David N. Aspy

An Investigation of the Relationship Between Student Levels of Cognitive Functioning and the Teacher's Classroom Behavior.

AbstractThis investigation analyzed audio recordings of instructional groups for (a) Flanders’ categories of interaction, (b) levels of interpersonal functioning attained on Carkhuff’s scales of empathy, congruence, and positive regard, and (c) the levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy reached in student responses. Of the thirteen variables investigated, only the relationship between student level of cognitive functioning and positive regard yielded a significant (p < .001) biserial coefficient. This pattern of relationships remained constant when the data from the total group was separately analyzed by grade levels. The indication seems to be that a teacher’s increased positive regard for students is translated into classroom behavior which elicits higher levels of cognitive functioning from the students.

The Effect of Teachers' Inferred Self Concept Upon Student Achievement.

AbstractThis study investigated the relationship between teachers’ levels of Inferred Self Concept (ISC) and the cognitive growth of their students. One hundred twenty third grade students were matched for sex and IQ, and their cognitive growth was determined by pre and post testing with the Word Meaning, Paragraph Meaning, Spelling, Word Study Skills, and Language sub tests of the Stanford Achievement Test. The six teachers levels of ISC were determined by three raters who completed Parker’s Self Concept Checklist after observing each teacher for one hour. The levels of ISC were related positively to the students’ cognitive growth at the .01 level of significance for four of the five subtests and the total gain.

Maslow and Teachers in Training

Though Maslow’s formulations concur with common sense, they are frequently ignored in practice. This can be illustrated by a common behavior that occurs when students make oral reports while the teacher assumes an evaluative role in the back of the classroom. Under such conditions, it is not surprising that many of these reports are marked more by the student’s fear and discomfort than by his informativeness to the group. However, the most striking feature of this situation is the discrepancy between the fearful student’s level of need and the level at which he is being evaluated. He is hoping to survive, while the teacher is judging his ability to make an oral report. His need is to learn that he can survive

Promotion of Student Success

AbstractThis study analyzed audio recordings of instructional groups for (1) Flanders’ Categories of Interaction; (2) levels of interpersonal functioning attained on Carkhuff’s scales of empathy, congruence, and positive regard; and (3) Aspy’s scale for teachers’ promotion of children’s achievement of self-selected goals. Of the thirteen variables investigated, six discriminated (p > .001) between teachers rated as high and low promoters of student success. It seems that the patterns which characterize a teacher who tends to promote the child’s own goals involve: (1) using praise; (2) avoiding the use of criticism; (3) using student-initiated ideas; (4) being aware of the meanings a situation has for a student; (5) being genuine in his responses; and (6) showing positive regard for the student as a person.

Educational Psychology: Challenged or Challenging?.

Modern educational psychology can be traced roughly to the beginning of the twentieth century when men like Charles H. Judd and E. L. Thorndike began to apply scientific methods to the problems of education. In the relatively short span of time between its inception and the present, it has achieved such status that, in i965, Fischer (8) made the statement, &dquo;The place of psychology in teacher education is too well established to call for

The Right to Human Decency in Education.

Every human being has a right to be treated decently. At present, students in Americas schools are not given conditions that meet the criteria of human decency. This situation should be corrected immediately because it violates human rights and mitigates against human fulfillment.

Centering on the child

veloping knowledge or are users of knowledge in their quest to live more effectively. Regardless of its simplicity, the way we respond to this question determines, to a large extent, how we teach. There is a great deal of difference between teaching arithmetic and teaching children arithmetic. In the first instance the teacher assumes a role as keeper of a specific content area and feels responsible for maintaining high levels of competence in that subject area. The greatest pride comes from producing students who really know the material. In the second frame of