 |
Investing
in the power of teachers
to improve teaching and learning. |
     |
|
  |
The writer used the research of this program as the basis for a Master's project. The project, in its entirety, is available at the University of Victoria, Library. The full version includes more complete data and a longer discussion of the findings, as well as appendices containing forms, letters, and other elements of the research that have not been included in this report for the sake of brevity.
The participants in this research project thank the Dr. Stirling McDowell Foundation for the financial support provided to facilitate this project.
Foreword: Gleanings from Quality Intelligence Connection Much can be learned by a group of teachers who come together to research a topic they are passionate about and believe in. The synergy created cannot be replicated by any externally driven professional development. The following are lessons learned during this project by the teachers of Quality Intelligence Connection:
Chapter 1 Statement of the Problem Student misbehavior currently requires more and more principal and teacher time. It appears many students don't know how to, or they are not willing to, take ownership for their behavior or their learning within the school environment. The time currently spent on attempting to control misbehavior could be better spent teaching students affective skills that would allow them to mediate their own problems and develop their own learning in a positive, growth-enhancing manner. The perception among teachers was that negative behavior and lack of internal motivation might be a result of students not learning good affective skills. It appeared that schools typically ignore the teaching of affective skills or teach them within curricula subjects, and there is little, if any, transfer to real-life situations. However, the staff of Osborne School believed that by changing the focus and actually teaching affective skills in isolation, then re-integrating these skills into the curricula areas, positive changes, such as enhanced self-esteem, improved student behavior and increased self-directed learning, would result. Statement of Purpose The purpose of this study was to investigate whether affective skills taught in isolation would be generalized by students and transferred to their life outside the program. Problem Statement The first component of this research project was to examine the plausibility, practicality, and efficacy of teaching affective skills in isolation rather than teaching them within curricular content. Second, this investigation concentrated on the conditions necessary to facilitate such a change and the effect the refocusing would have on self-esteem, behavior, and the development of self-directed learners. Significance of the Study If teaching affective skills in isolation meant an increase in self-esteem, schools would have a proactive way to deal with discipline. This may not only reduce the incidents of misbehavior, but it could also teach students problem-solving skills, create improved self-esteem in the students, and create self-directed learners. This in turn would relieve teachers and administrators of many hours of punishment-oriented activities. This time could better be used to create quality teaching and learning in the school. The long term benefits to society could be the creation of a generation of young people who are internally motivated and able to problem solve pragmatically and thereby operate in a less hostile environment. Conceptual Framework This study was based on Glasser's Choice Theory, Gardner's Multiple Intelligence Theory, as well as Sergiovanni's work on leadership. Affective skills development and behavior also had a major emphasis in the study. Saskatchewan Learning mandated the teaching of affective skills in its schools in the report Directions (1984). The goals that itemized the affective skills to be taught formed a basis for all Saskatchewan curricula. Methodology Data were collected at Osborne School, a local rural school, that implemented an affective skills program called Quality Intelligence Connection (QIC). Students and their parents completed questionnaires. Interviews were conducted with teachers who were a part of developing and implementing the program. Two teachers, who were not part of the initial planning but came to the school a year later, were also interviewed. The data collected were analyzed using appropriate statistical techniques and descriptive narrative. Recommendations were made regarding possible implementation of an affective skills program in a similar situation by comparing the active practice at Osborne School and the literature. Limitations The researcher acknowledges that several limitations affected the results of the inquiry. First, the success of the inquiry depended upon the cooperation of the students and their parents to complete the questionnaires. It was also vital that the teachers participate willingly in the interviews. A second limitation was derived from the bias inherent in self-reported student perceptions as well as the parents' understanding of how their children generalized their learning to the home environment. Finally, the conclusions and recommendations generated by this study should be recognized as tentative and may not generalize to other schools. Delimitation This study focused on the examination of only the Grade Five to Eight students in only one school and only the teachers who were involved in developing, implementing, and presenting the program. It did not include the kindergarten to Grade Four classes in the school or the teachers of these grades. Knowledge gained by the students outside the school was not taken into account. Definition of Terms The following terms have been provided to assist the reader with unfamiliar terms or with ambiguous terms. Affective Skills: intrinsic drives that motivate behavior and include beliefs, attitudes, feelings, and concerns Control Theory, now called Choice Theory, as used by Glasser (1986) in Control Theory in the Classroom: a belief that "all of our behavior is our constant attempt to satisfy one or more of five basic needs that are written into our genetic structure" Basic Needs, as used by Glasser(1986) in Control Theory in the Classroom: composed of the "physiological need to stay alive and reproduce, . and the four psychological needs which include:
Empower: enabling others to believe in themselves, so they may become self-directed and operate from an internal locus of control Leadership: the ability to guide, direct, or motivate individuals to work for the good of an organization and its individual members Locus of Control: either the internal or external source to which people attribute their success or failure Multiple Intelligences, as used by Gardner (1991) in The Unschooled Mind: "all human beings are capable of at least seven different ways of knowing the world .labeled the seven human intelligences" which are:
Quality Schools, as used by Glasser (1993) in The Quality School Teacher: "The goal of a Quality School is all students doing some quality work" Quality World, as used by Glasser (1998) in Choice Theory: "is made up of a small group of specific pictures that portray, more than anything else we know, the best ways to satisfy one or more of our basic needs". The pictures are created in our memories shortly after birth and are created and re-created throughout our lives Restitution,
as used by Gossen (1994) in Restitution: Restructuring school
discipline: a method where students choose to compensate
the person wronged. It's an opportunity for the students to
learn to meet their needs in a positive way in order to become
the kind of person they want to become Self-esteem: the belief one has about oneself - either positive or negative Summary In this chapter, the purpose and significance of the study are stated as well as the conceptual framework and methodology. The limitations and delimitations that apply are outlined. A list of terms and the definitions as they apply to this study are provided. The literature review is presented in Chapter Two together with the conceptual framework. Procedures used in the study are described in Chapter Three, and the findings are outlined in Chapter Four. In Chapter Five, the study concludes with recommendations to the school for possible changes as well as recommendations for how other schools may implement a similar program that is suitable to their situation.
