Evaluative criteria for industrial arts programs in secondary schools

150 Pages·06.183 MB·English

by  Witt, William Wallace

EVALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR INDUSTRIAL ARTS PROGRAMS
IN SECONDARY SCHOOLS
A Thesis
Presented To
the Faculty of the School of Education
The University of Southern California
In Partial Fulfillment
of the Requirements for the Degree
Master of Science in Education
by
William Wallace Witt
June 1950
UMI Number: EP56165
All rights reserved
INFORMATION TO ALL USERS
The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.
In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.
Dissertation Publishing
UMI EP56165
Published by ProQuest LLC (2014). Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author.
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.
All rights reserved. This work is protected against
unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346
£ ^ JS~0 LA) HU
This thesisj written under the direction of the
Chairman of the candidateJs Guidance Committee
and approved by all members of the Committee,
has been presented to and accepted by the Faculty
of the School of Education of the University of
Southern California in partial fulfillment of the
requirements for the degree of Master of Science
in Education.
Dean
Guidance Committee
Chairman
___
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PART I
ORIENTATION OF STUDY
CHAPTER PAGE
I. THE PROBLEM...................... 1
The problem............................. 2
Statement of the problem............ 2
Limitation of the problem............. . 2
Importance of the study . . . . . . . . 3
Definitions of terms used 7
Industrial arts • • • • . . • • • • • • 7
Organization ............ 7
Subjectivity . . . 7
Objectivity .......................... 7
Methodology .................... 7
II. REVIEW OF LITERATURE AND ORGANIZATION OF
REMAINDER OF THESIS.................... 9
Review of literature .................. 9
Organization of remainder of thesis . . . 13
PART II
DEVELOPMENT OF CRITERIA
III. ORGANIZATION . . . . . .................. 15
Administration of Program .......... 15
Student enrollment .................. 15
iii
CHAPTER PAGE
Grouping of students in courses . • . • 19
Time allotment............... 20
Teaching load • .................... 21
Records • • • • ................. 22
Administrative participants .......... 24
Administration of course .............. 24
Student management • • • • • • . . • • 25
Reference facilities . . .......... 27
Student planning facilities .......... 29
Display facilities .................. 31
IV. THE CURRICULUM.......................... 33
Industrial arts department......... . . 33
Basic philosophy and objectives . . . . 33
How instructional areas are taught • • 3#
Curriculum revision.................. 43
Industrial arts courses ........ 44
Course objectives ♦ ........ . . . . . 44
Course planning ........... 47
The safety program.................. 51
Pupil evaluation......... 56
V. THE TEACHER..................... 60
The teacher in his c l a s s .............. 60
Student interest and participation • • 6l
Developing student ability .......... 63
iv
CHAPTER PAGE
Conducting student experiences . . . . . 64
The teacher in his profession .......... 68
VI. THE PLANT AMD EQUIPMENT . .............. 72
Location and size of p l a n t .......... 73
Lighting........................... . . 75
Ventilation............. 73
Painting • . • ........................ 81
Equipment........* .................. 8 3
Electricity.......................... 86
Lavatory facilities ...................... 88
Acoustics ...................... . . . . . 38
Storage facilities . . . . . ............ 89
PART III
A CHECKLIST FOR EVALUATION
VII. THE CHECKLIST........................... .. 94
The original checklist .................. 96
Jurors1 rating of the checklist .......... 103
Question two in Part I, A .............. 103
Question six in Part II, B ........ 106
Question six in Part I V .................. 107
Question eight in Part IV . . . . . . . . . 107
Other discrepancies in the ratings . . . . 108
The revised checklist .................... 120
V
CHAPTER PAGE
Answers to the checklist................ 12$
PART IV
CONCLUSIONS
VIII. CONCLUSIONS................................ 133
BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................135
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE PAGE
I. Number and Percentage of Jurors Rating
Respective Checklist Questions Necessary,
Helpful, and Of Little Value............. 104
II* Comparison of the Numbers of Teachers and
Supervisors Rating Respective Checklist
Questions Necessary, Helpful, and Of
Little Value . ............ . . . . . . . . 109
III* Comparison According to Population of the
Numbers of Jurors Rating Respective
Checklist Questions Necessary, Helpful,
and of Little Value............... * 114
IV. Comparison According to Geographic. Location
of the Numbers of Jurors Rating Respective
Checklist Questions Necessary, Helpful,
and of Little Value .................... 117
PART I
ORIENTATION OF STUDY
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
One of the most important processes being conducted
in our schools today is that of evaluation,. If it is
objective in nature and carefully arrived at, it can per­
form major constructive functions in the betterment of the
school program,
,fIt can provide a periodical check which gives
direction to the continued improvement of the pro­
gram of the school or college; it can help to
validate some of the important hypotheses upon
which the program operates; it can furnish data
about individual students essential to wise guidance;
it can give a more satisfactory foundation for
psychological security of the staff, of parents, and
of students; and it can help both teachers and pupils
to clarify their goals."I
In order to achieve these functions, the evaluative program
must be planned and instituted with thought.
The two areas in which planned evaluation is a necess­
ity are the areas of educational environment and educational
outcome. The former consists of all things within the
school which influence the student; the latter is the degree
to which the student has matured through their influence.
1 R. W. Tyler, "A General Statement of Evaluation,"
Journal of Educational Research. XXX {March, 1942), 492.