UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Secondary mathematics teachers and local curriculum development Steblin, Victor Ronald 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 S73.pdf [ 6.08MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094078.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094078-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094078-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094078-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094078-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094078-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094078-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094078-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094078.ris

Full Text

SECONDARY MATHEMATICS TEACHERS and LOCAL CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT by VICTOR RONALD STEBL.IN B. Sc., O n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia, 1974 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTEE OF ABTS i n THE FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES FACULTY OF EDUCATION (MATHEMATICS EDUCATION) He accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the r e g u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May,1977 (g) V i c t o r Ronald S t e b l i n In p r e s e n t i n g t h i s t h e s i s i n p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f o r r e f e r e n c e and study. I f u r t h e r agree that permission f o r e x t e n s i v e copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head o f my Department or by h i s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . I t i s understood t h a t copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n p e r m i s s i o n . Department of H a t b ^ m a ^ s _ E d u c a t i o n a l ^ The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date: Mav_30 x_1977 i ABSTRACT T h i s study sought to determine, by means of a q u e s t i o n n a i r e , the answers to the f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . 1. To what ext e n t are secondary mathematics teachers i n B r i t i s h Columbia c u r r e n t l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? 2. What are the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics teachers toward c u r r i c u l u m development at the l o c a l l e v e l ? 3. What are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t e a c h e r s with r e s p e c t t o involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? A s p e c i a l t h r e e - p a r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e was c o n s t r u c t e d to answer these q u e s t i o n s . The f i r s t part asked f i f t e e n f a c t u a l Yes/No type g u e s t i o n s about the c u r r e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n of mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s . The second part of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e determined teacher a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development through a 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e . The t h i r d p a r t gathered d e s c r i p t i v e data from the respondents. A f t e r a p i l o t study, the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e was sent t o 200 secondary mathematics teachers randomly s e l e c t e d from the membership l i s t of the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n of Mathematics Teachers. The r e t u r n r a t e f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was 57%, and the Hoyt r e l i a b i l i t y estimate of the L i k e r t s c a l e was .86. Face v a l i d i t y of the L i k e r t s c a l e was determined by a panel of judges. A n a l y s i s on the f i r s t p a r t of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e v e a l e d that i n g e n e r a l , there was a l a c k of support f o r c u r r i c u l u m development at the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . In answer to q u e s t i o n two, the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics teac h e r s g e n e r a l l y were fa v o u r a b l e to l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e . An examination of s p e c i f i c items r e v e a l e d t h a t teachers g e n e r a l l y supported the p r o v i n c i a l c o r e program but were undecided as t o whether d i s t r i c t s should develop t h e i r own core. Furthermore, most teachers expressed a d e s i r e to be more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g and i n d i c a t e d t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to serve on d i s t r i c t and s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m committees. In answer to q u e s t i o n t h r e e , the only c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of t e a c h e r s t h a t seemed to have some r e l a t i o n s h i p to t h e i r a t t i t u d e s was t e a c h i ng l e v e l . J u n i o r secondary t e a c h e r s had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher s c o r e s on the a t t i t u d e s c a l e than s e n i o r secondary t e a c h e r s . The study found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female mathematics teachers, between those with graduate edu c a t i o n and those without, between teachers i n s m a l l schools and l a r g e s c h o o l s , and between teachers who were or were not department heads. A l s o , age, years of t e a c h i n g experience and e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y d i d not have any s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p to a t t i t u d e s . Recommendations were t h a t more support be given f o r l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s at the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s , t h a t some form of p r o v i n c i a l l e a r n i n g assessment program be used, and t h a t t e a c h e r s be allowed to choose t h e i r textbooks from an approved l i s t . F i n a l recommendations were t h a t support of secondary mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s should be d i r e c t e d to mathematics teachers as s c h o o l groups at the j u n i o r secondary school l e v e l and t h a t the a t t i t u d e s of mathematics teachers toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development should be f u r t h e r s t u d i e d s i n c e only a s m a l l p o r t i o n of the v a r i a n c e i n t h e i r a t t i t u d e s was e x p l a i n e d . i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . i i LIST OF TABLES ............................................... v LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . v i ACKNOWLEDGEMENT , v i i Chapter 1. THE PROBLEM . 1 1.1 INTRODUCTION 1 1.2 IMMEDIATE BACKGROUND ....................... .. 3 1.3 RELATED CONCERNS 6 1.4 PURPOSE of the STUDY ............................ 9 1.5 DEFINITION of TERMS ...10 1.6 LIMITATIONS of the STUDY ...11 2. LITERATURE REVIEW .12 2.1 OVERVIEW ...12 2.2 EMPIRICAL STUDIES .,,...,.,,....,.,12 2.3 TEACHER ROLES i n CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT .. . 26 2.4 QUESTIONNAIRE DEFECTS ............30 2.5 SUMMARY 33 3. METHODOLOGY 35 3.1 ORGANIZATION of the CHAPTER 35 3.2 POPULATION ...... ...36 3.3 DEVELOPMENT of the QUESTIONNAIRE ................ 37 3.4 PROCEDURES ................................. .43 3.5 METHOD of ANALYSIS ......46 4. ANALYSIS ; ... 51 4.1 ORGANIZATION o f the CHAPTER 51 4.2 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE 51 4.3 RELIABILITY and VALIDITY 54 4.4 ANALYSIS f o r QUESTION ONE ..57 4.5 ANALYSIS f o r QUESTION TWO ....................... 63 4.6 ANALYSIS f o r QUESTION THREE .67 5. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS .75 5. 1 SUMMARY ..........................75 5.2 CONCLUSIONS 77 5.3 RECOMMENDATIONS .................................81 BIBLIOGRAPHY ...........................84 APPENDICES ........................ 91 A. PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE 92 B. COVER LETTER and FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE ...... 97 C. VALIDATION PROCEDURE 103 V LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. P i l o t Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Beturn D i s t r i b u t i o n ......38 2. P i l o t Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item-Test C o r r e l a t i o n s ............. 40 3. O r g a n i z a t i o n of Data on Computer Cards .................45 4. F i n a l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Beturn D i s t r i b u t i o n ................ 51 5. Comments toward the whole Questi o n n a i r e ................52 6. Comments toward Item 14 ...53 7. D i s t r i c t Involvement f o r Respondents from the Same D i s t r i c t .................................54 8. F i n a l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item-Test C o r r e l a t i o n s 55 9. Responses of the Panel of Judges ....................... 56 10. D i s t r i c t Involvement i n Curriculum Development .58 11. School Involvement i n Curriculum Development ...................59 12. I n d i v i d u a l Involvement i n Curriculum Development .................................60 13. A t t i t u d e s o f Teachers toward L o c a l C u r r i c u l u m Development ...........................63 14. Low and High Scorers on the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement Factor ..................68 15. Low and High Scorers on the L i k e r t A t t i t u d e S c a l e .........68 16. T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Sex ..........................70 17. T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Formal C o l l e g e Education .....70 18. T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Teaching L e v e l ................ 71 19. T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n School S i z e ...................72 20. T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Teacher P o s i t i o n ............. 72 21. Begression of A t t i t u d e s on Age, Teaching Experience, E d u c a t i o n a l D i v e r s i t y and Teachers on S t a f f ...,.,..,...73 v i LIST OF FIGURES F i g u r e Page 1. Histogram f o r D i s t r i c t C urriculum Development ..,.61 2. Histogram f o r School Curriculum Development ..... .... ........................61 3. Histogram f o r I n d i v i d u a l C u r r i c u l u m Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62 4. Histogram f o r A t t i t u d e s toward L o c a l Curriculum Development ..66 v i i ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS S p e c i a l a p p r e c i a t i o n are due to Dr. Ian B e a t t i e , f o r the many hours of patience and many h e l p f u l suggestions, t o Dr. Walter S z e t e l a , f o r h i s enthusiasm and concern, and to Dr. Mar s h a l l A r l i n , f o r h i s time and guidance. S p e c i a l thanks are a l s o due t o John Epp, p r e s i d e n t o f the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n of Mathematics Teachers, f o r permission to use the BCAMT membership l i s t , and t o Dr. P a u l i n e Weinstein, who g r a c i o u s l y made the l i s t a v a i l a b l e . 1 Chapter 1 THE PROBLEM 1-1 INTRODUCTION The involvement of teach e r s i n c u r r i c u l u m development has grown s u b s t a n t i a l l y i n r e c e n t years throughout the world. Teacher involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development and f a c t o r s which i n f l u e n c e t h e i r involvement have furthermore been a su b j e c t o f study i n many c o u n t r i e s . Teachers, e s p e c i a l l y i n North America, appear t o be more a c t i v e l y concerned with the a c t u a l content of sc h o o l courses. K i r s t notes t h a t : "Curriculum i s s u e s are beginning t o appear i n c o n t r a c t demands o f teacher o r g a n i z a t i o n s . . . but as yet they have not been c e n t r a l i s s u e s . " 1 The e d u c a t i o n a l system i n B r i t i s h Columbia has not been immune to these t r e n d s . Recently c u r r i c u l u m d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and i t s e f f e c t on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development has begun to emerge as an i s s u e . In a p r e s e n t a t i o n given to the Surrey Teachers' *M. 8. K i r s t and D. F. Walker, "An A n a l y s i s of Curriculum P o l i c y - M a k i n g , 1 1 Beview of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, v o l . 41 no. 5 (December, 1971), p. 479. 2 A s s o c i a t i o n i n February 1975, Pedersen noted t h i s concern. " I t i s my impression from v i s i t i n g a number of s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s t h a t the n o t i o n of d e c e n t r a l i z i n g the c u r r i c u l u m f u n c t i o n i s causing marked concern among teacher and a d m i n i s t r a t o r groups." 1 The argument has o f t e n been made that the t e a c h e r , who knows the student best and u l t i m a t e l y c o n t r o l s the l e a r n i n g process, should have a g r e a t e r r o l e i n d e c i d i n g what i s to be taught. Jampolsky s t a t e d t h a t ; "The Department of Education may o f f e r g u i d e l i n e s , the M i n i s t e r of Education may p r e s c r i b e , boards of t r u s t e e s may demand a l l they l i k e , but i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , the teacher must teach. The r e a l maker of c u r r i c u l u m , the decision-maker, the guestion-answerer, the one r e s p o n s i b l e f o r what u l t i m a t e l y occurs i n the e d u c a t i o n a l process, i s the classroom t e a c h e r . 1 , 2 The views of B r i t i s h Columbia mathematics teac h e r s on teacher involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development are not known, and cannot be i n f e r r e d from other s t u d i e s s i n c e s u b j e c t f i e l d , geographic r e g i o n and experience with c u r r i c u l u m development seem to i n f l u e n c e the a t t i t u d e s t h a t teachers hold. P r o f e s s i o n a l groups d i f f e r i n t h e i r p o l i c i e s toward d e c e n t r a l i z i n g the c u r r i c u l u m development process. Some have not yet taken a p o s i t i o n . One group i n p a r t i c u l a r , the teachers of secondary s c h o o l mathematics i n B r i t i s h Columbia, does not appear to have a d e f i n i t e p o l i c y on teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. •lK. „,G. Pedersen, " E d u c a t i o n a l Decision-making: an i r r a t i o n a l p r o c e s s ? " E d u c a t i o n C a n a d a , v o l . 15 no. 3 {Summer 1975), p. 33. 2Murray Jampolsky, "The Teacher i s the C r i t i c a l F a c t o r i n C u r r i c u l u m , " The ATA Magazine, v o l . 5H no. 1 (September-October, 1973) , p. 35. 3 1,2 IMMEDIATE BACKGROUND Classroom teachers have been i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m development s i n c e Dewey's day, although t h e i r r o l e has g e n e r a l l y been a s u b s i d i a r y one.i In B r i t i s h Columbia, where the c u r r i c u l u m has been the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y o f the M i n i s t r y of Education, i t has been the custom t h a t government-appointed s p e c i a l i s t s organize and d i r e c t c u r r i c u l u m development programs. The teacher's r o l e has been mainly that o f "an o p e r a t i v e who puts new c u r r i c u l u m plans i n t o e f f e c t . " 2 To some educators, more teacher c o n t r o l over the c u r r i c u l u m i s an i n d i c a t i o n of i n c r e a s i n g p r o f e s s i o n a l i z a t i o n . As Nasstrcm e x p l a i n s , "For p u b l i c s c h o o l t e a c h e r s , c l a i m s to p r o f e s s i o n a l i s m encompass s u b s t a n t i a l power over the curriculum."3 To o t h e r s , the d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of c o n t r o l over the c u r r i c u l u m i s a r e a c t i o n to the top-down approach o f cu r r i c u l u m development with i t s l a r g e s c a l e p r o j e c t s i r r e l e v a n t to the l o c a l s i t u a t i o n . * The term 'teacher-proof c u r r i c u l u m * shows the extreme to which some experts i n c u r r i c u l u m development have gone. These views have o b v i o u s l y i n f l u e n c e d v a r i o u s groups i n B r i t i s h Columbia. iThomas i . M i l l e r , "Ten P r i n c i p l e s of Curriculum Development . . . f o r Classroom Teachers," O n t a r i o Education, v o l . 5 (May 1973) , p. 12. 2 R o b e r t G. Koopman, Curriculum Development (New York: Center f o r Appli e d Research i n Education, 1966), p. 22. 3Roy R. Nasstrom, "Teacher A u t h o r i t y Over the Cur r i c u l u m ? " E d u c a t i o n a l Leadership, v o l . 31 (May, 1974), p. 713. •Michael R. Simonson, Charles Poncelow and John Mclure, " A t t i t u d e s Toward Decision-making i n I n s t r u c t i o n a l Development," E d u c a t i o n a l Technology, v o l . 16 no. 1 {January, 1976), p. 51. 4 One h i g h l y i n f l u e n t i a l group i n the province i s the B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n (BCTF) . The F e d e r a t i o n supports the p a r t i c i p a t i o n o f teachers i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as i n d i c a t e d i n these statements. "34.B.04 -That the BCTF provide p r o f e s s i o n a l guidance to teachers i n the design and e v a l u a t i o n of l o c a l l y -develcped courses.(1972 AGM) 34. B.18 -That each l o c a l a s s o c i a t i o n be encouraged to appoint a c u r r i c u l u m committee.(January 1976)"* In September 1973, a group from the BCTF wrote and presented a b r i e f 2 on c u r r i c u l u m development to the M i n i s t e r of Education. The b r i e f g e n e r a l l y advocated a move toward d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of c u r r i c u l u m a u t h o r i t y so that l o c a l boards and t e a c h e r s would have room to provide f o r t h e i r own l o c a l requirements. A c t i n g on c e r t a i n recommendations, the government changed some s e c t i o n s of the P u b l i c Schools Act (PSA). A u t h o r i t y over c u r r i c u l u m was taken from the Lieutenant-Governor i n C o u n c i l and t r a n s f e r r e d to l o c a l Boards of School T r u s t e e s . This was expressed i n S e c t i o n 168 of the PSA as: "Subject to the r e g u l a t i o n s , a Board may approve courses of study, textbooks, supplementary readers, and other i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s f o r use i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l s i n the school d i s t r i c t . 1974,c.74,s.14; 197 5,c.58,s.14."3 1 B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n , Members' Guide to the BCTF 1976-1977 (Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n ) , p. 70. 2BCTF, Cu r r i c u l u m Development ( b r i e f submitted to the M i n i s t e r of E ducation, September, 1973). 3 P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia, " P u b l i c Schools Act," S t a t u t e s of B r i t i s h Columbia ( V i c t o r i a : Government of B r i t i s h Columbia), chap.319 sec.168.^ 5 T e n t a t i v e r e g u l a t i o n s 1 f o r c u r r i c u l u m d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n were prepared by a committee r e p r e s e n t i n g t e a c h e r s , t r u s t e e s , and government personnel and d i s t r i b u t e d throughout the province i n the s p r i n g of 1975. The purposes of the r e g u l a t i o n s were to f a c i l i t a t e the implementation of S e c t i o n 168 and to serve as a v e h i c l e f o r thorough c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the process of c u r r i c u l u m d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . .Reaction toward the d r a f t r e g u l a t i o n s r e v e a l e d c o n s i d e r a b l e disagreement over the assignment of a u t h o r i t y f o r c u r r i c u l u m development. However, due to the government turnover i n l a t e 1975, the d r a f t r e g u l a t i o n s n e i t h e r r e s u r f a c e d nor became p o l i c y . In March 1S76, the E d u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e of B r i t i s h Columbia (ERIBC) examined v a r i o u s i s s u e s concerning a u t h o r i t y f o r s c h o o l c u r r i c u l a . The i n t e n t of that study was to "show t h a t c o n f u s i o n over a u t h o r i t y f o r p u b l i c education i n B r i t i s h Columbia i s the r e s u l t , i n l a r g e p a r t , of vague l e g i s l a t i o n and r e g u l a t i o n s . " 2 Responses t o an open-ended q u e s t i o n n a i r e supported t h i s c l a i m and the study concluded t h a t much c o n f l i c t e x i s t e d over a u t h o r i t y and r o l e s i n c u r r i c u l u m development. P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Education, P r o v i n c i a l a d v i s o r y Committee on C u r r i c u l u m D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , D r a f t Regulations f o r C u r r i c u l u m D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n { V i c t o r i a : Department of Education, 1975). 2 L l o y d MacDonald and Janet Werker, Au th o r i t y P a t t e r n s i n &*. Education: An A n a l y s i s of A u t h o r i t y f o r School C u r r i c u l u m {Vancouver: EBIBC, May, 1S76), p.16. 6 1.3 RELATED CONCERNS Views on the involvement of teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development d i f f e r w idely. For some s u b j e c t f i e l d s , such as E n g l i s h and S o c i a l S t u d i e s , the changes to the P u b l i c Schools Act were necessary to r e f l e c t what i s i n r e a l i t y going on i n classrooms. There are a l s o some teachers who have, through l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d courses, been completely i n v o l v e d with c u r r i c u l u m development, from the formation of o b j e c t i v e s to the e v a l u a t i o n of l e a r n i n g . 1 B e n e f i c i a l e f f e c t s of such teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n on t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l development are w e l l documented i n s t u d i e s l i k e P r o j e c t Canada West and P r o j e c t I t l a n t i c Canada. 2 some r e s e a r c h on p r e f e r r e d l e v e l s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n a l s o i n d i c a t e s t h a t : "There are numerous i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t v a r i o u s groups and i n d i v i d u a l s wish to become i n v o l v e d i n s i g n i f i c a n t d e c i s i o n s t o a g r e a t e r extent than they have been i n the p a s t . " 3 However, involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development may not be p r a c t i c a l f o r a l l teachers or f o r a l l s u b j e c t f i e l d s . Developing a complete course from s c r a t c h i s a very complex process and takes much knowledge, experience, and a b i l i t y . lRalph H. Sabey, ed., P r o j e c t Canada West (Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , May 1975). 2 P r o j e c t Canada West was a 5-year S o c i a l S t u d i e s p r o j e c t which enabled classroom t e a c h e r s to be the major developers of c u r r i c u l a . P r o j e c t A t l a n t i c Canada i s a s i m i l a r S o c i a l S t u d i e s p r o j e c t c u r r e n t l y under way i n the A t l a n t i c p r o v i n c e s . 3 E . M i k l o s , " I n c r e a s i n g P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Decision-Making," The Canadian_Administrator, v o l . 9 no. 6 (March, 1970), p. 25. 