Chapter 2 Review of the Literature A review of the current literature on affective skills development, self-esteem building, self-directed learning, and behaviour was conducted in order to compare this information with the planning and implementation of the Quality Intelligence Connection (QIC) program that occurred at Osborne School. The major source of information in connection with self-esteem and behavior was Glasser's (1989; 1998) theories. Gardner's (1983) work on Multiple Intelligences formed the basis of the research on self-directed learning. Leadership styles were analyzed in connection with implementing a major change in a school community; Sergiovanni's (1992) conceptions concerning leadership formed a basis for this study. Literature on affective skills was less available, and the main source of information was the "Curriculum & Instruction Review" undertaken by Saskatchewan Education in 1984 called Directions. Choice Theory and Quality Schools Glasser (1998) believed much of the difficulty with interpersonal relationships in our society was due to a psychology based on external control. He developed an internal control psychology that he discussed in his book, Choice Theory, A New Psychology of Personal Freedom (1998). Choice Theory, which was previously named Control Theory, was based on the belief that we each have a physical need for survival, four basic psychological needs, and that all our behaviours work towards meeting those needs. The needs he spoke of are love and belonging, power, fun, and freedom. Love and belonging mean being connected to people who are important in our lives. Our Power need is met when we accomplish something that is meaningful to us. Freedom occurs when we are free from the influences of other people, and we can make choices that are valuable to us. Glasser (1998) concluded that laughter best defined fun, and stated, "Fun is a genetic reward for learning." He theorized, "We descended from people who learned more or better than others. This learning gave these people a survival advantage, and the need for fun became built into our genes." Glasser (1993) believed "we will work hard for those we care for (belonging); for those we respect and who respect us (power); for those with whom we laugh (fun); for those who allow us to think and act for ourselves (freedom); and for those who help us to make our lives secure (survival)." Another major premise in Glasser's (1998) work was that right from infancy, we each create our own quality world. This quality world contains pictures of three categories: "(1) the people we most want to be with, (2) the things we most want to own or experience, and (3) the ideas or systems of belief that govern much of our behavior" (Glasser, 1998). These pictures are the best way we know to satisfy our basic needs. "Our quality worlds contain the knowledge that is most important to us" (Glasser, 1998). The images in the quality world of students play a significant role in their participation and success in school. Glasser (1998) based his quality schools on his beliefs about internal control psychology, our basic needs, our quality worlds, and lead management. One of Glasser's major stipulations was that education is not acquiring knowledge but is using knowledge. Quality schools require students to think; students learn to use the knowledge in real life situations. "In a quality school, where students are led instead of bossed, they acquire a lot of knowledge by using what they learn, and they retain it" (Glasser, 1998). "The purpose of a quality school will be to educate children according to the following definition of education: Education is the process through which we discover that learning adds quality to our lives" (Glasser, 1990). All school activities must be relevant to the students' present or near future real world. Glasser's (1993) instructions to teachers were, "In a quality school, your job is to take the time to explain to your students the usefulness of what you ask them to do." In order for students to learn and participate in school, teachers and the activities required in the classes must be in the students' quality worlds. In a quality school, all students must do competent work that is the equivalent of a B in a traditional grading system. "For students to do quality work, it is crucial that they see that it is for their benefit, not the benefit of their teachers, school system, or parents" (Glasser, 1990). Students do not fail in a quality school, nor is incompetent work (a C or D grade) acceptable. Students continue to work until the project or test they are working on is of competent quality. Students are encouraged but not coerced to improve their work to a quality level, which would be a traditional A. In a quality school, the expectations are high for all students. "The main task of a quality teacher is to teach them first what quality is and then that they can do quality schoolwork" (Glasser, 1993). Students in quality schools are taught to self evaluate. "As self evaluation is a requisite for moving to quality, all students would be taught to evaluate their own work, and based on that evaluation, to improve it and to repeat this process until they begin to do some of what they and their teacher would call quality work" (Glasser, 1993). Glasser (1990) advocated that "Starting in Grade 1, students be asked to evaluate all their work in writing and sign it before turning it in." Teachers were then expected to evaluate the students' work and discuss their evaluation with the students which would further enhance the learning. Determining their own competence through self evaluation and tracking the competencies left to complete allowed students to "know exactly where they stand. They are in control of their own destiny, which means they can blame only themselves if they don't choose to do competent work" (Glasser, 1998). An integral part of quality schools is that students take ownership for their actions, and they learn that their actions can be changed in order to achieve what is important to them. Quality work done by teachers, administrators and students is key to success and enhanced self-esteem. Glasser (1993) believed, "Quality does not happen: it has to be carefully nurtured into existence by a lead-manager who understands that getting the uninitiated started is a long, slow process." Lead management is focused "on creating a cooperative system and on the belief that if you treat people well and explain what you want them to do, you can trust them to do a good job" (Glasser, 1998). Glasser believed that most schools operate on a boss management mentality which is focused "on individuals and pits them against each other" (Glasser, 1998). Teachers and principals in quality schools were trained in Choice Theory and used it in their personal lives; they practiced lead management as well as teaching choice theory to the students and their families. Self-esteem is enhanced by doing quality work because as Glasser (1993) stated, "what students need to get from school is the confidence, based on personal experience, that no matter what they choose to do, they can do a quality job." This belief will continue into adult