A Study of Social Status Differentiation in the Classroom Behavior of Nineteen Third Grade Teachers

204 Pages·010.125 MB·English

by  Hoehn, Arthur John

COPYRIGHTED
by
Arthur John Hoehn
1951
A STUDY OF SOCIAL STATUS DIFFERENTIATION IN
THE CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR OF NINETEEN
THIRD GRADE TEACHERS
BX
ARTHUR JOHN HOEHN
B.S., University of Illinois, 1940
M.S., University of Illinois, 1947
THESIS
SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN EDUCATION
IN THE GRADUATE COLLEGE OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS. 1961
URBANA, ILLINOIS
UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS
THE GRADUATE COLLEGE
November 28. 195Q
I HEREBY RECOMMEND THAT THE THESIS PREPARED UNDER MY
SUPERVISION TW ARTHUR JOHN HOEHN
KNTTTT.F-n A STUDY OF SOCIAL STATUS DIFFERENTIATION IN THE
CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR OF NINETEEN THIRD GRADE TEACHERS
BE ACCEPTED* AS FULFILLING THIS PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR
THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR O OPHY IN EDUCATK
Recommendation concurred inf
Committee
on
(UxWMsJiSl
Final Examinationt
* Subject to successful final examination in the case of the doctorate.
t Required for doctor's degree but not for master's.
6M—12-48—40199K
ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE
LIST OF FIGURES iv
LIST OF TABLES v
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT xi
CHAPTER
I. INTRODUCTION 1
II. SURVEY OF THE LITERATURE 5
A. The American Status Structure
B. Social Status And Teachers Classroom
Behavior
C. Some Correlates Of Socio-Economic Status
D. Teacher-Pupil Relationships And The
Mental Hygiene Of Pupils
III. DEFINITION OF THE PROBLEM 32
A. The Hypotheses
B. Definitions And Assumptions
IV. THE MEASURES 40
A. The Measure Of Teachers' Classroom
Behavior
B. The Measure Of Pupils' Social Status
C. Measures Of Achievement
V. THE SOURCES OF DATA 62
A. The Communities
B. The Classrooms
C. The Teachers
D. The Pupils
VI. COLLECTION OF DATA 71
A. Order In Which Data Were Collected
B. Collection Of Observation Data
C. Collection Of Status Data
iii
PAGE
VII. ANALYSIS OF DATA 74
A. Methods Of Analysis
B. Statistical Results For the First Four
Hypotheses
C. Teacher Contacts And Pupil Achievement
D. Differences Between Teachers
VIII. INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS 128
A. The Relation Of Quantity Of Teacher
Contacts To Pupil Social Status
B. The Relation Of Quality Of Teacher
Contacts To Pupil Social Status
C. Explanation Of The Relationship Between
Quality of Teacher Contacts And Pupil
Social Status
D. Range Of Applicability Of Findings
E. Practical Implications
IX. SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH 159
X. SUMMARY . 144
REFERENCES 147
APPENDIX 155
Forms
Tables
LIST OF FIGURES
FIGURE PAGE
1. Relation of the mean frequencies of contacts
with all pupils in the classroom to extent
of status differentiation in contact
frequencies * 118
2. Relation of tendency toward conflict with all
pupils in classroom to extent of status
differentiation with respect to conflict . . 120
3, Relation of IT/S Ratio for all pupils in the
classroom to extent of status differentiation
with respect to highly integrative contacts . 122
4, Relation of i/D ratio for all pupils in the
classroom to extent of status differentiation
in respect to i/D ratios 123
LIST OF TABLES
(Including Tables In Appendix)
TABLE PAGE
1. For each hypothesis, the teacher behavior
variable involved and the Anderson-Brewer
contacts or contact ratios equated to this
variable 39
2. Percentages of agreement in recording the
individual contacts of teacher A 45
3. Percentages of agreement in recording the
individual contacts of teacher B - extended
time units . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 46
4. Percentages of agreement in recording the
individual contacts of teacher B - five
minute time unit . . * 48
5. Percentages of agreement in recording the
individual contacts of teacher B with pupils
of different social status groups 50
6. Comparison of the i/D and IT/DC ratios for
teacher B as determined by simultaneous
observations 51
7. For each of eleven classrooms, correlations
of teacher contacts during the first 150
minutes of observation with contacts during
second 150 minutes of observation 55
8. Age, years of college, years of teaching
experience, and marital status of each of
the nineteen teachers 65
9. Description of the classroom groups of pupils. 67
10. Description of classroom social status groups. 69
11. For each classroom, a comparison of the mean
frequency of all teacher contacts involving
middle class (MC) pupils with the mean fre
quency of all teacher contacts involving lower
class (LC) pupils 77
vi
12, For each classroom, a comparison of DC/S