7 The Board of the N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of Teachers of Mathematics has r e c e n t l y s t a t e d : "We decry the i m p o s i t i o n on the classroom teacher of h a s t i l y adopted e d u c a t i o n a l i n n o v a t i o n s which e s s e n t i a l l y r e d e f i n e the t e a c h e r * s r o l e i n t o t h a t of a manager, c l e r k , or c u r r i c u l u m developer. We take the p o s i t i o n t h a t the classroom teacher should teach and that he or she should be supported i n , r a t h e r than d i v e r t e d from, t h a t important r o l e . " 1 In support of t h i s view, MacPherson 2 r e c e n t l y remarked t h a t l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development might be an enormous task dumped onto teachers who can then expect l i m i t e d help, l i t t l e r e l e a s e time, and few rewards f o r t h e i r l a b o u r . another o b j e c t i o n i s t h a t , f o r the h i g h l y content-o r i e n t e d s u b j e c t f i e l d s , l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development might r e s u l t i n unnecessary d u p l i c a t i o n of e f f o r t . The B r i t i s h Columbia S c i e n c e Teachers* a s s o c i a t i o n was p a r t l y concerned about t h i s when at a recent meeting i t r e s o l v e d : "That the BCScTA go on r e c o r d as being opposed to wholesale d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of s c i e n c e c u r r i c u l u m p a r t i c u l a r i t y at the s e n i o r secondary s c i e n c e l e v e l . " 3 In the same statement the A s s o c i a t i o n f u r t h e r claimed t h a t a p r o v i n c i a l core c u r r i c u l u m was e s s e n t i a l and t h a t d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n i n S c i e n c e would r e s u l t i n a great deal of d u p l i c a t i o n of e f f o r t i n the production of s u i t a b l e c u r r i c u l u m m a t e r i a l s . 1 Board of D i r e c t o r s , N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of Teachers of Mathematics, "Time to Teach," NCTM Newsletter {September 1976), p. 4. 2 E r i c MacPherson, Keynote Address at the F i f t h Mathematics Summer Workshop at Carson Graham School, Vancouver, August, 1976. 3Doug A. Black, "Communications: With the C u r r i c u l u m Branch," M., _C. Science Teacher, vol.17 no.3 (January, 1976), pp.18-19. 8 A recent i n d i c a t i o n from the S i n i s t e r of E d u c a t i o n 1 was that the c u r r i c u l u m would be d i v i d e d i n t o three c a t e g o r i e s , 1. That which must be l e a r n e d . ( P r o v i n c i a l l e v e l ) 2. That which should be l e a r n e d . ( P r o v i n c i a l l e v e l ) 3. That which may be l e a r n e d . ( D i s t r i c t l e v e l ) A b o o k l e t 2 d e s c r i b i n g the goals of the core c u r r i c u l u m was d i s t r i b u t e d i n December 1976 and the M i n i s t e r s a i d the f o l l o w i n g about t h i s booklet. "Assuming there i s broad consensus that these are the a p p r o p r i a t e s k i l l s and knowledge that every c h i l d must l e a r n i n the v a r i o u s grades, then i n September they w i l l become part of the core c u r r i c u l u m . " 3 These p o l i c i e s c o u l d very w e l l a f f e c t c u r r e n t procedures o f c u r r i c u l u m development. In summary, teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s l i k e l y to become an i s s u e i n B r i t i s h Columbia, but the views of p r o f e s s i o n a l groups on t h i s i s s u e are not c l e a r . One group i n p a r t i c u l a r , the secondary mathematics teachers of B r i t i s h Columbia, does not appear to have a d e f i n i t e p o l i c y on teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. 1 P a t r i c k McGeer, " M i n i s t e r ' s P o l i c y Statement," Education Today••, v o l . 3 no. 3 (November, 1976), p.,49. 2 P r o v i n c e of B r i t i s h Columbia, M i n i s t r y of Education, What should our c h i l d r e n fee l e a r n i n g ; Goals of the core c u r r i c u l u m ( V i c t o r i a : M i n i s t r y of Education, November, 1976). 3 P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h Columbia, M i n i s t r y of Education, "Core Goals Booklet Now A v a i l a b l e , " Education Today., v o l . 3 no. ,4 (December, 1976) , p. 2. 9 1-4 PURPOSE o f the STUDY Since l i t t l e has been done t o e l i c i t response from mathematics t e a c h e r s on the v a r i o u s i s s u e s presented above, the author s t u d i e d the c u r r e n t involvement of secondary mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development, t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward such involvement, and the r e l a t i o n s h i p between teacher a t t i t u d e s and v a r i o u s p e r s o n a l v a r i a b l e s . Other s t u d i e s , which are reviewed i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter, showed t h a t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f t e a c h e r s with r e s p e c t to involvement i n and a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development v a r i e d tremendously with time and p l a c e . T h i s study t h e r e f o r e examined many of the personal v a r i a b l e s that the other s t u d i e s had used. The study a l s o i n v o l v e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n o f a g u e s t i o n n a i r e which was sent to v a r i o u s mathematics t e a c h e r s a c r o s s the province. The data were used t o answer the f o l l o w i n g b a s i c g u e s t i o n s . 1. To what extent are secondary mathematics teachers c u r r e n t l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? 2. What are the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics t e a c h e r s toward c u r r i c u l u m development at the l o c a l l e v e l ? 3. What are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of teach e r s with r e s p e c t to involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? 10 1.5 DEFINITION of TERMS Curriculum: & b r i e f survey of the l i t e r a t u r e on c u r r i c u l u m theory shows t h a t there i s l i t t l e agreement on the d e f i n i t i o n s of ' c u r r i c u l u m ' or on the theory of c u r r i c u l u m development. For example, the word ' c u r r i c u l u m 1 s t i l l has a range of p o s s i b l e meanings, from " a l l the l e a r n i n g experiences encountered by a student i n a s c h o o l " t o "a s e t of intended l e a r n i n g outcomes." 1 B a b i n 2 r e p o r t s that a r e c e n t p e r u s a l of t w e n t y - f i v e c u r r i c u l u m textbooks gave t w e n t y - f i v e d i f f e r e n t d e f i n i t i o n s of c u r r i c u l u m . To some, c u r r i c u l u m means s u b j e c t matter, t o others i t means a guide o f what to teach and to yet o t h e r s , c u r r i c u l u m means l i f e i t s e l f . Secondary and elementary t e a c h e r s o f t e n d i f f e r on t h e i r i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of c u r r i c u l u m and c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h e r s must acknowledge and t o l e r a t e these d i f f e r e n c e s . Recently t h e r e has been some e f f o r t 3 to narrow down the concept o f c u r r i c u l u m t o i n c l u d e content only, thus e l i m i n a t i n g the aspect of i n s t r u c t i o n e n t i r e l y . In t h i s study, the attempt i s not so much to r e s t r i c t the concepts t o p r e c i s e d e f i n i t i o n s but r a t h e r t o a n t i c i p a t e what mathematics teac h e r s understand about c u r r i c u l u m development. *Ted A o k i , "Curriculum and I n s t r u c t i o n a l Design," P r o j e c t C a n a d a 8 e s t , ed. H. H. Sabey (Vancouver: BCTF, 1975), p. 51. 2 P a t r i c k Babin, " S l a u g h t e r i n g some sa c r e d cows," Education Canada, v o l . 14 no. 1 (March,1974), p. 41. 3 M a u r i t 2 Johnson, "On the Meaning of Cur r i c u l u m Design," Curriculum Theory Network, v o l . 3 (1969), p.6. 11 A t t i t u d e s : A t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development can be determined from u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r s and s p e c i f i c d u t i e s a s s o c i a t e d with c u r r i c u l u m development. T h e r e f o r e , the term • a t t i t u d e ' has been o p e r a t i o n a l l y d e f i n e d as the measure t h a t r e s u l t s from the a t t i t u d e s e c t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , which examines u n d e r l y i n g f a c t o r s and s p e c i f i c a c t i v i t i e s of l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. L o c a l : L o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i n t h i s study means c u r r i c u l u m development a t the d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l l e v e l . Instead of the c u r r e n t p r a c t i c e of i n v o l v i n g a few s e l e c t teachers on a p r o v i n c i a l r e v i s i o n committee, teachers at the d i s t r i c t or sc h o o l l e v e l would develop o u t l i n e s of courses. 1.6 LIMITATIONS of the 5TODY T h i s study i s l i m i t e d due to the f a c t t h a t a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was used to gather the data. In g e n e r a l , q u e s t i o n n a i r e s have many weaknesses, some of which w i l l be examined i n the f o l l o w i n g chapter. Another l i m i t a t i o n i s t h a t the survey p o p u l a t i o n may or may not be t r u l y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e o f secondary mathematics teac h e r s i n g e n e r a l . The members of the po p u l a t i o n were not f o r c e d to j o i n t h e i r a s s o c i a t i o n and could t h e r e f o r e be a s e l e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n . Another l i m i t a t i o n i s that the c o n c l u s i o n s of the study would n a t u r a l l y be r e s t r i c t e d to B r i t i s h Columbia and may not be g e n e r a l i z a b l e t o any other area. 12 Chapter 2 LITERATURE REVIEW 2- 1 OVERVIEW The review of l i t e r a t u r e has been d i v i d e d i n t o three p a r t s i n t h i s chapter. S e c t i o n 2.2 c o n s i s t s e x c l u s i v e l y of e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s t h a t have been done on the involvement of teachers i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s . Viewpoints expressed by i n d i v i d u a l s or s o c i e t i e s l i k e t e a c h e r s ' f e d e r a t i o n s have a l r e a d y been considered i n the pr e v i o u s chapter and t h e r e f o r e have been l e f t out i n favour o f a c t u a l r e s e a r c h a r t i c l e s and theses. S e c t i o n 2.3 r e p o r t s v a r i o u s teacher r o l e s i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and the f i n a l s e c t i o n examines the d e f e c t s o f q u e s t i o n n a i r e s . 2.2 EMPIRICAL STUDIES Th i s s e c t i o n examines e m p i r i c a l s t u d i e s t h a t r e l a t e t o the three b a s i c r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . These s t u d i e s have provided ideas of what types o f v a r i a b l e s to c o n s i d e r , the instruments or procedures t h a t might be u s e f u l and how the a p p r o p r i a t e data might be c o l l e c t e d . The l i m i t a t i o n s of s i m i l a r r e s e a r c h can o f t e n p r o v i d e e x c e l l e n t g u i d e l i n e s , even though some of the c o n d i t i o n s are g u i t e d i f f e r e n t . S t u d i e s at both the f o r e i g n and n a t i o n a l l e v e l were reviewed and are summarized i n the f o l l o w i n g . 13 Curriculum development at t h e l o c a l l e v e l i n Canada i s by no means a rec e n t concern f o r some pr o v i n c e s . O n t a r i o , f o r example, e s t a b l i s h e d l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m committees as e a r l y as 1950. In that year, the use of a s i n g l e textbook f o r each s u b j e c t was d i s c o n t i n u e d and te a c h e r s were allowed to choose textbooks from an e x t e n s i v e l i s t . A s t u d y 1 was completed i n 1959 by the Canadian Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n on the p a r t played by Ontar i o t e a c h e r s i n c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n . The study examined e x t e r n a l and i n t e r n a l methods of c u r r i c u l u m m o d i f i c a t i o n . E x t e r n a l methods r e f e r r e d to teacher involvement at the p r o v i n c i a l and d i s t r i c t l e v e l through membership on c u r r i c u l u m committees. I n t e r n a l methods r e f e r r e d to teacher d e v i a t i o n s from the e x i s t i n g c u r r i c u l u m guide a t the classroom l e v e l . Teachers, p r i n c i p a l s , and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n Onta r i o were a p p r o p r i a t e l y sampled and given a q u e s t i o n n a i r e which i n c l u d e d items r e l a t i n g to the extent of l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d c u r r i c u l a use, the extent of p a r t i c i p a t i o n on r e v i s i o n committees and the degree of l i b e r t y taken with c u r r i c u l u m o u t l i n e s . R e s u l t s r e l a t i n g t o these i s s u e s were as f o l l o w s . 1. In small communities ( l e s s than 1000), only 10% of the s c h o o l s were using l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d c u r r i c u l a , as compared to almost 40% i n the l a r g e communities (30, 000+). Si n c e the l a r g e r s c h o o l s were found i n l a r g e communities, l o c a l r e v i s i o n was co n c e n t r a t e d i n the l a r g e r s c h o o l s . 2. Mathematics and S o c i a l S t u d i e s were the s u b j e c t s most o f t e n r e v i s e d . 3. Most a d m i n i s t r a t o r s f e l t t h a t l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d c u r r i c u l a were b e t t e r s u i t e d to l o c a l c o n d i t i o n s . 4. The m a j o r i t y of teachers would accept c u r r i c u l u m change i f they were allowed to take part i n the 1Canadian Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n , Teacher I n f l u e n c e on C u r r i c u l u m , Research Study No. 4 (Ottawa, O n t a r i o : CTF, 1959). 14 p l a n n i n g . 5. Approximately 5 3 % of the c u r r i c u l u m guides i n use had been modified at e i t h e r the l o c a l or classroom l e v e l . 6. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development was g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d , yet only a few teachers f e l t t h a t they r e g u i r e d a st r o n g e r v o i c e i n c u r r i c u l u m matters. T h i s e a r l y study shows how a q u e s t i o n n a i r e provided d e t a i l s of teacher c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. However, O n t a r i o was the only province that d e c e n t r a l i z e d c u r r i c u l u m decision-making so e a r l y and one must turn t o f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s f o r other r e l e v a n t s t u d i e s . As p a r t of a study on tbe a t t i t u d e s of Swiss t e a c h e r s towards the planning of the c u r r i c u l u m , S a n t i n i * examined the s e l f - p e r c e p t i o n of teache r s i n c u r r i c u l u m development. From i n t e r v i e w s , he found out that they saw themselves as an important p a r t of the c u r r i c u l u m development process. V i r t u a l l y a l l t e a c h e r s c a l l e d f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development at the canton (corresponding t o the American s c h o o l d i s t r i c t ) l e v e l although only 14% of those i n t e r v i e w e d had a c t u a l l y p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the development of a c u r r i c u l u m . Some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of t e a c h e r s were that twice as many men as women p a r t i c i p a t e d and th a t l a r g e s c h o o l communities had a g r e a t e r r a t i o o f teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n . S a n t i n i f i n i s h e d h i s a r t i c l e by n o t i c i n g t h a t "involvement with c u r r i c u l u m i s not t o be viewed as a 'job* e n t i r e l y separated from o t h e r p r o f e s s i o n a l a c t i v i t i e s , but i n t e g r a t e d i n t o a tea c h e r ' s d u t i e s . " 2 1Bruno S a n t i n i , " A t t i t u d e s o f Swiss Teachers towards the Study and P l a n n i n g of the Curr i c u l u m , " The J o u r n a l of Curriculum S t u d i e s , v o l . 5 no. 2 (November, 1 9 7 3 ) , p.161. 2 I b i d . , p. 164. 15 The Swiss study showed that - t h e c u r r i c u l u m reform movement, with i t s emphasis on c u r r i c u l u m development by p r a c t i s i n g teachers i n s t e a d of s u b j e c t s p e c i a l i s t s , has a f f e c t e d f o r e i g n c o u n t r i e s as w e l l as North America., England a l s o , with her l o c a l teacher c e n t r e s p r o v i d i n g f o r c u r r i c u l u m development at the s c h o o l l e v e l , o f f e r e d many examples of teacher involvement. However, examination of s t u d i e s from the United S t a t e s was more p r o f i t a b l e , s i n c e t h e i r e d u c a t i o n a l system was c l o s e r to the Canadian one. Summaries of v a r i o u s EEIC r e p o r t s and d i s s e r t a t i o n s on i s s u e s r e l e v a n t to the t h r e e r e s e a r c h guestions are reported i n the f o l l o w i n g . In a r e p o r t to the American E d u c a t i o n a l Research A s s o c i a t i o n Conference i n 1970, Kardas* o u t l i n e d some r e s u l t s of her study of teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m planning and implementation. Although the study used elementary t e a c h e r s , the instruments were s u i t a b l e f o r secondary teachers a l s o . Kardas found t h a t there was a p o s i t i v e c o r r e l a t i o n between p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m planning a c t i v i t i e s and implementation of c u r r i c u l u m guides i n the classroom. Teachers who were most l i k e l y t o implement a c u r r i c u l u m at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l were those who wrote the guides, wanted to r e c e i v e p r o f e s s i o n a l c r e d i t f o r p a r t i c i p a t i o n and p r e f e r r e d s c h o o l personnel t o d i r e c t the c u r r i c u l u m a c t i v i t i e s . l B a r b a r a J . Kardas, C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C u r r i c u l u m Planning and Reported Acts of Implementation, U. S. , E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Center, ERIC Document ED 037 382, March, 1970., 16 Another ERIC document 1 presented a s e t of g u i d e l i n e s t o help s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s become more d e c e n t r a l i z e d . In the beginning c h a p t e r , the authors l i s t e d a s e r i e s of statements about d e c i s i o n s to be made at the l o c a l s c h o o l l e v e l . Some of these statements r e v e a l t y p i c a l d e c e n t r a l i z e d a c t i v i t i e s i n c u r r i c u l u m decision-making. For example, s c h o o l s i n t r u l y d e c e n t r a l i z e d s i t u a t i o n s would be abl e t o choose t h e i r own textbooks, i n i t i a t e t h e i r own courses, h i r e t h e i r own c u r r i c u l u m s p e c i a l i s t s , and decide on t h e i r own i n s e r v i c e a c t i v i t i e s . Beauchamp conducted a l o n g i t u d i n a l study of a new cu r r i c u l u m system f o r an I l l i n o i s s c h o o l d i s t r i c t . Teachers were organized i n t o t h r e e groups, a h o r i z o n t a l committee which handled c u r r i c u l u m matters at each grade l e v e l , a v e r t i c a l committee which handled the c u r r i c u l u m of each s u b j e c t f i e l d , and a c u r r i c u l u m c o u n c i l which coo r d i n a t e d the e f f o r t s of the other two committees and d i r e c t e d the implementation of the guides. The go a l of Beauchamp*s p r o j e c t was to observe the e f f e c t of v a r i o u s types of l e a d e r s h i p on te a c h e r a t t i t u d e s and performance. Some of the instruments used t o c o l l e c t data were the Curriculum A t t i t u d e Inventory by langenbach, the Teacher S e l f - A n a l y s i s Inventory, designed to measure t e a c h e r s ' p e r c e p t i o n of t h e i r performance, and the P r i n c i p a l ' s Teacher i f . W. Monahan and H. M. Johnson, D e c e n t r a l i z e d D e c i s i o n Making Toward E d u c a t i o n a l G o a l s , U.S., E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Inf o r m a t i o n Center, ERIC Document ED 078 586, May, 1973. 17 A n a l y s i s Inventory, designed f o r p r i n c i p a l s t o use i n e v a l u a t i n g teacher performance. The f i f t h s t u d y 1 i n the s e r i e s of ERIC documents analysed the s c o r e s on these three instruments with r e s p e c t to v a r i o u s teacher c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s i n c l u d i n g the grade l e v e l taught, sex, and e x t e n t of formal e d u c a t i o n . G e n e r a l l y , the p r o j e c t showed t h a t the a t t i t u d e s of teachers toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the c u r r i c u l u m system g r a d u a l l y improved with time. T h i s type o f c u r r i c u l u m system seems to have been e f f e c t i v e i n t h i s I l l i n o i s s c h o o l d i s t r i c t and g i v e s an example of l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. From q u e s t i o n n a i r e s on Colorado teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m committee work, McQuigg 2 reported the f o l l o w i n g major p o i n t s . 1. Teachers and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s agreed t h a t t e a c h e r s should be r e q u i r e d t o serve on c u r r i c u l u m committees; 2. A m a j o r i t y of t e a c h e r s approved of a reduced t e a c h i n g l o a d f o r teachers s e r v i n g on c u r r i c u l u m committees; 3. A m a j o r i t y of secondary s c h o o l teachers approved of the use of a s u b s t i t u t e teacher while the r e g u l a r teacher i s engaged i n c u r r i c u l u m committee work; 4. A m a j o r i t y of t e a c h e r s r e j e c t e d the o p i n i o n t h a t c u r r i c u l u m committee work i s a p a r t of every t e a c h e r ' s job and s p e c i a l p r o v i s i o n s need not be i n v o l v e d . lGeorge A. Beauchamp and P a t r i c i a C. Conran, L o n g i t u d i n a l Study i n C u r r i c u l u m E n g i n e e r i n g— 5 . U.S., E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Center, ERIC Document ED 102 670, A p r i l , 1975. ^Robert B. HcQuigg, " P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C u r r i c u l u m Committees by Classroom Teachers i n S e l e c t e d Colorado School Systems," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 1962, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , V o l . X X I I I , p. 3733. 18 McQuigg a l s o found t h a t "the time r e q u i r e d t o do c u r r i c u l u m committee work, a l a c k of c r e d i t r e c e i v e d , and a l a c k of implementation of the committee's recommendations appeared to be the major o b s t a c l e s to c u r r i c u l u m work f o r classroom t e a c h e r s . " 1 Many t e a c h e r s a l s o f e l t t h a t c u r r i c u l u m committee work was an ex t r a task added t o t h e i r job r a t h e r than an i n t e g r a l p a r t of i t . In a p a r t l y h i s t o r i c a l study, Heusner 2 determined i n 1963 that the l i t e r a t u r e on teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development i n d i c a t e d s t r o n g support f o r the c o n s t r u c t i o n of guides a t the l o c a l l e v e l . He then examined whether l a r g e - s c a l e teacher involvement was of value i n terms of the time and e f f o r t expended. Through i n t e r v i e w s of t e a c h e r s , p r i n c i p a l s , and c u r r i c u l u m s p e c i a l i s t s , Heusner found that teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y r e s u l t i n i n c r e a s e d u t i l i z a t i o n o f guides u n l e s s adequate r e c o g n i t i o n , time, and o r g a n i z a t i o n was e v i d e n t . He o u t l i n e d a c u r r i c u l u m model based on determining the degree of teacher r e a d i n e s s , i d e n t i f y i n g the r o l e of a l l p a r t i c i p a n t s , developing the format of gu i d e s , and i n c r e a s i n g communication between p a r t i c i p a n t s and other classroom t e a c h e r s . He a l s o pointed out the need f o r c l a r i f y i n g the f u n c t i o n of c u r r i c u l u m guides and textbooks. i l b i d . , p.3733. 