life and be a true benefit to society. Multiple Intelligences Howard Gardner, a Harvard University psychologist, developed the theory of multiple intelligences. In his book, The Unschooled Mind (1991), Gardner documented the limited nature of students' understanding across the disciplines in schools. He believed that while students may have a rote memory understanding of the information presented in schools they do not have a sufficient grasp of concepts, principles, or skills, so that one can bring them to bear on new problems and situations, deciding in which ways one's present competence can suffice and in which ways one may require new skills or knowledge. An important symptom of an emerging understanding is the capacity to represent a problem in a number of different ways and to approach its solution from varied vantage points: a single, rigid representation is unlikely to suffice (Gardner, 1991). His premise was that, despite the fact some students in today's schools can pass paper and pencil tests, they do not have a genuine understanding of the knowledge presented to them. They are, therefore, unable to transfer this information and effectively use it in their lives outside of school. He believed, as did Glasser (1998), that all learning in school should be relevant to the current life of the student. He proposed that one reason education is not always relevant or genuinely understood is that many students do not learn in the manner that information is presented in schools, nor do students present information well in the way it is expected of them. Gardner (1991) stated these differences challenge an educational system that assumes that everyone can learn the same materials in the same way and that a uniform, universal measure suffices to test student learning. Indeed, as currently constituted, our educational system is heavily biased toward linguistic modes of information and assessment and, to a somewhat lesser degree, toward logical-quantitative modes as well. Gardner (1983) believed the theory of intelligence currently in use was too narrow. He had difficulty believing in the idea that intelligence could be objectively measured and reduced to a single number of "IQ" score. Gardner studied people who were admired and valued in our culture; he realized that many of them had not worked in areas that required only linguistic and/or logical intelligence. He recognized there must be more to intelligence than the two areas on which schools concentrated. In his book, Frames of Mind (1983), Gardner proposed the idea of humans having seven intelligences. He believed there are seven distinct ways we know and learn about reality. Gardner's working definition of intelligence is: 'An intelligence entails the ability to solve problems or fashion products that are of consequence in a particular cultural setting. The problem-solving skill allows one to approach a situation in which a goal is to be obtained and to locate the appropriate route to that goal. The creation of a cultural product is crucial to capturing and transmitting knowledge or expressing one's views or feelings. The problems to be solved range from creating an end to a story to anticipating a mating move in chess to repairing a quilt. Products range from scientific theories to musical composition to successful political campaigns' (Lazear, 1992). The two intelligences most frequently used in schools, Gardner called linguistic/verbal intelligence and logical/mathematical intelligence. The other intelligences he labeled spatial intelligence, bodily/kinesthetic intelligence, musical intelligence, interpersonal intelligence, and intrapersonal intelligence. The linguistic/verbal intelligence is the capacity to use words effectively whether orally or in writing. Logical/mathematical intelligence is the ability to use numbers effectively. The capacity to perceive the visual-spatial world accurately and to perform transformations upon their perceptions he called spatial intelligence. Expertise in using one's whole body to express ideas and feelings is called bodily/kinesthetic intelligence. Musical intelligence is the capacity to perceive, discriminate, transform, and express musical forms. The ability to perceive and make distinctions in the moods, intentions, motivations, and feelings of other people he called interpersonal intelligence. Intrapersonal intelligence is self-knowledge and the ability to act adaptively on the basis of that knowledge (Armstrong, 1994). Gardner set up certain basic "tests" that each intelligence has to meet to be a full-fledged intelligence and not simply a talent, skill, or aptitude. The following four key points concerning Gardner's model of multiple intelligences were presented by Armstrong (1994):
These key points are only some of the reasons for implementing multiple intelligences curriculum in schools. "Identify your strengths and resources" was one of the steps in Canfield's (1990) 10-step system to " help student's strengthen their self-esteem and increase their chances for success in life." Multiple Intelligences can be one effective way for students to distinguish their areas of strengths and develop awareness of the resources that come with these intelligences. Another of Canfield's steps was to "focus on the positive." He believed that, "in order to feel successful, you have to have experienced success" (Canfield, 1990). When students work from their strong areas of intelligences to complete a project, they will be more successful and thus have something positive to focus on. Affective Skills Affective skills are defined as intrinsic drives that motivate behavior and include beliefs, attitudes, feelings and concerns. These are generally not considered as concrete, easily measured elements. These constituents play a vital role in development of self-esteem and are a major component in self-knowledge. "Affect is a key component of school success. .support of the tie between affect and cognition is offered by Gilligan and Bower (1984). Their report demonstrated, both through original research and replication of others' research, that learning, memory and social behavior have strong ties to the learner's emotional state" declared Currie (1988). Webber (1990) quoted a number of definitions of self-esteem; many of these included affective skills: Battle (1987, p.21) describes self-esteem as "the individual's perception of his or her own worth," and notes that it "determines the way one behaves." Reasoner (1982, p.1) says "self-esteem refers to the sense of self-respect, confidence, identity, and purpose found in an individual." Self-esteem influences a person's self-discipline, self-confidence, identification with others, trust in others, ability to assess people's actions, academic achievement, sense of security, happiness with personal potential and limitations, pride, responsibility, capacity to love, and success in life. In Canfield's (1990) 10-step system to be used by teachers to "help strengthen their students' self-esteem and increase their chances of success in life," his first step states that students must "assume an attitude of 100 percent responsibility." He used the formula "E (events) + R (your response to them) = (outcomes)." Canfield urged students to take responsibility for changing their responses to the event and thus taking ownership for the outcome. Canfield (1990) quoted a teacher who participated in one of his workshops as saying, I used to think all I needed to do was to teach mathematics well. Now I teach children, not math.The youngster who really made me understand this was Eddie. When I asked him one day why he thought he was doing so much better than last year, he replied, "It's because I like myself now when I'm with you. In the booklet, Directions, Saskatchewan Learning (1984) presented the Goals of Education in Saskatchewan-1984; learning basic skills such as reading, writing, and mathematics was only one of nine goals. The following six goals were based on affective skills: LIFE-LONG LEARNING
