages of the technique in
educational research are in its use as a means of gathering data about
behaviors in actual situations that can be immediately translated to
practitioners in the field. However, it was noted by Flanagan (1954)
that raw data collected by the observers did not automatically supply
solutions to the problems or activities that were being investigated.
Mayhew (1956) discussed the results of and the implications for
the use of the critical incident technique in educational evaluation.
Summarizing the use made of the critical incident technique in helping
to establish a communication measurement instrument in the Cooperative
Study of Evaluation in General Education (Dressel & Mayhew, 1953),
three areas of dissatisfaction by the teacher respondents participating
in the cooperative study were reviewed. College teachers of communica¬
tion skills collected incidents and episodes of college students
speeches or written themes that were judged effective or ineffective
incidents of communication. Thirteen hundred incidents of communication
were collected and categorized into effective and ineffective categories
of communication. It was reported that three problems arose during the

64
collection of incidents by the communication teachers. A number of
incidents were not reported objectively but were reported with personal
evaluative comments made by the teacher. It was difficult for the
communication teachers to establish criteria for writing, speaking or
communicating effectiveness. Collection of incidents from both the
written and spoken word of the students proved difficult for some
teachers trained in speech communication only. Mayhew concluded in his
summary of other studies of students conducted by the Cooperative Study
Project in critical thinking, critical analysis, dignity and worth of
individuals, and personality, that three general difficulties in
collecting critical incidents existed. These difficulties were: (1)
The respondents reported more ineffective than effective incidents of
behavior. It appeared that ineffective behaviors were more outstanding
or had more impact on the observers than effective behaviors. (2)
Respondents tended to write personal evaluative judgments of behavior
rather than descriptive behaviors. (3) Many reports were not incidents
that were judged truly critical; an effective or ineffective incident
that made the difference between success or failure in communication.
It was thought that such difficulties could be overcome with more care¬
ful planning and with clear directions to the respondents. Lastly,
Mayhew cited five areas in education in which the critical technique
could be applied in determining categories of affective traits, success¬
ful behavior, cognitive behavior, student behavior in non-academic areas,
and student grades.
Leles (1968) used the critical incident technique to collect data
in order to develop an operational theory of educational professionalism.
By obtaining an operational definition of professionalism, Leles believed
that it would be possible to clarify those performances of educators

65
who would perform effective educational services and meet education's
social obligations to society.
Leles used the critical incident technique in order that his
definitions of educational professionalism might be derived from educa¬
tors at work, rather than from professional organizations or literature
reviews. Thirteen categories of professional concerns were identified
from 129 reported critical incidents. Limitations to the study were
discussed. A number of incidents reported turned out to be personal
gripes of individuals involved in unsatisfactory interpersonal relation¬
ships with other educators. Such reports were excluded from the study.
A recommendation was made at the conclusion of the study to have the
reporting of critical incidents follow a more structured format rather
than leaving the reports open-ended.
The studies reviewed in the category about educational objectives,
evaluation and research using the critical incident technique offer
suggestions for further research and discuss important advantages and
disadvantages for the use of the technique in education. The use of the
technique includes a statement of the aim of the activity, a care¬
fully worded questionnaire, and subjects well prepared and informed
on the procedure for gathering critical incidents. The studies show
that terms needed to be clearly defined and that procedures to record
incidents in an objective rather than in evaluative language are essen¬
tial to the validity of the critical incident technique.
Studies About Educational Administration and Supervisory Functions
The critical incident technique has been used in administration
studies involving large numbers of respondents and pieces of data.

66
Most studies were made to measure the effectiveness of a certain job
performed by persons in educational administration or supervision.
Flanagan (1954) reported on Barnhart's 1952 study of establishing
critical requirements for school board membership. Measurements of
effective roles by school board members were made by Whalen (1953)
and Wright (1975). The latter study analyzed critical incidents in
the interpersonal relationship between district school superintendents
and school board members.
Critical requirements of public school principals were established
by Cooper (1956) and recommendations were made for the selection, evalua¬
tion, and preservice and inservice training of principals. Clark (1963)
identified seven major behavior areas of secondary school principals
by collecting incidents of effective and ineffective behaviors of
secondary school principals as perceived by superintendents, secondary
school teachers and secondary school principals. Of the three groups
of respondents, superintendents and teachers most often agreed on the
three most effective behaviors of principals in order of importance.
Lee (1975) found that perceptions of the supervisory functions of
principals differed between teachers and principals. Principals
recorded fewer perceived ineffective supervisory behaviors than
teachers.
Behaviors of curriculum directors perceived by teachers, princi¬
pals, and curriculum directors as most effective and ineffective
revealed that the curriculum director viewed his role differently than
did teachers and principals (Dean, 1966).

67
Peterson (1975) collected 112 critical incidents of experienced
and inexperienced college and university presidents and discussed the
implications for new and experienced presidents in higher education
institutions.
Studies of effective and ineffective behaviors of school super¬
visors were conducted by Foster (1959) and Colbert (1967). Foster
found considerable agreement about the critical competencies of elemen¬
tary school curriculum supervisors and identified specific effective
supervisory behaviors of this group. Foster also established the
reliability of the classification system of supervisory behaviors.
Three-quarters of the behaviors judged by independent jurors were
placed in the same categories of behaviors. Colbert's study identified
effective and ineffective behaviors of supervisors by secondary school
teachers. Colbert reported that the analysis of data derived from
classifying incidents of supervisory behavior indicated that teachers
were able to agree upon effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors.
Studies About Students
The critical incident technique was used primarily for studies
involving college students. Critical incidents in the lives of
female college students living in two different cultures were collected
by Espin (1974). Incidents of motivational effects of college students'
grades were reported by Norton and Wims (1974) and the predicted per¬
formance of dental students was reported by Flanagan (1954). Flanagan
also reported on a study conducted on the interpersonal behaviors of

68
high school students perceived by their peers to be behaviors judged
likeable or unlikeable in a friendship relationship. A study previously
reported (Mayhew, 1956) used college students as subjects to identify
effective and ineffective incidents of communication.
Studies About Teachers
Several critical incident studies about teachers and teaching
were reported by Flanagan (1954). The studies reported by Flanagan
explored the use of the critical incident technique in measuring
teacher effectiveness and teacher competence. Jensen (1951) collected
reports on teacher behaviors and from the reports formulated a set of
teacher behaviors that appeared to contribute to effective or ineffec¬
tive teaching. It was suggested that the use of specific examples of
teacher behaviors recorded by persons in teaching or preparing to teach,
would yield sufficient empirical data to define what constituted good
or bad teaching. From approximately 1,500 observations of critical
incidents in teaching of elementary and secondary teachers, a list
of critical requirements for teaching was classified in three general
categories: personal qualities, professional qualities, and social
qualities of good and bad teaching. It was suggested by Jensen that
the critical incident technique could be used at the local school
level to aid educators in developing valid criteria for teacher
evaluation and inservice growth.
Ingram and Blackhurst (1975) identified teaching and advising
competencies of special education professors and related their import¬
ance to educational accountability for special education faculties and
programs.

69
Hamrick (1969) explored the philosophical position of classroom
teachers by developing and testing within a theoretical framework how
teachers act or make decisions with respect to the purposes of educa¬
tion, the nature of the curriculum, the functions of teaching, and the
role of the school in society. Teacher responses to critical incidents
of decision making were classified into categories of progressive,
essentialist, perennialist, existentialist, and expedient views toward
education.
Corsini and Howard (1964) used critical incidents identified as
classroom crises to study the difficult interpersonal classroom situa¬
tions that elementary teachers could expect to encounter. The reporting
of critical incidents was expected to aid teacher, parents, and admin>-
istrators in recognizing crisis situations and responding to them
effectively.

CHAPTER III
METHODS AND PROCEDURES
Introduction
The purpose of this chapter is to present the methods and pro¬
cedures used to identify the effective and ineffective supervisory
behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by secondary cooperating
teachers. The discussion is organized under five sections. The first
section is an introduction to and a discussion of the critical incident
technique used as the method to identify the effective and ineffective
supervisory behaviors of college supervisors. The next section is a
review of the studies conducted in the field of student teaching that
used the critical incident technique. The third section is a discussion
of the general aim of supervision. The method used to establish the
aim of supervision is also outlined. The fourth section contains a
description of the design of the critical incident instrument used for
the purposes of this study. The last section is a presentation of the
method used for the selection of the participants in the study and a
description of the procedures used to gather data and to analyze the
data.
The Critical Incident Technique
The critical incident technique is the method chosen to gather
data about the effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of
college supervisors of student teachers as perceived by secondary school
70

71
cooperating teachers. The critical incident technique developed by
Flanagan (1954) and others forms a set of procedures for collecting
self-reported observations of behavior that are determined to be
effective or ineffective in accomplishing the aim or purpose of an
activity, job, or event. Fox (1969) stated that unlike the question¬
naire or interview which is used when the researcher expects to gather
a broad range of data or information, the critical incident technique
is an objective measure that is used to gather empirical data about
actual incidents of a specific nature. The reporting of an incident
is in response to a highly structured question or a set of questions
posed by the researcher. Thus, the reported incidents should have
special significance to an activity or situation and should occur in
specific behavioral situations.
The critical incident technique consists of a set of pro¬
cedures for collecting direct observations of human behavior
in such a way as to facilitate their potential usefulness
in solving practical problems and developing broad psychologi¬
cal principles. The critical incident technique outlines
procedures for collecting observed incidents having special
significance and meeting systematically defined criteria.
By an incident is meant any observable human activity that
is sufficiently complete in itself to permit inferences and
predictions to be made about the person performing the act.
To be critical, an incident must occur in a situation where
the purpose or intent to the act seems fairly clear to the
observer and where its consequences are sufficiently definite
to leave little doubt concerning its effects. (Flanagan, 1954,
p. 327)
The critical incident technique is viewed as a method for objectively
reporting especially effective and ineffective incidences of behaviors of
people and their activities in specific situations. McElroy (1972)
in establishing the rationale for using the technique in a major study
of college supervisor behaviors as perceived by student teachers, stated

72
that the descriptions of situations made by the observer were incidents
where some form of action had taken place, where important decisions
had been made, problems solved, or conflicts resolved. The task of the
observer was to report behaviors of persons in situations that resulted
in effective or ineffective outcomes. These outcomes marked the success
or failure of the person(s) in meeting the aims or purposes of the job
or activity.
For the purposes of this study, a critical incident is a report
made by a cooperating teacher who has supervised a student teacher or is
presently doing so, telling what the college supervisor said or did
during the period of student teaching that had either a positive or
negative effect, stating the effect of the action in terms of the aims of
supervision, and stating how the effects of the action affected the
functioning of the cooperating teacher. Thus the action of the college
supervisor could have made the difference between success or failure in
developing a positive supervisory relationship between the college
supervisor and the cooperating teacher during periods of student
teacher supervision.
It is not the intent of the observer to subjectively evaluate or
judge the behaviors of persons other than to report the specific
behaviors as being effective, ineffective, successful, unsuccessful,
critical or non-critical. To insure objectivity of the observations,
Flanagan (1950, 1954) outlined specific steps that needed to be fol¬
lowed before the data could be collected. (1) The behavior reported
must be observed by the respondent and the situation in which the
respondent recorded his observations must be clearly defined. (2) A

73
general aim or purpose of the activity which is being observed must be
defined for the respondent in sufficient detail so as to leave no
question as to the appropriateness of the situation and its effect on
the general aim. (3) The respondent must have a clear definition of
important aspects of the behavior or activity under study in order for
levels of effective and ineffective behavior to be determined in the
activities reported. (4) The respondent must be qualified to make
and report judgments about the behaviors in the activity under study.
(5) The respondent needs to be knowledgeable or trained about the methods
of reporting to insure accuracy in reporting specific behaviors.
There are a number of advantages cited for the use of the critical
incident technique in the study of effective and ineffective behaviors
(Fox, 1969). The technique is particularly valuable in collecting
large amounts of data pertaining to a narrow area in which the researcher
is interested. Anonymity of the subjects and respondents is observed.
McElroy (1972) stated that reports made with a minimum amount of pre¬
conceived assumptions or influences about the personal traits of the
subject helped to eliminate subjectivity in reporting. Observers need
only to report a specific behavior as effective or ineffective in the
accomplishment of a job or activity and to separate those behaviors
viewed as critical toward contributing to a specific task or activity
from those behaviors that have little effect on the activity. When the
critical incident instrument design is highly structured, the researcher
is able to collect reports of reality that have great depth and detail.
Mayhew (1956) concluded that the significance of the technique "...
lies chiefly in providing empirically derived classifications of
behavior which can then be used either as a framework for subsequent

74
measurement or as material out of which evaluation instruments can
be developed" (p. 598).
Burns (1956) cautioned against the indiscriminate use of the
critical incident technique in establishing success criteria in studies
in education. A researcher employing the critical incident technique
needs to understand that the data collected using the critical incident
technique can reveal through description, the perceptions of the observer
and can contribute to studies where perceptions of observed external
behaviors are desired. The data collected using the critical incident
technique, however, cannot be used to explain why such perceived
behavior, e.g., verbal or non-verbal takes place, nor can the researcher
make inferences about the internal motives of the subject's behavior.
Behavior is described as existing. To describe the behavior
other than as an existance, said Burns (1956), is to place a value
judgment upon the behavior. Thus the critical incident technique is
a method used to verify not evaluate behavior phenomena. While Burns
argued against subjective evaluation in the treatment of the data, most
researchers using the critical incident technique discussed caution
in placing value judgments upon observed behaviors. They did not,
however, rule out the analytical nature of such reports of specific
behaviors (Flanagan, 1954; Jensen, 1951).
Most researchers employing the critical incident technique, used
critical incidences to report accurately the behavior of the subject
engaged in a specific job, role, or task. Only a simple judgment
needs to be made by the observer according to McElroy (1972). This
judgment permits the observer to state whether a specific behavior is

75
effective or ineffective in a particular job performance. In the
present study, the investigator asked the observer, the cooperating
teacher, to report the consequences of the college supervisor’s behavior
upon the functioning of the cooperating teacher during periods of
student teacher supervision.
A description of the consequences of the college supervisor's
behavior upon the functioning of the cooperating teacher, should help
to form the basis for deciding whether a specific behavior of the
college supervisor is to be judged effective or ineffective, critical
or non-critical to the task of supervising student teachers. If the
observed behavior does not result in the cooperating teacher reporting
a consequence for such behavior, the behavior is not judged as having
an especially effective or ineffective impact upon the functioning of
the cooperating teacher.
It is believed by this investigator that based upon the works of
Deutsch (1969, 1973) who had studied the characteristics of destructive
and constructive conflicts and the conditions that give rise to such
outcomes of conflicts, that the critical incident technique can be used
to yield incidents of conflicts between college supervisors and
cooperating teachers as one consequence of ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors. This belief is founded in the assumption that
cooperating teachers will identify ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors as behaviors that had conflict consequences for the inter¬
personal relationship between college supervisors and cooperating
teachers.