Ratios for contacts with middle class (MC)
pupils and with lower class (LC) pupils . , • 79
13, For each classroom, a comparison of the IT/S
ratio for contacts with middle class pupils
and the IT/S ratio for contacts with lower
class pupils 80
14, For each classroom, a comparison of the i/D
ratio for contacts with middle class (MC)
pupils and the i/D ratio for contacts with
lower class (LC) pupils . . . . . . . . . .. 81
15, For each classroom, a comparison of the IT/DC
ratio for contacts with middle class (MC)
pupils and the IT/DC ratio for lower class
(LC) pupils 82
16, For each teacher contact index and for each
analysis: (1) the number of classrooms in
which the teacher was found to "favor" high
status over low status pupils, and (2) the
significance level of each such result.
Also a similar summary of results from
analyses involving boys only and girls only , 90
17, For each of six classrooms, the mean fre
quency of contacts with middle class (MC),
upper-lower class (ULC) and lower-lower
class (LLC) pupils ,, 95
18, For each of six classrooms, the DC/S ratios
for contacts with middle class (MC), upper
lower class (ULC) and lower lower class
(LLC) pupils 97
19, For each of six classrooms, the IT/S ratios
for contacts with middle class (MC), upper-
lower class (ULC), and lower-lower class
(LLC) pupils 98
20, For each of six classrooms, the i/D ratios
for contacts with middle class (MC), upper-
lower class (ULC), and lower-lower class
(LLC) pupils 99
vii
TABLE J^ACffi
21. For each of six classrooms, the IT/DC ratios
for contacts with middle class (MCj, upper-
lower class (ULC), and lower-lower class (LLC;
pupils. • • •• . 100
22. For each of several teacher contact indices: (lj
the number of classrooms in which the teacher
was found to "favor" middle class pupils over
lower class pupils, (2J the number of classrooms
in which the teacher was found to "favor" high
achievers over low achievers, and (3j the signi
ficance level of each such result • • • • • • •• 104
2o. For each of ten classrooms, the inter.-correla
tions of status rating of pupil, achievement of
pupil, and number of contacts involving the
pupil 107
24. For each of ten classrooms, the inter-correla
tions of status rating of pupil, achievement
of pupil, and DC/S ratio. Also the correla
tions between status ratings and DC/S ratios
when achievement is partlalled out • • • • • *• 110
25* For each of nineteen teachers, the differences
in contact indices computed separately for middle
class pupils and for lower class pupil3 . • • • . 113
26. Comparison of "between teachers" and "between
social classes" differences ..- • 125
A. For nine classrooms, the correlation between
the reading and the total scores on the Pro
gressive Achievement Tests, rrimary Battery,
Form A. . . . 158
Bl« For each classroom, a comparison of the mean
frequency of all teacher contacts involving
middle class I MO) boys with the mean frequen-
of all teacher contacts involving lower class
(LC> boys 159
B2. For each classroom, a comparison of the mean
frequency of all teacher contacts involving
middle class (MCj girls with the mean fre
quency of all teacher contacts involving
lower class {LGj girls. • • . . .. 160
viii
PAGE
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median frequency of all teacher contacts
involving middle class (MC) pupils with the
median frequency of all teacher contacts
involving lower class (LC) pupils 161
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median frequency of all teacher contacts in
volving middle class (MC) boys v/ith the
median frequency of all teacher contacts in
volving lower class (LC) boys 162
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median frequency of all teacher contacts in
volving middle class (MO) girls with the
median frequency of all teacher contacts in
volving lower class (LC) girls • 163
For each classroom, a comparison of DC/S
ratios for contacts with middle class (MC)
and with lower class (LC) boys 164
For each classroom, a comparison of DC/S
ratios for contacts with middle class (MC)
and with lower class (LC) girls 165
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median DC/S ratios for contacts with middle
class (MC) and lower class (LC) pupils . . . 166
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median DC/S ratios for contacts with middle
class (MC) and lower class (LC) boys . . .. 167
For each classroom, a comparison of the
median DC/S ratios for contacts with middle
class (MC) and lower class (LC) girls . . .. 168
For each classroom, a comparison of IT/S ratios
for contacts with middle class (MC) boys and
with lower class (LC) boys 169
For each classroom, a comparison of IT/S
ratios for contacts v/ith middle class (MC)
girls and with lower class (LC) girls . . .. 170