UNDERSTANDING AND RELATING TO OTHERS
SELF-CONCEPT DEVELOPMENT
SPIRITUAL DEVELOPMENT
MEMBERSHIP IN SOCIETY
GROWING WITH CHANGE
Based on the above goals, developing affective skills in students was extremely important to Saskatchewan Learning. The curricula for each subject taught in Saskatchewan have these goals for a base. Leadership Leadership is a vital component to any successful change occurring in a school community. The principal, a staff member, or anyone in the community can provide leadership. There may be a shift in leadership throughout the change process depending on the strengths and skills required. Leadership was described in 1994 by Sergiovanni as "connecting people morally to each other and to their work. The work of leadership involves developing shared purposes, beliefs, values, and conceptions themed to teaching and learning, community building, collegiality, character development, and other school issues and concern." Sergiovanni (1992), quoted Leonard, a principal in California who believed "that schools should 'use shared leadership with a heavy emphasis on following a vision rather than a person. . The staff is not working harder and longer because I'm a charismatic leader or because I'm using a carrot or a stick. These people are working toward realizing a goal that they believed in; their internal motivation takes much of the burden of motivation and management off me'." Schools as a moral community shaped Sergiovanni's (1994) theory of leadership. He believed this theory had two advantages over other theories. The first was that it "provides for moral connections among teachers, principals, parents, and students". Assisting these people to become self-managing is the second benefit. Sergiovanni (1994) believed that moral connections are stronger than extrinsic or intrinsic reward connections because they come from commitments to shared values and beliefs that teachers, parents, and students accept, and the obligations they feel toward each other and their work. . With leaders firmly grounded in shared ideals, and with moral connections in place, principals, teachers, parents, and students can come together in a shared followership. The principal serves as head follower by leading the discussion about what is worth following, and by modeling, teaching, and helping others to become better followers. When this happens, the emphasis changes from direct leadership based on rules and personality, to a different kind of leadership based on stewardship and service. Clark (1995) echoed Sergiovanni's (1992) ideas with her beliefs that the principal's role has changed from ".an all-knowing patriarch of the school" to a dreamer and leader who collaboratively creates visions, strategically plans, and solves issues using the knowledge of all players. "Principals must be team builders. Today, success requires the knowledge of all the professionals in the building and all the community resources outside the building. The smart administrator knows that to tap into that collective wisdom, a team must be forged." Senge (1990) advocated collaboration among all members who made up the team of participants. Saskatchewan Teachers' Federation (1996) discussed Senge's beliefs about learning organizations. "They are an organization in which people at all levels are, collectively, continually enhancing their capacities to create the results they truly desire, where new and expansive patterns of thinking are nurtured, where collective aspiration is set free, and where people are continually learning how to learn together." When discussing leadership for learning organizations the Saskatchewan Teachers' Federation quoted Senge (1990) who validated many of Sergiovanni's (1992) beliefs about leadership: Senge goes on to argue that learning organizations demand a new view of leadership. He proposes that leaders in learning organizations are designers, stewards and teachers. As designers, leaders build organizations "where people continually expand their capacities to understand complexity, clarify vision, and improve shared mental models." They empower others; they design policies, strategies, systems, and learning processes; they integrate vision, values, purposes, systems thinking, and mental models. As stewards, leaders understand their purposes and personal visions and become caretakers of the vision and story of the organization. They foster self-respect and self-actualization, contributing to build a better world. As teachers, they enable people to see trends and underlying structures, not merely events. They model lifelong learning and foster learning for everyone in the organization. Bolender (1996), a principal in Alberta, like many others who wrote about organizational leadership for the Twenty-first Century, believed the leader's role had undergone quite a dramatic change in recent years when she pronounced: [L]eaders must be visionaries who are able to communicate their vision, "walk the talk" of their vision, and take risks to encourage others to try the "walk". Teachers seeing unshakeable commitment to a vision are more likely to commit than those who merely hear of the vision. Licata, Teddlie, and Greenfield (1990) affirm the principal's vision as being crucial to change within the school. Their findings specify, however that this vision must be developed and implemented through a public process with all who have a stake in the school's future. One final testament that supported leadership including all people with a vested interest in developing and implementing change came from Clemens-Brower (1997). She theorized: "I attribute my success with the 6-, 7-, 8-, and 9-year-olds in my multiage class to the involvement of parents and other members of our Aloha, Oregon, community. They took advantage of four major ways to get involved-communicating through voice mail, sharing expertise in the classroom, helping me gather lesson materials, and participating in our monthly learning celebrations." Clemens-Brower was also amazed how readily parents and community resource people were willing to use their noon hours to come to the school and participate in the activities with great enthusiasm. Brandt (1992) quoted Sergiovanni as remarking "The only thing that makes the leader special is that she or he is a better follower: better at articulating the purposes of the community; more passionate about them, more willing to take time to pursue them."