76
Studies About Student Teaching: The College Supervisor,
Cooperating Teacher and Student Teacher
Most of the studies about student teaching identified specific
behaviors of one or more members of the student teaching triad as
effective or ineffective in job or role performance. Critical job
requirements for elementary school cooperating teachers were identified
by Farbstein (1965). Those specific behaviors of secondary school
cooperating teachers that would aid in their selection and professional
development as cooperating teachers were identified by Hackley (1976)
and discussed in more detail in Chapter II.
Elkin (1959) collected descriptions of effective and ineffective
behaviors of secondary cooperating teachers and identified those
critical behaviors which contributed to the success or failure of
supervising student teachers. The perceptions of role responsibilities
of the cooperating teacher were viewed differently by student teachers
and cooperating teachers in Elkin's study.
Helpful and hindering behaviors of cooperating teachers identified
by student teachers as being critical to their successful completion of
student teaching, were collected by Nicholson (1971). These incidents
were used to establish the criteria for the development of a student
teacher checklist for on-the-job performance. Conclusions reached by
the investigator indicated that the role and behaviors expected of
cooperating teachers might be too complex and numerous to entrust the
supervision of student teachers to one person.
The Southall and King (1979) study of college supervisors’ per¬
ceptions of critical incidents that could have or did have an impact upon

77
the student teacher's completion or success in the student teaching
experience was reviewed in Chapter II. The authors devised ten cate¬
gories as possibilities for critical incidents. College supervisors
categorized each critical incident that they identified as contributing
to a stressful student teaching experience. College supervisors also
identified themselves as generalist or specialist supervisors. A total
of sixty-one college supervisors participated in the study and categor¬
ized 661 critical incidents in the ten categories. The results indicated
that the three major problems perceived by college supervisors as hinder¬
ing the completion or success of the student teaching experience were
the lack of communication between cooperating teacher and student
teacher, the inability of the student teacher to live up to the cooper¬
ating teacher's expectations, and the student teacher not being prepared
or not knowing methods and teaching techniques.
Carr (1967) in a study designed to identify and define those
factors that influence the interpersonal relationship between college
supervisors and student teachers, reported that more effective inter¬
personal relationships existed between the two groups when the college
supervisor spent more time with the student teacher in both observation
and conference situations. Incidents of effective supervision were
identified in situational and personal variables attributed to the
college supervisor.
Practices of college supervisors perceived by student teachers to
be effective and ineffective in improving their teaching and attitudes
toward teaching were studied by McElroy (1972) and discussed in
depth in Chapter II. In a two-part study of supervisors of student

78
teachers, Nicklas (1960) collected effective supervisory techniques
of college supervisors and cooperating teachers identified by members
of the student teaching triad. The results indicated that there was
general agreement among the triad members that conferences, demonstra¬
tive teaching, and compliments of student teacher performance were
effective supervisory behaviors. Negative practices included classroom
disruptive behavior, excessive criticism, and withdrawal of help to
the student teacher.
The studies reviewed in education using the critical incident
technique indicated that the method can be used to study effective and
ineffective interpersonal behaviors, job performance and role require¬
ments, educational objectives and evaluation, and attitudes and
philosophical positions of persons in education. The validity and
reliability of the critical incident technique as a method of research
was established in a number of studies (Flanagan, 1954; McElroy, 1972).
The advantages and limitations for the use of the critical incident
technique were discussed and the use of the critical incident technique
in appropriate studies in education was suggested.
The present study under investigation will contribute to another
dimension of studying behaviors of the student teaching triad. Identi¬
fying those effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college
supervisors by cooperating teachers during supervision of student
teachers should aid in establishing an effective professional relation¬
ship that will enable college supervisors and cooperating teachers to
cooperatively supervise student teachers.

79
The General Aim of the
College Supervisor
As reported by Flanagan (1954), "A basic condition necessary for
any work on the formulation of a functional description of an activity
is a fundamental orientation in terms of the general aims of the
activity. No planning and no evaluation of specific behaviors are
possible without a general statement of objectives" (p. 336). Flanagan
added that the stated general aim of an activity should be written as a
functional description of the activity that is observed. In conclusion,
the general aim is a brief description made by authorities knowledgeable
about the area under study which expresses in simple objective terms
the aim or purpose of the activity.
From the brief descriptions gathered, a definition for the aim of
the activity is obtained and used to convey a uniform idea of the aim
to the observers recording the behaviors of persons engaged in the
activity. Defining the aim or purpose of the activity, job, or event
in this way, enables the observer to record specific behaviors that are
relevant only to the general aim. Thus the observer decides how
important an observed behavior is to the general aim and if the observed
behavior has a degree of criticalness that will have a positive or
negative effect on the activity.
McElroy (1972) in his study identifying behaviors of college
supervisors perceived as being effective or ineffective by student
teachers, reviewed the supervision literature for descriptions of the
general aim or purpose of supervision. Agreement was found among the
authorities in supervision that the aim of supervision was to improve

80
instruction. A questionnaire developed by Flanagan (1954) was used
in the McElroy study to obtain general statements of the aim of super¬
visors by selecting participants in the study. The general aim state¬
ment was then revised and agreed upon by those participants. The
statement of the general aim of the college supervisor used in the McElroy
study became: "The general aim of the college supervisor of secondary
student teachers is to improve the teaching and attitude toward teaching
of the student teacher" (p. 187). This definition appears to be con¬
sistent with definitions of the aim of supervision appearing later in the
literature. Blumberg (1974) identified the goals of supervision in
education as "the improvement of instruction, and the enhancement of the
personal and professional growth of teachers." (p. 11) Lewis and Miel
(1972) viewed supervision as a monitoring function "enhancing the quality
of instruction" (p. 43).
After reviewing the literature on the aim of supervision that was
appropriate to the study, this investigator wrote an aim of supervision
statement which would be written on the two critical incident question¬
naire forms as a statement of critical behavior of a college supervisor
during student teacher supervision. This statement read: "The aim of
supervision is to help the professional development of the student
teacher." The placement of this aim statement on the two forms of the
critical incident questionnaire will be discussed more fully in the
discussion on the specifications and criteria used in designing the
critical incidents in supervision instrument.

81
Design of the Critical Incident Instrument
Used for Reporting Critical Incidents
The design of the questionnaire used to gather reports of
critical incidents follows the specifications of the form laid down
by Flanagan (1954) and the criteria applied to the designing of the
questions used to collect critical incidents by McElroy (1972). Two
forms were used to gather critical incidents in supervision. Form I
was designed to be used to record effective incidents in supervision,
and Form II to record ineffective incidents in supervision. Each form
contained the following items: the general aims statement, a state¬
ment delimiting the situation to be observed, and ten questions
relating directly to the incident that was observed by the cooperating
teacher. The third part of the instrument was a brief biographical
data questionnaire with the request that each respondent complete the
questions anonymously.
Accompanying the Critical Incidents in Supervision questionnaire
and biographical form was a short letter addressed to the cooperating
teachers requesting their participation in the study. A second page
provided the respondent with a definition and explanation of a critical
incident and the directions for completing Form I entitled "Effective
Incident in Supervision," and Form II entitled "Ineffective Incident
in Supervision." The directions were written by the investigator
in order to leave as little doubt as possible with the respondent
regarding the procedures to be used in recording critical incidents.
Flanagan's (1954) definition of a critical incident stated " an incident
is critical if it makes a 'significant' contribution, either positively

82
or negatively, to the general aim of the activity" (p. 338). In the
present study under investigation, the discussion of the "criticalness"
of an incident was presented in the directions to the participants.
Included in the directions were the rules for reporting critical
incidents.
The Specifications and Criteria Used in Designing the Critical
Incidents in Supervision Instrument
The first specification for Forms I and II of Critical Incidents
in Supervision is a statement of the general aim of the job or task
that was under observation. The purpose of a general aim statement
when using the critical incident technique is to give the observer
a brief but clear definition of the job or activity in which specific
behaviors will be observed and recorded (Flanagan, 1954). In the
present study under investigation, the general aims statement, written
by the investigator, was written as a description of an effective
critical incident on Form I. The aims statement on Form I, Effective
Critical Incident in Supervision read as follows:
An effective critical incident in supervision is an
action by the college supervisor that helps the
professional development of the student teacher.
The aims statement on Form II, Ineffective Critical Incident in
Supervision was written identical to Form I except the word hinders
was substituted for the word helps. The general aims statement was the
first item to be placed on Forms I and II in order for the respondents
to continuously refer to the aim of the task or activity statement they
were recording as a critical incident in supervision.
The second specification needed prior to collecting the incidents
of observed behavior as reported by Flanagan (1954) was to be ", . .

83
a delimitation of the situation to be observed. This specification
must include information about the place, the persons, the conditions,
and the activities" (p. 338).
The delimitation of the situation statement immediately followed
the aims of supervision statement on Form I and Form II. The statement
read as follows on Form I.
Think of an instance when you were engaged with the
college supervisor in supervising a student teacher.
This instance may have resulted in a positive exper-
ience for you.
The statement on Form II is identical to Form II except that the word
negative was substituted for the word positive.
The purpose of the statement delimiting the situation to be
observed by the cooperating teacher was to provide structure to the
situation in which the cooperating teacher was asked to record the
behaviors of college supervisors. This statement delimiting the
situation required the cooperating teacher to record observations
occurring when the cooperating teacher and college supervisor were
engaged in the supervision of a student teacher. A second part of the
delimitation of the situation statement further limited the conditions
of recording of incidences by stating that such a behavior had to result
in a positive or negative experience for the cooperating teacher. This
would eliminate the tendency for cooperating teachers to record
incidents that were judged as neutral in affecting the supervisory
relationships.
The third specification in designing the critical incident instru¬
ment used in the present study was the wording of the questions stated
on Form I and Form II. Flanagan (1954) reported that a slight change
in the wording of a question could produce substantial change in the

84
type of incident reported. McElroy (1972) listed nine criteria to
be used as a guide in constructing the questions for the critical
incident instrument. The questions designed for the present study
were written to elicit from the cooperating teacher specific critical
behaviors of college supervisors. These behaviors were ones that were
perceived by cooperating teachers as being effective or ineffective and
thereby affecting the functioning of the cooperating teacher during
periods of student teacher supervision. The ten questions that appear
on Form I : Effective Incident in Supervision, and Form II : Ineffective
Incident in Supervision,are identical. A brief description of the ten
questions that were designed for the study under investigation follows.
Questions one through four on Form I and Form II were written to
further delimit the situation to be observed by the respondent. Ques¬
tion one asked the cooperating teacher, the observer, to record when the
incident occurred. This question was left open-ended because some
respondents might not be able to give specific dates and times if so
asked, and would therefore leave the question blank. Question two
asked the observer to describe what happened prior to the incident that
was perceived as being effective or ineffective by the cooperating
teacher. This question allowed the cooperating teacher to describe
the event(s) leading up to the incident. Question three asked the
respondent to further delimit the prior event(s) by recording the
physical location of the incident’s occurrence. Question four asked
the respondent to name the persons involved in this incident but to
identify them only by title, not by proper name. By giving only the
title of those persons involved in the incident the anonymity of the

85
persons would be preserved. This question was also included in order
to identify persons other than the cooperating teacher and college
supervisor who were involved in the incident.
Question five requested the respondent to describe briefly but
exactly what the college supervisor said or did that resulted in the
incident that was being recorded. The question did not ask the respon¬
dent to place any judgment upon the action taken or statement made by
the college supervisor other than the judgment that such action or
statement resulted in a positive or negative experience for the coopera¬
ting teacher. In this way, it was expected that an evaluational feeling
of the cooperating teacher would be greatly limited.
Questions six and seven asked the respondents to record what they
perceived as the attitude of the college supervisor when the incident
took place and what the consequences or outcomes of the incident were
for the cooperating teacher as a result of the incident. The recording
of the perceived attitude of the college supervisor at the time of
the incident's occurrence was viewed as important in some situations
where the attitude of the college supervisor contributed to an outcome
that might have been different if such an attitude had not existed.
Question eight was a behavioral question in that it asked the
cooperating teacher to state how the consequences of the effective or
ineffective behavior of the college supervisor affected the cooperating
teacher's functioning as a supervisor of a student teacher. In order
to eliminate as much bias, opinion or evaluation judgment as possible
on the part of the cooperating teacher, the respondents were asked to
underline in the report of the consequences of the incident, that part

86
of the incident that affected their functioning as a cooperating teacher.
The report of the consequences of the incident as asked in question
eight could then be used by the investigator to state ways in which
the situational needs of cooperating teachers could be met by college
supervisors.
Questions nine and ten asked the respondents to state their
reaction to the incident recorded and to state how they felt toward the
college supervisor in relation to the incident. These questions
were designed to obtain a behavioral description of attitudes toward
the college supervisor and the incident and to further clarify why
specific incidents were judged as being effective or ineffective. The
questions would also give clues as to the perceived interpersonal
relationship that existed between the cooperating teacher and college
supervisor during student teacher supervision.
The ten questions were designed to form the critical incident
instrument. The intent was to obtain descriptions of events or activities
leading up to the critical incident, to effect the recording of the
effective or ineffective incident by stating what the college supervisor
said or did that was perceived as critical by the cooperating teacher,
and to determine the consequences of the incident upon the functioning
of the cooperating teacher during student teacher supervision.
The last section of the critical incident instrument was a brief
biography to be filled out by the participants in the study. The
instructions for the biographical questionnaire as stated previously
asked the respondents to remain anonymous. The purpose for the bio¬
graphical questionnaire was to provide personal and professional

87
information to enable the investigator to obtain a profile about the
respondents participating in the study.
Method of Subject Selection and Data Gathering
The subjects selected for this study were secondary school
cooperating teachers who had supervised or were currently supervising
a student teacher. All the subjects were teachers in the state of
Florida and the student teachers assigned to them came from the colleges
of education of three Florida state universities.
The selection of cooperating teachers was made informally on a
volunteer basis. Several methods for requesting participation by the
cooperating teachers were used. In a number of secondary schools, the
assistant principal for curriculum was contacted by the investigator.
/The study was explained to the assistant principal and request for
participation was made. The assistant principals agreed to identify
the teachers who had supervised student teachers, and to distribute
the instrument packet to each teacher who agreed to participate in the
study. The assistant principals were requested by the investigator to
obtain participation from all subject areas, physical education, art,
music and vocational programs, as well as special education programs.
Feedback indicated that this request was honored.
In two of the secondary schools, the investigator was asked to
meet with the teachers who had volunteered to participate in the study.
These meetings took place after school during the teachers’ planning
period.
The cooperating teachers were asked by the assistant principal
and the investigator to return the completed instrument packets to the

88
assistant principal's office at their earliest convenience. The
investigator made several trips to each school to insure that all
completed packets were picked up.
Two other groups of persons assisted in the distribution of the
instrument packets to the cooperating teachers. The area coordinators
for the student teachers from one university, and the director of
student teaching at another university were contacted by phone and
letter with the request to distribute the instrument packets to second¬
ary school cooperating teachers who supervised student teachers sent
from the participating universities. The contact with the individual
schools was made by the axea coordinators and the director of student
teaching. Because of the time and distance involved, the investigator
could not go personally to these schools to pick up the completed
instruments. A self-addressed stamped envelope was provided with each
packet in order for each cooperating teacher to mail the completed
instruments directly to the investigator.
A total of 192 instrument packets, each containing a letter to the
cooperating teacher, directions for recording critical incidents, Form I
to record an effective incident in supervision, Form II to record an
ineffective incident in supervision, and a biographical data page,were
delivered or sent by mail to the contact people identified above. Seven
weeks were allowed for the distribution and collection of the critical
incidents instruments.
At the end of seven weeks, each contact person was approached by
phone or letter in order for the investigator to obtain help in
gathering data from respondents who had not completed the critical

89
incident forms. Seventy-eight out of a total of 192 packets distributed
to cooperating teachers in the state of Florida were returned to the
investigator. Of the 78 packets returned, 46 packets contained recorded
critical incidents of supervisory behavior. These packets supplied the
data used in the study.
Each critical incident report returned by the participating cooper¬
ating teachers was read by the investigator and its contents analyzed in
order to extract from the contents an effective or ineffective critical
behavior of a college supervisor. The reported behaviors were then
categorized into a classification system established by the investigator.
The procedure for analyzing the content of each critical incident is
reported in the discussion of the results.