2Henry C. Heusner, "A Study of the U t i l i z a t i o n o f Curriculum Guides as Related to S e l e c t e d F a c t o r s i n t h e i r P l a n n i n g and C o n s t r u c t i o n , " Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Wayne State U n i v e r s i t y , D e t r o i t , Michigan, 1963, D i s s er ta t i on A b s t r a c t s , Vol . XXV, p. 322. 19 A secondary purpose of Johansen's 1 study i n 1965 was to i n v e s t i g a t e the r e l a t i o n s h i p between teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m decision-making and c u r r i c u l u m implementation. He developed a q u e s t i o n n a i r e t h a t measured teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development and teacher implementation of the cu r r i c u l u m quide. The r e s e a r c h e r found s i g n i f i c a n t p o s i t i v e c o e f f i c i e n t s of c o r r e l a t i o n between the two measures. By means of a q u e s t i o n n a i r e based on the l i t e r a t u r e o f c o o p e r a t i v e c u r r i c u l u m development, M a r t i n 2 analysed how teachers and c u r r i c u l u m l e a d e r s viewed the teacher's r o l e i n c o o p e r a t i v e development. S p e c i f i c a l l y , t e a c h e r s i n ten Los Angeles County s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s gave t h e i r i d e a s of teacher r o l e s . The th r e e major c o n c l u s i o n s r e p o r t e d were: 1. The r o l e s of secondary and elementary teachers i n c o o p e r a t i v e c u r r i c u l u m development are not the same i n that the secondary t e a c h e r should be regarded as an expert i n h i s s u b j e c t s p e c i a l t y . 2. C l e r i c a l a s s i s t a n c e , the p r o v i s i o n o f a workroom, and r e l e a s e time are e s s e n t i a l to. c u r r i c u l u m development work. 3. Bole e x p e c t a t i o n s of te a c h e r s and c u r r i c u l u m s p e c i a l i s t s should be c l e a r l y determined, and should be f r e q u e n t l y reviewed. *John H. Johansen, "An I n v e s t i g a t i o n of the R e l a t i o n s h i p s Between Teachers* P e r c e p t i o n s of A u t h o r i t a t i v e I n f l u e n c e i n L o c a l Curriculum Decision-Making and Curriculum Implementation," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y , Evanston, I l l i n o i s , 1965, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . V o l . XXVI, p. 3127. zMary D. Mart i n , "The Teacher i n Cooperative Curriculum Development," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y of Southern C a l i f o r n i a , 1965, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . V o l . XXVI, p. 799. 20 In 1970, Burns 1 examined the c u r r e n t and p r o s p e c t i v e p a r t i c i p a t i o n of classroom t e a c h e r s i n c u r r i c u l u m policy-making i n the State of New J e r s e y . In h i s a n a l y s i s of q u e s t i o n n a i r e r e t u r n s , he found t h a t s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s among teachers e x i s t e d on the f o l l o w i n g v a r i a b l e s : sex, years of teaching experience, e d u c a t i o n a l l e v e l , t e a c h i n g l e v e l , and g e o g r a p h i c a l area of employment. . S p e c i f i c f i n d i n g s i n c l u d e d : 1. Male teachers appeared to be more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m planning. 2. Teachers with the l e a s t experience d i d not f e e l f r e e to make some d e c i s i o n s w i t h i n the classroom. , 3. Teachers with the g r e a t e r amount of formal e d u c a t i o n appeared to b e l i e v e they were more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m p o l i c y f o r m a t i o n and d e c i s i o n making than t h e i r l e s s educated c o l l e a g u e s . 4. Most suburban teachers r e p o r t e d they enjoyed more academic freedom than urban and r u r a l c o l l e a g u e s . . R a d c l i f f e 2 conducted a study i n 1972 to determine the change of teacher a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m planning and use i n an I l l i n o i s s c h o o l d i s t r i c t . The d i s t r i c t t r i e d a new approach to c u r r i c u l u m planning which i n v o l v e d the c o n s t r u c t i o n of a w r i t t e n guide f o r l e s s o n planning and c u r r i c u l u m implementation. The r e s e a r c h e r found that teachers g e n e r a l l y had a p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e toward the c u r r i c u l u m system but t h a t 1 Edward J.Burns, "The Emerging Role of the Teacher i n Curriculum P o l i c y Formation and D e c i s i o n Making i n the S t a t e of New j e r s e y , " Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Fordham U n i v e r s i t y , 1970, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . V o l . XXXI, p. 3161. 2 D a v i d H. R a d c l i f f e , "A Study of the E f f e c t of C u r r i c u l u m Planning and Usage on Teacher A t t i t u d e s i n the D a n v i l l e P u b l i c Schools, D a n v i l l e , I l l i n o i s , " Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s at Urbana-Champaign,1972, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , Vol.XXXII, p. 539. 21 they had s t r o n g negative f e e l i n g s to the planning and development of the guide. A l s o r e p o r t e d was t h a t high s c h o o l t e a c h e r s tended t o show the g r e a t e s t amount of p o s i t i v e change i n a t t i t u d e towards c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g and use. In 1975, Oswalt* s t u d i e d v a r i o u s aspects of teacher involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development. S p e c i f i c a l l y , he examined teachers' p e r c e p t i o n s of t h e i r involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development, the r e l a t i o n s h i p between these p e r c e p t i o n s and s e l e c t e d p e r s o n a l v a r i a b l e s , and teachers* e v a l u a t i o n s cf t h e i r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s . He c o l l e c t e d some of the data with an instrument c a l l e d the Cu r r i c u l u m Development P a r t i c i p a t i o n Survey and reported the f o l l o w i n g r e s u l t s . 1. A p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e toward t e a c h i n g i s r e l a t e d to a p o s i t i v e p e r c e p t i o n of involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development. 2. Young te a c h e r s and t e a c h e r s with l i m i t e d experience have p a r t i c u l a r i l y high m o t i v a t i o n f o r personal involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t y . 3. Teachers p e r c e i v e c u r r i c u l u m development as t h e i r own l e g i t i m a t e r e s p o n s i b i l i t y and not the r e s p o n s i b i l i t y of experts from o u t s i d e the s c h o o l system. *Eugene T.Oswalt, " P e r c e p t i o n s and E v a l u a t i o n s of Involvement i n Curriculum Development, 1 1 Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . Auburn U n i v e r s i t y , 1975, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . Vol.XXXVI, p. 3304. 22 Domanico 1 surveyed s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s i n New Jersey i n an e f f o r t t o determine how d i s t r i c t p o l i c y on c u r r i c u l u m development had changed i n the years 1971-75. He found t h a t the c u r r i c u l u m reform movement had caused s c h o o l d i s t r i c t p o l i c y changes i n more than h a l f of the d i s t r i c t s i n t h a t these d i s t r i c t s now had w r i t t e n a d m i n i s t r a t i v e g u i d e l i n e s f o r c u r r i c u l u m development. Domanico f u r t h e r reported t h a t procedures f o r c u r r i c u l u m development were a l s o a f f e c t e d i n the l a s t f i v e years, the most i n f l u e n t i a l approach being the teacher committee. The r e s e a r c h e r recommended t h a t s c h o o l board and a d m i n i s t r a t i v e p o l i c y should be the primary g u i d e l i n e s f o r c u r r i c u l u m development. There are a few Canadian r e p o r t s on c u r r i c u l u m development p r o j e c t s i n v a r i o u s p r o v i n c e s . For example, a study by Newton 2 was undertaken i n 1967 to d i s c o v e r whether or not classroom teachers i n Saskatoon were s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r r o l e i n c u r r i c u l u m changes. A q u e s t i o n n a i r e was sent t o t e a c h e r s of grades 5-8 who were using a new mathematics textbook. The r e s e a r c h e r found t h a t few teachers seemed t o be s a t i s f i e d with t h e i r r o l e s i n the change process. They wanted to have more share i n the e a r l y stages of p l a n n i n g although they saw the need iEdward M. Domanico, "An Examination of P r o c e d u r a l Options f o r Curriculum Development i n Response t o the C u r r i c u l u m Reform Movement," unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , Vol.XXXVII, p. 109. 2E.E.Newton, "Teacher Reaction to Change," Unpublished Master of Education T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1967, r e p o r t e d i n The Canadian A d m i n i s t r a t o r . v o l . 6 no. 7, A p r i l , 1967, pp. 25-28. 23 to have other people from other f i e l d s a s s i s t i n a n a l y s i n g a s i t u a t i o n and i n e s t a b l i s h i n g the g o a l s . Newton remarked t h a t ; "Time i s the key to the whole question i n the o p i n i o n of the t e a c h e r s i n t e r v i e w e d . They want to share i n c u r r i c u l u m planning but they i n s i s t t h a t i t cannot be done p r o p e r l y on weekends and i n the evenings. S e v e r a l t e a c h e r s suggested that there ought t o be permanent c u r r i c u l u m committees i n l a r g e s c h o o l systems, and that teachers i n v o l v e d should be given at l e a s t one-half day a week f o r t h i s work." 1 Although t h i s study d e a l t p r i m a r i l y with elementary teachers, i t was the only study t h a t d e a l t e x c l u s i v e l y with mathematics t e a c h e r s . The f o l l o w i n g study, wider i n scope, analysed t e a c h e r s of grades K-12 and i n a l l s u b j e c t f i e l d s . S i m p k i n s 2 analysed t e a c h e r p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n d e c i s i o n -making i n f o u r t e e n urban s c h o o l s i n A l b e r t a . P a r t of h i s study i n v o l v e d teacher p e r c e p t i o n s of c u r r i c u l u m planning and a d a p t a t i o n . He found t h a t t e a c h e r s p r e f e r r e d those i n higher o f f i c i a l a u t h o r i t y t o play the major r o l e i n d e c i d i n g the b a s i c o u t l i n e of the c u r r i c u l u m . Teachers themselves p r e f e r r e d to play the major r o l e i n determining the d e t a i l e d content of the c u r r i c u l u m . - simpkins s t r e s s e d t h a t a c t u a l teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n must be s t u d i e d , not j u s t t h e i r a s p i r a t i o n s . JE.E.Newton and I.E.Housego, "Teacher Reaction t o Change: A Case Study," The Canadian A d m i n i s t r a t o r , v o l . 6 no. 7 ( A p r i l , 1967), P. 27. 2 w i l l i a m S. Simpkins, "The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Decision-Making A u t h o r i t y i n the S c h o o l , " Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1968, reported i n W.S.Simpkins and D . F r i e s e n , "Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n School Decision-Making," The Canadian_Administrator. v o l . 8 no. ,U, {January, 1969), pp. 13-16. 24 M i l l e r * reviewed the l i t e r a t u r e on teacher p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m development and determined t h a t there had been l i t t l e r e s e a r c h on the r o l e of the classroom teacher as the major developer of c u r r i c u l a . He t h e r e f o r e developed ten b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development which he used as a b a s i s f o r a q u e s t i o n n a i r e and an i n t e r v i e w schedule. The s u b j e c t s were p a r t i c i p a n t s i n P r o j e c t Canada West, a p r o j e c t e n a b l i n g S o c i a l S t u d i e s teachers to be the major developers of c u r r i c u l u m . , His study l e d to the f o l l o w i n g c o n c l u s i o n s . The p a r t i c i p a n t s i n P r o j e c t Canada West 1. Implemented to a c o n s i d e r a b l e extent the ten b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s of c u r r i c u l u m development at the l o c a l and r e g i o n a l l e v e l . 2. Were s l i g h t l y o l d e r , were b e t t e r q u a l i f i e d a c a d e m i c a l l y , had more years of t e a c h i n g experience and had a l a r g e r percentage of t h e i r number teaching at the secondary l e v e l than was true f o r t e a c h e r s i n Canada as a whole. 3. B e l i e v e d t h a t the e f f e c t s of t h e i r involvement had been mainly b e n e f i c i a l i n r e l a t i o n to t h e i r classroom a c t i v i t i e s and t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l growth as t e a c h e r s . P r o j e c t A t l a n t i c Canada (PAC) i s a p r o j e c t i n S o c i a l S t u d i e s s i m i l a r to P r o j e c t Canada l e s t and c u r r e n t l y underway i n the A t l a n t i c p r o v i n c e s . In a r e c e n t a r t i c l e , Anderson 2 r e p o r t e d the a t t i t u d e changes i n Newfoundland teachers who volunteered to i n i t i a t e c u r r i c u l u m development. Anderson asked the f o l l o w i n g general q u e s t i o n : "Do teachers d i s p l a y changes i n a t t i t u d e s iThomas W. M i l l e r , "An A n a l y s i s of Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Curriculum Development f o r P r o j e c t Canada West," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Saskatchewan, 1972. 2R.fl.Anderson, "The R e s u l t s of Teacher I n i t i a t i v e i n Curriculum Development: Some E m p i r i c a l F i n d i n g s , " Newfou ndland Teachers * A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , v o l . 67 no.,1, (Winter 1975/76), p.59. 25 toward c u r r i c u l u m use and p l a n n i n g as a r e s u l t of involvement i n PAC?" He i d e n t i f i e d four groups of t e a c h e r s ; 1. Teachers who v o l u n t e e r e d and subsequently p a r t i c i p a t e d . 2. Teachers who v o l u n t e e r e d but were not chosen to p a r t i c i p a t e . 3. Teachers who r e f u s e d to become i n v o l v e d . 4. Teachers unaware of the p r o j e c t . Each group was given the Curriculum A t t i t u d e Inventory (by langenbach) i n order to determine t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g . A n a l y s i s o f variance and m u l t i p l e comparison techniques r e v e a l e d t h a t the teacher p a r t i c i p a n t s i n PAC had s i g n i f i c a n t l y more p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s towards c u r r i c u l u m planning than the group that r e f u s e d and a l s o the group t h a t volunteered but did not p a r t i c i p a t e . The r e s e a r c h e r t h e r e f o r e concluded t h a t involvement i n PAC a p p a r e n t l y a f f e c t e d a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g . As an ending note, the author claimed t h a t Langenbach*s i n v e n t o r y would be a u s e f u l t o o l f o r f u t u r e i n v e s t i g a t i o n s i n t h i s area. , Langenbach's 1 q u e s t i o n n a i r e was developed to d i s c r i m i n a t e between teachers who had v a r i o u s a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g . The f i n a l f i f t y items of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were chosen from a pool of statements about the c u r r i c u l u m and v a l i d a t e d by two groups of t e a c h e r s , one with p o s i t i v e a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m planning and the other with negative a t t i t u d e s . The instrument was then administered to a group of i f l i c h a e l Langenbach, "Development of an Instrument to Measure Teachers* A t t i t u d e s Toward Cur r i c u l u m Dse and P l a n n i n g , " J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research, vol . 66 no. 1 (September, 1972), pp. 35-38. 26 teachers to see i f t h e r e were d i f f e r e n c e s due to the f o l l o w i n g f a c t o r s . 1. P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g . 2. , Grade l e v e l {elementary or secondary). 3. Years o f te a c h i n g experience. Langenbach found that there was a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the s c o r e s of teachers who had p a r t i c i p a t i o n e x periences and the s c o r e s of those who d i d not. However, he found t h a t grade l e v e l and years of experience d i d not s i g n i f i c a n t l y a f f e c t the s c o r e s . The r e s e a r c h e r concluded that although the r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t of h i s instrument was only .66, teachers could s t i l l be s u c c e s s f u l l y d i f f e r e n t i a t e d as t o t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m use and plan n i n g . 2.4 TEACHER ROLES i n CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT Developing g u e s t i o n s on involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development r e g u i r e d an understanding o f p o s s i b l e t e a c h e r r o l e s . T h e r e f o r e , the f o l l o w i n g presents a few examples of the d u t i e s and r o l e s of t e a c h e r s i n a d e c e n t r a l i z e d c u r r i c u l u m development s i t u a t i o n . F i r s t , teacher involvement through teacher c e n t r e s i s d e s c r i b e d . Then the teacher*s r o l e i n c u r r i c u l u m development as viewed by a c u r r i c u l u m t h e o r i s t i s examined. A f t e r a review of teacher involvement i n the United S t a t e s , the M i l l e r 1 p r i n c i p l e s on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development are presented. iThomas 8. M i l l e r , "Ten P r i n c i p l e s of Curriculum Development... For Classroom Teachers," O n t a r i o Education, v o l . 5 (May, 1973), p. 13. 27 In England, the i n c r e a s e d involvement of teachers i n c u r r i c u l u m development i n d i r e c t l y l e d to the c r e a t i o n of teacher c e n t r e s 1 during the middle s i x t i e s . The c e n t r e s are l o c a l f a c i l i t i e s where self-improvement programs are o r g a n i z e d and run by the t e a c h e r s themselves. B a s i c a l l y , they are used f o r i n -s e r v i c e t r a i n i n g , c u r r i c u l u m development work, and as a p l a c e to s o c i a l i z e . what t e a c h e r s do at these c e n t r e s and how they c o n s t r u c t t h e i r l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m guides provide good examples of involvement i n c u r r i c u l u m development. By open d i s c u s s i o n with tea c h e r s and an a n a l y s i s of s y l l a b u s e s { l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m g u i d e s ) , T a y l o r 2 found out that methods of planning and the content of s y l l a b u s e s v a r i e d tremendously with s u b j e c t f i e l d and i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r s . An examination of the involvement of Science teachers showed that planning was g e n e r a l l y a s c h o o l departmental a f f a i r and i n v o l v e d the continuous refinement of a sequence o f o r g a n i z e d content. The s y l l a b u s e s concentrated h e a v i l y on content and l a r g e l y ignored t e a c h i n g methods or e v a l u a t i v e procedures. Teachers were f r e e t o develop t h e i r own c u r r i c u l u m , the only e x t e r n a l guide on s u b j e c t matter being the nationwide system of s c h o o l examinations. 1 Steven K. B a i l e y , "Teachers' Centres: A B r i t i s h F i r s t , " P h i Delta_Kappan, vol.53 no.3 (November, 1971), pp. 146-149. 2 P h i l l i p H. T a y l o r , How Teachers Plan T h e i r Courses. {England: N a t i o n a l Foundation f o r E d u c a t i o n a l Research, 1970). 28 A c o n t r a s t to the p r a c t i c a l a spects of the B r i t i s h teacher c e n t r e s i s the standard c u r r i c u l u m t h e o r i s t view on c u r r i c u l u m development. A t y p i c a l teacher saddled with the duty of complete c u r r i c u l u m development would be a c t i v e l y i n v o l v e d i n the f o l l o w i n g four b a s i c procedures. 1 1. D e f i n i n g goals and fundamental o b j e c t i v e s , based on a thorough knowledge of student c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and the l o c a l s i t u a t i o n . 2. Designing and s e l e c t i n g the d e t a i l s of content, sequence, and i n s t r u c t i o n a l m a t e r i a l s , c u l m i n a t i n g i n the production of a w r i t t e n c u r r i c u l u m guide. 3. Implementing the c u r r i c u l u m guide i n the classroom through i n s t r u c t i o n , using p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e to decide on a p p r o p r i a t e t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s . 4. E v a l u a t i n g the whole c u r r i c u l u m and determining l e a r n e r progress, l a y i n g the b a s i s f o r r e v i s i o n and f u t u r e p l a n n i n g . T h i s c u r r i c u l u m s p e c i a l i s t approach c o u l d be c a r r i e d out at the classroom, s c h o o l or d i s t r i c t l e v e l . At the d i s t r i c t l e v e l , a committee would most l i k e l y be held r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the process. A t y p i c a l American example of teacher involvement i n mathematics c u r r i c u l u m development at a d i s t r i c t l e v e l c o u l d be d e s c r i b e d as f o l l o w s . . A f u l l - t i m e s p e c i a l i s t i n c u r r i c u l u m development, assuming o v e r a l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r l e a d e r s h i p , would form a c u r r i c u l u m c o u n c i l composed of d i s t r i c t personnel, s u b j e c t s p e c i a l i s t s and community v o l u n t e e r s . 2 Teachers on the c o u n c i l would have adequate t r a i n i n q i n c u r r i c u l u m development procedures and some r e l e a s e time from classroom d u t i e s . The J J . G . S a y l o r and W.M.Alexander, P l a n n i n g C u r r i c u l u m F o r Schools, (Hew York: H o l t , B i n e h a r t and Winston, Inc., 1974), p.27. 2S.A.Jackson, "The C u r r i c u l u m C o u n c i l : New Hope, New Promise," E d u c a t i o n a l L e a d e r s h i p , vol.29 no.8 (May, 1972), pp.690-691. 29 c o u n c i l i t s e l f would provide a workroom, m a t e r i a l s , i n s e r v i c e workshops, and p r o f e s s i o n a l e x p e r t i s e f o r the mathematics teachers of the d i s t r i c t . 1 The c o u n c i l would a l s o develop and write the - l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m guide, choose the textbooks and programs to f e l l o w , and s u p e r v i s e the implementation of the program. The Canadian example of P r o j e c t Canada West prov i d e s a f i n a l d e s c r i p t i o n o f teacher r o l e s i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. M i l l e r reported t h a t the p a r t i c i p a n t s i n P r o j e c t Canada West implemented to a c o n s i d e r a b l e e x t e n t ten b a s i c p r i n c i p l e s of c u r r i c u l u m development a t the l o c a l l e v e l . These p r i n c i p l e s were t h a t : "1. The teac h e r s p a r t i c i p a t e i n every phase of the pl a n n i n g ; 2. The teac h e r s work i n an atmosphere of c o o p e r a t i o n , permissiveness and e q u a l i t y ; 3. The t e a c h e r s have the e s s e n t i a l s of c u r r i c u l u m development— time, money and f a c i l i t i e s ; 4. The teachers s e l e c t a l i m i t e d program f o r l o c a l development and avoid e l a b o r a t e , comprehensive programs; 5. The teac h e r s g i v e a t t e n t i o n to s p e c i f i c g o als and a p p r o p r i a t e m a t e r i a l s , content and t e a c h i n g s t r a t e g i e s ; 6. The teac h e r s employ the methods of p r o f e s s i o n a l r e s e a r c h e r s t o study c u r r e n t l i t e r a t u r e , a v a i l a b l e m a t e r i a l s and other c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t s , and thus a c g u i r e a r e s e a r c h p o i n t of view; 7. The t e a c h e r s u t i l i z e the s e r v i c e s of e d u c a t i o n a l c o n s u l t a n t s , u n i v e r s i t y s c h o l a r s , p r o f e s s i o n a l laymen 1 Harold E. Turner, "What i s the Optimum D i s t r i c t f o r C u r r i c u l u m Development?" Peabody J o u r n a l of Education. vol.46 no.6 (May, 1969) . 