John E. Horrocks

Developmental trends in wishes, confidence, and the sense of personal control from childhood to middle maturity.

Summary The three wishes of a random sample of 100 subjects were obtained from each of five age groups: elementary, junior high, high school, early college (18–24 years), and late college (25–50 years). The wishes were placed in appropriate categories and into subcategories including possessions, activities, maintenance, achievement, and altruism. Exploratory measures of “confidence” and “sense of personal control” were taken for each subject. Sex and socioeconomic condition were analyzed. Results supported previously established trends of increasing generality, increasing altruism, and decreasing materialistic content up to different ages in adolescence and early adulthood depending on the data chosen to relate to the generalizations. In addition, a gradual increase in achievement wishes through middle adulthood was observed. The measure of “sense of personal control” was found to yield significant variation, while the data related to “confidence” varied only within chance limits. Comparisons with previo...

Case Study Tests of Ability to Use Knowledge of Human Growth and Development

THE purpose of this paper is to describe the construction and use of three reasonabIy valid and reliable instruments developed as a means of measuring students’ and teachers’ ability to apply the facts and principles of human development. Traditionally student progress is appraised by testing for the acquisition of facts and principles in the discipline being studied. The test may be objective or subjective. It may be purely memoriter or i t may give opportunity for the student to recognize the truth or falsity of generalizations or to draw inferences. But essentially, such a test is not dynamic in that i t presents isolated instances. It is artificial in that there is seldom any attempt to even simulate a life situation. It tends to test knowledge or recognition of facts and principles. Thus there is the implied assumption that ability t o retain and repeat facts and principles is evidence that students can use them effectively. Unfortunately, there is evidence to support the belief that the knowledge of facts and principles does not assure the ability to apply those facts and principles to a life situation. Horrocks (5) found that knowledge of facts and principles about adolescent behavior are positiveIy but not highly related to the ability to make a diagnosis or to identify appropriate remedial procedures. This would also appear to be true in other areas. The situation is well summed up by Eurich and Cain (.3) “tests of knowledge are not valid measures of teaching ability, nor

Retrospect and Prospect in Educational Psychology

Change is supposedly the essence of progress. If it is indeed true that change represents progress then one can say of educational psychology that the past 50 years, the span of my time in the field, has brought much progress. Yet, one wonders. Change there has been, but has it represented progress? Of course, it is a matter of point of view and against point of view it is vain to argue. We all tend to have some feeling, however vigorously we may deny it, that our own times were the best of times and that new ways and interests, although perhaps of some value, still leave much to be desired.

Dr. Leonard W. Doob Resigns

(2000). Dr. Leonard W. Doob Resigns. The Journal of Social Psychology: Vol. 140, No. 2, pp. 149-149.

A Method of Estimating Effectiveness of Groups in a “Group” Teaching Situation

THE use of “group” techniques for teaching college level courses has evoked considerable discussion in educational and psychological literature. Research, comparing “group” or discussion classes (student centered) with “lecture” classes (instructor centered) has resulted in equivocal findings (Asch, 1951; DiVesta, 1954; Ward, 1956; Wispe, 1951). It is difficult to determine whether the lack of clearcut differences between the two approaches lies with the instructor, the course material, the course objectives, the methods of evaluation, the individual in the classes or some other unrecognized variables. Wispe (1951) studied some of the less obvious variables in an investigation invoking the use of projective tests, systematic observation through one-way screens, and other techniques. While his study reveals some characteristics of individuals who like or dislike a particular method, the major questions are still unanswered. The writers wish to approach one aspect of this problem in quite a different fashion. Several of the studies mentioned above have discussed the importance of the students’ acceptance of a particular teaching method. I n a “group” centered method, not only the individual student but the small group with whom he works becomes important in determining acceptance or rejection of the method. m i l e analysis of the characteristics of a large number of individ-