CHAPTER IV
RESULTS
Introduction
The results of the study are presented in this chapter. The
first section is a discussion of the descriptive data of the cooper¬
ating teachers who comprised the sample of subjects for the study. The
second section presents a discussion of the procedure used by the
investigator for analyzing the critical incident reports. The final
section contains the answers to the six questions asked in the study and
a discussion of the apparent answers to the six questions.
Descriptive Data of Sample
Over a period of seven weeks, of the 192 instrument packets dis¬
tributed, a total of seventy-eight packets were returned by mail or
picked up at the participating schools by the investigator. This return
represented 41 percent of the total number of packets distributed. Of
the seventy-eight returns, forty-six}or 24 percent of the total number
of packets distributed,contained recorded critical incidents of effective
and/or ineffective incidents of behavior of college supervisors. Forty-
one effective incidents and thirty-four ineffective incidents were
collected in this manner.
Thirteen instrument packets representing 7 percent of the packets
distributed were returned with notes or letters indicating that the
cooperating teacher could not recall an incident where the college
90

91
supervisor's behavior would meet the criteria of "criticalness" as
outlined in the instrument packet directions. These returns were elim -
inated from the study.
Nineteen instrument packets representing 10 percent of the packets
distributed were returned with notes or letters stating specific reasons
why the cooperating teacher could not participate in the study. Four¬
teen of the nineteen cooperating teachers indicated that they could not
participate in the study because the college supervisor assigned to
supervise the student teacher came once or never appeared, leaving the
job of supervision to the cooperating teacher. Three of the nineteen
cooperating teachers indicated that the college supervisor was good,
friendly, or a friend to the cooperating teacher, but that the teacher
did not wish to record a particular incident in which these traits were
evident. Two of the nineteen cooperating teachers indicated that in
working with a student teacher and college supervisor, their situations
were different, and comments would not be helpful. Because the nineteen
cooperating teachers did not report the incidents on the forms provided,
the information provided by these cooperating teachers was not included
in the results reported in this study.
It should be noted that because the cooperating teachers who com¬
prised the sample for this study, were selected on a volunteer basis,
the number of participants from each of the three university student
teaching programs used in the study were not identified. It is possible
that cooperating teachers supervising student teachers from one of the
universities held different views of supervision based upon their
experiences with or the policies of a particular university. In addition,

92
college supervisors may have perceived or performed their roles in a
different discernible manner based upon some university orientation.
No test of comparison or similarity of supervisory views of college
supervisors held by cooperating teachers was made to distinguish one
university student teaching program from another.
The forty^six packets containing recorded critical incidents
supplied the data used in the study. Table 4-1 shows the number of
subjects by sex and academic degree held.
Table 4-2 shows by range and median, age, years teaching, and
number of student teachers supervised by each cooperating teacher.
The thirteen subjects who returned the instrument with a note or
letter stating that they could not recall an incident of college
supervisors' behavior that would meet the criteria of "criticalness" as
outlined in the instrument packet directions did not return a completed
biographical data form. Of the nineteen subjects who returned the
instruments with notes or letters stating other specific reasons why
they could not participate in the study, ten filled out the biographical
data form. However, those subjects who filled out the biographical
data form were not included in the biographical data tables because their
responses were not included in the study.
Procedure for Analyzing the Critical Incident Reports
Forty-six cooperating teachers recorded a total of seventy-five
effective and ineffective supervisory behaviors of college supervisors
that occurred during the period of student teacher supervision. These
behaviors were perceived by the cooperating teachers as behaviors that
affected their functioning as a cooperating teacher during the period

93
TABLE 4-1
COOPERATING TEACHERS BY ACADEMIC DEGREE,
SEX, AND NUMBER WHO COMPLETED CRITICAL
INCIDENT FORMS
Academic Degree
Male Female Total
B.A.
M.A.
M.A. plus graduate hours
Doctorate
3
4
3
1
10
9
16
0
13
13
19
1
11
35
46

94
TABLE 4-2
COOPERATING TEACHERS BY RANGE AND MEDIAN
OF AGE, YEARS TEACHING, AND NUMBER OF
STUDENT TEACHERS SUPERVISED
Number of Student
Age
Range
Median
Years
Teaching
Teachers
Supervised
Range
Median
Range
Median
Male
22-52
34
1-32
10
1-30
6.4
Female
25-65
36
3-27
10
1-20
6.0
To tal
22-65
35
1-32
10
1-30
6.0

95
of time that a student teacher was assigned to their classroom. The
purpose of analyzing each critical incident report was to obtain from
its contents an effective or ineffective critical behavior of a college
supervisor and to categorize the behavior into a classification system
that would simplify the content of each reported behavior while at the same
time preserving as much as possible the content of the reported behavior.
The final objective for analyzing the data was to report how the effective
and ineffective behaviors of college supervisors affected the functioning
and situational needs of the cooperating teacher during the period of
student teacher supervision.
The procedure for analyzing the content of each critical incident
report followed the procedures suggested by Flanagan (1954) and McElroy
(1972). The first step in the procedure in analyzing the content of
each critical incident report was to read each report returned to the
investigator. The seventy-five reports read were obtained from the forty -
six subjects who completed the effective and ineffective critical incident
forms. Forty-one effective and thirty-four ineffective critical incident
reports were read.
The second step in analyzing the content of the critical incident
reports was to develop a frame of reference that would be useful in
describing the recorded effective and ineffective incidents (Flanagan,
1954). Classification of the incidents was obtained by organizing the
data into categories of effective supervisory behaviors and ineffective
supervisory behaviors of college supervisors. The categories were
selected by the investigator in such a way- that they represented a
practice or phase of the job for supervising student teachers.

96
The third step in analyzing the content of a critical incident
was to abstract the reported behavior of the college supervisor that
comprised the effective or ineffective incident in supervision. This
was fairly easy to do because question five on Form I and Form II asked
the cooperating teacher to "Describe exactly but briefly what the college
supervisor said or did that resulted in this positive (negative) exper¬
ience." Although the entire contents of both Forms I and II were read
in order to be sure that all information relevant to the critical
incident was included, most cooperating teachers were very clear about
and were able to communicate to the investigator the incident of super¬
visory behavior that resulted in the positive or negative experience.
The effective or ineffective incident recorded by the cooperating
teacher was extracted from each report and written on a separate three-
by-five card. For clarity in handling the data, the incident, recorded
in the first person by the cooperating teacher was written in the first
person on the three-by-five card. Following the recorded effective or
ineffective incident, was the statement of how the consequence of the
incident affected the functioning of the cooperating teacher. The state¬
ment of function was extracted from question eight of Form I and Form II
which read,"How did the consequences affect your functioning as a
cooperating teacher? Underline that part of the incident that affected
your functioning as a cooperating teacher." For clarity the functioning
statement was also written in the first person on the three-by-five card.
The responses to questions five and eight on Forms I and II of the
critical incident instruments contained the data that would be used

97
in answering questions one and two proposed for the study on critical
behaviors of college supervisors.
Figure 4-1 illustrates the format for the extracted content of an
effective incident in supervision and how the incident affected the
functioning of the cooperating teacher.
Figure 4-2 is an example of an ineffective incident in supervision
and how the incident affected the functioning of the cooperating teacher.
The fourth and final step in analyzing the data was to put the
forty-one identified effective incidents of college supervisor behavior
and the thirty-four identified ineffective incidents of college super¬
visor behavior into categories. After carefully reading each effective
and ineffective incident of supervisory behavior that was extracted
from Forms I and II, the investigator placed the forty-one effective
incidents in supervision into four categories of ineffective behaviors.
The categories were not pre-selected. Rather, the categories of
critical behaviors emerged from the data that were collected. Each
critical incident was given careful consideration before being placed
in a category. This method of categorizing the critical incidents was
consistent with Flanagan's (1954) discussion of category formulation.
The four categories of effective behaviors of college supervisors
and the four categories of ineffective behaviors of college supervisors
are found in Table 4-3.
Answers to the Research Questions
The Effective and Ineffective Behaviors of College Supervisors
Question I asked:
What were the effective and ineffective supervisory
behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by

98
Effective Incident
The student teacher was having problems; attendance,
planning, inaccurate reports, etc. In a conference
with the student teacher and myself, the college
supervisor clarified the responsibilities of the
student teacher. The college supervisor was support¬
ive and positive although the student teacher showed
some animosity toward me.
Functioning
My duties as a cooperating teacher were clarified
and my relationship with the student teacher was
kept at a professional level. I was able to
contact the college supervisor if needed. My job
was made easier.
FIGURE 4-1
EFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION

99
Ineffective Incident
The college supervisor made one visit during the
student teacher's internship. The student teacher
had anticipated a visit and had all the planning
lessons up to date. The college supervisor was
not friendly and criticized the lesson plans but
did not visit with the student teacher or me after
the class observation.
Functioning
As the cooperating teacher, the incident made me
more aware of the need to praise a beginning
teacher and to give help when needed and as soon
as possible. I requested never to have this
college supervisor come to my class again.
FIGURE 4-2
INEFFECTIVE INCIDENT IN SUPERVISION

100
secondary school cooperating teachers using the
critical incident technique?
Table 4-3 identifies by category the effective and ineffective
behaviors of college supervisors, and indicates the number of behaviors
recorded.
Category I identified those incidents of effective behaviors of
college supervisors where the college supervisor helped the student
teacher with a personal problem related to student teaching. The five
effective incidents of behavior identified by the cooperating teachers
were concerned with situations where the student teacher's continuation
in the student teaching program was in jeopardy due to the inability
of the student teacher to cope with some aspect of the student teaching
experience. In these incidents, the college supervisor counseled and
conferred with the student teacher and cooperating teacher. Open
communication was viewed as a positive aspect of the counseling situa¬
tion, and criticism of the student teacher's performance was stated
as being one of constructive criticism.
In four of the five incidents, a solution to each problem was
collectively arrived at and the student teacher continued in the
program. In these four incidents, the college supervisor rather than
the cooperating teacher was viewed as providing the most support and
suggestions for remedying the specific problem. An extreme example
of an outcome of a situation was for the college supervisor and cooper¬
ating teacher to furnish enough financial aid to help the student
teacher complete the internship program.
In the fifth incident of Category I, the situation was so difficult
that the college supervisor asked the student teacher to withdraw from
the student teaching program.

101
TABLE 4-3
FORTY-SIX SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING TEACHERS’
PERCEPTIONS OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS' BEHAVIORS
Effective Behavior
Number of
Behaviors Recorded
Category I
The college supervisor helped the
student teacher with a personal
problem related to student teaching
5
Category II
The college supervisor helped to set
instructional expectations and pro¬
fessional goals for the student
teacher
9
Category III
The college supervisor held confer¬
ences with one other member of the
student teaching triad (the cooper¬
ating teacher or student teacher)
about some aspect of the student
teaching experience
14
Category IV
The college supervisor held confer¬
ences with both members of the
student teaching triad (the cooperating
teacher and the student teacher) about
some aspect of the student teaching
experience
13
TOTAL
41

102
TABLE 4-3 continued
Ineffective Behavior
Number of
Behaviors Recorded
Category V
The college supervisor made
one or no visit to the school
site to observe and supervise
the student teacher 14
Category VI
The college supervisor exhibited
poor professional judgment in
supervision 7
Category VII
The college supervisor supported
inappropriate behavior or
practices of the student teacher 7
Category VIII
The college supervisor displayed
hostility, rudeness, or negative
destructive criticism toward the
student teacher or cooperating
teacher 6
TOTAL
34

103
Category II identified those incidents of effective behavior of
college supervisors where they helped to set instructional expectations
and instructional goals for the student teacher. Nine incidents were
identified by the cooperating teacher. In four incidents, the college
supervisor clarified for the student teacher the responsibilities and
professional obligations that the student teacher was to meet during the
internship. In two incidents, the college supervisor helped the student
teacher to work more effectively with the pupils, and followed up the
supervision with letters or conferences with the student teacher. In
one incident, the college supervisor brought the technical equipment
needed to teach a particular class. Two incidents occurred when the
goals of the student teaching program were discussed, in one instance
by the college supervisor and cooperating teacher prior to the arrival
of the student teacher, and in the second instance, in a meeting that
included the student teacher. In this latter meeting, the agreed-upon
goals for the student teacher were put into writing.
Category III identified those incidents of effective behavior of
college supervisors when the college supervisor held a conference at the
school with the cooperating teacher or with the student teacher about
some aspect of the student teaching experience. It should be noted that
these conferences included only the college supervisor and one other
member of the student teaching triad, not both members. Fourteen
effective incidents of dyadic conferences were recorded. Eight confer¬
ences were held between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher,
and six conferences were held between the college supervisor and
student teacher.