30 and o t h e r r e s o u r c e persons; 8. The t e a c h e r s u t i l i z e a c e n t r a l , c o o r d i n a t i n g body to u n i f y t h e i r s c a t t e r e d e f f o r t s , and to a s s i s t each other; 9. The t e a c h e r s develop good p u b l i c r e l a t i o n s with t h e i r s u p e r v i s o r s , other teachers and laymen; 10. The teachers conduct a program of continuous e v a l u a t i o n of t h e i r work." 1 These p r i n c i p l e s were summarized by M i l l e r from an e x t e n s i v e review of the l i t e r a t u r e on c u r r i c u l u m development and d e s c r i b e the c o n d i t i o n s o f e f f e c t i v e l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. 2.4 Q0ESTIONNAIBE DEFECTS Qu e s t i o n n a i r e s are d i f f i c u l t t o c o n s t r u c t properly and are plagued by s e v e r a l d e f e c t s . K e r l i n g e r has s t a t e d : "Two of these d e f e c t s are p o s s i b l e l a c k of response and the i n a b i l i t y to check the responses given. These d e f e c t s , e s p e c i a l l y the f i r s t , are s e r i o u s enough to make the ma i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e worse than u s e l e s s , except i n h i g h l y s o p h i s t i c a t e d hands. 1 , 2 A t h i r d d e f e c t i s response s e t , which i s d e f i n e d as "a g e n e r a l tendency to agree or disagree with q u e s t i o n n a i r e items, r e g a r d l e s s of t h e i r c o n t e n t . " 3 These t h r e e d e f e c t s are considered i n the f o l l o w i n g . 1Thomas H. M i l l e r , The Classroom Teacher as C u r r i c u l u m D e v e l o p e r f o r P r o j e c t Canada Best (Saskatchewan: Saskatchewan Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , 1973), p.12. 2 F r e d N. . K e r l i n g e r , Foundations of B e h a v i o r a l Research- (2d. ed.; New yorx: Hart, B i n e h a r t and Hinston, 1973), p.414. 3 I b i d . , p. 43. 31 Opinion i s d i v i d e d on what c o n s t i t u t e s a good r e t u r n r a t e . The N a t i o n a l Education A s s o c i a t i o n Research D i v i s i o n c l a i m s t h a t : " U n t i l 90% o f those q u e r i e d have responded, the r e s u l t s o f t e n do not r e f l e c t a c c u r a t e l y important c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the e n t i r e group from which the sample i s drawn." 1 However, one percent i s c o n s i d e r e d good f o r a n a t i o n a l magazine p o l l . 2 In order to determine a reasonable r e t u r n r a t e f o r a sample l i k e secondary mathematics t e a c h e r s , two s t u d i e s were examined. In the f i r s t one, 61% of a sample of classroom mathematics teachers randomly s e l e c t e d from the N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of Teachers of Mathematics membership l i s t responded to a s u r v e y 3 on i n - s e r v i c e e d u c a t i o n . In the second survey*, about 60% of secondary mathematics teachers randomly s e l e c t e d from a c r o s s the United S t a t e s responded. These s t u d i e s i n d i c a t e d that a r e t u r n r a t e of around 60% c o u l d be expected f o r the c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h . 1 N a t i o n a l Education A s s o c i a t i o n , i n Scheduled S a l a r i e s 1965-66 to no. 44 (December, 1966), p.109.. Research D e v i s i o n , "Increases 1966-67, NBA R e s e a r c h B u l l e t i n . 2.Dan Turner, "A Time to Care," The Canadian. ( A p r i l 9, 1977), p. 4. 3 A l a n Osbourne (chairman), " I n - s e r v i c e Education: Views of Teachers," A Report to the Commission on the Education of Teachers of Mathematics, r e p o r t e d i n Vector, vol.16 no.4 (June, 1975) , p.24. •George Gearhart, "what do Mathematics Teachers t h i n k about the High s c h o o l Geometry Controversy?" The aathematics Teacher, vol.68 no.6 (October, 1975), p.486. The i n a b i l i t y to check responses i s a defect which i s d i f f i c u l t t o remedy. Follow-up s t u d i e s using telephone surveys or p e r s o n a l i n t e r v i e w s can be e f f e c t i v e , and one can o f t e n check the c o n s i s t e n c y of responses by c o n s t r u c t i n g matched items i n the survey instrument. However, the i n v e s t i g a t o r i s u s u a l l y a t the mercy of the respondents and can at most assume that the survey instrument was t r u t h f u l l y and c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y f i l l e d out. The f i n a l d e f e c t c o n s i d e r e d here, response s e t , i s c u r r e n t l y under much d i s c u s s i o n and examination by s o c i a l t h e o r i s t s . Robinson* i n d i c a t e s t h a t there are two main types of i n d i v i d u a l s who i n d i c a t e t h i s b i a s toward t a k i n g t e s t s . The f i r s t type are y e a - s a y e r s , who g e n e r a l l y i n d i c a t e a w i l l i n g n e s s to go along with o t h e r s . The second type are i n d i v i d u a l s who t r y t o make a good impression. An e f f e c t i v e way of c o n t r o l l i n g response set i s e x p l a i n e d by Couch. "By using an egual number of p o s i t i v e l y and n e g a t i v e l y scored items, the a greeing response s e t can be balanced out at i t s s o u r c e . " 2 However, amidst a l l the t h e o r i z i n g about c o n t r o l l i n g response set , Borer submits t h i s c a u t i o n . 1J.P.Bobinson e t a l , Measures of P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s ( A n n Arbor, Michigan: I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i a l Research, U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, September, 1968), p. 12. 2A.Couch and K.Keniston, "Yeasayers and Naysayers: Agreeing Besponse s e t as a P e r s o n a l i t y v a r i a b l e , " J our na1 of A bnor m a l a n d S o c i a l _ P s y c h o l o g y . vol . 6 0 no.2 {1960), p.173. 33 "Unless one has some kind of supplementary i n f o r m a t i o n , no such i n f e r e n c e s (about an i n d i v i d u a l ' s response s t y l e ) are p o s s i b l e on i n v e n t o r i e s , because the c o r r e c t n e s s of the answers i s unknown and because t h e r e i s no b a s i s f o r assuming that the i n d i v i d u a l guessed at any of the answers.'! 1 Often, w r i t t e n comments can i n d i c a t e the response s e t of an i n d i v i d u a l , but comments are most u s e f u l f o r determining the r e a c t i o n to a t e s t as a whole and a l s o to i n d i v i d u a l items. 2.5 SUMMARY The f o r e g o i n g d e s c r i b e d f o r e i g n and n a t i o n a l s t u d i e s of teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Many s t u d i e s answered q u e s t i o n s almost i d e n t i c a l t o the ones of the c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h . However, the r e s u l t s and c o n c l u s i o n s of the s t u d i e s v a r i e d tremendously. The extent of teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development depended on where the study took p l a c e . Teacher a t t i t u d e s toward p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a l s o v a r i e d tremendously from p l a c e t o p l a c e . v a r i a b l e s which were s i g n i f i c a n t i n one study would o f t e n be i n s i g n i f i c a n t i n a s i m i l a r study. O v e r a l l , the r e s u l t s seemed to be g e n e r a l i z a b l e only to the p a r t i c u l a r place and group which the study i n v o l v e d . The methods of i n v e s t i g a t i o n a l s o d i d not seem to f o l l o w any standard procedure. One instrument, the C u r r i c u l u m A t t i t u d e *L. G. Rorer, "The Great Response-Style Myth," P s y c h o l o g i c a l B j ^ l e t i S * vol.63 no.3 (March, 1965), p. 151. 34 Inventory c r e a t e d by Langenbach, was used by s e v e r a l of the s t u d i e s , but most i n v e s t i g a t o r s developed t h e i r own survey instruments. T h i s was undoubtedly due to the v a r i a t i o n i n l o c a l s i t u a t i o n s and the d i f f e r i n g goals of each p r o j e c t or study. Although the Langenbach instrument was a c q u i r e d , i t was not a p p r o p r i a t e f o r the c u r r e n t r e s e a r c h . A s p e c i a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e was needed f o r t h i s study, and t h e r e f o r e s p e c i f i c problems a f f e c t i n g q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were reviewed. Q u e s t i o n n a i r e d e f e c t s were con s i d e r e d i n order to understand more f u l l y the l i m i t a t i o n s and weaknesses of the mail g u e s t i o n n a i r e . Since t h i s study used a q u e s t i o n n a i r e , many of these c o n s i d e r a t i o n s were h i g h l y important and necessary f o r the methodology of t h i s r e s e a r c h . 35 Chapter 3 METHODOLOGY 3.1 ORGANIZATION_of the CHAPTER The p o p u l a t i o n and sample used i n the study are d e s c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n 3.2. Por reasons e x p l a i n e d i n Chapter two, t h i s study r e q u i r e d the development of a m a i l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . Development of t h i s q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s des c r i b e d i n s e c t i o n 3.3. Se c t i o n s 3.4 and 3.5 d e s c r i b e the procedures used t o gather and organ i z e the data and the method of a n a l y s i s of the data r e s p e c t i v e l y . 36 3.2 POPULATION T h i s study r e q u i r e d data from teac h e r s of mathematics i n the p u b l i c s c h o o l s of B r i t i s h Columbia. Some data were obtained from the E d u c a t i o n a l Data S e r v i c e s branch of the M i n i s t r y of Education, but were mostly demographic and very general i n nature. The B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n (BCTF) was then contacted i n an attempt t o obt a i n a p o p u l a t i o n o f mathematics t e a c h e r s , but the membership l i s t was not e a s i l y a c c e s s i b l e and furthermore, d i d not d i s t i n g u i s h t e a c h e r s as to t h e i r s u b j e c t area. The best a v a i l a b l e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n of mathematics teac h e r s seemed t h e r e f o r e to be the members of the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n of Mathematics Teachers (BCAMT). The BCAMT i s a s u b j e c t s p e c i a l i s t group supported by the BCTF and i s ded i c a t e d to the improvement of mathematics education throughout the province. The o r g a n i z a t i o n accepts as members a l l persons i n t e r e s t e d i n the te a c h i n g of s c h o o l mathematics and c o n s i s t s of groups l i k e u n i v e r s i t y educators, elementary and secondary s c h o o l teachers, and even e d u c a t i o n a l company r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . These concerned and i n v o l v e d people may not t r u l y r e p r e s e n t mathematics t e a c h e r s i n g e n e r a l . However, these people are the ones most l i k e l y to determine f u t u r e t r e n d s , so the BCAMT was con s i d e r e d the best a v a i l a b l e group t o study. A sample of 200 was randomly chosen from t h i s p o p u l a t i o n . 37 3.3 DEVELOPMENT of the QIIESTIONNAIBE The f i r s t s tep was t o develop a p r e l i m i n a r y q u e s t i o n n a i r e . The qu e s t i o n s under i n v e s t i g a t i o n r e g u i r e d t h a t the q u e s t i o n n a i r e be i n three p a r t s , each p a r t corresponding t o one of the b a s i c r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n s . Items f o r the g u e s t i o n n a i r e were d e r i v e d from the l i t e r a t u r e , i n f o r m a l t a l k s with t e a c h e r s and personal experience. The f i r s t p a r t of the instrument, through a f a c t u a l Yes/No design, determined the c u r r e n t involvement of secondary mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The second p a r t , a f i v e - p o i n t L i k e r t s c a l e , determined the a t t i t u d e s of teachers toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development w h i l e the t h i r d p a r t gathered p e r s o n a l data on the respondents. T h i s p r e l i m i n a r y g u e s t i o n n a i r e was s u b j e c t t o s e v e r a l r e v i s i o n s . These r e v i s i o n s were made on the b a s i s of t r i a l s with i n d i v i d u a l t e a c h e r s , f e l l o w graduate students and approximately t h i r t y mathematics teac h e r s from an i n s e r v i c e workshop i n Mission, B.C. Grammatical e r r o r s and unclear items were e a s i l y picked out i n these p r e l i m i n a r y t r i a l s but an examination of u n d e r l y i n g c o n s t r u c t s and f a c t o r s r e g u i r e d a f o r m a l p i l o t study. On February 11,1977, the p i l o t g u e s t i o n n a i r e , c o n s i s t i n g of 15 c u r r e n t involvement items, 25 a t t i t u d e items and 10 b a s i c data items, was sent to twenty-seven members of the BCAMT. T h i s p i l o t q u e s t i o n n a i r e i s attached as Appendix A. , Some of the p i l o t s u b j e c t s were chosen because the w r i t e r knew them p e r s o n a l l y , others because t h e i r known p e r s o n a l i t i e s would check 3 8 the v a l i d i t y of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , and the r e s t were randomly chosen frem the BCAMT membership l i s t . No two s u b j e c t s came from the same d i s t r i c t , so each respondent was p e r s o n a l l y i d e n t i f i e d when h i s d i s t r i c t number was r e p o r t e d i n the b a s i c data s e c t i o n o f the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . A signed cover l e t t e r e x p l a i n i n g the p i l o t and a stamped r e t u r n envelope was enclosed with the q u e s t i o n n a i r e . As the r e t u r n s came i n , they were i n d i v i d u a l l y i d e n t i f i e d and t h e data were coded and entered i n t o a computer data f i l e . A l l comments were t r a n s f e r r e d to one master q u e s t i o n n a i r e . No c u t - o f f date was mentioned i n the cover l e t t e r and by the middle of March 1977 a l l r e t u r n s were judged to be i n . Twenty-two q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were r e t u r n e d , a r e t u r n r a t e of about 75%. T a b l e 1 shows the r e t u r n d i s t r i b u t i o n . T a b l e 1 P i l o t Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Return D i s t r i b u t i o n I J T | Time p e r i o d \ No. of r e t u r n s l , : ¥ ^ | 1st week | 8 I I 2nd week ] 9 J i 3rd week I 3 | I a f t e r 3rd week| 2 I 1 1 : 1 | t o t a l | 22 I t i i T h i s r e t u r n r a t e was higher than the one expected on the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e because the p a r t i c i p a n t s , knew t h a t they were a s m a l l group and t h e i r response was to be used i n developing the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . E i g h t respondents commented d i r e c t l y on v a r i o u s items and some of these comments proved extremely h e l p f u l . The changes t h a t r e s u l t e d from the p i l o t are d e s c r i b e d below. 39 Part one was not altered to any great extent. Items 1,2,7,9, and 10 were made more s p e c i f i c to eliminate ambiguity. Item 13, which read "I have a l o t of freedom i n determining what I should teach i n my mathematics classes" produced many comments and seemed to be more of an a t t i t u d i n a l item than a f a c t u a l one. I t was therefore deleted and a new item, "My school has a locally-constructed l i s t of mathematics goals and objectives" was added. This refinement also egualized the number of items i n each of the d i s t r i c t , school and i n d i v i d u a l categories. The numerical range for each category was then i d e n t i c a l , from a low of 5 to a possible high of 15. Part two, the Lik e r t scale on attitudes, was altered considerably. For scales of t h i s type, important considerations are v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y . A L i k e r t scale i n p a r t i c u l a r , assumes that a l l the items are evenly weighted and that each item measures to some degree the concept under inves t i g a t i o n . Face v a l i d i t y of the p i l o t was established through discussions with the members of the writer's advisory committee. An estimate of the r e l i a b i l i t y of the Lik e r t scale was computed fo r the p i l o t questionnaire by a computer program c a l l e d Lertapi and changes to the scale were made from the results of the program's item-analysis routine. The Lertap analysis calculates the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t of each item with the t o t a l test, thus determining i f an item i s representative of what the t o t a l t e s t measures. The r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f i c i e n t , the Hoyt estimate of *The Educational Research and S t a t i s t i c s Centre (ERSC) of the Faculty of Education at UBC supports an item-analysis routine (LERTAP) which was created at the University of Colorado. uo r e l i a b i l i t y , i s c a l c u l a t e d from these item c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s through an a n a l y s i s of v a r i a n c e method. The r e l i a b i l i t y e stimate obtained from the p i l o t study was .88 and the data f o r the item a n a l y s i s are presented i n Table 2. T a b l e 2 P i l o t Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item-Test C o r r e l a t i o n s i 1 : r 1 Sank Order | Item No. j C o r r e l a t i o n with Test H +_ 1 12 | .749 2 | 16 .745 3 | 25 | .731 4 14 j .689 5 | 19 j .685 6 | 9 | .605 7 | 4 j .595 8 | 21 j .573 9 | 5 | .570 10 | 15 .523 11 | 18 | .518 12 ] 11 | .507 13 | 7 | . 441 14 1 1 | .382 15 i 22 i .372 J i 16 1 13 } .356 17 | 23 | .340 18 8 .299 19 | 20 | .291 20 6 | .279 21 | 2 | .271 22 3 | .232 23 | 24 \ .223 24 10 1 .206 25 17 | . 102 items r e t a i n e d items d e l e t e d The ten items whicn c o r r e l a t e d lowest with the t o t a l i n the item a n a l y s i s were d e l e t e d . Two of these items underwent major rewording. a l t o g e t h e r , 25 o r i g i n a l items were r e f i n e d down to a f i n a l 20-item s c a l e through 8 d e l e t i o n s , 3 a d d i t i o n s and 2 rewordings. 41 P a r t three, l i k e p a r t one, was a l s o modified o n l y s l i g h t l y . Items 4,7, and 8 underwent format changes t o ease the responding e f f o r t . Instead o f having t o w r i t e i n f o r m a t i o n down, the respondents simply had to check o f f the a p p r o p r i a t e i n f o r m a t i o n . A d e s c r i p t i o n of the f i n a l form f o l l o w s . The f i r s t p a r t of the f i n a l g u e s t i o n n a i r e (the f i n a l g u e s t i o n n a i r e i s a t t a c h e d as Appendix B) was designed to determine the c u r r e n t involvement o f secondary mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Involvement was d i v i d e d i n t o t h r e e c a t e g o r i e s , at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l , a t the s c h o o l l e v e l , and a t an i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l . Respondents could g u i t e c o n c e i v a b l y d i f f e r e x t e n s i v e l y on each category. Each item had three response modes; No, U ( U n c e r t a i n ) , and Yes as i n the f o l l o w i n g examples. D i s t r i c t l e v e l No D Yes 1. My d i s t r i c t has a l o c a l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide. No U Yes 2.„ My d i s t r i c t has a committee f o r c u r r i c u l u m development i n secondary s c h o o l mathematics. School l e v e l No U Yes 1. My s c h o o l o f f e r s a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d mathematics course. No U Yes 2. My s c h o o l has a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d l i s t of mathematics g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s . I n d i v i d u a l l e v e l No U Yes 1 . 1 have taught a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d mathematics course. No U Yes 2., I have had some r e l e a s e time t h i s past year to work on a mathematics c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t . The t h r e e response modes No, U, and Yes were weighted r e s p e c t i v e l y by 1, 2, and 3 and the a p p r o p r i a t e items were 42 t o t a l l e d to give a measure of involvement a t the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . The second p a r t of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was designed to measure the a t t i t u d e s of t e a c h e r s toward involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. In a L i k e r t s c a l e , f i v e c a t e g o r i e s of response. S t r o n g l y Disagree <SD), Disagree (D), Undecided (U) , Agree (A), and S t r o n g l y Agree (SA) were weighted r e s p e c t i v e l y from 1 to 5 as i n the f o l l o w i n g examples. 1. Teachers should be i n v o l v e d i n developing l o c a l core c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 2. I would v o l u n t e e r to serve on a s c h o o l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committee. SD D U A SA 3. I n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s should o u t l i n e t h e i r owm core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA The items were weighted so t h a t a high t o t a l on the s c a l e would i n d i c a t e a f a v o u r a b l e a t t i t u d e toward per s o n a l involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and a f a v o u r a b l e a t t i t u d e toward the d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of the c u r r i c u l u m development process. The t h i r d p a r t of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e c o n s i s t e d of ten items which gathered the f o l l o w i n g data from the respondents. 1. years of age 6. Current t e a c h i n g l e v e l 2. Sex 7. Courses taught i n the past 3. School d i s t r i c t 8. School s i z e 4. Formal c o l l e g e education 9. Teachers on s t a f f 5. Years of t e a c h i n g experience 10., Department head or not? These v a r i a b l e s were chosen e i t h e r because they proved s i g n i f i c a n t i n other reported s t u d i e s or f o r t h e i r p o s s i b l e r e l e v a n c e to the l o c a l s i t u a t i o n . The items of the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were c a r e f u l l y spaced out on each page, each response r e q u i r i n g at most a c i r c l e , check mark, or numeral. The q u e s t i o n n a i r e i t s e l f had a t o t a l of f o u r t y - f i v e items and was f o u r pages l o n g . 43 3.4 PROCEDURES T h i s s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s the sampling t e c h n i q u e s , e f f o r t s with the cover l e t t e r and r e t u r n envelope, m a i l i n g procedure, and data t a b u l a t i o n t h a t were used i n the survey. The BCTF maintains a m a i l i n g l i s t of the BCAMT membership but the BCAMT ex e c u t i v e c o n t r o l s o u t s i d e access to t h i s l i s t . Permission to use the l i s t was t h e r e f o r e obtained from the p r e s i d e n t of the BCAMT. The a c t u a l l i s t was a p r i n t o u t from the computer at the BCTF b u i l d i n g . The i n f o r m a t i o n on the computer p r i n t o u t i n c l u d e d the name, address, s c h o o l d i s t r i c t number, and tea c h i n g or i n t e r e s t l e v e l f o r each member. , Members who were not a c t u a l l y t e a c h i n g i n a s c h o o l d i s t r i c t were s p e c i a l l y c a t e g o r i z e d . I t was t h e r e f o r e p o s s i b l e to i s o l a t e members who i n d i c a t e d a secondary t e a c h i n g or i n t e r e s t l e v e l and who were a c t u a l l y t e a c h i n g i n a s c h o o l d i s t r i c t . T h i s group of approximately 350 people formed the p o p u l a t i o n of the study. A sample of 200 was randomly chosen from the above-def i n e d p o p u l a t i o n . The computer l i s t had been c o n v e n i e n t l y arranged i n i n c r e a s i n g order by d i s t r i c t number, and the names w i t h i n each d i s t r i c t were a l s o a l p h a b e t i c a l l y ordered. I g n o r i n g the s u b j e c t s who were chosen f o r the p i l o t study, every second a v a i l a b l e name on the l i s t was chosen. On r e t u r n to the beginning of the l i s t , every f o u r t h a v a i l a b l e name was then chosen u n t i l 200 names were obtained. T h i s e s t a b l i s h e d a s t r a t i f i e d random sample with p r o p o r t i o n a l r e p r e s e n t a t i o n as to sch o o l d i s t r i c t . 