Chapter 3 Methodology The purpose of this study was to examine whether teaching affective skills in isolation and then integrating them into school curricula and in social situations would result in positive changes to students. The investigation of these changes focused on behaviour, self-esteem, and the development of self-directed learners. This chapter will identify the setting for the study, describe the population of the school and the members who took part in the research. A description of the development and use of the instruments used to collect data is included as well as the method used to address ethical concerns. The methods used to analyze the data and the implications for future research are a part of this chapter. Setting This project took place at Osborne School that was a part of the Prince Albert Rural School Division #56 which is now called Saskatchewan Rivers School Division. The school is located approximately fifteen minutes south of the city of Prince Albert. This city is in the approximate geographic center of the province of Saskatchewan (See Figure 3.1). It is located on the southern edge of the Parkland region and is the service, retail and distribution center for the Northern Saskatchewan resource industries such as mining, forestry and agriculture; it is called the "Gateway to the North". The Prince Albert Pulp Mill is a major economic resource in this area as well as other businesses related to the forest industry. Tourism also provides a large source of income to this area. Reverend James Nisbet of the Presbyterian church landed on the southern shore of the North Saskatchewan River in 1866. He proclaimed that location to be Prince Albert-named after the Prince Consort of Queen Victoria. Prince Albert was settled by First Nations people, fur traders who plied their trade on the North Saskatchewan River, and settlers who were drawn by the possibilities for agriculture and forestry. It is one of the oldest settlements in Saskatchewan; it was incorporated as a city in 1904. Prince Albert has a population of approximately 34,000 and is the third largest city in Saskatchewan. This area of Saskatchewan has a large population of Metis people whose
ancestors were generally French fur traders and First Nations people (mainly Plains Cree). There is also an extensive Ukrainian, French and English population. Population The school community demographics included residents from the large surrounding farming community, many acreage owners, and two trailer courts situated between the city and the school grounds. Many of the farm families were third or fourth generation families who settled in the area south of Prince Albert. The students from the trailer court were often from families who were transient for a number of reasons, including the seasonal nature of their work in the forest industry. The population included a wide range of family configurations, beliefs and values. Within this community were eight fostering families. The school included a population of approximately 168 students, eleven teachers, a part-time vice-principal and a principal. Sixty-four of the students, approximately one-third, required and received some type of modified or adaptive academic, behaviour, or social/emotional programming. The target population was the students in Grades Five to Eight. The staff involved were the teachers for those four grades, the principal, and the special education teacher. Parents receptive to participating in the program were also included in a parallel program designed to teach them the goals and language of the program. This information was disseminated through information meetings called brown-bag noon lunches, after school workshops, evening sessions, letters, memos, newsletters, and invitations to observe classes in progress. Parents were also given an opportunity to assess themselves and learn about the different types of intelligence profiles in order to connect home and school with a common language and information. Guest presenters and workshop leaders from the community also played an integral part in the program. Background Information The project began as a result of administration and teacher concerns about the many incidents of misbehavior, the amount of time spent on reactive discipline which did not result in long term changes to student behavior, and the fact that students did not appear to take ownership for their actions. The divergent student needs, the diverse community, the varying economic status of its members, and the number of students with special needs may have contributed to the number of fights on the playground and the behaviour problems within the school environment. The teachers of Grades Five to Eight believed there was a better way to deal with misbehavior which would lead to long-term solutions for real life situations. The staff recognized they required a "mind shift" to focus on students and learning rather than on teachers and teaching. It also required a shift from teaching students in their deficit areas to one of teaching from each student's area of strength. They worked to develop a curriculum that would teach the skills necessary for internal efficacy, skills necessary to strengthen self-esteem, and skills that would generalize into real life situations. The administration, the teachers, and the evaluator met monthly throughout the year of implementation to develop, evaluate, and transform the program into a curriculum that endeavoured to meet the required criteria. The participants adhered to the belief that the program must be fluid and evolving; therefore, it underwent many changes and revisions including a number of name changes. The program began as "MI" (Multiple Intelligences), changed to "It's What's Inside that Counts: Tools for Life", and finally became known as "Quality Intelligence Connection" (QIC). The teachers believed that teaching affective skills in isolation and then integrating them into the rest of the school day was the most effective method to use. The timetable for the Grades Five to Eight students included a forty-minute period each day specifically for classes teaching these skills. Data Collection Procedures Permission to conduct this research project at Osborne School was given in writing by the Director of Education of Prince Albert Rural School Division No. 56 and by the Principal of Osborne School. The Local School Board was kept informed at their monthly meetings about the progress of both the QIC program and the research project. A record of misbehaviors handled by teachers or administrators was kept as well as the consequences that followed. This baseline information was recorded in a binder for a year prior to implementing the new program. Each time a student's misbehavior was written up in the binder, a letter was sent home informing the parents of the misbehavior and how it was dealt with. This was an attempt to enlist parents' assistance in reducing the misbehavior at the school and to keep parents informed. This procedure was continued throughout the implementation of the program in order to provide comparative data. Parents and students completed questionnaires after