104
Three of the conferences between the college supervisor and
cooperating teacher were held to discuss problems that the student
teacher was having in the classroom. In each of these incidents, the
college supervisor shared the concerns of the cooperating teacher and
was supportive of the cooperating teacher's suggestions for student
teacher improvement. In four other incidents of conferences held
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher, the college
supervisor asked questions of the cooperating teacher in order to obtain
feedback about the student teaching experience. The college supervisor
indicated an interest and a desire to be helpful to the cooperating
teacher. The last incident in conferences held between the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher occurred when the college supervisor
requested that the cooperating teacher speak at the seminar held for
student teachers on the topic of gaining insights on student teaching.
The six conferences of Category III held between the college
supervisor and student teacher were identified as incidents when the
college supervisor provided both positive and negative feedback about
some aspect of a lesson that the college supervisor had observed. Three
of the conferences were held to provide constructive criticism about
weaknesses observed in the lesson taught by the student teacher. Two
of the conferences focused on the strengths of the student teacher's
lessons, and one incident of a conference involved the college supervisor
critiquing with the student teacher a video taping of the student
teacher's lesson.
Category IV identified those incidents of effective behavior of
college supervisors when the college supervisor met in conferences with
the cooperating teacher and student teacher about some aspect of the
student teaching experience. Thirteen incidents of conferences among

105
members of the student teaching triad were identified. In five of the
incidents, the college supervisor was helpful and showed a positive
attitude toward the student teacher. In these situations, the observed
lesson was critiqued by the college supervisor with input from the
cooperating teacher and student teacher. Four incidents of conferences
focused on situations where the student teacher was having difficulties
with instructional methods, was disinterested, displayed stress in
teaching, and used inappropriate English grammar. In each of these
incidents the college supervisor offered help to the student teacher but
at the same time supported the cooperating teacher's concern for change
in performance or attitude on the part of the student teacher. In one
incident, the conference was held because the student teacher requested
help about an aspect of student teaching. The college supervisor gave
specific suggestions to the student teacher for improvement.
The last three incidents involved conferences held to work out
some administrative procedure involving the members of the student
teaching triad. One incident centered on the need to decide when the
student teacher would complete the internship. A second incident
focused on a decision that concerned the student teacher taking over
a difficult class that had a history of discipline problems, and the
third incident occurred when the conference was used as a means of
introducing several student teachers to the cooperating teacher. In
each of the three incidents, the college supervisors were supportive of
the student teachers and the kinds of experiences they would encounter.
At the same time, the college supervisor recognized the cooperating
teacher's role in supervision.

106
In the identification of the forty-one effective incidents of
college supervisor’s behavior, the responses indicated that the coopera¬
ting teachers showed positive attitudes toward college supervisors and
were able to state quite clearly incidents of effective supervision. In
addition, the cooperating teachers were well aware of the situation
that led to the incident and were able to separate the situation from
the specific incident.
Many of the forty-one effective incidents of supervision took
place in a situation where open communication between members of the
student teaching triad occurred. Twenty-seven of the incidents from
Categories III and IV were reported at the actual conference that took
place. Although the communication links established by the incidents
of helpfulness to che student teacher were present in Categories I and
II, the conference in which the incidents of helpfulness took place was
not identified as the effective incident as in Categories III and IV.
Instead, the effective incidents recorded in Category I and II were the
results of conferences between or among members of the student teaching
triad, rather than the convening of a conference to discuss topics of
mutual concern.
Of the forty-one identified incidents of effective supervision,
the cooperating teachers recorded twenty-two (54%) incidents that occurred
in the classroom. Five incidents (12%) were recorded that occurred in the
teacher's planning area or departmental office, four incidents (10%)
occurred in the teacher's lounge, one incident occurred each in the hall
or on the telephone. Eight (20%) incidents were not clearly identified as
to the location. For a majority of the cooperating teachers, the classroom

107
remained the focus of student teachers' practical experiences and
supervision contacts.
Category V identified those incidents of ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors whose infrequency of visits to the school was
perceived to be a negative experience for the cooperating teacher.
Fourteen critical incidents of ineffective behavior were recorded. Five
incidents of ineffective behavior were recorded because the college
supervisor did not visit the school to supervise the student teacher. In
four of the incidents, the cooperating teacher indicated that a visit
by the college supervisor was expected and planned for by the student
teacher and cooperating teacher. In one incident, the cooperating
teacher indicated that the college supervisor, without making a single
visit, wrote an evaluation of the student teacher.
Nine incidents of ineffective behavior were recorded because the
college supervisor came once to visit and observe the student teacher.
In five of the incidents, the cooperating teacher stated that the college
supervisor did not help the student teacher, did not give feedback, did
not confer, and did not help with solutions to problems the student
teacher was having. In three other incidents, the cooperating teacher
only stated that the single visit was ineffective but did not discuss
its effects. In one incident, the cooperating teacher stated that the
college supervisor indicated that there was only time for one visit
during the student teacher's internship.
Category VI identified those incidents of ineffective behaviors
of college supervisors where the college supervisor exhibited poor
professional judgment in supervision. Seven critical incidents of
ineffective behavior in this category were recorded. In one incident

108
the cooperating teacher reported that the college supervisor was not
interested in supervising the student teacher, and in another incident,
the college supervisor fell asleep while observing the student teacher.
One cooperating teacher reported that the college supervisor was not
academically or professionally qualified to supervise and evaluate the
student teacher. One incident involved feedback to the cooperating
teacher that a seminar session had been used to discuss and criticize
the cooperating teacher's handling of a pupil, without the student
teacher or the college supervisor knowing about the background to the
confrontation. The final three incidents in Category VI involved the
college supervisor's insistence that his presence and/or demands for
certain activities to take place, should supercede classroom instruction
that was on going at the time.
Category VII identified those incidents of ineffective behaviors
of college supervisors where the college supervisor supported inappro¬
priate behavior or practices on the part of the student teacher. The
seven incidents reported in this category, illustrated seven different
situations where the college supervisor's behaviors were perceived as
hindrances to the cooperating teacher.
One incident occurred because the college supervisor supported a
student teacher who told lewd army stories to the pupils despite
requests from the cooperating teacher and school principal to cease such
conduct. In this situation, the college supervisor would not talk to the
student about his conduct.
A second incident occurred when a student teacher used college
lecture notes to teach a class despite the cooperating teacher's opinion
that the material was too advanced for the pupils. The college supervisor

109
supported the use of the notes because the student teacher felt
comfortable using this method of instruction.
A third incident occurred when the college supervisor supported
the student teacher's use of corporal punishment against the objections
of the cooperating teacher. In this incident, the student teacher was
sent to another school to continue the internship.
A fourth incident occurred when the college supervisor refused to
believe that a student teacher who was physically handicapped and
academically ill-prepared was being taken advantage of by the pupils.
The college supervisor believed the situation would improve in time
despite the cooperating teacher's belief that the classes had become
unmanageable for the student teacher.
A fifth incident occurred when the college supervisor refused to
confront a student teacher who had stopped working and had become
disinterested in the pupils two weeks before the end of the student
teaching experience. The college supervisor supported the student
teacher by stating that the two weeks left in the internship did not
matter.
A sixth incident occurred when the college supervisor supported
the student teacher's desire not to teach from the county curriculum
guide as required. The student teacher stated that the materials were
irrelevant to pupil learning and the college supervisor agreed.
The seventh and last incident in Category VII occurred when the
college supervisor gave a satisfactory grade to a student who had not
met the requirements for student teaching, had lacked commitment and
interest in the program, and had regularly missed days during the

110
internship. This grade was given despite the cooperating teacher's
request that the student not pass the internship.
Each incident described above focused on a different incident of
inappropriate supervisory behavior as perceived by the cooperating
teacher. In each incident, the college supervisor used a conciliatory
approach toward the student teacher. The college supervisor's behavior
was viewed by each cooperating teacher to be one of maintaining an
existing unsatisfactory situation rather than working with the student
teacher or cooperating teacher toward positive, professional change.
Category VIII identified incidents of ineffective behaviors of
college supervisor's behavior that were viewed by the cooperating teacher
as incidents of rudeness or hostility toward the student teacher, or other
negative behavior that was directed toward the student teacher or cooper¬
ating teacher. Six incidents were recorded in this category.
Four of the incidents occurred when conferences were held to critique
the observed lesson taught by the student teacher. In each of these
incidents, the college supervisor was seen by the cooperating teacher as
being unreasonably critical of the student teacher despite the opinion
by the cooperating teacher that each lesson had been successful. The
college supervisor was reported as being rude or brusque. The college
supervisor was viewed as displaying a negative attitude toward the student
teacher and/or cooperating teacher and in each incident, the college
supervisor would not discuss the positive contributions of the student
teacher.
The fifth incident in this category occurred when the college
supervisor criticized the student teacher in front of the pupils while

Ill
observing the lesson being taught. In this incident the college super¬
visor told the student teacher to seek other employment.
The sixth incident occurred when the student teacher anticipating
a visit from the college supervisor had carefully planned the lesson.
The college supervisor was critical of the lesson plan but refused to
meet with the student teacher or cooperating teacher after the class
observation.
Fourteen of the thirty-four ineffective incidents of college
supervisor’s behavior were reported by the cooperating teacher to be
incidents involving college supervisors who did not visit or made one
visit to the school. Several judgmental statements accompanied the
critical incident report. The statements made by cooperating teachers
indicated that they saw the lack of visits by college supervisors as
evidence that the supervisor was not interested in the role of
supervising student teachers, and was not meeting the professional
responsibilities of a college supervisor.
It was noted previously in this report that fourteen participants
in the study had returned the critical incident instruments with notes
or letters stating that they could not participate in the study because
the college supervisor assigned to the student teacher had not come to
the school to supervise the student. The reports of the fourteen
participants coupled with the fourteen subjects who wrote ineffective
critical incidents about the lack of visitations indicated that cooperating
teachers view the college supervisor's absence from the school as a major
ineffective behavior. Reasons for the frequency of absences were not
included in this study. It was suggested, however, that clear lines of
communication needed to be established between the university and the

112
school about the responsibilities a college supervisor had in meeting
visitation commitments to the student teacher and cooperating teacher.
The remaining twenty ineffective behaviors of college supervisors
were reported by cooperating teachers to have occurred at the school
during periods of supervision. The professional judgment of the college
supervisor was questioned by cooperating teachers who cited specific
behaviors that they viewed as inappropriate to a college supervisor.
These behaviors were identified as actions taken such as making unreason¬
able demands on the cooperating teacher's time, or falling asleep during
an observation period. Cooperating teachers also stated that college
supervisors who supported inappropriate behaviors or practices of
student teachers were viewed as lacking in professional judgment needed
to supervise student teachers. A number of cooperating teachers ques¬
tioned how a person responsible for the educational and professional
development of student teachers could be assigned to such a task.
The loss of respect for the college supervisor was an often cited con¬
sequence of poor supervisory judgment. Many cooperating teachers also
indicated that they felt angry and frustrated with negative incidents
of supervision. Not only did the cooperating teachers see their role
as being made more difficult as a result of such incidents, but they
also saw their relationship with the student teacher in a different
perspective. Cooperating teachers most often stated a feeling of
isolation from the partnership idea of supervision, but they continued
to work with the student teacher in order to fulfill the obligations
of supervising a student teacher.

113
The College Supervisor Effects on the Functioning of
the Cooperating Teacher
Question II asked:
How did the behaviors of college supervisors as perceived
by cooperating teachers as being effective or ineffective,
affect the functioning of the cooperating teacher during
student teacher supervision?
Table 4-4 shows the secondary school cooperating teacher's self-
perceived functioning as it was affected by the college supervisor's
behavior. The college supervisor's behavior was categorized by effec¬
tive and ineffective incidents of behavior. The cooperating teacher's
functioning was identified within the areas of cognitive, affective,
and behavior functions.
The results indicate that (1) College supervisors effective
behaviors elicited cognitive changes in cooperating teachers' insights
about student teacher supervision more than twice as often as did
college supervisors ineffective behaviors. (2) College supervisors
effective behaviors elicited only 60 percent as many behavioral changes
in the cooperating teacher as did college supervisors' ineffective
behaviors. (3) Little or no difference was observed in the affective
responses of cooperating teachers' insights about student teacher super¬
vision relative to effective or ineffective behaviors of college super¬
visors. (4) College supervisors effective behaviors created thought
(cognitive) changes in cooperating teachers' insights about student
teacher supervision more often while college supervisors ineffective be¬
haviors resulted in more action (behavior) changes by cooperating teachers.
It should also be noted that the college supervisor's behavior in some
instances resulted in multiple outcomes of change for the cooperating

114
TABLE 4-4
EFFECT ON THE SECONDARY SCHOOL COOPERATING
TEACHER'S FUNCTIONING OF THE COLLEGE SUPERVISOR'S BEHAVIORS
College Supervisor's Behavior
Cooperating Teacher's
Functioning
Ineffective
Effective Incidents Incidents
Cognitive
16
7
Affective
19
17
Behavior
10
16

115
teacher, usually in an affective to cognitive change sequence. Thus
the consequences of the college supervisor's behavior were often greater
than the college supervisor's behavior noted by the cooperating teachers.
The behaviors of college supervisors affected the cooperating
teachers' functioning in the areas of cognitive, affective and behavior
functions that changed how the cooperating teacher thought, felt, or
acted during the student teacher supervision as a result of some critical
incident of college supervisor behavior. Cognitive changes in the func¬
tioning of cooperating teachers were identified as cooperating teachers'
statements of thoughts; concerns, clarification, insights, learning or
understandings that were a result of something a college supervisor said
or did during student teacher supervision. Affective changes in the
functioning of cooperating teachers were identified as cooperating
teachers' statements of feelings; dislike, trust, anger, respect, help¬
lessness, credibility, faith, or belonging that were a result of something
a college supervisor said or did during student teacher supervision.
Behavior changes in the functioning of cooperating teachers were
identified as cooperating teachers' statements of actions; input, relation¬
ship, partnership, responsibility, role or conflict, that were a result
of something a college supervisor said or did during student teacher
supervision.
The cognitive, affective, and behavior changes in the functioning of
cooperating teachers were identified by the investigator by analyzing the
cooperating teacher's answer to Question Eight on Forms I and II about how
an effective or ineffective incident of college supervisor behavior
affected their functioning as a cooperating teacher.