44 An envelope c o n t a i n i n g a cover l e t t e r , the g u e s t i o n n a i r e and a stamped r e t u r n envelope was mailed t o the home address of each person i n the sample. The cover l e t t e r , o b v i o u s l y c r i t i c a l i n i n t r o d u c i n g the q u e s t i o n n a i r e , contained a b r i e f d e s c r i p t i o n of the r e s e a r c h , i t s purpose and mentioned the permission of the BCAMT p r e s i d e n t t o conduct the survey. An attempt to arouse the respondent's i n t e r e s t was made and each l e t t e r was p e r s o n a l l y signed. A c u t - o f f date f o r r e t u r n s was not mentioned because minimum pressure t o respond was d e s i r e d . The r e t u r n envelope was stamped and addressed to Dr. Ian B e a t t i e of the F a c u l t y of Education, UBC. The use of the UBC computing c e n t r e m a i l i n g l a b e l system was used and g r e a t l y a p p r e c i a t e d . The g u e s t i o n n a i r e was mailed on March 23, 1977. As return s came i n they were numbered, the date and place of mai l i n g noted, and the data t r a n s f e r r e d t o computer coding forms. The i n f o r m a t i o n was keypunched on to standard 80 column computer cards and was orga n i z e d as f o l l o w s . 45 Table 3 O r g a n i z a t i o n of Data on Computer Cards i 1 • r ™ c a r d columns | i n f o r m a t i o n recorded i 1- 15 | weighted response to items of I j \ Current S i t u a t i o n | 17- 18 \ t o t a l of columns 1 to 5, a measure | I of d i s t r i c t involvement | 20- 21 | t o t a l o f columns 6 to 10, a measure | | of s c h o o l involvement | 23- 24 | t o t a l of columns 11 to 15, a measure | of i n d i v i d u a l involvement | 26- 27 ) t o t a l of columns 1 t o 15, a measure J | t o t a l involvement i n l o c a l I j c u r r i c u l u m development. | 31- 50 J weighted item response to I I | ) a t t i t u d e s 52- 54 1 t o t a l of columns 31 t o 50, a measure | | of a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m 1 J development | 61- 62 J age of respondent | 63 | sex (1=male 2=female) | 64- 65 | s c h o o l d i s t r i c t number j 66 | formal c o l l e g e education (1 = l e s s 1 | than 4 years, 2= 4 years , 3= 5 I | y e a r s , 4= some postgraduate courses, ] 5= 6 years or more) | 67- 68 J years of teaching experience | 69 | t e a c h i n g l e v e l (1= J u n i o r , 2= ) j S e n i o r , 3= both) | 70- 71 J an index of e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y | | (range of 0-20) | 72 j s c h o o l enrollment (1= l e s s than 500, ] ] 2= 500-1000, 3= more than 1000) | 73- 74 | number of teachers on s t a f f | 75 J head of department or not? (1=no, | 2=yes) | 78- 80 | i d e n t i f i c a t i o n number i , i A l l comments were t r a n s f e r r e d to one master g u e s t i o n n a i r e . Items t h a t were commented on, but l e f t blank were t r e a t e d i n d i v i d u a l l y and coded as a p p r o p r i a t e f o r p a r t s I and I I . Items t h a t seemed to have been d e l i b e r a t e l y ignored were coded as missing data and were i n d i c a t e d with a blank. 46 3.5 Method of A n a l y s i s T h i s s e c t i o n d e s c r i b e s the analyses t h a t sere performed on the data i n order t o i n t e r p r e t the r e t u r n s and to answer the t h r e e r e s e a r c h guestions. Both d e s c r i p t i v e and i n f e r e n t i a l s t a t i s t i c s were used; the d e s c r i p t i v e technigues t o r e p o r t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of the sample, and the i n f e r e n t i a l techniques t o g e n e r a l i z e t o the p o p u l a t i o n . The g u e s t i o n n a i r e response was d e s c r i b e d by t a b u l a t i n g the r e t u r n d i s t r i b u t i o n and p r e s e n t i n g some of the comments t h a t s u b j e c t s wrote on the g u e s t i o n n a i r e . As r e t u r n s came i n , the b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s t h a t were r e l a t e d to each o t h e r , such as years of age and years of teaching experience, were compared f o r reasonableness. The d i s t r i c t measure o f c u r r e n t involvement was a l s o compared f o r each d i s t r i c t . The r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of the L i k e r t s c a l e was determined, the r e l i a b i l i t y through the L e r t a p i t e m - a n a l y s i s r o u t i n e d e s c r i b e d e a r l i e r and the v a l i d i t y through a procedure where v a r i o u s judges examined the items f o r f a c e - v a l i d i t y . As a check on the p o l a r i t y of the items, judges a l s o i n d i c a t e d how they thought a teacher who favoured involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and favoured d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of the c u r r i c u l u m development process would respond. T h i s v a l i d a t i o n procedure i s attached as Appendix C. In order t o answer q u e s t i o n one on the e x t e n t of involvement of secondary mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development, each of items 1-15 was c o n s i d e r e d i n t u r n . The percentages of response to the c a t e g o r i e s of each item were t a b u l a t e d and the mean and standard d e v i a t i o n f o r each item were c a l c u l a t e d . The item r e s u l t s were then t a b u l a t e d i n groups of f i v e to correspond to each f a c t o r i n v e s t i g a t e d , t h a t i s , by d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l . A histogram showing response to each of these groups of f i v e items was drawn and a t e s t of n o r m a l i t y was performed f o r each d i s t r i b u t i o n . A computer program c a l l e d S i F I T 1 was used t o t e s t whether each observed d i s t r i b u t i o n c o u l d be approximated by a normal curve. The program was designed to perform a c h i - s g u a r e t e s t based on the freguency of s c o r e s i n any p a r t i t i o n i n g of the data. The program i n d i c a t e d poor f i t s by l a r g e c h i - s g u a r e v a l u e s and gave a p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t the f i t was good. A t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between the f a c t o r s of d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l involvement was planned i f the d i s t r i b u t i o n s were accepted as normal. A standard t a b l e 2 was used f o r t e s t i n g the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the obtained c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t a g a i n s t the hypothesis t h a t the p o p u l a t i o n c o r r e l a t i o n i s z e r o . iR. H. H a l l , UBC FIT: Test f o r Goodness of F i t {Vancouver: O n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Computing Centre, 1972), pp.1-7. 2Henry E. G a r r e t , S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and Education (New York: David McKay Co., 1955), p.201. 48 The a n a l y s i s f o r qu e s t i o n two a l s o i n v o l v e d t a b u l a t i n g the percentages of response t o the c a t e g o r i e s of each item. The mean, standard d e v i a t i o n and range of the L i k e r t s c a l e measure of a t t i t u d e toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development were c a l c u l a t e d , a histogram drawn and a goodness of f i t f o r normality performed. The above t e s t of n o r m a l i t y was used here a l s o . To r e p o r t the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of teachers with r e s p e c t to involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development, the teachers were d i v i d e d i n t o two groups on the b a s i s of t h e i r scores on the i n d i v i d u a l involvement f a c t o r of the c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n part of the g u e s t i o n n a i r e . The means and standard d e v i a t i o n s of r e l e v a n t b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s f o r high s c o r e r s and low s c o r e r s were presented. In s i m i l a r manner, high and low s c o r e r s on the L i k e r t a t t i t u d e s c a l e were compared on the b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s . In a d d i t i o n , the f o l l o w i n g s p e c i f i c hypotheses were t e s t e d . 1. With r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , there i s no d i f f e r e n c e between males and females. 2. with r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between teachers with normal c o l l e g e education (5 years or l e s s ) and t e a c h e r s with graduate t r a i n i n g . 3. With r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between teachers at the j u n i o r secondary l e v e l and teachers a t the s e n i o r secondary l e v e l . 4. With r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , there i s no d i f f e r e n c e between mathematics teachers i n s m a l l s c h o o l s ( l e s s than 500) and teachers i n l a r g e s c h o o l s (more than 1000). 5. With r e s p e c t t o a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between teachers who are heads of mathematics departments and teachers who are not. 49 6. The r e g r e s s i o n of a t t i t u d e as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e on the b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s of age, years of te a c h i n g experience, e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y and number o f teachers on s t a f f i s not s i g n i f i c a n t . Hypotheses one through f i v e were t e s t e d by means of the t - t e s t r o u t i n e i n a computer package c a l l e d UBC TBP. 1 The r o u t i n e t e s t s the hypothesis t h a t two samples come from p o p u l a t i o n s with the same mean on a c e r t a i n v a r i a b l e . Using c o r r e l a t i o n a r r a y s , the r o u t i n e f i r s t performs F - t e s t s to t e s t the assumption of homogeneity of v a r i a n c e o f the two samples and uses an a p p r o p r i a t e formula i f the v a r i a n c e s are unegual. Other assumptions are that the samples have been randomly s e l e c t e d from the p o p u l a t i o n and that the p o p u l a t i o n i s normally d i s t r i b u t e d with r e s p e c t to the c r i t e r i o n of i n t e r e s t . Hypothesis s i x was t e s t e d by means of the stepwise r e g r e s s i o n r o u t i n e of UBC TBP. T h i s r o u t i n e performs the forward stepwise r e g r e s s i o n of a dependent v a r i a b l e on a number of independent v a r i a b l e s . A l l the independent v a r i a b l e s are t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r i b u t i o n s to the r e g r e s s i o n equation and the v a r i a b l e with the g r e a t e s t s i g n i f i c a n c e i s entered i n t o the equation f i r s t . The remaining v a r i a b l e s are t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e while t a k i n g i n t o account the v a r i a b l e already i n the equation. At each subsequent step, t e s t s a re performed t o determine the s i g n i f i c a n c e o f v a r i a b l e s a l r e a d y i n the equation and the v a r i a b l e s p o t e n t i a l f o r the equation. The assumptions ^Teresa T e n i s c i and Chinh Le, P r e l i m i n a r y D r a f t of UBC TRP; T r i a n g u l a r Regression Package (Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Computing Centre, 1976), p.107. 50 are that the dependent scores are normally d i s t r i b u t e d and possess equal v a r i a n c e s at each value of the independent v a r i a b l e s , and t h a t the dependent v a r i a b l e i t s e l f i s normally d i s t r i b u t e d . However, the t e s t s performed are reasonably r e s i s t a n t to v i o l a t i o n of the assumptions. 1 *Fred N . K e r l i n g e r and E l a z a r J.Pedhazur, M u l t i p l e Regression i n B e h a v i o r a l Research (New York: H o l t , Rinehart and Winston, 1973), p.47. 51 Chapter 4 ANALYSIS 4.1 ORGANIZATION of the CHAPTER T h i s c h a p t e r r e p o r t s the r e s u l t s obtained by the g u e s t i o n n a i r e and the analyses that were performed on the data. S e c t i o n 4.2 prese n t s the r e t u r n r a t e and v a r i o u s comments t h a t were made about the g u e s t i o n n a i r e . S e c t i o n 4.3 e s t a b l i s h e s the r e l i a b i l i t y and fa c e v a l i d i t y of the f i n a l q u e s t i o n n a i r e . S e c t i o n s 4.4 to 4.6 analyse each of the b a s i c r e s e a r c h questions r e s p e c t i v e l y . 4.2 QUESTIONNAIRE RESPONSE The r e t u r n d i s t r i b u t i o n of the f i n a l g u e s t i o n n a i r e i s presented i n Tab l e 4. The dates were taken from the p o s t a l c a n c e l l i n g mark on the r e t u r n envelopes. Table 4 F i n a l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Return D i s t r i b u t i o n i 1 j | Time P e r i o d | No. of Returns! j j | 1st week j 49 | | 2nd week | 50 I I 3rd week | 7 | I a f t e r 3rd week| 8 | , ., , i t o t a l | 114 | i 1 1 Since 200 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s were sent out, the r e t u r n r a t e was 57%. 52 A number of teachers wrote a d d i t i o n a l comments. Some of these comments are presented i n T a b l e 5. Table 5 Comments toward the Whole Questio n n a i r e 1. I b e l i e v e the act of c u r r i c u l u m development i s b e t t e r f o r the teacher and h i s involvement and commitment than f o r the c o n c r e t e r e s u l t s that expert c u r r i c u l u m developers can a c h i e v e . 2. A great d e a l of energy can be expended on developing your own c u r r i c u l u m without any improvement on a p r o v i n c i a l course. In the meantime the students may have s u f f e r e d from your experimenting. 3. Of course i t i s the teacher's job to develop and change c u r r i c u l u m , but o n l y a f t e r the teacher has taught the course s e v e r a l years and has a knowledge of c u r r i c u l u m . 4. I am f o l l o w i n g a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. There may be a l i t t l e problem here with d e f i n i t i o n s . I understand l o c a l l y -developed to r e f e r to the p r o v i n c i a l l y approved co u r s e s . 5. I would l i k e to be given the time to develop my own c u r r i c u l u m with c o n s i d e r a t i o n f o r the p r o v i n c i a l mathematics programs. 6. Many of the items of the g u e s t i o n n a i r e presuppose a s u r f e i t of time, which would be n i c e to have. Time i s u n f o r t u n a t e l y seldom a v a i l a b l e a f t e r the r e g u l a r t e a c h i n g and e x t r a c u r r i c u l a r a c t i v i t i e s are attended t o by c o n s c i e n t i o u s mathematics t e a c h e r s . 7. Who has the time t o develop t h e i r own c u r r i c u l u m , s t a y married, r a i s e a f a m i l y , own a house and keep your s a n i t y ? These comments r e f l e c t opposing views on c u r r i c u l u m development, some ambiguity i n d e f i n i t i o n s and the f a c t that a v a i l a b i l i t y of time i s an important c o n s i d e r a t i o n . 53 One p a r t i c u l a r item caused g u i t e a r e a c t i o n . T h i s was item 14, which read; "Covering the p r o v i n c i a l core m a t e r i a l i s more important than determining the needs of s t u d e n t s . " Table 6 presents seme r e p r e s e n t a t i v e comments t h a t t h i s item produced. Table 6 Comments toward Item 14 1. Two-fold q u e s t i o n ! Teachers should develop c u r r i c u l u m guides and then implement them. 2. Both can be done at the same time. 3. Loaded g u e s t i o n ! 4. Who says the p r o v i n c i a l core c u r r i c u l u m does not c o n s i d e r the needs of the students. 5. I f the guide i s good, yes! 6. Every teacher should be able to diagnose student weaknesses and to teach students a c c o r d i n g l y . 7. Give t e a c h e r s some c r e d i t f o r I n t e l l i g e n c e i 8. I do not see any c o n f l i c t between the two. 9. In f a c t , the core c u r r i c u l u m does meet the needs of s t u d e n t s . 10. T h i s i s a poorly devised g u e s t i o n ! again these comments i n d i c a t e a range of viewpoints but some comments express the view t h a t the core c u r r i c u l u m does i n f a c t meet the needs of s t u d e n t s . C e r t a i n l y , the item proved very e f f e c t i v e i n t a p p i n g u n d e r l y i n g f e e l i n q s which might not have otherwise s u r f a c e d . 54 4 . 3 R E L I A B I L I T Y and VALIDITY I n t h i s s t u d y , no f o l l o w - u p p r o c e d u r e t o v e r i f y t h e r e s p o n s e s o f s u b j e c t s was p l a n n e d . I t was assumed t h a t t e a c h e r s would answer t h e g u e s t i o n s t r u t h f u l l y and c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y and t h e r e were no i m m e d i a t e i n d i c a t i o n s o f i n c o n s i s t e n c y on t h e b a s i c d a t a s e c t i o n . A l t h o u g h i t was i m p r a c t i c a l t o c h e c k r e s p o n s e s t o t h e s c h o o l o r i n d i v i d u a l f a c t o r s o f t h e c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n measure, i t was p o s s i b l e t o c h e c k t h e d i s t r i c t f a c t o r r e s p o n s e s . S i n c e t h e d i s t r i c t number f o r e a c h s u b j e c t was r e c o r d e d , t h e d i s t r i c t s c o r e o f i n d i v i d u a l s f r o m t h e same d i s t r i c t were compared. T a b l e 7 shows r e p r e s e n t a t i v e d a t a f o r t h e d i s t r i c t f a c t o r . T a b l e 7 D i s t r i c t I n v o l v e m e n t f o r R e s p o n d e n t s from t h e Same D i s t r i c t i : 1 1 1 -i ^ J D i s t r i c t no. | N 1 Hean | S.D. | Range i 1 1 4- 1 •{ 4 J 1 | 2 ] 5 . 0 | 0 . 0 | 5 - 5 | I 9 | 2 J 7 . 5 | 1 .5 J 6 -9 | | 12 | 2 { 1 0 . 0 | 3 . 0 | 7 - 1 3 | j 22 | 4 ] 7 . 5 | 2 . 7 | 5 -11 | | 23 | 8 | 8 . 9 | 2 . 2 | 7 -14 | | 36 J 4 | 7 . 0 J 1 . 9 1 5 -10 | | 37 | 4 | 10 .0 ] 0 . 8 | 9 -11 ] | 38 I 5 J 11 .2 J 1 .3 | 9 -13 J I 39 | 12 | 8 . 8 | 2 . 3 | 5 - 1 3 | | 41 | 3 { 6 . 3 J 1 .3 | 5 -8 J | 43 I 3 J 7 . 3 J 0 . 5 | 7-8 | I L 1 1 1 1 As c a n be s e e n i n t h e above d a t a , some t e a c h e r s from t h e same s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s e x p r e s s e d d i v e r g e n t v i e w s on i t e m s which s h o u l d have been answered i d e n t i c a l l y . However, s i n c e no f o l l o w - u p was c o n d u c t e d , t h e r e s p o n s e s had t o be a c c e p t e d a s r e p o r t e d . 55 The Lertap item a n a l y s i s r e s u l t s f o r the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e are presented i n rank order i n Table 8. Table 8 F i n a l Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Item-Test C o r r e l a t i o n s r I tem-test • C o r r e l a t i o n s ! t i 1 i 1 \ Bank Order | Item No, | F i n a l | P i l o t | 1 i 1 1 I i t 1 J 1 l 15 j .750 I .731 | 2 I 12 .735 | .605 j 3 I 19 | .667 ] new item j 4 i 18 J .613 I .745 | 5 I 13 j .589 | .685 i 6 I 3 | .584 | new item ] 7 I 5 | .580 I .518 | 8 | 9 | .522 I .523 I 9 I 2 .487 I .573 J 10 1 14 .482 I new item J 11 I 11 | .429 1 .595 | 12 I 8 | .403 | .570 | 13 I 4 | .399 I .441 | 14 i 7 j .375 I .749 | 15 I 17 | .374 | .689 | 16 ) 10 | .347 J .206 I 17 | 1 ] .320 I .232 i 18 | 16 | .301 1 .507 | 19 ] 20 | .100 | .382 J 20 I 6 ] .064 1 .372 1 L. . i ... - i . . _ j — t Comparing the f i n a l c o e f f i c i e n t s with the p i l o t c o e f f i c i e n t s showed t h a t the items were g e n e r a l l y as e f f e c t i v e i n the f i n a l as i n the p i l o t g u e s t i o n n a i r e . The new items d i d not weaken the s c a l e and the reworded items helped s l i g h t l y . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of three items, 6 (.064), 7 (.375) and 17 (.374) dropped s u b s t a n t i a l l y from t h e i r p i l o t e f f e c t i v e n e s s , (.372), (.749) and (.689) r e s p e c t i v e l y and a l l the textbook items (4,7,16,17) dropped i n t h e i r e f f e c t i v e n e s s . The Hoyt estimate of r e l i a b i l i t y was .86, comparable t o the .88 obtained i n the p i l o t . 56 The v a l i d a t i o n procedure o u t l i n e d i n Chapter three was f o l l o w e d to determine the face v a l i d i t y and p o l a r i t y of the items i n the L i k e r t s c a l e . Table 9 presents the response of the panel of judges t o t h e items. Table 9 Responses of the Panel o f Judges r 1— T " r~ - i T " " ••• r - -1 1 Item 1 SD| 0 1 U | A 1 SA| POL 1 L | | • 1 1 i i r 1 1 ! 1 1 1 | 1 1 5 | 2 1 0 1 o 1 0 1 -| 2 I 0 | 0 1 0 1 3 | 4 I j 3 t 0 1 0 1 1 j 1 J 5 1 + | 4 1 2 1 1 I 0 I 3 j 1 I +* j 5 I 0 ] 0 I 0 1 2 J 5 | + | 6 1 2 1 2 I 1 1 1 | 1 i -* | 7 1 0 ] 0 i 1 I 2 | 4 1 + | 8 1 3 | 4 I 0 I o | 0 1 -| 9 i 1 I 1 | 1 i 2 2 1 +* | 10 | 4 | 2 I 1 I o | 0 I -] 11 I 0 | 0 I 1 | 3 J 3 1 + | 12 I 6 | 1 I 0 I o | 0 | -| 13 I 5 | 2 I 0 1 o ] 0 i -| 14 I 6 | 1 l 0 1 o | 0 I -j 15 I 6 j 1 J 0 1 o 0 1 -| 16 I 2 | 1 I 2 1 2 | 0 I ** ) 17 I 4 J 3 I 0 1 o | 0 i -| 18 i 0 | 0 I 0 i <i | 3 | | 19 | 4 1 3 | 0 1 o | 0 1 -| 20 1 0 | 3 I 2 1 2 J 0 1 -* l , J - _ A . . j . _ . J -* i d e n t i f i e s ambiguous p o l a r i t y . SD S t r o n g l y Disagree D Disagree 0 Undecided A Agree SA S t r o n g l y Agree POL P o l a r i t y assigned t o the item Hith the e x c e p t i o n of f i v e items, judges c l e a r l y agreed i n t h e i r p e r c e p t i o n of how teachers who favour involvement and d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n would respond to these q u e s t i o n s . In four of these items, the judges tended t o agree with the p o l a r i t y assigned to the item. 57 4.4 ANALYSIS f o r QUESTION ONE The f i r s t b a s i c r e s e a r c h q u e s t i o n of t h i s study was as f o l l o w s . 1. To what extent are secondary mathematics teach e r s c u r r e n t l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? T h i s q u e s t i o n was answered by d i v i d i n g p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n t o d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . Each l e v e l had f i v e items measuring the p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s of the items f o r each l e v e l were t a b u l a t e d and a histogram f o r each of the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l , and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s was drawn. 58 The involvement of teac h e r s i n c u r r i c u l u m development as a group at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l helps to i n d i c a t e the extent of l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Table 10 presents the item by item s t a t i s t i c s f o r the f i v e items of the d i s t r i c t f a c t o r . Table 10 D i s t r i c t Involvement i n Curriculum Development t J Item " r • -I No \ % • r r I 0 1 i % 1 Yes I % I Mean | S. D. •i 1 1. My s c h o o l d i s t r i c t has j a c o o r d i n a t o r f o r secondary j s c h o o l mathematics. 1 73 1 9 J 18 | 1. 46 | .79 j 2. My d i s t r i c t has a c u r r i c u l u m 1 r e s o u r c e c e n t r e u s e f u l t o j secondary mathematics tea c h e r s . 1 54 1 18 | 28 | 1. 74 | .87 J 3.,My d i s t r i c t holds i n s e r v i c e 1 mathematics workshops. | 47 i 6 1 47 | 2. 