the program had been operating for approximately one and a half years. The questionnaires were developed around the four concepts of self-knowledge, self-directed learning, behavior, and generalization of the affective skills learned. The parent questionnaire followed a similar format as the one completed by their children; the focus was on behavior within the home environment and the use of the skills learned in QIC. The questionnaires completed by the students consisted of 20 questions which they were to respond to with either "yes", "I think so", or "not yet," and a set of five open-ended questions with space for a comment. Each of the questions was read to the students, and they were given any explanations required. The parent questionnaire followed a similar format and provided a four-point Likert-type scale ranging from strongly agree to strongly disagree. An initial letter was sent to the parents that introduced the researcher, explained the data collection procedures, ensured anonymity, and described the voluntary nature of participation for them and their children. They were also informed of the questionnaire that would be given to the students at the school within the next month; a request for permission to have their children participate in the survey was included. The parents were asked to return the form if they were not willing to have their children participate. A parent questionnaire was also included in the package with a request that parents answer the questions as candidly as possible and return the completed form to the researcher by a specified date. The questionnaires were very slowly returned, and the date had to be extended twice. The researcher phoned each parent who had not returned a form, provided additional information where necessary, and made an appeal to have the questionnaire completed and returned as soon as possible. A number of parents had misplaced their original questionnaires and a new copy was mailed to them immediately. The researcher made a second set of phone calls several weeks later in an effort to get more of the questionnaires returned. The students who completed the questionnaires were from Grades Five to Eight, and had been in the program for a year and a half with the exception of the Grade Five students who started the previous September. The parents who completed the questionnaires had students in these grades. As well as the questionnaires for the students and parents, an interview was conducted with each of the teachers and administrators involved from the beginning. A slightly altered interview format was used with two teachers who were new to the school at the beginning of the second year of the program, and who were not a part of the initial program development. The focus of the interviews was on what conditions were necessary to facilitate change in the school, and the effect the refocusing had on self-esteem, behavior, the development of self-directed learning, and the prospects for continued student development within the school and the community. A pilot interview was conducted with the Principal and any adjustments that were deemed necessary were made before the other staff members were interviewed. The teachers received a letter from the researcher explaining the data collection procedures, ensuring anonymity, the voluntary nature of participation, and a request for them to participate in the interview process. An audio tape recorder was used to record the private interviews as well as anecdotal notes made by the researcher. The teachers were given a copy of the interview questions at the time of the interview. An interview summary was sent to the respective teachers with a request that they make changes, clarify wording, or add more to what was said, in order to be sure that their thoughts were accurately reflected. The teachers were requested to make the appropriate changes, sign, and return a form indicating they were in agreement with the summary and the document could be used as part of the data collected. Future Research Qualitative and quantitative data collected from the major participants in the QIC program formed a foundation to determine the perceived success of a program which teaches affective skills in isolation. The researcher's inexperience affected the development of the questionnaires. Several relevant questions were omitted; an example of this was not including questions to determine whether the targeted skills were known prior to the QIC program. It would have assisted the data evaluation to know if the parents who responded understood the QIC skills and were able to apply them. One hundred percent of the teachers participated in the interview process. However, a much smaller percentage of parents and students completed questionnaires. There were a number of possible reasons for this. One explanation might have been that the school was located in a farming community, and spring was a very busy time for many families in this area. Several parents, who were phoned, said they were not able to return the questionnaires because of the seeding and calving. Another reason may have been the fact that a number of children came from homes where there was a great deal of dysfunction in the family, and the parents were not able or not willing to participate in the program or to answer the questionnaire. Before the questionnaires were distributed, a controversy erupted between a small group of parents and the school over discipline. This had a very negative effect on the QIC program and the teachers who worked so long and diligently to develop and teach the new curriculum. Some parents, whose children had attended the school for a while, sided with this group. It is possible that as a result of this conflict, some of the families refused to allow their children to participate in the survey and refused to do so themselves. Finally, the researcher was able to attend only one of the information sessions presented for parents; there may have been a higher percentage of returns had the parents gotten to know the researcher personally during these sessions. An initial phone call prior to the letters and questionnaires being mailed may also have increased the rate of return. However, these activities would have been very time consuming. Future research could also include an interview with a random sample of parents and students which might glean information not available through the questionnaire process. Chapter 4 Findings The twelve tables that follow outline the findings of the study. The complete data and a full discussion of the data are not included here but may be obtained from the complete study document at the University of Victoria. Table 4.1 Student Perception of Self-knowledge
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: Yes I Think So Not Yet Total (%)
4. I have a better understanding about my needs and wants. 8 (28.6) 13 (46.4) 7 (25.0) 28 (100.0) 6. I like the person I am. 22 (78.6) 3 (10.7) 3 (10.7) 28 (100.0) 10. I know I can change the way I feel about myself. 11 (39.3) 10 (35.7) 7 (25.0) 28 (100.0)
Table 4.2 Parent Perceptions of Their Child's Self-knowledge
Responses N (%) Items: SA A D SD Total (%)
of his feelings.