116
The cooperating teachers who participated in the study were very
aware of how the college supervisor’s behaviors affected their
functioning as cooperating teachers. The incidents of effective and
ineffective behaviors of college supervisors influenced how the cooper¬
ating teacher behaved, felt, or thought as a result of the college
supervisor's activities. In Category I of effective behaviors, the
cooperating teachers reported that when solutions to student teacher
problems were collectively arrived at, they had good feelings about
the student teaching program and gained confidence in their judgments
as a member of the student teaching team. Although many of the state¬
ments made by cooperating teachers were affecting statements, cooper¬
ating teachers also reported the value of shared thoughts between the
college supervisor and cooperating teacher about the student teacher's
situation. The sharing of thoughts was seen by the cooperating teacher
as an indication that a supervisory partnership existed.
In category II of effective behaviors, the cooperating teachers
reported that when the college supervisor helped to set instructional
expectations and professional goals for the student teacher by clarifying
the student teacher's responsibilities, they felt part of the super¬
vising team because the college supervisor accepted shared responsibility
for the learning outcomes. Cooperating teachers viewed this shared
responsibility as a means for a more objective appraisal of the classroom
situation by the college supervisor. Cooperating teachers also reported
that college supervisors who reinforced to the student teacher the
cooperating teacher's concerns about some aspect of the internship con¬
tributed to the belief that a supervisory partnership existed. The
cooperating teachers developed more confidence in their role of

117
supervisor and felt that their input was valued. In such instances, the
cooperating teachers reported that they would like to work with the
same college supervisor again.
In Category III of effective behaviors, the cooperating teachers
reported that when the college supervisor held a conference with the
student teacher or cooperating teacher about some aspect of the student
teaching experience, more insight was gained by the cooperating teacher
about the strengths and weaknesses of the internship. Again, the
cooperating teacher viewed their conferences with the college supervisors
as evidence of a positive supervisory relationship. The cooperating
teachers reported gaining insight into the problems of the student
teacher. One teacher reported that as a result of the conference she
felt angry at herself that she had not been more perceptive. At the
same time, the conference reinforced her self-concept. Cooperating
teachers viewed dyadic conferences as a time of realization that a
cooperative relationship did develop between the college supervisor and
themselves because the expectations for the student teacher were clarified
by both partners. The functioning of the cooperating teacher was made
easier because the college supervisor was there to help.
Conferences held between the college supervisor and student teacher
were also viewed by the cooperating teacher as a positive function of
supervision. The cooperating teachers reported that when college
supervisors pointed out to the student teachers the same problems that
the cooperating teacher had observed, the cooperating teacher's position
was reinforced because a second opinion helped in evaluating the
situation while providing consistent feedback to the student teacher. In

118
incidents of conferences where the college supervisor conferred with
the student teacher about the teaching strengths observed during the
lesson, the cooperating teachers reported that such feedback helped
them to learn more about the process of teaching and student teacher
evaluations.
In Category IV of effective behaviors, cooperating teachers reported
on conferences that included the college supervisor, cooperating teacher,
and student teacher. Cooperating teachers identified the support system
of the student teaching triad as an essential element of the conferences.
When the college supervisor critiqued a lesson taught by the student
teacher, offered positive and helpful comments to the student teacher,
and encouraged cooperating teachers to share in the input of the critique,
cooperating teachers reported that through the recognition of a support
system they became more understanding of the student teacher’s growth
and gained greater insight into new ways of teaching. Cooperating
teachers reported that they felt good about their contributions made to
the conference and saw that these contributions reinforced their role
as the cooperating teacher. In incidents where the college supervisor
offered help and support to a student teacher who was having difficulties
with some aspect of teaching, and reinforced the cooperating teacher's
concerns about problems and a need for change, the cooperating teachers
reported that they felt less inhibited about talking to the student
teacher about the problems encountered during student teaching. Working
together resulted in the cooperating teacher gaining more respect for the
college supervisor's role in supervision. Confidence in the college
supervisor and the willingness to supervise more student teachers were
other positive outcomes for cooperating teachers. A final statement by one

119
cooperating teacher summarizes the good relationships that developed
as a result of the triad conference. This teacher stated that he
saw his work with the student teacher valued by the college supervisor.
The ineffective incidents of supervisory behavior contributed to
a number of negative functioning outcomes for cooperating teachers who
stated that these incidents negatively affected their functioning as
a supervisor of student teachers. Category V identified ineffective
incidents where the college supervisor made one or no visit to the
school to supervise the student teacher. Cooperating teachers reported
that the lack of visits made them realize that they had to work alone
with the student teacher without the support promised by the sponsoring
university. Yet, the college supervisor evaluated a student teacher
without observing any part of the teaching process. The cooperating
teachers also reported that they had to deal with the apprehensiveness
of the student teacher who was ignored. One result was that the college
supervisor lost credibility with the cooperating teacher in the program.
The loss of credibility influenced the cooperating teacher's decision
not to take student teachers in the future. The cooperating teachers
also reported that they had no opportunity to develop a professional
relationship with the college supervisor. They felt isolated in the
work of supervision and realized that problems would have to be solved
alone. Without the benefit of feedback from the college supervisor,
cooperating teachers stated that they made most of the decisions about
the student teachers alone.
Category VI identified those incidents of ineffective behavior where
the college supervisor exhibited poor professional judgment in supervision.
Cooperating teachers reported that when they perceived that the college

120
supervisor did not appear interested in supervising a student teacher
they lost respect for the college supervisor. In such instances cooper¬
ating teachers knew that they would not receive guidance or help from
the college supervisor. In the one incident where the cooperating
teacher reported that the college supervisor was not professionally
or academically qualified to supervise the student teacher, the cooper¬
ating teacher reported that there was conflict between the two super¬
visors over methodology and in particular, the evaluation of the student
teacher. Cooperating teachers reported frustration with the college
supervisors who insisted that certain activities should take place
which would supersede classroom instruction planned for that occasion.
One cooperating teacher reported that he was hesitant to override a
college supervisor's decision pertaining to the classroom situation.
Cooperating teachers did not always have the opportunity to discuss
the student teacher's program with the college supervisor before
decisions were made by the college supervisor. The lack of communication
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher was viewed to
be a major hindrance to the functioning of the cooperating teacher.
In the one incident where a college supervisor used a seminar session
to allow a student teacher to criticize a cooperating teacher's handling
of a pupil, the college supervisor had not, according to the cooperating
teacher, obtained the knowledge of the background to the confrontation.
The cooperating teacher reported a loss of respect for the college
supervisor who lacked in professional judgment by allowing such
criticism to take place

121
The ineffective behaviors of college supervisors listed in
Category VII were identified by seven incidents in which the college
supervisor supported inappropriate behavior or practices of the student
teacher. Each incident affected the cooperating teacher's functioning
in a different way but feelings of anger and frustration were commonly
expressed. In each incident, the cooperating teachers stated that the
college supervisor went against their wishes and as a result, after
overcoming initial feelings of anger, frustration, or helplessness, the
cooperating teacher usually took some form of action. For example,
because of the outcomes in three of the incidents, the cooperating
teacher would no longer participate in the student teacher program. The
ineffective behaviors of college supervisors were identified in incidents
where the college supervisor supported a student teacher who told
inappropriate stories to the class, taught a class by using college
lecture notes, or used corporal punishment against the cooperating
teacher's wishes. Cooperating teachers reported that in such instances,
the student teacher-cooperating teacher relationship disintegrated.
Evaluation of the student teacher by the cooperating teacher was also
made more difficult when this relationship was weakened. Cooperating
teachers in two instances stated that they became the "fall guy" during
the evaluation of the student teacher because they had the responsibility
to work with the student teacher but felt that their evaluations would
not be honored.
Category VIII identified those incidents of ineffective behaviors
where the college supervisor displayed hostility, rudeness, or negative,
destructive criticism toward the student teacher or cooperating teacher.

122
Four of the incidents dealt with situations where the college super¬
visor was viewed by the cooperating teacher as being unreasonably
critical of the student teacher's performance. In such instances, the
cooperating teachers reported dislike for the college supervisor who
could only criticize. The opinion of the college supervisor was not
viewed as being trustworthy and as one cooperating teacher stated,
"any remarks about the student teacher ceased because the college
supervisor might misinterpret the remarks and cause more trouble."
Cooperating teachers also reported that they had to continually reassure
the student teacher that his performance was satisfactory. In the
one incident where the college supervisor criticized the student teacher
in front of the class, the cooperating teacher reported feeling very
sad about the situation because the student teacher needed encouragement
and the recognition that he had strengths as well as weaknesses. Two
cooperating teachers reported that as a result of the college supervisors'
behavior, they had requested not to have the college supervisors work in
their classrooms again.
The Needs of the Cooperating Teacher
Question III asked:
How did the college supervisor become aware of and
respond to the needs of the cooperating teacher
during the period of student teacher supervision?
Table 4-5 identified the activities of college supervisors that
according to cooperating teachers supported their expressed needs during
student teacher supervision.
The nine statements of activities of college supervisors that
supported the expressed needs of cooperating teachers were extracted from

123
TABLE 4-5
ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT SUPPORTED
THE EXPRESSED NEEDS OF COOPERATING TEACHERS
RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF STATEMENTS
FROM MOST TO LEAST
Activity
Frequency
The college supervisor counseled, conferred, helped
or gave constructive criticism to the student teacher.
21
The college supervisor conferred with the cooperating
teacher about some aspect of the student teacher's
performance.
21
The college supervisor supported the cooperating
teacher's decisions about the student teacher's
problems.
18
The college supervisor respected the judgment of
the cooperating teacher during the supervision of
a student teacher.
12
The college supervisor participated in the evaluation
process of the student teacher with the cooperating
teacher.
10
The college supervisor reinforced the cooperating
teacher's evaluation of the student teacher's
performance to the student teacher.
6
The college set goals for the student teacher and
got input from the cooperating teacher on the student
teacher's responsibilities.
8
The college supervisor did not give destructive
criticism or feedback to the student teacher unless
there were grounds for doing so.
5

124
the discussion of the effective and ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors as reported by the cooperating teachers on forms I and II
of the critical incident questionnaire. Question seven on the question¬
naire was particularly important in identifying the needs of the cooper¬
ating teachers. This question asked: What were the consequences or
outcomes for you as a result of this incident? This question helped
the investigator to place a particular need or importance to an effective
or ineffective incident of college supervisor behavior.
The statements of the cooperating teachers recorded in question
nine were also read by the investigator in obtaining activities of college
supervisors that supported the expressed needs of cooperating teachers.
Question nine asked: What was your reaction to the incident? The two
questions, seven and nine on Forms I and II, provided sufficient feed¬
back to obtain the nine needs statements of cooperating teachers.
In summary, cooperating teachers reported that their needs as
supervisors of student teachers were met by college supervisors when they
visited the school and the student teacher, communicated with the
cooperating teacher about some aspect of student teacher supervision,
conferred and provided help to the student teacher, and held conferences
with one or both members of the student teaching triad. These four major
areas of supervision were viewed by cooperating teachers as major support
areas during the period of student teacher supervision.
The Influence of the Relationship on the Production of
Student Teacher Learning Experiences
Question IV asked:
Was the relationship established between the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher influential in
determining the success or lack of success of learning
experiences provided to the student teacher during
student teaching?

125
Table 4-6 identifies the activities of college supervisors that
according to cooperating teachers were influential in contributing to
successful or unsuccessful learning experiences of student teachers.
Nine statements of successful influence and five statements of
unsuccessful influence were extracted from Froms I and II. Questions
six, seven, nine, and ten were read and analyzed in order to write
statements of inferred successful or unsuccessful learning experiences
for student teachers. These questions focused on the perceived attitudes
of college supervisors, the consequences of the incident for the cooper¬
ating teacher, the cooperating teacher's reaction to the incident, and
the feelings of the cooperating teacher toward the college supervisor
in relation to the incident. Not every incident reported by the cooper¬
ating teachers was identified as influencing the learning outcomes of
the student teachers. In a number of incidents, multiple learning out¬
comes for student teachers were recorded by the cooperating teachers.
In many instances, the needs statements of cooperating teachers
were judged by their perceived relationship with the college supervisor
and how the relationship influenced the success or lack of success of
learning experiences provided to the student teacher. When the
cooperating teachers saw that the relationship with the college supervisor
met their needs of supervision, the statements would relate the needs to
the provision of learning experiences for the student teacher. For
example, cooperating teachers reported that an important need for support
was met when the college supervisor counseled, conferred, helped, or
gave constructive criticism to the student teacher. Cooperating teachers
reported that a successful student teacher learning experience occurred
when the college supervisor gave the student teacher feedback about

126
TABLE 4-6
ACTIVITIES OF COLLEGE SUPERVISORS THAT INFLUENCED
THE RELATIONSHIP ON THE PRODUCTION OF STUDENT
TEACHER SUCCESSFUL OR UNSUCCESSFUL LEARNING
EXPERIENCES RANKED BY FREQUENCY OF
STATEMENTS FROM MOST TO LEAST
Cooperating Teachers* Statements
of Successful Influence on Student
Teacher Learning Experiences Frequency
The college supervisor conferred with the
student teacher about the same concerns held
by the cooperating teacher. 15
The college supervisor gave insight to the
cooperating teacher about the importance of
supervision. 15
The college supervisor gave the student teacher
appropriate feedback about some aspect of the
student teaching experience. 13
The college supervisor was interested in the
student teacher's problems about some aspect of
teaching. 11
The college supervisor helped meet the needs of
the student teacher. 10
The college supervisor helped the student teacher
correct teaching weaknesses. 6
The college supervisor helped the student teacher
to adjust to difficult classes. 3
The college supervisor helped the student teacher
grow professionally. 3
The college supervisor helped the student teacher
to plan lessons. 2

127
TABLE 4-6 continued
Cooperating Teachers' Statements
of Unsuccessful Influence on Student
Teacher Learning Experiences
Frequency
The college supervisor did not fulfill the
duties of supervision.
19
The college supervisor did not reinforce to
the student teacher the concerns of the
cooperating teacher.
6
The college supervisor was critical of the
student teacher at inappropriate times.
5
The college supervisor showed a lack of
interest in supervision and did not guide
the student teacher.
5
The college supervisor allowed the student
teacher to pass student teaching when the
established requirements had not been met.
3

128
some aspect of the student teaching experience. Cooperating teachers
also reported that an important need was met when the college super¬
visor supported the cooperating teacher's decisions about the student
teacher or respected the judgment of the cooperating teacher. Cooper¬
ating teachers stated that they viewed a successful learning experience
for student teachers occurring when the college supervisor conferred
with the student teacher about the same concerns held by the cooperating
teacher, eliminating the sending of double messages.
Cooperating teachers reported and viewed as successful, incidents
when college supervisors took a personal interest in student teachers
by helping them grow professionally. Cooperating teachers also reported
that they were very accepting of and enjoyed working with college
supervisors who displayed an attitude of wanting the student teachers to
do their very best. While such attitudes held by college supervisors
could not be judged as determinates of successful learning experiences
for student teachers, they were cited often enough by cooperating
teachers as attitudes that contributed toward a successful relationship
in the student teaching triad.
Cooperating teachers were most critical of college supervisors who
because of various behaviors got the student teacher upset, disrupted the
classroom during an observation period or did not guide the student
teacher through positive means of supervision. When college supervisors
failed to perform their duties, the cooperating teachers became
frustrated. Such frustration was reported to have a negative impact
upon the student teachers' relationship with the college supervisor and
student teaching experience. When the college supervisor and cooperating
teacher worked together, however, cooperating teachers reported that

129
student teachers appeared more relaxed and confident about the
student teaching experience.
The Role of Conflict During Times of Interpersonal Interaction
Between the College Supervisor and the Cooperating Teacher
Question V asked:
In what ways did conflict occur during times of inter¬
personal interaction between the college supervisor
and the cooperating teacher?
For the purpose of this study, conflict was defined as some
incident that occurred between the college supervisor and cooperating
teacher where the cooperating teacher perceived that incident as
creating an incompatible situation between themselves and the college
supervisor. The four categories of ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors recorded by cooperating teachers were reviewed for
incidences of conflict that occurred as a result of something the
college supervisor said or did during the period of student teacher
supervision. It was assumed by the investigator that the recorded
ineffective behaviors of college supervisors would contain conflict
situations.
There appeared to be two major areas of interpersonal conflict
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher. These areas
were identified as conflict over the goals of student teaching, and
conflict over the role or task expectations of the college supervisor by
the cooperating teacher. The findings also indicated that competition
between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher was not a cause
for conflict but when it did exist, was a result of conflict. The few
incidences of a conflict over power occurred when the student teacher-
cooperating teacher relationship deteriorated as a result of some