01 i .97 J 4. My d i s t r i c t has a l o c a l i mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide. J 73 I 6 | 21 | 1. 48 | .82 1 5. My d i s t r i c t has a committee | f o r c u r r i c u l u m development j i n secondary s c h o o l mathematics. « -| 61 .a 1 15 J A. , - i. 24 | i 1. 62 | .85 i Table 10 shows t h a t most t e a c h e r s have n e i t h e r a d i s t r i c t mathematics c o o r d i n a t o r nor a s u i t a b l e r esource c e n t r e . Although approximately h a l f o f the teac h e r s reported t h a t t h e i r d i s t r i c t o f f e r s mathematics workshops, most are not under any l o c a l g u i d e l i n e s which might have evolved from workshops or c u r r i c u l u m committees. In item 3 , the percentage of respondents i n d i c a t i n g YES (47%) a c t u a l l y r e p r e s e n t s 25 out of 43 s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s . 59 T a b l e 11 p r e s e n t s t h e d a t a on t e a c h e r i n v o l v e m e n t i n c u r r i c u l u m d e v e l o p m e n t a c t i v i t i e s a t a s c h o o l l e v e l . T a b l e 11 S c h o o l I n v o l v e m e n t i n C u r r i c u l u m Development 1 " • - T " 1 Item J No t r™ • 1 r 1 0 | 1 % 1 Yes - T - , . , , . r . Mean } S. D. i j J 7b 7o • ! -i i 6. My s c h o o l o f f e r s a l o c a l l y - j | d e v e l o p e d m a t h e m a t i c s c o u r s e . I 53 1 2 | 45 T 1. 92 | .99 i 7. My s c h o o l h a s a s p e c i a l work- 1 j room s e t a s i d e f o r t h e d e v e l o p - | i ment o f c l a s s r o o m m a t e r i a l s . | 85 ! 0 | 15 | 1. 30 J .72 1 8. My s c h o o l h a s a l o c a l l y - | J c o n s t r u c t e d l i s t o f m a t h e m a t i c s | | g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s . I 49 1 5 | 46 1. 97 | .98 j 9. The m a t h e m a t i c s t e a c h e r s i n my| J s c h o o l a r e f r e e t o d e v e l o p | i t h e i r own c o u r s e o u t l i n e s . | 26 1 7 i 67 j 2. 40 | .88 1 10. The m a t h e m a t i c s t e a c h e r s 1 i i n my s c h o o l h a v e d e v e l o p e d an | 1 o u t l i n e f o r m a t h e m a t i c s c o u r s e s . | 29 1 4 i i J . 67 2. 38 | ... j .91 i I t e m s 6 and 8 show t h a t a b o u t h a l f o f t h e t e a c h e r s come f r o m s c h o o l s which o f f e r a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d m a t h e m a t i c s c o u r s e o r have a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d l i s t o f m a t h e m a t i c s g o a l s . Item 7 shows t h a t a g r e a t number o f t e a c h e r s do n o t have t h e b e n e f i t o f a s p e c i a l s c h o o l workroom. However, most t e a c h e r s c o n s i d e r t h e m s e l v e s f r e e t o d e v e l o p t h e i r own c o u r s e o u t l i n e s and m o r e o v e r , many t e a c h i n a s c h o o l where t e a c h e r s have d e v e l o p e d o u t l i n e s f o r m a t h e m a t i c s c o u r s e s . 60 Perhaps the best i n d i c a t i o n of secondary mathematics teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s the extent of p e r s o n a l involvement. Table 12 presents the i n d i v i d u a l involvement of mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Table 12 I n d i v i d u a l Involvement i n Curriculum Development 1 " - • - T~ 1 Item I No | % 1 r 0 I % I Yes • T T" I Bean | S.D. i •4 4 11. I have taught a l o c a l l y - I J developed mathematics course. j 60 | 1 | 39 1 1. 80 J .98 I 12. I have taken part i n the | I p l a n n i n g of a d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l | 1 c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. | 59 | 0 I 41 I 1. 83 | .99 i 13. I am c u r r e n t l y f o l l o w i n g I i a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d c u r r i c u l u m | j guide i n mathematics. | 61 ] 3 i 36 J 1. 75 J .96 J 14. I have taken a course J J on c u r r i c u l u m development. | 76 | 2 I 22 I 1. 46 1 .83 j 15. I have had some r e l e a s e | 1 time t h i s past year t o work on J j a mathematics c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t . | t . — _ . . . " . . . _. i. 90 J j -0 i . J-10 J 1. 21 i i. .62 . J items 11, 12, and 13 show t h a t approximately three out of every f i v e t e a c h e r s have not taught a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d course, have not taken part i n the p l a n n i n g of a d i s t r i c t o r s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics, and c u r r e n t l y do not f o l l o w a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. A l s o t h r e e -quar t e r s o f the teachers have never taken a course on c u r r i c u l u m development and nine out of every ten t e a c h e r s have not r e c e i v e d any r e l e a s e time t h i s past year to work on a mathematics p r o j e c t . 61 Teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development as measured by the f i r s t s e c t i o n of the g u e s t i o n n a i r e was r e v e a l e d by histograms f o r each of the d i s t r i c t , s chool and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . The f o l l o w i n g three f i g u r e s r e v e a l t h i s i n f o r m a t i o n . score F i g u r e 1 Histogram f o r D i s t r i c t C u r r i c u l u m Development i 1 1 I Mean | 8.31 | | S . D . , | 2.47 | | Bange j 5-14 1 J Skewness | 0.37 1 1 K u r t o s i s J -.70 | | Chi-sguare159. 4 J I C h i - p r o b H 0.0 \ i J i 15.| 14| ** 13 j * * * * * * 32j ***** 11| ************ 10| ****** 9| ************************* gj ****** 7j ************ ************** 6j **** 5j ********************** A frequency F i g u r e 2 Histogram f o r School C u r r i c u l u m Development score 15| *** 14J * 13) *********************** 12j *** 11j ***************************** 10| *** 9j ********************* 8j ***** 7j **************** 61 ** 5j ******** i frequency 1 9. 96 2.59 5-15 Mean S.D. J Bange I Skewness | -.22 I K u r t o s i s | -.80 1 Chi-sguarej 83. 1 I Chi-prob | 0.0 xThe Chi-prob value i n d i c a t e s the p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t the observed d i s t r i b u t i o n i s normal. 62 i -i ] F i g u r e 3 Histogram f o r I n d i v i d u a l C u r r i c u l u m Development score 15J 141 | Mean J 8.04 13| ********* j S.D- I 2.69 12| * | Range J 5-13 11j ********************* j skewness j .31 10| ** j K u r t o s i s | -1.20 9\ ********************** |Chi-sguare|142.6 8| * 1 Chi-prob J 0.0 7| * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * i j 6| * 5j ************************************* +_ + frequency Figures 1 and 3 show d i s t r i b u t i o n s that are skewed p o s i t i v e l y . T h i s means t h a t most of the respondents r e p o r t e d l i t t l e involvement i n t y p i c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s a t the d i s t r i c t and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s as measured by the two s c a l e s . F i g u r e 2 shows a d i s t r i b u t i o n t h a t i s skewed n e g a t i v e l y , which i n d i c a t e s that most teachers were i n v o l v e d with c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s at the s c h o o l l e v e l . The t e s t f o r no r m a l i t y on each of the D i s t r i c t , School and I n d i v i d u a l f a c t o r s r e v e a l e d that the d i s t r i b u t i o n s c o u l d not be accepted as normal. T h e r e f o r e , a t e s t f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between the f a c t o r s was not performed, s i n c e the t e s t r e q u i r e d the assumption that p a i r e d o b s e r v a t i o n s had come from a b i v a r i a t e normal p o p u l a t i o n . * iG.V.Glass and J.C.Stanley, S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n Education and Psychology (2d ed., Englewood C l i f f s , New J e r s e y , 1970), p.308. 63 4.5 ANALYSIS f o r QOESTIQN TIP The second b a s i c r e s e a r c h guestion o f t h i s study was as f o l l o w s . 2. What are the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics teachers toward c u r r i c u l u m development at the l o c a l l e v e l ? Table 1 3 r e v e a l s the d e s c r i p t i v e s t a t i s t i c s of the items of the L i k e r t s c a l e which was s p e c i a l l y developed t o measure teacher a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Tab l e 13 A t t i t u d e s of Teachers toward L o c a l C u r r i c u l u m Development T T T — ~ r- - T • • - T -T - 1 " 1 I Item 1 SD | 1 % 1 D % I U | 1 % I A % 1 SA | % 1 Mean j S.D. J Corr | Pol | 1 | 1 1 r 1 I | 1 ! 4 1 4 1 7 | 43 | 42 | 1.85 | 1.0 ] .320 | - J I 2 ! 1 1 2 | 15 | 44 38 | 4.16 | 0.8 | .487 i + J I 3 1 2 | 6 I 9 l 41 | 41 | 4. 14 | 0.9 J .584 j * i I 4 I 3 J 17 I 25 ] 40 j 15 I 3.48 | 1.0 1 -399 | + | i 5 1 3 1 25 I 27 J 32 | 14 J 3.30 J 1.1 J .580 | + J i 6 1 5 1 39 i 39 | 13 4 I 3.29 | 0.9 I .064 | - j | 7 1 10 | 14 I 17 t 40 | 19 | 3.46 | 1.2 J .375 | + i i 3 1 15 | 50 \ 21 I 10 j 4 i 3.61 | 1.0 J .403 J - | | 9 t 3 | 10 I 18 i 49 ] 21 | 3.76 | 1.0 I .522 I * { | 10 I 4 | 1 1 1 15 | 47 | 24 | 2.25 I 1.1 1 -347 J J I 11 i 1 \ 29 1 17 | 40 | 7 I 3.11 J 1.1 I .4 29 I •*• J | 12 1 6 1 26 ] 33 | 28 ] 6 1 2.98 | 1.0 J .735 J - | I 13 1 20 f 38 i 18 | 20 | 4 1 3,51 | 1.1 1 .5 89 | - J I 14 1 29 | 44 1 18 | 7 | 2 | 3.91 J 1.0 J .482 J | 1 15 1 18 | 54 1 15 | 11 | 1 i 3.78 | 0.9 I .7 50 | - J 1 16 I 2 | 7 J 11 I 60 ] 21 | 3.91 | 0.9 1 -301 1 + J I 17 J 13 J 53 | 11 | 15 | 8 I 3.48 | 1.1 I .374 J — J I 18 ! 3 | 21 | 26 | 40 | 10 | 3.33 | 1.0 | .613 ) + | I 19 1 10 | 50 I 18 | 19 I 4 I 3.43 | 1.0 | .667 | - ] | 20 i 6 i 12 i 12 | 63 ] 6 I 2.49 | 1.0 | - 100 | j i '. i , - i 1 L . . i . - _ „ ,L X . l„ - - J - 1 An examination of s p e c i f i c items r e v e a l e d t h a t most teac h e r s found the c u r r e n t p r o v i n c i a l guide u s e f u l , supported the idea of 64 a core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m s t a n d a r d i z e d a c r o s s the province, and f e l t that there should be some province-wide program to ensure t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l core was being covered. However, most teachers f e l t t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l core was not n e c e s s a r i l y more important than determining the needs of s t u d e n t s . Teachers were undecided as t o whether i n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s should o u t l i n e t h e i r own core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m although most disagreed with statements that l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development was not needed f o r a u n i v e r s a l s u b j e c t l i k e mathematics and t h a t mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committees at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l were unnecessary. Teachers a l s o expressed a d e s i r e t o be more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m planning at a d i s t r i c t l e v e l . Teachers were undecided as to whether they would r a t h e r f o l l o w the p r o v i n c i a l mathematics program or develop t h e i r own c u r r i c u l u m . However, a great m a j o r i t y f e l t t h a t t e a c h e r s should be i n v o l v e d i n developing l o c a l core c u r r i c u l u m and many volunteered to serve on a s c h o o l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committee. They disagreed with the statement t h a t s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m committees were g e n e r a l l y a waste of time i f a good p r o v i n c i a l c u r r i c u l u m guide e x i s t e d . They a l s o disagreed with the statement that a t e a c h e r ' s job was to implement the c u r r i c u l u m guide, not to develop i t , although they were g e n e r a l l y undecided about the point-blank statement; I would l i k e to develop my own c u r r i c u l u m . 65 The items which examined textbook i s s u e s g e n e r a l l y d i d not d i s t i n g u i s h between t e a c h e r s with high and low a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. However, some d e s c r i p t i o n of teacher a t t i t u d e s toward textbook technigues was p o s s i b l e . In g e n e r a l , most teach e r s were i n favour of a m u l t i t e x t approach f o r a mathematics course. They agreed with the statement t h a t mathematics t e a c h e r s should use a c u r r i c u l u m guide more than the textbook i n l e s s o n planning and p r e f e r r e d not to use o n l y one standard t e x t . In a d d i t i o n , the great m a j o r i t y expressed a d e s i r e t o be a b l e t o choose t h e i r mathematics textbooks from an approved l i s t . F i g u r e U r e v e a l s the d i s t r i b u t i o n of the a t t i t u d e s c o r e s achieved by teachers on the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e . 66 score F i g u r e 4 Histogram f o r a t t i t u d e s toward L o c a l C u r r i c u l u m Development 89J 88| I 851 77J 721 1 691 641 1 61| 53J 50J 46J 381 +-* * ** ** ****** ** ***** *** ******* *********** *********** ** ******** ****** *** ******** ****** ***** ***** ** ***** **** * * ** "T-1 I 1 Mean S.D. Range Skewness K u r t o s i s J _ I Chi-sguare1 5.38 Chi-prob J 0.50 67.2 10.66] 26-88 i -.65 1. 17 freguency F i g u r e 4 shows t h a t secondary mathematics teachers have a wide range of a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The extent of skewness o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n seems t o have been the r e s u l t of two extreme sc o r e s (26 and 39) at the low end of the s c a l e and i s not pronounced i n the main body of s c o r e s . The t e s t 67 f o r n o r m a l i t y performed on the above d i s t r i b u t i o n r e v e a l e d t h a t there was a 50% p r o b a b i l i t y t h a t the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a t t i t u d e s c o r e s was normal. The s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s used i n answering question three were not extremely s e n s i t i v e to v i o l a t i o n of the assumption of n o r m a l i t y , so the d i s t r i b u t i o n was considered normal and the s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s of the f o l l o w i n g s e c t i o n were performed. 4.6 ANALYSIS f o r QUESTION THREE The t h i r d b a s i c r e s e a r c h guestion of t h i s study was as f o l l o w s . 3. What are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of teachers with r e s p e c t t o involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? To answer t h i s q u e s t i o n , the t e a c h e r s were d i v i d e d i n t o two groups, those who scored below the median on the i n d i v i d u a l involvement f a c t o r of the c u r r e n t s i t u a t i o n s c a l e , and those who scored above. Table 14 r e v e a l s the means and standard d e v i a t i o n s of these two groups with r e s p e c t to the other v a r i a b l e s of the study. S i m i l a r i l y , Table 15 a l s o r e v e a l s the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of low and high s c o r e r s on the L i k e r t s c a l e of a t t i t u d e s . 68 D S In AIT AGE SEX IDOC YREX LEV DIV SIZE TEAC HEAD Table 14 Low and High Scorers on the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement F a c t o r 1 1 Tl Low S c o r e r s (5-7) | High Scorers (9-15) J Mean 8.3 8.8 5.7 63.0 36.8 1.2 3.5 11.9 1.7 6.4 2. 1 7.2 1.2 S. D, 2.5 2.4 1.0 10. 4 10. 0 0.4 0.9 8.5 0.9 3.3 0.7 2. 5 0.4 +-Mean | 4 -8.3 11. 1 10.5 71. 9 37.7 1.04 4. 1 1 2. 2 2. 1 8.3 2.3 8. 1 1.3 S.D. 2.5 2.2 1.5 9.0 9.2 0.2 0.9 7.7 0.9 3.1 0.6 2.7 0.5 D d i s t r i c t involvement S school involvement IN i n d i v i d u a l involvement ATT L i k e r t A t t i t u d e s AGE years of age SEX 1=male 2=female EDOC formal c o l l e g e education YREX t e a c h i n g experience LEV j u n i o r or s e n i o r secondary DIV e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y SIZE s i z e of sch o o l TEAC no. of teach e r s on s t a f f HEAD head of department Tab l e 15 Low and High Scorers on the L i k e r t A t t i t u d e S c a l e Low Scorers(30-68) + -Mean J i S.D. I Mean i J . j S.D. i 1 i — D 8.2 | 2.3 | 8.4 | 2.6 S 9.6 | 2. 4 | 10.4 ] 2.6 IN 7.1 | 2. 3 I 9.0 | 2.7 ATT | 59.5 i 6.4 | 75.8 | 5.0 AGE 37.0 J 9.4 | 37.3 j 9.9 SEX 1. 1 | 0.3 | 1.1 ] 0.4 EDUC 3.7 | 0.9 | 3. 9 | 0.9 YREX 12.2 J 8. 3 | 11.8 8.0 LEV 2.0 | 0.9 | 1.8 | 0.9 DIV 6.9 | 2. 5 J 7.4 ] 3.7 SIZE 2.3 | 0.7 J 2. 1 | 0.6 TEAC 8. 1 J 2.7 1 7.2 | 2.5 HEAD 1.3 ] 0.4 J 1. 3 0.4 High Sccrers(69-90) 1 69 Table 14 shows t h a t low s c o r e r s on the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement f a c t o r a l s o scored low on the School Involvement f a c t o r and on the A t t i t u d e s c a l e . A l s o , high s c o r e r s on I n d i v i d u a l Involvement g e n e r a l l y have more ed u c a t i o n and have taught a wider s e l e c t i o n of mathematics courses as measured by the E d u c a t i o n a l D i v e r s i t y index. However, c a u t i o n must be used i n making any i n f e r e n c e s s i n c e s t a t i s t i c a l assumptions of n o r m a l i t y have not been v e r i f i e d f o r the v a r i a b l e s c o n s i d e r e d and no s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t s were run . Table 15 shows that a t t i t u d e s as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e and Involvement as measured by the Current S i t u a t i o n s c a l e were somewhat r e l a t e d . , Respondents with low a t t i t u d e s c o r e s g e n e r a l l y had low s c o r e s f o r i n d i v i d u a l involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. Again, c a u t i o n must be used i n i n t e r p r e t i n g these measures s t a t i s t i c a l l y . The s i x hypotheses were c o n s i d e r e d in t u r n as f o l l o w s . A t a b l e of the r e s u l t s of the s t a t i s t i c a l t e s t i s g i v e n , a d e c i s i o n to r e t a i n or r e j e c t the h y p othesis i s made, and the r e s u l t i s d i s c u s s e d b r i e f l y . 70 Hypothesis one With r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between males and females. Table 16 presents the i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the hypothesis. T a b l e 16 T - t e s t f o r d i f f e n c e s i n Sex 1- -+ i N Mea n S.D. T-value D.F. Tprob i Males i 95 67. 8 10. 1 1-534 114 0. 124 t Females 15 63. 6 13.0 \-Since the p r o b a b i l i t y of o b t a i n i n g a t- v a l u e of 1.534 by chance i s g r e a t e r than .05, the hypothesis i s r e t a i n e d . The t e s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development as measured by the 20-item l i k e r t s c a l e between male mathematics teachers and female mathematics teachers. Hypothesis two With r e s p e c t t o a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between teachers with the normal c o l l e g e education (5 years or l e s s ) and te a c h e r s with graduate t r a i n i n g . Table 17 presents the i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the hyp o t h e s i s . Table 17 T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Formal C o l l e g e Education , . _ j. N Mean S.D. T-value D.F. , Tprob ,. . + 5 years or l e s s 55 67.6 9.4 0.2998 113 0.758 graduate t r a i n i n g 55 67.0 11.8 I + 71 S i n c e t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f o b t a i n i n g a t - v a l u e o f 0.2998 by c h a n c e i s g r e a t e r t h a n .05, t h e h y p o t h e s i s i s r e t a i n e d . The t e s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m d e v e l o p m e n t a s measured by t h e 2 0 - i t e m L i k e r t s c a l e between t e a c h e r s w i t h t h e n o r m a l c o l l e g e e d u c a t i o n and t e a c h e r s w i t h g r a d u a t e t r a i n i n g . H y p o t h e s i s t h r e e With r e s p e c t t o a t t i t u d e s a s measured by t h e 20-i t e m L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between t e a c h e r s a t the j u n i o r s e c o n d a r y l e v e l and t e a c h e r s a t t h e s e n i o r s e c o n d a r y l e v e l . T a b l e 18 p r e s e n t s t h e i n f o r m a t i o n f o r t h e h y p o t h e s i s . T a b l e 18 T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n T e a c h i n g L e v e l 1 : + . N Mean S.D. T - v a l u e D.F. T p r o b J L j u n i o r s e c o n d a r y 47 69.9 9.3 2.74 8 78 0.007 s e n i o r s e c o n d a r y 28 63.2 12.5 1 : h S i n c e t h e p r o b a b i l i t y o f o b t a i n i n g a t - v a l u e o f 2.748 by c h a n c e i s l e s s t h a n .05, t h e h y p o t h e s i s i s r e j e c t e d . The t e s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e s t o w a r d l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m d e v e l o p m e n t as measured by t h e 2 0 - i t e m L i k e r t s c a l e between t e a c h e r s a t t h e j u n i o r and s e n i o r t e a c h i n g l e v e l s . 72 l y p o t h e s i s f o u r With r e s p e c t t o a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , there i s no d i f f e r e n c e between teachers i n sm a l l s c h o o l s ( l e s s than 500) and teacher s i n l a r g e s c h o o l s (more than 1000). Table 19 presents the i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the hy p o t h e s i s . Table 19 T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n School S i z e I + N Mean S.D. T-value D.F. Tprob i : j. s m a l l s c h o o l s 15 66.1 9.6 1.23 6 55 0.220 l a r g e s c h o o l s 38 62.6 10.0 I : I-Since the p r o b a b i l i t y of o b t a i n i n g a t - v a l u e of 1.236 by chance i s g r e a t e r than -05, the hypothesis i s r e t a i n e d . The t e s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e r e i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e between teachers i n s m a l l s c h o o l s and te a c h e r s i n l a r g e s c h o o l s . Hypothesis f i v e With r e s p e c t to a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , t h e r e i s no d i f f e r e n c e between te a c h e r s who are heads of mathematics departments and t e a c h e r s who are not. Table 20 p r e s e n t s the i n f o r m a t i o n f o r the hyp o t h e s i s . Table 20 T - t e s t f o r d i f f e r e n c e s i n Teacher P o s i t i o n ! ; + N Mean S.D. T-value D.F. Tprob i _ : + non-heads 81 67.4 9- 8 0. 1016 113 0.883 heads 29 67.1 12., j. . _ . j . 73 Since the p r o b a b i l i t y of o b t a i n i n g a t - v a l u e of 0.1016 by chance i s g r e a t e r than .05, the hypothesis i s r e t a i n e d . The t e s t i n d i c a t e s t h a t there i s no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e i n a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e between heads and non-heads of mathematics departments. Hypothesis s i x The r e g r e s s i o n o f a t t i t u d e as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e on the b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s of age,years of teaching experience, e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y and numbers of te a c h e r s on s t a f f i s not s i g n i f i c a n t . Table 21 p r e s e n t s the f i n a l r e s u l t s o f the stepwise r e g r e s s i o n . Table 21 Regression of A t t i t u d e on Age, Teaching Experience, E d u c a t i o n a l D i v e r s i t y and Teachers on S t a f f S i g n i f i c a n t f o r equation R 2= 0.037 j + V a r i a b l e c o e f f i c i e n t F-Ratio F-Prob 1 + TEAC -0.784 -4.204 0.040 constant 73.231 565.0 0.0 p o t e n t i a l f o r equation . , ; . + V a r i a b l e Par. Corr. F-Ratio F-Prob f + AGE 0.0310 0.105 0.742 iREX 0.0378 0.156 0.695 DIV 0.0393 0.169 0.684 Since the p r o b a b i l i t y of o b t a i n i n g an F-Ratio of 4.204 i s l e s s than .05 the hypothesis i s r e j e c t e d . T h i s means that the r e l a t i o n between the a t t i t u d e score as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e and number of teach e r s on s t a f f c o u l d probably not have occurred by chance. However, the R 2 c o e f f i c i e n t , which expresses 74 the magnitude of the r e l a t i o n , i s only 0.037. T h i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t approximately 4% of the v a r i a n c e o f a t t i t u d e score i s accounted f o r by the number of teach e r s on s t a f f . T h e r e f o r e , although the r e g r e s s i o n i s s t a t i s t i c a l l y s i g n i f i c a n t , the magnitude of the r e l a t i o n i s a c t u a l l y t r i v i a l . 