about her needs and wants.
Note: N's vary across items as not all participants responded to each item. Code: SA Strongly Agree A Agree D Disagree SD Strongly Disagree Table 4.3
Teacher Comments on Student Self-knowledge (N=8)
Comments Number of Responses
negative opinions
Note: The above comments are in response to the following interview question.
esteem?
Table 4.4 Student Perception of Self-Directed Learning
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: Yes I Think So Not Yet Total (%) 16. I take responsibility for my learning by the choices I make. 11 (39.3) 14 (50.0) 3 (10.7) 28 (100.0) 17. I am finding ways to contribute/control my learning. 4 (14.3) 15 (54.6) 9 (32.1) 28 (100.0) 18. I know how to use my strengths to learn more. 4 (14.3) 11 (39.3) 13 (46.4 28 (100.0)
I can best learn it.
Table 4.5 Parent Perception of Self-Directed Learning
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: SA A D SD Total (%)
her homework. sate for his areas of weakness when he is working on a school project or something at home.
Note: N's vary across items as not all participants responded to each item. Code: SA Strongly Agree A Agree D Disagree SD Strongly Disagree Table 4.6 Teacher Comments on Self-Directed Learning (N=8) _ Comments Number of Responses
students were exploring other ways to meet requirements of assignments.
on the student).
alternatives.
Note: N's vary across items as some teachers responded with more than one comment. The above comments are in response to the following interview question.
Table 4.7 Student Perception of Behavior
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: Yes I Think So Not Yet Total (%)
they do. 12. I have changed my behavior at school because of my QIC 6 (21.4) 5 (17.9) 17 (60.7) 28 (100.0)
Table 4.8 Parent Perception of Behavior
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: SA A D SD Total (%)___
about why she behaves the way she does. why his siblings and/or friends behave the way they do.
right when things are going wrong at home or in the community.
we use QIC skills to solve the problem.
Note: N's vary across items as not all participants responded to each item. Code: SA Strongly Agree A Agree D Disagree SD Strongly Disagree Table 4.9 Teacher Comments on Student Behavior (N=8)
Comments Number of Responses
adults present
admitting to inappropriate behavior. -they understand negative and positive behavior
other QIC skills More confident about trying something new 1
environment -more respectful and courteous -accepted responsibility for their actions
language of QIC. Table 4.9 (continued) Comments Number of Responses
Note: N's vary across items as some teachers responded with more than one comment. The above comments are in response to the following interview questions.
12. Do you believe the QIC program has helped students take more ownership for their behavior? Table 4.10 Student Perception of Generalization
Responses N (%)________________________ Items: Yes I Think So Not Yet Total (%) 5. I have a better understanding about my friends needs and wants. 3 (10.7) 13 (46.4) 12 (42.9) 28 (100.0) 7. I understand that it is okay to be better at some skills than others. 22 (78.6) 3 (10.7) 3 (10.7) 28 (100.0) 8. I use my strengths to meet my needs and wants. 6 (21.4) 10 (35.7) 12 (42.9) 28 (100.0) 9. I can use my QIC skills to make things right when things are 2 (7.1) 7 (25.0) 19 (67.9) 28 (100.0) going wrong. 11. With the help of my teachers, I am solving problems using QIC skills 1 (3.6) 7 (25.0) 20 (71.4) 28 (100.0) 12. I have changed my behavior at school because of my QIC 6 (21.4) 5 (17.9) 17 (60.7) 28 (100.0) 13. When I am having a conflict with a peer or adult, I think about 1 (3.6) 6 (21.4) 21(75.0) 28(100.0) how my behaviour is meeting my needs. 14. I think about how I can meet my needs without interfering with 4 (14.3) 12 (42.9) 12 (42.9) 28 (100.0) the needs of others. 15. I can use my QIC skills outside of the school. 3 (10.7) 4 (14.3) 21 (75.0) 28 (100.0) Table 4.11 Parent Perception of Generalization
Responses N (%)_____________________ Items: SA A D SD Total (%) 8. My child uses his strengths to meet his 4 (15.4) 19 (73.1) 3 (11.5) 0 26 (100.0) needs/wants. 9. I talk to my child about his feelings and about 1 (4.5) 7 (31.8) 14 (63.6) 0 22 (100.0) using his QIC skills to change the way he feels. 10. My child is able to use her QIC skills to solve 0 11 (45.8) 13 (54.2) 0 24 (100.0) problems with some assistance from me. 11. My child is able to use his QIC skills to solve 0 13 (54.2) 12 (45.8) 0 25 (100.0) problems without my assistance. 12. My child's behavior has changed at home 0 4 (17.4) 17 (73.9) 2 (8.7) 23 (100.0) because of the QIC skills she learned at school.