130
action on the part of the college supervisor. In several such cases
the cooperating teacher resolved the conflict by refusing to take
student teachers in the future.
A number of conflicts over the goals of student teaching were
communicated through the recording of ineffective incidents of super¬
vision by cooperating teachers. The aim of supervision was to help the
professional development of the student teacher. Conflict over goals
for student teaching supervision occurred when the cooperating teacher
perceived that the college supervisor's behavior hindered this profes¬
sional development. Such goal conflicts were identified as conflict
over the methods and criteria to be used to evaluate student teachers,
conflict over the amount of guidance or help to student teachers cooper¬
ating teachers expected of college supervisors, and conflict about
excessive criticism but little praise about the student teacher's work.
Finally, the goals of supervising student teachers were in conflict when
the cooperating teacher criticized the college supervisor for the lack
of a support role for the student teacher.
The second area of conflict was over the role or task expectations
that the cooperating teacher held for the college supervisor. The
results of the data collected indicated that there did not exist a clear
definition of role for the college supervisor although cooperating
teachers could evaluate an effective or ineffective role behavior of
college supervisors. It appeared that role or role expectation evolved
out of a particular situation and was evaluated by the cooperating teacher
on the basis of some outcome for that particular situation.
The largest number of conflicts over role expectation occurred for
the cooperating teacher when the college supervisor did not come to the

131
school to visit the student teacher or came so infrequently that the
cooperating teacher judged the visits as being ineffective for the
purposes of supervision. The non-fulfillment of this role for college
supervisors created conflicts for cooperating teachers about student
teacher evaluation procedures, conflicts about retaining credibility
for the college supervisor, and conflicts over the college supervisor's
lack of supervision for the student teacher. Consequently, the role of
being an absentee supervisor clearly affected the goals for supervision
that cooperating teachers had identified as being important goals.
The last three categories of ineffective behaviors of college
supervisors were cateogries of inappropriate role behaviors of college
supervisors during periods of supervision. Role conflicts that occurred
on the job were identified as acts of poor professional judgment, the
support of inappropriate behavior of student teachers, and hostility
toward student teachers by college supervisors. As a result of these
perceived inappropriate role behaviors by college supervisors, conflicts
arose over the kinds of methods of instruction that student teachers
should engage in, over trust and respect for the college supervisor,
and over the amount of perceived support by the college supervisor for
the student teaching program.
The Role of Interpersonal Conflict in the Judgment of Behaviors of
College Supervisors and the Functioning of the College Supervisor-
Cooperating Teacher Supervisory Relationship
Question VI asked:
If the perceived effective and ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors were a function of the college super¬
visor-cooperating teacher supervisory relationship, what
part if any did interpersonal conflict play in those
judgments?

132
As reported in the discussion on how the activities of college
supervisors affect the functioning of cooperating teachers, the cooper¬
ating teachers were able to report how incidents of college supervisor
behavior affected their functioning as cooperating teachers. The
incidents in which interpersonal conflict appeared to arise between
college supervisors and cooperating teachers were recorded as part of
the thirty-four ineffective behaviors of college supervisors in Table
4-3. Categories V through VIII, in Table 4-3, in which are listed the
appropriate behaviors of college supervisors, were judged by cooperating
teachers to have important consequences on their functioning as super¬
visors. Thus one assumption made by the investigator was that negative
behaviors of college supervisors would give rise to interpersonal
conflicts between college supervisors and cooperating teachers.
Judgments made about interpersonal conflict are also inferred
from Table 4-4. These interpersonal conflicts between college super¬
visors and cooperating teachers more often resulted in judgments made
by stating feelings (affective) and stating actions (behavior), than
in cognitive judgments made by reacting to a conflict situation.
One result of interpersonal conflict was that a judgment was made
to resolve the conflict by taking some form of action to end the
conflict, or to manage the conflict by decreasing the intensity of the
conflict between college supervisors and cooperating teachers.
Cooperating teachers' judgments of interpersonal conflict resulted
in their resolving the conflict in one of three ways: By refusing to
participate in the student teaching program with the sponsoring
university, by requesting that the college supervisor who was in conflict
with the cooperating teacher not visit the classroom again, or by

133
requesting that the student teacher be withdrawn from the school. By
using one of these three methods of conflict resolution, cooperating
teachers were able to remove themselves from direct contact with the
college supervisor.
There were five ways in which cooperating teachers judgments of
interpersonal conflict resulted in their ability to manage conflicts.
The first way occurred by cooperating teachers recognizing that they
must work alone with the student teacher and take the responsibility for
the professional development of the student teacher. This judgment most
often occurred as a result of the college supervisor not visiting the
school and the student teacher. The second way in which conflict
management occurred was when cooperating teachers decided that in the
best interest of supervision, they would deal with student teacher prob¬
lems as best as possible with or without the help of the college
supervisor. The third way that cooperating teachers managed conflict was
by deciding that they alone would make decisions about the student teacher
without consulting the college supervisor. Fourth, the cooperating
teacher would allow the college supervisor's decision about the student
teacher to take precedence, and a fifth and final way in which
cooperating teachers managed conflict was by deciding that they would
not discuss any phase of the student teacher's experience with the
college supervisor during the latter's visits.
Summary
It appears from the results of the study that those cooperating
teachers who participated by recording effective and ineffective incidents
of college supervisor behavior, took the role of supervision seriously

134
and recognized the support system and sense of partnership that could
develop between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher.
Cooperating teachers were most critical of college supervisors who
did not fulfill their duties of supervising the student teacher. Cooper¬
ating teachers were more likely to be critical of college supervisors
behaviors when the college supervisor was not a frequent visitor to the
school than critical of behaviors of college supervisors who made
regular visits. Thus college supervisors who worked regularly with the
student teacher helped the cooperating teacher to develop a more positive
view of the total student teaching experience.
Cooperating teachers did not indicate whether a dyadic or triadic
conference contributed more to their role as a supervisor and to the
student teachers' learning experiences in general. However, they made
frequent referral to the importance of the communication link between
the college supervisor, student teacher, and themselves and saw the
conference as the major means of communication among members of the
student teaching triad. Cooperating teachers also indicated that when
they perceived a lack of interest on the part of the college supervisor,
they were more likely to be very selective in what they communicated to
the college supervisor about the student teacher. It is essential
therefore, for college supervisors to become more aware of the amount
and types of communication that pass between themselves and the other
members of the student teaching team.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY AND IMPLICATIONS
The purpose of this study was to identify through the use of the
critical incident technique, activities of college supervisors, per¬
ceived as effective or ineffective by selected secondary school cooper¬
ating teachers, in order to ascertain whether there were appropriate or
inappropriate ways for college supervisors to respond to the situational
needs of cooperating teachers during the period of student teacher
supervision that would lead to enhanced student teacher professional
development. A collateral purpose of the study was for the investigator
to utilize insights gained from studying the literature on conflict in
interpersonal communication in analyzing and interpreting the data.
A review of the literature in the area of student teaching indicated
that the interpersonal relationship established between members of the
student teaching triad was one of the weakest links in the student teaching
experience. The study undertaken focused on the interpersonal relation¬
ship between two members of the student teaching triad, the college super¬
visor and cooperating teacher, to see if effective and ineffective behaviors
of college supervisors affected the functioning and the needs of cooper--
ating teachers during student teacher supervision. The literature on
conflict communication was also reviewed for application to the findings
on the ineffective behaviors of college supervisors for some explanations
of how conflict occurred during student teaching supervision and how
interpersonal conflict affected the judgments made by cooperating teachers
about the supervisory relationship.
135

136
The critical incident technique developed by Flanagan (1954), but
modified for the purposes of this study was used to access the effective
and ineffective behaviors of college supervisors as perceived by cooper¬
ating teachers. An extensive review of the literature in educational
research showed that the critical incident technique was an appropriate
technique to use in accessing critical behaviors of college supervisors.
Two forms of the questionnaire were developed. Form I recorded
effective behaviors of college supervisors and Form II recorded ineffec¬
tive behaviors of college supervisors. Six questions were asked in the
study. The six questions were answered from the responses obtained
from the critical incidents recorded on Forms I and II.
Forty-six cooperating teachers identified forty-one effective and
thirty-four ineffective critical behaviors of college supervisors. In
addition, the cooperating teachers indicated how the identified critical
behavior of college supervisors affected their functioning as a cooper¬
ating teacher. Nine need statements by cooperating teachers were
extracted from the critical incidents and nine statements of successful
influence and five statements of unsuccessful influence of college
supervisors upon the learning experiences of student teachers were
written.
Two major areas of conflict between college supervisors and cooper¬
ating teachers were identified by the writer. These areas dealt with
conflicts over the goals of student teaching and conflicts over the roles
or task expectations of college supervisors by cooperating teachers. It
was also found that cooperating teachers made two types of judgments
about their relationship with cooperating teachers in an effort to

137
resolve conflict situations; to resolve the conflict by taking some
form of action to end the conflict, or to manage the conflict by decreas¬
ing the intensity of the conflict between the cooperating teacher and
college supervisor.
The reports of critical incidents in supervision by cooperating
teachers showed that cooperating teachers resolved conflicts between
themselves and college supervisors in three ways. Cooperating teachers
terminated their relationship with the university, college supervisor
or student teacher. Cooperating teachers reported that they managed
conflict in five ways. Conflict management resulted in a decreased
intensity of conflict while cooperating teachers maintained and continued
the supervision of student teachers with college supervisors.
The results of the study indicated that cooperating teachers were
able to identify critical behaviors of college supervisors and were
able to relate those behaviors to their own functioning and needs as
cooperating teachers. In addition it was possible for cooperating
teachers to make decisions about the continuation of the student teacher
supervision experience when conflict situations between themselves and
college supervisors arose.
It is important to note that cooperating teachers identified more
effective than ineffective critical behaviors of college supervisors,
lending support to the notion that cooperating teachers viewed the
supervisory relationship as an important one. The most effective
behavior of college supervisors identified by cooperating teachers on the
critical incident questionnaire was judged to be their participation in
conferences with members of the student teaching triad. Cooperating

138
teachers were most complimentary of college supervisors who used
conferences among triad members for feedback and continuous dialogue.
Cooperating teachers reported that conferences more often than any
other method of communication helped to establish a positive relation¬
ship among the student teaching triad. Thus more communication rather
than less communication among triad members was judged to be a critical
behavior for effective student teacher supervision.
Cooperating teachers were most critical of college supervisors who
did not fulfill the major supervisory role that they perceived the
college supervisor to have. This role was identified as one in which
the college supervisor made frequent visits to the school to observe
and supervise the student teacher and to confer with the cooperating
teacher. Cooperating teachers indicated that when college supervisors
did not make frequent visits they experienced á loss of sense of
partnership and support.
Based on the results of this study, college supervisors would be
well advised to reestablish and maintain stronger ties with secondary
schools that host student teachers. It is recommended that college
supervisors make weekly visits to the school site. Each visit should
include a conference, formal or informal, with the cooperating teacher
and student teacher. College supervisors should take time to listen to
the concerns of cooperating teachers about the student teaching exper¬
ience and to collaborate with cooperating teachers in ways that will
enhance rather than undermine the supervision process. One means of
effective collaboration would be for the student teaching triad members
to meet prior to the beginning of the student teacher’s assignment and
to discuss and place in writing the agreed upon goals and responsibilities

139
for each member of the triad to undertake. Purposeful goal setting
will contribute to a lessening of conflict between the college
supervisor and cooperating teacher.
Although the study confirmed the continued importance of and need
for effective college supervisors of student teachers, several educa¬
tors have questioned the effectiveness of the college supervisor’s
presence and whether that presence does make a difference in the profes¬
sional development of the student teacher (Bowman, 1979; Morris, 1974).
Patty (1973) predicted that the college supervisors would be replaced
by classroom teachers because the standard role model of supervision was
weak due to infrequent visits by college supervisors. Moser and
Bebb (1970) suggested that the role of the college supervisor needed to
be redefined and changed from "visitor inspector," to "teacher" and
"invited consultant." In their model, the college supervisor would
become a consultant to the school and be responsible for inservice
training seminars for cooperating teachers with the purposes of identi¬
fying and acquiring supervisory skills. The cooperating teacher in
turn would be given the major responsibility for guiding the professional
growth of student teachers. This responsibility would no longer be a
joint effort on the part of cooperating teachers and college supervisors.
The results of this study indicate that college supervisors and
cooperating teachers can work effectively together as supervisors of
student teachers and it is recommended by the investigator that the
student teaching triad of college supervisor, cooperating teacher, and
student teacher continue. However, the roles and responsibilities of
each supervisor need to be clarified by the schools and universities

140
participating in the student teaching program. Ideally, college super¬
visors and cooperating teachers would collaborate and agree on the
responsibilities to be designated to each supervisor. Agreement about
the role of college supervisors and cooperating teachers should not,
as it is often done, be left to chance or non-communicated assumptions.
It is also recommended by this investigator that future research in
student teaching supervision be conducted in the area of conflict
communication. Little work has been done in the area of studying how
conflict is manifested in supervision. A number of areas for possible
research are suggested. More research is needed on how cooperating
teachers and college supervisors manage and/or resolve conflict. The
study of cooperation and competition in conflict between college super¬
visors and cooperating teachers is needed. Studies of ego strength,
influence and trust among members of the student teaching triad are
recommended using conflict models of Deutsch (1969, 1973) as guidelines.
Lastly, the whole area of the definition of conflict and how to conceptual¬
ize and operationalize conflict in supervision is recommended for future
study.
Whatever the outcome identified as the role for college supervisors,
it appears that most college supervisors have not been adequately
trained in student teacher supervision (Patty, 1973). While calls
have been made to provide supervisory training to cooperating
teachers through inservice education, educators have not supported similar
needs for college supervisors. Work particularly needs to be done
in the areas of human relations and communication skills.

141
The final recommendation as a result of the findings in this study
is for models of inservice training for both cooperating teachers and
college supervisors to be developed in order to strengthen and provide
support for continuous supervision and collaboration by college super¬
visors and cooperating teachers in the professional development of
student teachers.