1 Age, years o f teaching experience and e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y a l s o do not have any s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p t o a t t i t u d e s as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e . O v e r a l l , the r e g r e s s i o n a n a l y s i s i n d i c a t e s t h a t the v a r i a n c e of a t t i t u d e s c o r e s can not be meaningfully d e s c r i b e d by v a r i a n c e s i n any of the four b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s c o n s i d e r e d . 4 F r e d N. K e r l i n g e r and E. J . Pedhazur, M u l t i p l e Regression i n  B e h a v i o r a l Research (New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, 1973), p.72. 75 Chapter 5 SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS and RECOMMENDATIONS 5.1 SUMMARY The views o f p r o f e s s i o n a l groups on c u r r i c u l u m d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development d i f f e r g r e a t l y and are o f t e n not c l e a r . , One group i n p a r t i c u l a r , the tea c h e r s of secondary s c h o o l mathematics i n B r i t i s h Columbia, does not seem t o have a d e f i n i t e p o l i c y on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The primary purpose o f t h i s study was t o determine the c u r r e n t involvement of secondary mathematics teachers i n and t h e i r a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. A secondary purpose of the study was to examine the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of teachers who p a r t i c i p a t e i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s and who have v a r i o u s a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. S p e c i f i c a l l y , the study attempted t o answer the f o l l o w i n g r e s e a r c h g u e s t i o n s . 1. To what extent are secondary mathematics teac h e r s c u r r e n t l y p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? 2. What are the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics teac h e r s toward c u r r i c u l u m development at the l o c a l l e v e l ? 3. What are the c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f teache r s with r e s p e c t t o involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development and a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development? 76 A s p e c i a l t h r e e - p a r t q u e s t i o n n a i r e was c o n s t r u c t e d to answer these q u e s t i o n s . The f i r s t p art attempted to determine the c u r r e n t p a r t i c i p a t i o n of mathematics teachers i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development by a s k i n g f a c t u a l Yes/No type statements about c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s at the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . The second part o f the g u e s t i o n n a i r e determined a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development throuqh a 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e . The t h i r d part qathered p e r s o n a l and f a c t u a l data from the respondents. Items f o r the q u e s t i o n n a i r e were d e r i v e d from r e p o r t s on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s , i n f o r m a l t a l k s with t e a c h e r s and personal experience. A review of the l i t e r a t u r e a l s o r e v e a l e d p e r s o n a l v a r i a b l e s t h a t other s t u d i e s had found i n f l u e n t i a l . A f t e r a lengthy process o f refinement, i n c l u d i n g a p i l o t study, the f i n a l g u e s t i o n n a i r e was sent t o a random sample of tea c h e r s s e l e c t e d from the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n of Mathematics Teachers. In the a n a l y s i s , the f i r s t q u e s t i o n was answered by t a b u l a t i n g the responses to each Yes/No item and drawing histograms of involvement at the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s of p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The second que s t i o n was answered by d e s c r i b i n q the r e s u l t s of the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e which «as desiqned t o measure high and low a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The t h i r d guestion was p a r t l y answered by f i r s t d e s c r i b i n g the p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f hiqh and low s c o r e r s on both the i n d i v i d u a l involvement measure and on the L i k e r t s c a l e . Then t - t e s t s were performed t o determine whether or not sex, f o r m a l c o l l e q e 77 e d u c a t i o n , c u r r e n t teaching l e v e l , s chool s i z e or being a department head had any s i g n i f i c a n t e f f e c t on a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e . F i n a l l y , the r e g r e s s i o n of a t t i t u d e on years of age, years of teaching experience, e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y and the number of mathematics t e a c h e r s on the s c h o o l s t a f f was t e s t e d f o r s i g n i f i c a n c e and meaningfulness. 5.2 CONCLUSIONS Although mail q u e s t i o n n a i r e s have many d e f e c t s , survey technigues were a p p r o p r i a t e f o r the c u r r e n t study because the data could not be obtained i n any other p r a c t i c a l way. The r e t u r n r a t e , r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y of the f i n a l g u e s t i o n n a i r e a l s o supported i t s use. The r e t u r n r a t e was comparable to the approximate 60% r e t u r n r a t e that other s i m i l a r s t u d i e s obtained and the Hoyt estimate of r e l i a b i l i t y i n d i c a t e d a reasonable i n t e r n a l c o n s i s t e n c y f o r the L i k e r t part of the g u e s t i o n n a i r e . Responses of the panel of judges permitted a c o n c l u s i o n t h a t the s c a l e was a v a l i d a t t i t u d i n a l measure. From comments w r i t t e n by the respondents, lac k of time seemed to be the major o b s t a c l e f o r p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n and developing l o c a l c u r r i c u l a . T h i s concern of teachers over the l a c k of time f o r c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s compares to s i m i l a r f i n d i n g s by Newton (p.23). Other comments i n d i c a t e d some d r a s t i c a l l y opposing views on c u r r i c u l u m development and some ambiguity i n the d e f i n i t i o n o f terms l i k e l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d and l o c a l l y -developed c u r r i c u l a . Host comments i n g e n e r a l i n d i c a t e d t h a t the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was being completed c o n s c i e n t i o u s l y . 78 In answer to g u e s t i o n one, the general i n d i c a t i o n s were that most d i s t r i c t s , s c h o o l s and i n d i v i d u a l s were not i n v o l v e d i n t y p i c a l l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s . a t the d i s t r i c t l e v e l , support s e r v i c e s f o r c u r r i c u l u m development were l i m i t e d . Most d i s t r i c t s d i d not have a secondary mathematics c o o r d i n a t o r or an a p p r o p r i a t e c u r r i c u l u m resource c e n t r e . Only a few d i s t r i c t s had a l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m guide or a committee f o r c u r r i c u l u m development i n secondary s c h o o l mathematics and only h a l f of the d i s t r i c t s o f f e r e d i n s e r v i c e workshops. School support f o r c u r r i c u l u m development was a l s o weak. Most teachers came from s c h o o l s which n e i t h e r o f f e r e d a l o c a l l y -developed mathematics course nor had a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d l i s t of mathematics goa l s . Furthermore, most s c h o o l s d i d not provide workrooms f o r the development of classroom m a t e r i a l s and few teachers had obtained r e l e a s e time i n the past year t o work on c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t s . However, some oppo r t u n i t y f o r s c h o o l l e v e l c u r r i c u l u m development was e v i d e n t , s i n c e t e a c h e r s c o n s i d e r e d themselves f r e e to develop s c h o o l mathematics o u t l i n e s and many had developed and implemented these o u t l i n e s . At an i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l , most te a c h e r s had not taught a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d course, had not planned one, and were not c u r r e n t l y f o l l o w i n g a l o c a l guide. T h i s was not s u r p r i s i n g s i n c e most teachers had n e i t h e r taken a course i n c u r r i c u l u m development nor o b t a i n e d the r e l e a s e time t o plan a course. Written responses i n d i c a t e d the importance of time as a f a c t o r f o r involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. 79 The f i n a l a n a l y s i s f o r q u e s t i o n one, a comparison of the three l e v e l s of c u r r e n t involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development, was not performed.. The d i s t r i b u t i o n of s c o r e s f o r the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l , and i n d i v i d u a l f a c t o r s prevented an examination of the c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s between these f a c t o r s . A meaningful comparison of these f i n d i n g s to the r e s u l t s cf other s t u d i e s was a l s o i m p r a c t i c a l s i n c e no other study examined a s i m i l a r p o p u l a t i o n of secondary mathematics teachers cn t h e i r involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. In answer t o q u e s t i o n two, the a t t i t u d e s of secondary mathematics teachers g e n e r a l l y were f a v o u r a b l e to l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e . fin examination of s p e c i f i c items revealed t h a t mathematics teachers g e n e r a l l y supported a p r o v i n c i a l core c u r r i c u l u m and the i d e a o f a province-wide program to ensure i t s coverage. In a d d i t i o n , most f e l t t h a t the p r o v i n c i a l core was not n e c e s s a r i l y incompatible with the i n d i v i d u a l needs of students. Teachers were g e n e r a l l y undecided as to whether d i s t r i c t s should develop t h e i r own c o r e , although most expressed a d e s i r e to be more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m planning a t a l l l e v e l s and i n d i c a t e d t h e i r w i l l i n g n e s s to serve on d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m committees. Teachers a l s o expressed t h e i r d e s i r e f o r more l o c a l c h o i ce by i n d i c a t i n g acceptance of the m u l t i - t e x t approach and expressing a d e s i r e to choose textbooks from an approved l i s t . The f i n d i n g t h a t teachers supported a core c u r r i c u l u m and d e s i r e d more opp o r t u n i t y to p a r t i c i p a t e i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s was s i m i l a r to r e s u l t s d i s c o v e r e d by Newton{p.23) and Simpkins (p. 24) . 80 In answer t o q u e s t i o n t h r e e , low and high s c o r e r s on both the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement f a c t o r and the L i k e r t a t t i t u d e s c a l e were amazingly s i m i l a r on most of the v a r i a b l e s c o n s i d e r e d . However, there was some i n d i c a t i o n t h a t I n d i v i d u a l Involvement and L i k e r t a t t i t u d e s c o r e s were r e l a t e d . Low s c o r e r s on the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement f a c t o r a l s o s c o r e d low on the L i k e r t a t t i t u d e s c a l e and v i c e - v e r s a . A l s o , high s c o r e r s on the I n d i v i d u a l Involvement f a c t o r g e n e r a l l y had more educa t i o n and had more d i v e r s e t e a c h i n g experience. Regarding a t t i t u d e s as measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e , the study found no s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s between male and female secondary mathematics t e a c h e r s , between those with graduate e d u c a t i o n and those without, between teachers i n small s c h o o l s and l a r g e s c h o o l s , and between teachers who were or were not department heads. A l s o , age, years o f t e a c h i n g experience and e d u c a t i o n a l d i v e r s i t y d i d not have any s i g n i f i c a n t r e l a t i o n s h i p t o a t t i t u d e s . However, j u n i o r secondary mathematics teachers had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher s c o r e s on the a t t i t u d e s c a l e than s e n i o r secondary teachers and the number of mathematics t e a c h e r s on the s c h o o l s t a f f was a l s o r e l a t e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y to a t t i t u d e s although the magnitude of the r e l a t i o n s h i p was a c t u a l l y t r i v i a l . In summary, the mail g u e s t i o n a i r e , with a r e t u r n r a t e of 57%, a r e l i a b i l i t y e stimate of .86 and reasonable f a c e v a l i d i t y , r e v e a l e d that i n g e n e r a l there was a l a c k of support f o r c u r r i c u l u m development a t the d i s t r i c t , s c h o o l and i n d i v i d u a l l e v e l s . However, the a t t i t u d e s of t e a c h e r s were g e n e r a l l y f a v o u r a b l e to l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as 81 measured by the 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e . Teachers supported the p r o v i n c i a l core c u r r i c u l u m yet a l s o i n d i c a t e d a d e s i r e t o be more i n v o l v e d i n developing l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m . Although i n d i v i d u a l involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development seemed to be somewhat r e l a t e d t o a t t i t u d e s , the only c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of teachers that seemed to have a d e f i n i t e e f f e c t on a t t i t u d e s was teac h i n g l e v e l . J u n i o r secondary mathematics teachers had s i g n i f i c a n t l y higher s c o r e s on the a t t i t u d e s c a l e than s e n i o r secondary mathematics teachers. F i n a l l y , the v a r i a n c e of a t t i t u d e scores c o u l d not be meaningfully d e s c r i b e d by any of the f o u r b a s i c data v a r i a b l e s c o n s i d e r e d . A t t i t u d e s toward c u r r i c u l u m development were apparently determined by f a c t o r s other than those i n v e s t i g a t e d by t h i s study. 5.3 BECOHHENDATIONS Based on the f i n d i n g s and c o n c l u s i o n s o f t h i s study, the f o l l o w i n g recommendations can be made i f teacher involvement i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s seen t o be d e s i r a b l e . 1. School d i s t r i c t s should give more l e a d e r s h i p i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. D i s t r i c t support of c u r r i c u l u m development was g e n e r a l l y l i m i t e d and many d i s t r i c t s c o u l d appoint a c o o r d i n a t o r f o r secondary mathematics, s e t up a resource c e n t r e o r s t a r t i n s e r v i c e workshops. A d i s t r i c t committee f o r c u r r i c u l u m development c o u l d then be formed to develop l o c a l g u i d e l i n e s . 2. Schools should support l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development by p r o v i d i n g f a c i l i t i e s and reasonable r e l e a s e time. 82 Very few respondents r e p o r t e d t h a t t h e i r s c h o o l s had a s p e c i a l workroom s e t a s i d e f o r teacher use and even fewer respondents reported r e c e i v i n g any r e l e a s e time to work on c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t s . Support of t h i s kind would allow teachers as s c h o o l groups to be more p r o d u c t i v e i n c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s . Teachers i n the same school already have the advantages of s e e i n g each other r e g u l a r l y , s h a r i n g m a t e r i a l s and hel p i n g each other immediately. 3. Teachers should develop more e x p e r t i s e i n c u r r i c u l u m development procedures. Curriculum development i s a complex process and r e g u i r e s much knowledge, experience and a b i l i t y . T h i s study i n d i c a t e s t h a t many teach e r s may be u n f a m i l i a r with c u r r i c u l u m theory and a l s o have l i m i t e d experience with l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d courses. I n d i v i d u a l improvement can o f t e n occur through p r o f e s s i o n a l development a c t i v i t i e s and graduate work. 4. Some form of p r o v i n c i a l l e a r n i n g assessment program should be used. I n d i c a t i o n s are that secondary mathematics t e a c h e r s are i n favour of some province-wide program to ensure t h a t core m a t e r i a l i s being covered, which supports a government assessment program., 5. Teachers should be allowed t o choose t h e i r mathematics textbooks from an approved l i s t . Over e i g h t y percent of the respondents agreed with t h i s 83 statement. k s m a l l p r o v i n c i a l committee c o u l d c o n s t r u c t such a l i s t based on teacher suggestions and a c a r e f u l examination of a v a i l a b l e textbooks. 6. Support f o r l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s should be d i r e c t e d to mathematics teachers a t the j u n i o r high s c h o o l l e v e l . T h i s recommendation f o l l o w s from the r e s u l t t h a t j u n i o r high s c h o o l teachers expressed s i g n i f i c a n t l y g r e a t e r i n t e r e s t i n l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as measured by the L i k e r t s c a l e . Teachers a t t h i s l e v e l may see more need to develop l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m because of the grea t e r range i n student a b i l i t y and more v a r i a t i o n i n l o c a l s i t u a t i o n . 7. The a t t i t u d e s of teach e r s i n other s u b j e c t f i e l d s should be s t u d i e d i n order to determine t h e i r p o s i t i o n s on l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. I n d i c a t i o n s are t h a t the views of teachers vary g r e a t l y w i t h i n and a c r o s s s u b j e c t f i e l d . The a t t i t u d e s o f E n g l i s h , S o c i a l S t u d i e s , S c i e n c e , I n d u s t r i a l Education, Mathematics and other s u b j e c t f i e l d t e a c h e r s c o u l d then be determined and compared. 8. The cause of a t t i t u d e d i f f e r e n c e s i n secondary mathematics teachers should be f u r t h e r examined. Since only 4% of the varia n c e i n a t t i t u d e s was e x p l a i n e d i n the study, f u r t h e r examination of u n d e r l y i n g causes of a t t i t u d e s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s necessary. T h i s may be a very d i f f i c u l t y e t rewarding task. BIBLIOGfiftPHY 85 BIBLIOGRAPHY 1. BOOKS Anderson, Vernon E. Curriculum G u i d e l i n e s i n an Era of Change. Hew York; The Bonald Press Company, 1969. Beauchamp, George A. Curriculum Theory. 2d. ed. f i l o n e t t e , I l l i n o i s : The Kagg P r e s s , 1968. Beeby, C.E. The Q u a l i t y of Education i n Developing C o u n t r i e s . Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard O n i v e r s i t y P r e s s , 1966. B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n . In volvemen t : The Key t o Be t t e r S c h o o l s . <The Report of the Commission on Education of the BCTF). Vancouver, B.C.: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n , September, 1968. Burbank, I r v K., and Don E. Daugs. A p p l i e d P r i n c i p l e s of C u r r i c u l u m Development: A Guide f o r Curriculum Teams a t the L o c a l L e v e l . Canadian E d u c a t i o n a l C o n s u l t i n g Services,1975. Campbell, W i l l i a m G i l e s , , and Stephen Vaughan B a l l o u . Form and S t y l e : Theses, Reports. Term Papers. 4th ed. Boston: Houghton M i f f l i n Co., 1974. Canadian Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n . Teacher -1nf1gence on C u r r i c u l u m . (Research Study No. 4 ) , Ottawa, O n t a r i o : Canadian Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n , Research D i v i s i o n , 1959. G a r r e t , Henry. E. S t a t i s t i c s i n Psychology and E d u c a t i o n . New York: David McKay Co.* 1955. G l a s s , Gene V., and J u l i a n C. S t a n l e y . S t a t i s t i c a l Methods i n Education and Psychology. 2d. ed., Englewood C l i f f s , New Jersey, 1970. Goodlad, John I . School. Curriculum and The I n d i v i d u a l . Toronto: B l a i s d e l l P u b l i s h i n g Co., 1966. K e r l i n g e r , Fred N. Foundations o f B e h a v i o r a l Research. 2d. ed. New York: Hart, Rinehart and Winston, 1973. K e r l i n g e r , Fred N. And E l a z a r E. Pedhazur. Mu I t i p l e _ : Regression i n _ B e h a v i o r a l Research. New York: H o l t , R i n e h a r t and Winston, 1973. Koopman, R. G. Curriculum Development. New York: Center f o r A p p l i e d Research i n Education, 1966. M i l l e r , Thomas W. The Classroom Teacher as C u r r i c u l u m Developer f o r P r o j e c t Canada West. Saskatoon, Saskatchewan: Saskatchewan Teachers' F e d e r a t i o n , 1973. 86 Nelson, L a r r y R. Guide to L e r t a p Use and I n t e r p r e t a t i o n . Dunedin: New Zealand, U n i v e r s i t y of Otago, Department of Education, 1974. •. Oppenheim, A. N. Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Design and A t t i t u d e Measurement. New York: Bas i c Books* Inc., P u b l i s h e r s , 1966. Parten, M i l d r e d . Surveys, P o l l s , and Samples: P r a c t i c a l Procedures. New York: Harper and B r o t h e r s , 1950. Richards, Don K. "Curriculum Development a t the L o c a l L e v e l . " The C o n t i n u i n g R e v o l u t i o n i n Mathematics. Reston, V i r g i n i a : N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of Teachers of Mathematics, 1968. Robinson, J . P., J . G, Rusk, and K. B. Head. Measures of P o l i t i c a l A t t i t u d e s . Ann Arbor, Michigan; I n s t i t u t e f o r S o c i a l Research, U n i v e r s i t y of Michigan, 1968. Sabey, Ralph H. P r o j e c t Canada Best. Vancouver; B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , May, 1975. S a y l o r , J . G., and W. M. Alexander. Planning- C u r r i c u l u m f o r Schools. New York; Holt, Rinehart and l i n s t o n , 1974. Tanner, D a n i e l , and L a u r e l N. Tanner. Curriculum Development: Theory and P r a c t i c e . New York; Macmillan P u b l i s h i n g Co., Inc., 1975. T a y l o r , P h i l l i p H. How Teachers Plan T h e i r Courses. London: N a t i o n a l Foundation f o r E d u c a t i o n a l Research i n England and Wales, 1970. Wise, John E., Robert B. Nordberg and Donald J . R e i t z . Methods of Research i n Education. Boston: D. C. Heath and Co., 1967. 2. PERIODICAL LITERATURE Anderson, R. M. "The R e s u l t s of Teacher I n i t i a t i v e i n Curriculum Development: some E m p i r i c a l F i n d i n g s , " Newfoundland Teachers* A s s o c i a t i o n J o u r n a l , v o l . 67 no. 1 (Winter, 1975/76), pp. 53-59. Babin, P a t r i c k . " S l a u g h t e r i n g some sacred cows," Education Canada, v o l . 14 no. 1 (March* 1974) , pp. 40-45. B a i l e y , Steven K. "Teachers* C e n t r e s : A B r i t i s h F i r s t , " P h i D e l t a Kappan. v o l . 53 no. 3 (November, 1971), pp. 146-149. Black, Doug A- "Communications: With the Curriculum Branch," B.. v C j t_Science Teacher. vol.17 no.3 (January, 1976), pp. 18-19. Board of D i r e c t o r s , N a t i o n a l C o u n c i l of Teachers of Mathematics. "Time to Teach," SCTM Newsletter, (September, 1976), p.4. 87 Burns, Edward Joseph. "The Emerging Role of the Teacher i n Curriculum P o l i c y formation and D e c i s i o n Making i n the S t a t e of New Jersey.*' Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Fordham U n i v e r s i t y , 1970, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , V o l . XXXI, p. 3161-A. . Couch, A., and K. Keniston. "Yeasayers and Naysayers: Agreeing Response Set as a P e r s o n a l i t y V a r i a b l e , " J o u r n a l of Abnormal and. S o c i a l Psychology, v o l . 60 no. 2 (I960), PP. 151-174. Domanico, Edward M a r t i n , "An Examination of P r o c e d u r a l Options f o r C u r r i c u l u m Development i n Response to the Curriculum Reform Movement," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n . Temple U n i v e r s i t y , 1976, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , V o l . XXXVII, p. 109-A. Gearhart, George. "What do Mathematics Teachers t h i n k about the High School Geometry Controversy?" The Mat-hemat 1 cs Teacher. v o l . 68 no. 6 (October, 1975), p. 486-493. fleusner, Henry C. "A Study of the U t i l i z a t i o n of Curriculum Guides as Related t o S e l e c t e d F a c t o r s i n t h e i r Planning and C o n s t r u c t i o n , " unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Wayne State U n i v e r s i t y , D e t r o i t , Michigan, 1963, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , V o l . XXV, p. 322. Jackson, S. A. "The Curriculum C o u n c i l : New Hope, New Promise," E d u c a t i o n a l Leadership, v o l . 29 no. 8 (May,1972), pp. 690-691. Jampolsky, M. "The Teacher i s the C r i t i c a l F a c t o r i n C u r r i c u l u m , " The ATA Magazine, v o l . 54 no. 1 (September-October, 1973), pp. 35. Johanson, John H. "An I n v e s t i g a t i o n o f the R e l a t i o n s h i p s between Teachers' P e r c e p t i o n s of A u t h o r i t a t i v e I n f l u e n c e s i n L o c a l Curriculum Decision-Making and Curriculum Implementation," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y , Evanston, I l l i n o i s , 1965, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t ra c t s V o l . XXVI, p. 3127. Johnson, M a u r i t z . "On the Meaning of C u r r i c u l u m Design," Curriculum Theory Network, v o l . „ 3 (196 9), pp.3-9. K i r s t , M. W., and D. F. Walker. "An A n a l y s i s of C u r r i c u l u m P o l i c y - M a k i n g . " Review o f E d u c a t i o n a l Research, vol.41 no,5 (December, 1971) , p. 479. Langenbach, Michael., "Development of an Instrument t o Measure Teachers' A t t i t u d e s toward Curriculum Use and P l a n n i n g , " J o u r n a l of E d u c a t i o n a l Research. vol.66 no. 1 (September, 1972) , pp. 35-38. McGeer, P a t r i c k . " M i n i s t e r ' s P o l i c y Statement," Education Today, vo l . , 3 no. 3 (November, 1976), pp. 49. 88 McQuigg, Bobert Bruce. " P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Curriculum Committees by Classroom Teachers i n s e l e c t e d Colorado School Systems," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y of Colorado, Boulder, Colorado, 1962, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . Vo l . XXIII, p.3733. Martin, Mary Dahlberg. "The Teacher i n Cooperative C u r r i c u l u m Development," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Southern C a l i f o r n i a , 1965, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . V o l . XXVI, p.799. fliklos, E. " I n c r e a s i n g P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Decision-Making," The Canadian A d m i n i s t r a t o r , v o l . 9 no. 6 (March, 1970}, pp. 25-29. M i l l e r , Thomas W. "Ten P r i n c i p l e s of Curriculum Development ... For Classroom Teachers," O n t a r i o Education, v o l . 5 (May, 1973), pp. 12-14. Nasstrom, Boy B. "Teacher A u t h o r i t y Over The Curriculum?" E d u c a t i o n a l Leadership, v o l . 16 no. 1 (January, 1976), pp. 713-715. N a t i o n a l Education A s s o c i a t i o n , Research D i v i s i o n , "Increases i n Scheduled S a l a r i e s 1965-66 to 1966-67," NEA Research B u l l e t i n , no. 44 (December, 1966), p. 109. Newton, E. E., and I . E . Housego. "Teacher Reaction to Change: A Case Study," The Canadian A d m i n i s t r a t o r . v o l . . 6 no. 7 ( A p r i l , 1967), pp. 25-28. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, M i n i s t r y of Education. "Core Goals Booklet Now A v a i l a b l e , " Education Today, v o l . 3 no. 4 (December, 1976), p.2. Osbourne, Alan (chairman). "A Report to the Commission on the Education of Teachers of Mathematics," Vector, vol,16 no. 4 (June, 1975), pp. 24-27. , Oswalt, Eugene Talmadge, Sr. "Perceptions and E v a l u a t i o n s of Involvement i n C u r r i c u l u m Development," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , Auburn U n i v e r s i t y , 1975, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s . V o l . XXXVI, p. 3304-A. Pedersen, K. George " E d u c a t i o n a l Decision-making: an i r r a t i o n a l process?" Education Canada, v o l . 15 no. 3 (Summer, 1975), pp. 30-36. B a d c l i f f e , David H a r r i s o n , "A Study of the E f f e c t of Curriculum Planning and Usage on Teacher A t t i t u d e s i n the D a n v i l l e P u b l i c Schools, D a n v i l l e , I l l i n o i s , " Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of I l l i n o i s a t Urbana-Champaign, 1972, D i s s e r t a t i o n A b s t r a c t s , V o l . XXXII, p. 539-A. Bomey, W i l l i a m D. "The Curriculum-Proof Teacher," Phi Delta M £ £ a n , v o l . 54 no. 6 (February, 1973), p. 407. 89 Borer, L. G. "The Great Response-Style Myth," P s y c h o l o g i c a l B u l l e t i n , vol.,63 no. 3 (March, 1965), pp. 129-156, S a n t i n i , Bruno, " a t t i t u d e s o f Swiss Teachers toward the Study and Planning of the C u r r i c u l u m , " The J o u r n a l o f - C u r r i c u l u m S t u d i e s , v o l . 5 no. 2 (November, 1973), pp. 156-164. Simonson, Michael R., C h a r l e s Poncelow, and John McLure. " a t t i t u d e s Toward Decision-Making i n I n s t r u c t i o n a l Development," E d u c a t i o n a l Technology. v o l . 16 no. 1 (January, 1976), pp. 51-53. Simpkins, W i l l i a m S., and D. F r i e s e n . "Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n School Decision-Making," The_Canadian a d m i n i s t r a t o r , v c l . 8 no. 4 (January, 1969), pp. 13-16 Turner, Dan. " a Time t o Care," The Canadian. ( A p r i l 9, 1977), pp.4-6. Turner, Harold E. "What i s the Optimum D i s t r i c t f o r Curriculum Development?" Peabody J o u r n a l of Education* v o l . 46 no. 6 (May, 1969), pp. 340-345. 3. MISCELLANEOUS MATERIAL A l l e s t e r , 1. V. "Curriculum Planning and Implementation" (An address to the B r i t i s h Columbia A s s o c i a t i o n of S u p e r v i s o r s of I n s t r u c t i o n , Kelowna, B. C., 1971). Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , January, 1973. Beauchamp, George A., and P a t r i c i a C. Conran. L o n g i t u d i n a l Study i n C u r r i c u l u m E n g i n e e r i n g — 5 . 0. S., E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Center, E1IC Document ED 102 670, A p r i l , 1975. B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n . Curriculum Development ( b r i e f submitted to the M i n i s t e r of Education) Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , September, 1973. B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n . Members' Guide t o the BCTF 1976-1977. Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , 1976. Church, John S. "Curriculum D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n " (An address to the M i s s i o n D i s t r i c t Teachers* A s s o c i a t i o n P r o f e s s i o n a l Day, H a t z i c , B. C , 1975), Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia Teachers* F e d e r a t i o n , 1975. H a l l , R. H. UBC FIT: Test f o r Goodness of F i t . Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Computing Centre, 1972. Housego, Ian E. School L e v e l Program Development. Unpublished Essay, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, F a c u l t y of Education, September, 1972. 90 Kardas, Barbara J . , and H a r r i e t Taimage. C h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n C u r r i c u l u m Planning and Reported Acts of Implementation, 0. S. , E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Center, ERIC Document ED 037 382, March, 1970. MacDonald, L l o y d , and Janet Werker. A u t h o r i t y Patterns i n B. C.  Education: An A n a l y s i s of A u t h o r i t y f o r School C u r r i c u l u m , Vancouver: E d u c a t i o n a l Research I n s t i t u t e o f B r i t i s h Columbia, S o c i a l P o l i c y P lanning and A n a l y s i s Programme, May, 1976. MacPherson, E r i c . Keynote Address a t the F i f t h Mathematics Summer Workshop, Carson Graham School, Vancouver: B r i t i s h Columbia, August, 1976. M i l l e r , Thomas W i l l i a m . "An A n a l y s i s of Teacher P a r t i c i p a t i o n i n Curriculum Development f o r P r o j e c t Canada West," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , U n i v e r s i t y of Saskatchewan, (Canada), 1972. Monahan, W. W., and H.M. Johnson. D e c e n t r a l i z e d D e c i s i o n Making Toward E d u c a t i o n a l Goals. U.S., E d u c a t i o n a l Resources Information Center, ERIC Document ED 078 586, May, 1973. Newton, E. E. "Teacher Reaction t o Change," Unpublished Master of Education T h e s i s , U n i v e r s i t y of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, 1967. N i g h t i n g a l e , J . H. UBC FMTBASIC: A Ba s i c U s e r s 1 Guide to FMT. Vancouver, B. C : The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h Columbia. Computing Centre, 1976. P r o v i n c e o f B r i t i s h Columbia, Department of Education, P r o v i n c i a l A d v i s o r y Committee on Curriculum D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n , D r a f t R e g u l a t i o n s f o r C u r r i c u l u m D e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n . Department of Education, 1975. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, M i n i s t r y of Education. What should our c h i l d r e n be l e a r n i n g : Goals of the Core C u r r i c u l u m , V i c t o r i a : M i n i s t r y of E d u c a t i o n , November, 1976. Province of B r i t i s h Columbia, P u b l i c Schools A c t , V i c t o r i a : Government of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1974. Simpkins, W i l l i a m S., "The D i s t r i b u t i o n of Decision-Making A u t h o r i t y i n the School," Unpublished d o c t o r a l d i s s e r t a t i o n , The U n i v e r s i t y of A l b e r t a , 1968. T e n i s c i , T eresa, and Chinh Le. P r e l i m i n a r y D r a f t of UBC TRP:  T r i a n g u l a r Regression Package, Vancouver: U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Computing Centre, 1976. Webb, B i l l . UBC FMT: : A Documentation Program. Vancouver, B-*-€.: The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, Computing Centre, 1976. 91 APPENDICES APPENDIX A LOT QUESTIONNAIRE 93 I CURRENT SITUATION Please c i r c l e one of 'No*, *U', {Uncertain), or * Yes* f o r the f o l l o w i n g statements. No U Yes 1. My s c h o o l d i s t r i c t has a mathematics c o o r d i n a t o r . No U Yes 2. My d i s t r i c t has a c u r r i c u l u m resource c e n t r e . No U Yes 3. My d i s t r i c t holds i n s e r v i c e mathematics workshops. No U Yes 4. My d i s t r i c t has a l o c a l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide. No U Yes 5. My d i s t r i c t has a committee f o r c u r r i c u l u m development i n secondary s c h o o l mathematics. No U Yes 6. My s c h o o l o f f e r s a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d mathematics course. No U Yes 7. My s c h o o l has a res o u r c e c e n t r e or a s p e c i a l workroom s e t aside f o r teacher use. No U Yes 8. The mathematics teachers i n my s c h o o l have r e g u l a r meetings to d i s c u s s c u r r i c u l u m matters. No u Yes 9. The mathematics teachers i n my s c h o o l decide c o o p e r a t i v e l y on course o u t l i n e s . No U Yes 10. I have taught or helped to s e t up a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d course. No U Yes 11. I have taken part i n the pl a n n i n g of a d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. No U Yes 12. I am c u r r e n t l y f o l l o w i n g a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d c u r r i c u l u m o u t l i n e i n mathematics. Bo U Yes 13. I have a l o t of freedom i n determining what I should teach i n my mathematics c l a s s e s . No U Yes 14. I have taken a course on c u r r i c u l u m development. No U Yes 15. I have had some r e l e a s e time t h i s past year to work on a mathematics c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t . 94 I I ATTITUDES Please c i r c l e one of SD (Strongly Disagree) D (Disagree) U (Undecided) A {Agree) SA (Strongly Agree) f o r each of the f o l l o w i n g statements. 1. I f i n d the p r o v i n c i a l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide u s e f u l . SD D U A SA 2. A p r o v i n c i a l r e v i s i o n committee should be c o n t i n u o u s l y working on mathematics r e v i s i o n . SD D U A SA 3. The mathematics c u r r i c u l u m should be s t a n d a r d i z e d a c r o s s the pro v i n c e r a t h e r than d i v e r s i f i e d . SD D U A SA 4, I n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s should o u t l i n e t h e i r own core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 5. Mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committees at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l are unnecessary. SD D U A SA 6. The content of a mathematics course should be determined a t the s c h o o l l e v e l . SD D U A SA 7. Mathematics teac h e r s s h o u l d use a c u r r i c u l u m guide more than the textbook i n l e s s o n planning. SD D U A SA 8. My d i s t r i c t l a c k s the resources, m a t e r i a l s and personnel f o r l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. SD D D A SA 9. I would r a t h e r use e x i s t i n g mathematics programs than develop ay. own c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 10. I would l i k e t o see a r e t u r n to a p r o v i n c i a l system o f examinations a t the grade 12 l e v e l . SD D U A SA 11. I would l i k e to choose my mathematics textbooks from an approved l i s t . SD D U A SA 95 25. L o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s not needed f o r a u n i v e r s a l s u b j e c t l i k e Mathematics. SD D U A SA 96 I I I BASIC DATA Please f i l l i n or check the a p p r o p r i a t e box. * 1 1. Years of age | | I 3 J—1 I T 2. Sex F «—i M *—' I 9 3. School d i s t r i c t number i ) j i i T 5. Years of t e a c h i n g experience | | a i 6. Teaching l e v e l i—i i — T J u n i o r secondary 1 — 1 Senior secondary 1—• i 1 7. Mathematics grades t h a t I ] j have taught i n the past. 3 J i 1 8. Approximate s c h o o l enrollment 1 \ t i 9. Approximate number of teach e r s on s t a f f who | I teach at l e a s t one mathematics course. 1 1 10, I am a mathematics department head. i — i No L — 1 Yes t - J APPENDIX B COVER LETTER and FINAL QUESTIONNAIRE 98 March, 1977. Dear BCAMT member, The purpose of the enclosed g u e s t i o n n a i r e i s to o b t a i n i n f o r m a t i o n on the involvement and a t t i t u d e s of mathematics teachers i n and toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The a t t i t u d e s of te a c h e r s toward the v a r i o u s d u t i e s and r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s of t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n are extremely important amid changing methods of c u r r i c u l u m r e v i s i o n and course development. The w r i t e r i s a graduate student i n Mathematics Education and has the permission of the p r e s i d e n t of the BCAMT to conduct t h i s survey. Your name has been randomly s e l e c t e d from the BCAMT membership l i s t and your i d e n t i t y w i l l remain s t r i c t l y c o n f i d e n t i a l . , The g u e s t i o n n a i r e should take approximately ten minutes to complete. I b e l i e v e t h a t mathematics teachers should have more op p o r t u n i t y to express t h e i r o p i n i o n s on matters which might d r a s t i c a l l y a f f e c t t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n . Your response w i l l h e l p i n d i c a t e the a t t i t u d e s t h a t mathematics t e a c h e r s as a group hol d toward c u r r i c u l u m d e c e n t r a l i z a t i o n and l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development. The r e s u l t s o f t h i s study w i l l be submitted to the VECTOR f o r p o s s i b l e p u b l i c a t i o n . Your cooperation i s t r u l y a p p r e c i a t e d . V i c t o r S t e b l i n 99 I CURRENT SITUATION For the f o l l o w i n g statements, please c i r c l e one of No, U (uncertain) , or Yes. No U Yes 1. My s c h o o l d i s t r i c t has a c o o r d i n a t o r f o r secondary s c h o o l mathematics. No U Yes 2. My d i s t r i c t has a c u r r i c u l u m resource c e n t r e u s e f u l to secondary mathematics teac h e r s . No U Yes 3. My d i s t r i c t holds i n s e r v i c e mathematics workshops. No U Yes 4. My d i s t r i c t has a l o c a l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide. No U Yes 5. My d i s t r i c t has a committee f o r c u r r i c u l u m development i n secondary s c h o o l mathematics. No U Yes 6. My s c h o o l o f f e r s a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d mathematics course. No U Yes 7. My s c h o o l has a s p e c i a l workroom s e t a s i d e f o r the development of classroom m a t e r i a l s . No U Yes 8. My s c h o o l has a l o c a l l y - c o n s t r u c t e d l i s t of mathematics g o a l s and o b j e c t i v e s . No U Yes 9. The mathematics teachers i n my s c h o o l are f r e e to develop t h e i r own course o u t l i n e s . No D Yes 10. The mathematics teac h e r s i n my s c h o o l have developed an o u t l i n e f o r mathematics c o u r s e s . No U Yes 11. I have taught a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d mathematics course. No U Yes 12. I have taken p a r t i n the planning of a d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. No 0 Yes 13. I am c u r r e n t l y f o l l o w i n g a l o c a l l y - d e v e l o p e d c u r r i c u l u m guide i n mathematics. No U Yes 14. I have taken a course on c u r r i c u l u m development. No U Yes 15. I have had some r e l e a s e time t h i s past year to work on a mathematics c u r r i c u l u m p r o j e c t . 100 I I ATTITUDES For each of the f o l l o w i n g statements, please c i r c l e one of SD (Strongly Disagree) D (Disagree) U (Undecided) A (Agree) SA (St r o n g l y Agree) 1. I support the i d e a of a core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m s t a n d a r d i z e d a c r o s s the p r o v i n c e . SD D U A SA 2. Cu r r i c u l u m planning by t e a c h e r s c o n t r i b u t e s to t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n a l s t a t u s . SD D U A Si 3. Teachers should be i n v o l v e d i n developing l o c a l core c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 4. Mathematics t e a c h e r s should use a c u r r i c u l u m guide more than the textbook i n lesson planning. SD D U A SA 5. I would l i k e to develop my own c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 6. Curriculum theory does not help much i n the classroom s i t u a t i o n . SD D U A SA 7. I am i n favour of a m u l t i t e x t approach f o r a mathematics course. SD D U A SA 8. Mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committees at the d i s t r i c t l e v e l are unnecessary. SD D O A Si 9. I would v o l u n t e e r to serve on a school mathematics c u r r i c u l u m committee. SD D U A SA 101 10. There should be some province-wide program to ensure that core m a t e r i a l i s being covered.. SD D U A SA 11. I n d i v i d u a l s c h o o l d i s t r i c t s should o u t l i n e t h e i r own core mathematics c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 12. I would r a t h e r f o l l o w the p r o v i n c i a l mathematics program than develop my own c u r r i c u l u m . SD D U A SA 13. A t e a c h e r ' s job i s t o implement the c u r r i c u l u m guide, not to develop i t . SD D U A SA 14. Covering the p r o v i n c i a l core i s more important than determining the needs of st u d e n t s . SD D U A SA 15. l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development i s not needed f o r a u n i v e r s a l s u b j e c t l i k e Mathematics. SD D 0 A SA 16. I would l i k e to choose my mathematics textbooks from an approved l i s t . SD D D A SA 17. I would p r e f e r to use only one standard textbook f o r a mathematics course. SD D U A SA 18. I would l i k e to be more i n v o l v e d i n c u r r i c u l u m p l a n n i n g at a d i s t r i c t l e v e l . SD D 0 A SA 19. School c u r r i c u l u m committees are g e n e r a l l y a waste of time i f a good p r o v i n c i a l c u r r i c u l u m guide e x i s t s . SD D 0 A SA 20. I f i n d the p r o v i n c i a l mathematics c u r r i c u l u m guide u s e f u l . SD D 0 A SA 102 I I I BASIC DATft Please f i l l i n or check the a p p r o p r i a t e box. 1. Years of age i 2. Sex 3. School d i s t r i c t | | number 1 J 4. Formal c o l l e g e education l e s s than 4 years 4 years i — i 5 years some grad 6 years courses or more 5. Years of teaching | experience *-6. Current t e a c h i n g l e v e l J — T J u n i o r secondary Senior secondary 7. Mathematics c o u r s e s which I have taught. (Please check any a p p l i c a b l e combinations) | grade I | g e n e r a l J r e g u l a r +-I elem | 8 | 9 |10 |11 —-I -j -) i I 4-I -4- 4-j _j_ \ advanced | I +-\ other I - A -1 •4-12 J — ^ -i I H 8. Approximate s c h o o l e n r o l l m e n t l e s s than 500 500 to 1000 more than 1000 9. Approximate number of teachers on s t a f f who I j teach at l e a s t one mathematics course 1 » i — i i— J 10. I am a mathematics No 1—» Yes 1—» department head. 103 APPENDIX C VALIDATION PROCEDURE 104 VALIDATION PROCEDURE The f o l l o w i n g 20-item L i k e r t s c a l e attempts to measure the a t t i t u d e of secondary mathematics t e a c h e r s toward l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development at the d i s t r i c t or s c h o o l l e v e l . The s c a l e w i l l h o p e f u l l y be able to d i s t i n g u i s h between two b a s i c types of t e a c h e r s , which are d e s c r i b e d as f o l l o w s . D e c e n t r a l i s t s -who are a g a i n s t the s t a n d a r d i z a t i o n o f the mathematics c u r r i c u l u m . -who would l i k e to develop t h e i r own m a t e r i a l s and c u r r i c u l u m f o r classroom use. -who t h i n k of c u r r i c u l u m development a c t i v i t i e s as b e n e f i c i a l t o t e a c h i n g e f f e c t i v e n e s s and p r o f e s s i o n a l development. C e n t r a l i s t s -who would l i k e t o see more emphasis on a province-wide core c u r r i c u l u m . -who are more t r a d i t i o n a l i n t h e i r views of the r o l e of t e a c h i n g . -who g e n e r a l l y t h i n k that l o c a l c u r r i c u l u m development would hinder the u n i f o r m i t y and e f f e c t i v e n e s s o f mathematics t e a c h i n g . The f o l l o w i n g L i k e r t s c a l e assumes t h a t each o f the i n d i v i d u a l items helps to d i s t i n g u i s h between the two types of t e a c h e r s . Furthermore, each item i s assumed to be roughly egual i n weight. To help v a l i d a t e these assumptions, I would l i k e you to do the f o l l o w i n g f o r each item. 1. C i r c l e the response t h a t you t h i n k a D e c e n t r a l i s t would make. 2. I f you t h i n k the item i s not evenly weighted with the o t h e r s , give an i n t e g e r value from 1 to 9 (5 i s the normal weight) f o r what you t h i n k the weight should be. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094078/manifest

Comment

Related Items