Table 4.11 (continued) Items: SA A D SD Total (%) 16. I talk with my child about meeting his 6 (23.1) 16 (61.5) 4 (15.4) 0 26 (100.0) needs and taking care of himself. 17. I think that the QIC program has brought 1 (4.3) 6 (26.l1) 15 (65.2) 1 (4.3) 23 (100.0) about positive changes in my child's behavior.Note: N's vary across items as not all participants responded to each item.Code: SA Strongly Agree A Agree D Disagree SD Strongly DisagreeTable 4.12Teacher Comments on Student Generalization of the QIC Program (N=8)_ Comments Number of Responses
-less confrontational
-ability to look at what the other person is thinking
3.
Behavior "Understanding
and Relating to Others" was identified as a goal for education in
Saskatchewan (Saskatchewan Learning, 1984). This goal established
that students would base decisions and actions on the recognition
that people differ in their values, behaviours, and life styles.
Socially appropriate behaviour of students was a consequential goal
of education in Saskatchewan. While
a majority of participants theorized there had been an increase
in student self-knowledge and more students were becoming self-directed
learners, this did not translate into a similar number of changes
in behavior. Although just over half the parents and students speculated
that the students understood why they behaved the way they did,
slightly less than half confirmed a behavior change had occurred
due to the QIC program. A majority of parents postulated that their
children did not use the QIC skills for
conflict resolution at home or in the community. However, one parent,
whose comments echoed several others as far as changes in problem
solving at home, stated, "In the way that they are very willing
to approach me to talk about and seek solutions to problems." The
consensus of students and parents was that the students understood
their behavior but had not yet chosen to make changes in it. The
teachers theorized that there had been an improvement in behavior,
and the number of acts of aggression on the playground had decreased.
The statistics kept over the three-year period supported the teachers'
convictions (Figure 5.1). The method of problem solving was shifting from one of adversary to one of problem solving where both parties were able to get their needs met. One teacher stated, "They are able to work it out with their peers because they are familiar with the language and have learned the skills when they were not in a crisis." A large percentage of teachers believed that more students were taking ownership for their behavior. "They knew their boundaries, and all the teachers were on the same line. It set a stable discipline environment," declared one teacher. One person conveyed a concern that some of the students, after learning the QIC skills, had chosen to use these skills against their fellow students; the teacher described it as an "internal backlash". A backlash to the program by some of the parents and their children may have led to a situation where although the skills had been learned, they were not being used effectively. Several of the teachers theorized that because a few of the parents were openly criticizing the QIC program some students felt they no longer had to co-operate or participate in the program. One of the concerns expressed by a number of parents was that some of the teachers were not consistent in their teaching and actions. A parent reiterated a number of comments made by other parents when stating, "My child's biggest complaint of the program is that the teachers often are not practicing what they preach when a student approaches them with an issue, or in handling incidents involving a class or whole student body." Some of the parents expressed resentment that the school did not acknowledge the positive influence the parents had on their children, and some indicated they did not need to be taught parenting skills by the teachers. One parent declared, "we were involved initially but parent concerns were not addressed." Many parents concluded their children had no behavior problems prior to the program. This may be one explanation as to why more students had gained the skills of the program than appeared to have made changes in their behavior. RECOMMENDATIONS: 3.1 That a program operate over a five year period which may allow students sufficient time to generalize the QIC skills into action.
The program has kind of infiltrated the day because it's a way of thinking. There are indicators that students have an extra tool because some of the language will come out in a situation. I remember a student in Grade Eight saying that they were dumb because they failed a social exam. Somebody else said, 'No, social is just not what you're good at.' We haven't made the global difference in the school we had wanted, but there are some indicators that there are things happening. It's going to take longer than a year and a half to do what we wanted. Education for the year 2000 should: .be a co-operative venture among the school, home, and community. .Relationships between student, teacher, home, and school were seen to be of the utmost importance and in need of improvement. Parents want to feel welcome and at home in their children's schools, and many expressed a desire to become more involved in the schools.
5. Teacher Perceptions of the Implementation Process
|
|||||||||||||
INSERT
FIGURE 3.1