APPENDIX
January, 1980
Dear Colleague,
I am conducting a study about the effective and ineffective
supervisory behaviors of college supervisors of student teachers
as perceived by cooperating teachers. I sincerely appreciate the
time and effort you will expend in helping me with this research.
I trust that your professional commitment will help you to find
this a rewarding activity for you.
At its completion, I will be sharing the results of this
study with university and school personnel who are involved with
the supervision of student teachers. If you would like to have
a copy of the summary of the results, please notify me by postcard
at:
Department of Subject Specialization Teacher Education
360 Norman Hall
University of Florida
Gainesville, Florida 32611
Sincerely,
Louise S. Rothman
142

143
CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN SUPERVISION
You have had the recent experience of being a cooperating teacher
to a student teacher in secondary education. During this period of
supervision, you may have met and/or worked with a college supervisor
from the college or university sponsoring your student teacher. It is
this relationship between you and the college supervisor to whom the
student teacher is assigned, that I am interested in exploring.
Directions:
For the purpose of this study, a critical incident in supervision
is defined as follows: A critical incident during supervision occurs
when the action or behavior of the college supervisor is perceived by
the cooperating teacher as being appropriate or inappropriate to the
aims of supervision and therefore affects the functioning of the
cooperating teacher. Consequently, the action taken by the college
supervisor may make the difference in developing an effective or ineffec¬
tive relationship between the college supervisor and cooperating teacher.
To be critical, an action of the college supervisor must have a very
definite effective or ineffective outcome and should mark the difference
between success or failure in developing a positive relationship between
the college supervisor and cooperating teacher.
Most supervisor's behaviors will fall in between the two critical
poles of effective and ineffective behavior and I am sure that you are
aware of those activities that have a neutral effect upon the relation¬
ship and do not need to be recorded. The behaviors that I am interested

144
in would be those that you identify as being the most critical in
supervision, thereby affecting your functioning as the cooperating
teacher in the supervision of student teachers.
Enclosed are two types of forms. Please use FORM I to record
information about effective incidents in supervision, and FORM II to
record information about ineffective incidents in supervision. A
short biographical form is also enclosed. Please complete this form
and return it with the critical incident forms. A return envelope is
provided for your convenience.

145
CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN SUPERVISION
FORM I
Effective Incident in Supervision
An effective critical incident in supervision is an action by the
college supervisor that helps the professional development of the
student teacher.
Think of an instance when you were engaged with the college supervisor
in supervising a student teacher. This instance may have resulted
in a positive experience for you.
1.When did this incident occur?
2.What happened prior to this incident?
3.Where did this incident occur? (classroom, hall, lounge, etc.)
4.Who were the persons involved in this incident? (Identify them
only by title, not by their proper names.)
5.Describe exactly but briefly what the college supervisor said or
did that resulted in this positive experience.
6. What did you perceive as the attitude of the college supervisor?
7. What were the consequences or outcomes for you as a result of this
incident?
8. How did the consequences affect your functioning as a cooperating
teacher? Underline that part of the incident that affected your
functioning as a cooperating teacher.
9. What was your reaction to the incident?
10.How did you feel toward the college supervisor in relation to this
incident?

146
CRITICAL INCIDENTS IN SUPERVISION
FORM II
Ineffective Incident in Supervision
An ineffective critical incident in supervision is an action by the
college supervisor that hinders the professional development of the
student teacher.
Think of an instance when you were engaged with the college supervisor
in supervising a student teacher. This instance may have resulted in
a negative experience for you.
1. When did this incident occur?
2. What happened prior to this incident?
3. Where did this incident occur? (classroom, hall, lounge, etc.)
4. Who were the persons involved in this incident? (Identify them
only by title, not by their proper names.)
5. Describe exactly but briefly what the college supervisor said or
did that resulted in this negative experience.
6. What did you perceive as the attitude of the college supervisor?
7. What were the consequences or outcomes for you as a result of
this incident?
8. How did the consequences affect your functioning as a cooperating
teacher? Underline that part of the incident that affected your
functioning as a cooperating teacher.
9. What was your reaction to the incident?
10.How did you feel toward the college supervisor in relation to
this incident?

147
BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION
In order to establish a profile of the cooperating teachers
participating in the study on effective and ineffective behaviors of
college supervisors during student teaching supervision, I would
appreciate your taking a few minutes to fill out the biographical
information listed below. Please do not include your name or any
other identifying personal information about yourself.
1. MALE FEMALE
2. AGE
3. DEGREE: BA MA MA plus graduate hours DOCTORATE
4. Years Employed as a Classroom Teacher
5. How Many Times Have You Supervised a Student Teacher?

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, H.S. Prospective Teachers Have Fears. Clearing House.
i960, 34, 337-341.
Ashby, Mary G. The Role of the College Supervisor: Expectations of
Cooperating Teachers, Student Teachers, and College Supervisors.
(Doctoral Dissertation, Fordham University, 1973). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1973, 34, 2428-2429-A. (University
Microfilm No. 73-26704)
Barnlund, Dean C. Interpersonal Communication: Survey and Studies.
Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1968.
Bennie, William A. Campus Supervision of Student Teaching ... A
Closer Look. Teachers College Journal, 1964, 36_, 131-133.
Bennie, William A. Cooperation for Better Student Teaching. Minnesota
Burgess Publishing Company, 1966.
Bennie, William A. Supervising Clinical Experiences in the Classroom.
New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1972.
Blanchard, Sister M. Grace Imelda. Inquiry into the Professional
Problems of College Supervisors of Student Teaching and into
Improvement Procedures to Help College Supervisors Handle These
Problems. (Doctoral Dissertation, New York University, 1968).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1968, 29, 493-A.
(University Microfilm No. 68-11822)
Blumberg, Arthur. Supervisors and Teachers;A Private Cold War.
Berkeley: McCutchan Publishing Corporation, 1974.
Bosse, Sylvia I. An Investigation of the Qualifications of
Cooperating Teachers in the Student Teaching Programs Offered
by the State Colleges of Education in Ohio. (Doctoral Disserta¬
tion, University of Toledo, 1972). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 1973, 34, 645-646-A. (University Microfilm No.
73-24876)
Bowman, Novy. College Supervision of Student Teaching: A Time to
Reconsider. The Journal of Teacher Education, 1979, 3£, 29-30.
Burgoon, Michael,and Ruffner, Michael. Human Communication. New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1978.
148

149
Burns, Robert W. Success Criteria and the Critical Incident Technique.
Phi Delta Kappan, 1956, _38, 73-75.
Campbell, Lloyd, and Williamson, John. Practical Problems in the Student
Teacher-Cooperative Teacher Relationship. Education, 1973, 94.
168-169.
Carr, Carolyn Jane. Factors in Constructive Human Relationships
Between College Supervisors and Student Teachers in Selected
Professional Situations. (Doctoral Dissertation, Columbia
University, 1967). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1967,
28. 1322-rA. (University Microfilm No. 67-12683)
Clark, Charles P. A Study of Critical Requirements of the Public School
Secondary School Principalship in Pennsylvania. (Doctoral
Dissertation, University of Pittsburg, 1963). Dissertation
Abstracts International. 1963, _24, 1896. (University Microfilm
No. 63-07792)
Clarke, C.M. The Partnership in Action: Student Teaching. In
C.M. Clarke (ed.), Teacher Education and the Public Schools.
Fortieth Yearbook of the Association for Student Teaching,
Washington, D.C., 1961, 33-59.
Coates, T.J., and Thoreson, C.E. Teacher Anxiety: A Review with
Recommendations. Review of Educational Research, 1976, 46,
159-184.
Colbert, James E. A Study of Effective and Ineffective Supervisory
Behavior. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Virginia, 1966).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1967, J27, 2306-A. (Univer¬
sity Microfilm No. 66 -15217)
Cooper, Bernice L. The Critical Requirements for the Principalship
Based Upon an Analysis of Critical Incidents Reported by Instruc¬
tional Supervisors and Visiting Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Georgia, 1956). Dissertation Abstracts International.
1956, 17, 290. (University Microfilm No. 00-18909)
Corbally, John E. The Critical Incident Technique and Educational
Research. Educational Research Bulletin. 1956, _35, 57-62.
Corsini, Raymond J., and Howard, Daniel D. (Eds.) Critical Incidents in
Teaching. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1964.
Coser, Lewis A. The Functions of Social Conflict. Illinois: The Free
Press, 1956
Cross, Delores. Intern Perception of Professional Support and the
Learning Situation. 1969. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. Ed. 087-752).

150
Deakins, Karen. The School Based Supervision Team: An Alternative.
Washington, D.C.: U.S.. Department of Health, Education and
Welfare, National Institute of Education, 1977. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. Ed. 147-259).
Dean, Billy J. Critical Requirements of Curriculum Directors in
Texas. (Doctoral Dissertation, East Texas State University, 1965).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1966, 27, 1582-A.
(University Microfilm No. 65-11680)
Deutsch, Morton. Conflicts: Productive and Destructive. Journal of
Social Issues. 1969, _25, 7-14.
Deutsch, Morton. The Resolution of Conflict: Constructive and Destruc¬
tive Processes. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1973.
Dewey, John. Logic, the Theory of Inquiry. New York: Henry Holt and
Company, 1938.
Diamonti, Michael C. Student Teacher Supervision. Educational Forum,
1977, 41^ 477-486.
Dickson, George E. The Crux of an Effective Off-Campus Student Teaching
Program. Educational Administration and Supervision, 1953, 39,
139-146.
Dressel, P., and Mayhew, L.B. The Cooperative Study of Evaluation in
General Education: Its Organization and Mode of Operation. The
Educational Record. 1953, 34. 54-67.
Earp, William A. The Effect of Participation in Collaborative Super¬
vision on Cooperating Teachers' Job Satisfaction and on Their
Evaluation of Fellow Teachers, Student Teachers, and Supervisors, as
Sources of New Instructional Ideas. (Doctoral Dissertation, Univer¬
sity of Tennessee, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1975,
36. 1204-1205-A. (University Microfilm No. 75-18955)
Edmund, Neal, and Hemink, Lyle H. Do Student Teachers and Supervising
Teachers Communicate With Each Other? Journal of Educational
Research. 1960, 53, 355-357.
Edwards, Helen. Building Good Relationships: A Major Role of the
College Supervisor. Cedar Falls, Iowa: Association for Student
Teaching, 1961.
Elkin, Sol M. The Critical Requirements for the Secondary School
Supervising Teacher as Perceived by Student Teachers and Super¬
vising Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation, Wayne State University,
1958). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1959, 19, 3230.
(University Microfilm No. 59-1358)
Ellis, Donald, and Fisher, B. Aubrey. Phases of Conflict in Small
Group Development: A Markov Analysis. Human Communication Research,
1975, 1, 195-211.

151
Ellis, June G. The Relationships Among Student Teacher Problems as
Perceived by the Student-Teachers, Supervising Teachers, Directing
Teachers and Curriculum Directors. (Doctoral Dissertation,
Florida State University, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts Inter¬
national. 1975, 3^5, 5985-5986-A. (University Microfilm No. 75-6281)
Espin, Oliva. Critical Incidents in the Lives of Female College Students:
A Comparison Between Women of Latin America and the United States.
(Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida, 1974). Dissertation
Abstracts International. 1975, J36, 703. (University Microfilm No.
75-16379)
Farbstein, Marvin. Critical Requirements for Cooperating Teachers:
A Study of Cooperating Teachers as Perceived by Student Teachers
in the State of New Jersey. (Doctoral Dissertation, Rutgers, The
State University, 1964). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1965, _25, 3991. (University Microfilm No. 64-11485)
Flanagan, John C. Contribution of Research in the Army Air Forces to
Educational Policy. Educational Record. Supplement No. 16, 1947a,
28, 78-90.
Flanagan, John C. Research Techniques for Developing Educational
Objectives. Educational Record. 1947b, _28, 139-148.
Flanagan, John C. The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological
Bulletin. 1954, 51, 327-358.
Flanagan, John C. The Critical Requirements Approach to Educational
Objectives. School and Society, 1950, _71, 321-324.
Foster, Lucille C. Perceived Competencies, School Supervisors. (Doctoral
Dissertation, Stanford University, 1959). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 1959, _20, 568. (University Microfilm No. 59-02807)
Fox, David J. The Research Process in Education. New'York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, Inc. 1969.
Freed, Harvey F. Role Expectations of the College Supervisor of
Student Teaching as Perceived by Supervisors, Principals, Coopera¬
ting Teachers and Student Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation,
Temple University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1976, _37, 233-234tA. (University Microfilm No. 76-15839)
Frenzel, N.J. Perceptions of University Supervisors. The Teacher
Educator, 1977, _12, 14-17.
Fuller, Frances. Concerns of Teachers: A Developmental Conceptualiza¬
tion. American Educational Research Journal, 1969, _6, 207-226.
Garrard, Judy. Concerns of Student Teachers, A Review of the Literature.
University of Texas: Counseling and Assessment Division, Research
and Development Center in Teacher Education, College of Education,
1966. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed. 011-604).

152
Good, Carter V. (Ed.) The Dictionary of Education. New York: McGraw-
Hill Book Company, 1973.
Crumet, Madeleine R. Supervision and Situation: A Methodology of Self
Report for Teacher Education. Paper presented to the American
Educational Research Association, Division C, Toronto, March 1978.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed. 151-322).
Hackley, Mary M. A Critical Incident Study to Identify Specific Behavioral
Criteria for the Selection and Development of Effective Secondary
School Supervising Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation, East Texas
State University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1976, 37^ 2795-2796-A. (University Microfilm No. 76-24094)
Halpert, Ruth L. A Study of the Sources, Manifestations and Magnitude
of Stress Among Student Teachers at U.C.L.A. (Doctoral Dissertation,
The University of California at Los Angeles, 1966). Dissertation
Abstracts International. 1966, 27. 2359-A. (University Microfilm
No. 67-00566)
Hamrick, Mervin C. A Critical Incident Approach to Identification of
the Philosophical Position of Classroom Teachers. (Doctoral
Dissertation, University of Florida, 1969). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 1970, 31., 290. (University Microfilm No. 70-11741)
Harpole, Charles H. Conflict Management in Communication Environments.
The Speech Teacher, 1974, 23, 353-358.
Harris, Thomas, and Smith, Robert M. Methods for Introducing Analysis of
Conflict Theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
Speech Association of the Eastern States, New York, March 1973.
(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed. 074-542).
Harrow, Thomas L. An Investigation into Student Teacher Problems During
Practice Teaching. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, February
1973. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed. 076-578).
Hawes, Leonard C., and Smith, David H. A Critique of Assumptions Under¬
lying the Study of Communication in Conflict. Quarterly Journal of
Speech, 1973, 59, 423-435.
Heitzmann, William R. The Classroom Teacher and the Student Teacher.
What Research Says to the Teacher. Washington D.C.: National
Education Association, 1977. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. Ed. 146-152).
Hilyard, Delmar M. Research Models and Designs for the Study of
Conflict. In F. Jandt (Ed.) Conflict Resolution Through Communi¬
cation. New York: Harper and Row Publishers, 1973, 439-451.

153
Hochel, Sandra L. The Relationship of Self-Concept as a Communicator to
Effectiveness in Student Teaching. (Doctoral Dissertation,
Purdue University, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1973, J34, 3592-A. (University Microfilm No. 73-28085)
Huddle, Donald D. Supervision of Student Teachers: A New Concept.
1973. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed. 074-029)
Hytrek, Anthony J. The Role of the College/University Consultant as
Perceived by the Cooperating Teacher. (Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Northern Colorado, 1973). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 1973, 34, 2439-2440. (University Microfilm No.
73-26503)
Ingram, Gregg F. and Blackhurst, A. Edward. Teaching and Advising
Competencies of Special Education Professors. Exceptional
Children, 1975, 42, 85-93.
Inlow, Gail M. The Complex Role of the College Supervisor. Educational
Research Bulletin, 1956, Z5, 10-17.
Jandt, Fred. Conflict Resolution Through Communication. New York:
Harper and Row Publishers, 1973.
Jensen, Alfred C. Determining Critical Requirements for Teachers.
Journal of Experimental Education, 1951, 20, 79-84.
Johnson, David W. Communication and the Inducement of Cooperative
Behavior in Conflicts: A Critical Review. Speech Monographs,
1974, 41, 64-78.
Johnson, James A. The Role of the College Student Teaching Supervisor
in In-service Teacher Education. 1974. (ERIC Document Reproduc¬
tion Service No. Ed. 096-293).
Johnson, Larry K. Functions of a College Supervisor. Educational
Forum, 1964, 28, 469-475.
Karmos, Ann H. and Jacko, Carol M. The Role of Significant Others During
the Student Teacher Experience. The Journal of Teacher Education,
1977, 28, 51-55.
Kelley, Edgar A. Principles of Conflict Resolution. NASSP Bulletin,
1979, 63, 11-17.
Kimsey, Theodora R. The Work of One College Supervisor with Cooper¬
ating Teachers in Off-campus Schools: An Analysis of Conferences.
(Doctoral Dissertation, Columbia University, 1969). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1970, 31, 268-269-A. (University
Microfilm No. 70-12558)

154
Kunde, Dorothea J. The Role of the College Supervisor: An Analysis
of the' Perceptions Held by Directors of Student Teaching, College
Supervisors, Cooperating Teachers and Student Teachers. (Doctoral
Dissertation, Boston College, 1973). Dissertation Abstract
International. 1973, 34^ 1162-1163-A. (University Microfilm No.
73-21627)
Lee, Billy D. Critical Incidents of Supervisory Functions of Principals
in Southeastern New Mexico. (Doctoral Dissertation, East Texas
State University, 1974). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1975, 35. 4134-A. (University Microfilm No. 75-01586)
Leles, Sam. Using the Critical Incidents Technique to Develop a
Theory of Educational Professionalism: An Exploratory Study.
The Journal of Teacher Education. 1968, 29. 59-69.
Lewis, Arthur J., and Miel, Alice. Supervision for Improved Instruction
Belmont, California: Wadsworth Publishing Company, Inc., 1972.
Lieberman, Ann. Linking Processes in Educational Change. In N. Nash
and J. Culbertson (Eds.), Linking Processes in Educational
Improvement. Ohio: University Council for Educational Administra¬
tion, 1977, 149-188.
Lipsey, Sally. Student Teachers Ask for Help. The Mathematics
Teacher. 1972, 65, 137-138.
Lipton, Aaron, and Lesser, Elena. Teacher Training at Stony Brook: A
Model for Conflict. The Journal of Teacher Education, 1978, 29,
57-60.
Lock, Corey R. Problems of Secondary School Students. The Teacher
Educator. 1977, _13, 30-40.
Littlejohn, Stephen. Theories of Human Communication. Columbus:
Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company, 1978.
Lowther, Malcolm A. Most Helpful and Least Helpful Activities of
Supervising Teachers. Clearing House, 1968, 4¿, 40-43.
Lowther, Malcolm A. Some Concerns of Student Teachers in Secondary
Education. The University of Michigan School of Education
Bulletin. 1964, 35, 71-74.
Lowther, Malcolm A. Successful and Unsuccessful Experiences of
Student Teachers in Secondary Education. Contemporary Education,
1970, 41, 272-275.
Mahan, James J., and Lacefield, Warren. Educational Attitude Changes
During Year-Long Student Teaching. Journal of Experimental
Education. 1978, 4b, 4-15.

155
Manning, Diane T. The Influence of Key Individuals on Student Teachers
in Urban and Suburban Settings. The Teacher Educator, 1977, 13,
2-8.
Mayhew, Lewis B. The Critical Incident Technique in Educational
Research. Journal of Educational Research, 1956, 49, 591-598.
McAteer, John F. Student Teaching Supervision: Roles and Routines.
Clearing House, 1976, 50, 161-165.
McAulay, J.D. How Much Influence Has a Cooperating Teacher? The
Journal of Teacher Education, 1960, 11, 79-83.
McElroy, Paul D. The Effective and Ineffective Practices of the
College Supervisor as-Perceived by Secondary School Student
Teachers Using the Critical Incident Technique. (Doctoral
Dissertation, Johns Hopkins University, 1971). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1972, 33, 115. (University Microfilm No.
72-19448)
Morris, June R. The Effects of the University Supervisor on the
Performance and Adjustment of Student Teachers. Journal of
Educational Research, 1974, 67, 358-362.
Moser, J., and Bebb, A. New Roles for the Supervisor of Student Teaching.
Educational Leadership, 1970, 28, 44-47.
Neal, Charles D., Kraft, Leonard E., and Kracht, Conrad R. Reasons for
College Supervision of the Student-Teaching Program. The Journal
of Teacher Education, 1967, 18, 24-27.
Nicholson, Clair M. A Critical Incident Study of the Behavior of
Classroom Supervisors of Secondary Student Teachers in Conventional
and Special Teacher Education Programs. (Doctoral Dissertation,
University of Washington, 1971). Dissertation Abstracts Inter¬
national, 1971, 32, 6275-A. (University Microfilm No. 72-15125)
Nicklas, Merrill S. A Comparative Study of Critical Incidents to
Determine Recommended Techniques for Supervisors of Student
Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Arkansas, 1960).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1960, 20, 4320. (University
Microfilm No. 60-1321)
Norton, Steven D., and Wims, Earl W. A Critical Incident Study of the
Motivational Effect of Grades on College Students. Psychological
Reports, 1974, 34, 735-745.

156
Openshaw, Karl. -Procedures for Training the' Preservice Teacher:
The Instructional Strategy Gap. Paper presented to the Annual
Meeting of the Association of Teacher Educators, Las Vegas,
Nevada, February 1978. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service
No. Ed. 152-725)
Patty, A.H. Classroom Teachers Will Replace College Supervisors.
Contemporary Education, 1973, 44, 179-183.
Pearce, W. Barnett. Trust in Interpersonal Communication. Speech
Monographs, 1974, 41, 236-244.
Peterson, William D. Critical Incidents for New and Experienced
College and University Presidents. Research in Higher Education,
1975, 3, 45-50.
Pfeiffer, Robert T. (Ed.). The College Supervisor; Conflict and
Challenge. The Association for Student Teaching Forty-third
Yearbook. Dubuque, Iowa: William Brown Company, Inc., 1964.
Poole, Charles. The Influence of Experience in the Schools on Students
Evaluation of Teaching Practice. Journal of Educational Research,
1972, 66, 161-164.
Price, Robert D. The Influence of Supervising Teachers. The Journal
of Teacher Education, 1961, 12, 471-475.
Rich, Anita S. The Student Teaching Experience as a Contribution to
the Inservice Education of the Cooperating Teacher: Inquiry and
Instances. (Doctoral Dissertation, Columbia University, 1971).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1971, 32, 3143-A.
(University Microfilm No. 72-01259)
Roark, Albert E. Interpersonal Conflict Management. Personnel and
Guidance Journal. 1978, _56, 400-402.
Rousseau, Joseph F. A Study of Verbal Behaviors Engaged in by College
Student Teaching Supervisors in Dyadic Conferences with Cooperating
Teachers and Student Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation, Syracuse
University, 1970). Dissertation Abstracts International. 1971,
31, 5915-A. (University Microfilm No. 71-10973)
Ryan, Kevin (Ed.) Teacher Education. The Seventy-fourth Yearbook of
the National Society for the Study of Education, Part II.
Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1975.
Sainé, Thomas J. Perceiving Communication Conflict. Speech Monographs,
1974, 41, 49-56.

157
Simms, Earline M. The Role of the Elementary and Secondary Cooperating
Teachers as Determined by Current Practices in Student Teaching.
(Doctoral Dissertation, Kansas State University, 1975).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1975, 36, 2755-A. (Univer-
sity Microfilm No. 75-25061)
Smith, E. Brooks. Cooperative Structures in School-College Relation¬
ships. Washington, D.C.: American Association of Colleges for
Teacher Education, 1965. (ERIC Document Reproduction
Service No. Ed. 014-485)
Smith, Herbert F.A. The Depth Dimension in Student Teaching Supervision.
Peabody Journal of Education, 1960, 38, 18-20.
Soares, Anthony T., and Soares, Louise M. Self Perceptions of Student
Teachers and the Meaningfulness of Their Experiences. The Journal
of Teacher Education, 1968, 19, 187-191.
Sorenson, G., and Halpert, R. Stress in Student Teaching. California
Journal of Educational Research. 1968, 19, 28-33.
Southhall, Carey, and King, Dorothy F. Critical Incidents in Student
Teaching. The Teacher Educator, 1979, 15, 34-36.
Stagg, George F. Problems of Student Teachers. (Doctoral Dissertation,
Montana State University, 1968). Dissertation Abstracts Inter¬
national. 1968, 29. 3901-3902. (University Microfilm No. 69-7889)
Steeves, Frank L. A Summary of the Literature on the Off-Campus
Cooperating Teacher. Educational Administration and Supervision,
1952, 38, 129-137.
Steinfatt, Thomas M. Communication and Conflict: A Review of New
Material. Human Communication Research. 1974, 1^ 81-89.
Stillers, Bruce, and Kniep, Willard M. A Program to Improve Student
Teacher Supervisor Communications. 1973. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. Ed. 098-184)
Stratemeyer, Florence, and Lindsey, Margaret. Working with Student
Teachers. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College,
Columbia University, 1958.
Strebel, Ralph F. The Nature of the Supervision of Student-Teaching
in Universities Using Cooperating Public High Schools. Teachers
College Record. 1936, 37. 545-547.

158
Tannenbaum, Michael A. An Analysis of Communication Patterns Between
Student-Teachers and University Supervisors with Training in
Transactional Analysis. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Oregon, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1977, 37,
5583-A. (University Microfilm No. 77-4765)
Thompson, Michael L. Identifying Anxieties Experienced by Student
Teachers. The Journal of Teacher Education, 1963, 14, 435-439.
Tjosvold, Dean. Cooperation and Conflict Between Administrators and
Teachers. The Journal of Teacher Education, 1978, 12, 138-148.
Waters, Elred K. Critical Incidents of Administrative Behavior in
Urban Schools Where There Have Been Drastic Changes in Black-White
Ratios. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Florida, 1972).
Dissertation Abstracts International, 1973, 34, 110. (University
Microfilm No. 73-151554)
Watkins, Charles. An Analytic Model of Conflict. Speech Monographs,
1974, 41_, 1-5.
Whalen, Richard E. Effectiveness of Elected and Appointed School
Board Members. (Doctoral Dissertation, Indiana University,
1953). Dissertation Abstracts International, 1953, 13, 1074.
(University Microfilm No. 00-06127)
Wheeler, Carol L. Open-mindedness, Self Concept, and Teacher-Student
Rapport of the College Senior, Supervising Teacher, and College
Supervisor During Student Teaching. (Doctoral Dissertation, Ohio
State University, 1976). Dissertation Abstracts International,
1977, 37, 5060. (University Microfilm No. 77-2533)
Wright, Willie J. Critical Incidents in Relationships Between District
Superintendents and School Boards in Selected Urban School
Districts in Florida. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of
Florida, 1975). Dissertation Abstracts International. 1975, 34,
110. (University Microfilm No. 76-04286)
Yee, Albert H. Do Cooperating Teachers Influence the Attitudes of
Student Teachers? Journal of Educational Psychology. 1969, 60,
327-332. ~ -
Yee, Albert H. Interpersonal Relationships in the Student Teaching Triad.
The Journal of Teacher Education. 1968, 19. 95-112.
Yee, Albert H. The Student Teaching Triad f—- The Relationship of
Attitudes Among Student Teachers, College Supervisors, and
Cooperating Teachers. Austin: Research Report to the U.S.
Office of Education, University of Texas, 1967. (ERIC Document
Reproduction Service No. Ed. 010-849)

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH
Louise Sundberg Rothman was born on the 9th of January, 1940, in
Brooklyn, New York. After graduating from Horace Greeley High School,
Chappaqua, New York,in 1958, she entered the University of Arizona where
she majored in history. In 1962, following a year at Stockholm Univer¬
sity, Sweden, under the sponsorship of the American Scandinavian Founda¬
tion in New York, she was awarded a Bachelor of Arts degree. In 1962,
she entered Teachers College, Columbia University, and graduated with a
Master of Arts degree in geographic education in 1963. Between 1963 and
1966, she taught social studies at Roslyn High School in New York and
completed further graduate work in geography at the East-West Center,
University of Hawaii, and at Columbia University. In 1966, she left
teaching to accept a Fulbright-Hays Award to Addis Ababa University in
Ethiopia, and upon her return to the United States, worked at the
Educational Research Council of America in Cleveland, Ohio. After her
marriage in 1967, she worked as a geographer for the U.S. Geological
Survey on the National Atlas Project, University of Florida, taught at
Santa Fe Community College in Gainesville, Florida,and then entered the
doctoral program in geography at Indiana University, Bloomington, Indiana
She also held the position of instructor with the Division of Continuing
Education at Indiana University. Upon her return to Gainesville, Florida
in 1973, she entered the College of Education at the University of
Florida to pursue a Doctor of Philosophy degree in the Department of
159

160
Instructional Leadership and Support. She also held the position of
graduate assistant and later graduate teaching associate in the Depart¬
ment of Subject Specialization Teacher Education.
Louise Sundberg Rothman is married to Leslie K. Rothman and is the
mother of two sons. She is a member of Phi Delta Kappa, and the
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
CXaXÁma
Arthur J. Lewis,/
Professor of Ins
and Support
iChairman
:ructional Leadership
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is fully
adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy.
Cí\(kd¿¿i 0 idcciM;*.).
Charles A. Henderson
Associate Professor of Subject
Specialization Teacher Education
I certify that I have read this study and that in my opinion it
conforms to acceptable standards of scholarly presentation and is
fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a dissertation for the degree
of Doctor of Philosophy.
Phillip A. Clark
Professor of Educational Administration
and Supervision
This dissertation was submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Division
of Curriculum and Instruction in the College of Education and to the
Graduate Council, and was accepted as partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy.
March, 1981
Dean for Graduate Studies and Research

UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA