RESEARCH RKRORTS

A Study of Classroom Interaction Patterns from Student Teaching to Independent Classroom Teaching

GERALD DOUGLASS BAILEY

Interaction patterns of the nine teachers in this study changed significantly after two years of independent classroom experience.

MAJOR goal of teacher train ing institutions is to provide prospective teachers with sufficient knowledge, skills, and behaviors to enable them to function effectively in future teaching experiences. Considerable experimentation and innova tion have earmarked the preservice programs intended to produce more effective classroom teachers.

Unfortunately, few preservice education programs have attempted to measure the character and longevity of teacher behavior beyond the terminal period of preservice training. Lack of qualified personnel, tech nical problems, logistics of teacher place ment, and expense have been a few of many reasons limiting this type of research en deavor. However, the advent of videotape storage, computer-assisted data analysis pro grams, and long range planning have begun to make such investigations feasible.

The ProblemThe study was designed to determine

whether interaction patterns demonstrated during student teaching changed or were modified significantly after two years of inde pendent classroom experience. To determine

whether significant changes occurred, the following hypothesis was tested:

1. Interaction patterns observed during independent classroom teaching will not dif fer significantly from those observed during student teaching with regard to Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis categories, sub-categories, and selected matrix data.

Definition of terms. Student Teaching was defined as the period of guided teaching during which a college student assumes in creasing responsibility for directing the learn ing of a group or groups of learners over a period of consecutive weeks. 1 Independent Classroom Teaching was defined as that period of teaching when a teacher has com plete responsibility for organizing, coordinat ing, and directing the learning of a group or groups of students.

The sample. The sample consisted of 9 teachers who were selected from 30 randomly selected secondary social studies teachers graduating from the University of Nebraska. Criteria for selection included: (a) entering the teaching profession upon graduation, (b) planning to teach in the state of Nebraska, and (c) planning to teach in their major

1 L. O. Andrews. "Definition of Terms." In: James A. Johnson and Roger C. Anderson, editors. Secondary Student Teaching Readings. Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresman and Company, 1971. p. 10.

Advisory Committee for the Research Reports: John M. Kean, Professor of Education, University of Wisconsin, Madison; and James Raths. Chairman, Department of Elementary Education, University of Illinois, Urbana.

December 1974 225

subject matter endorsement. Twelve teach ers out of the original 30 participants were identified as having entered the teaching pro fession. Three of the potential participants were eliminated on the basis of not meeting the various criteria stated previously.

Limitations of the study. No control was exerted by the investigator over the sec ondary grade level or type of social studies class being taught during student teaching or independent classroom teaching. Nor was any attempt made to control the various com binations of variables operating on the teach er's interaction patterns during the two year period from student teaching to independent classroom teaching.

ProceduresObservable verbal and selected non

verbal classroom interaction patterns were recorded with the Interaction Analysis Sys tem '2 and the Nebraska Skill Analysis Sys tem. 1 Since two observational techniques were used to code classroom interaction, data collection via videotape was necessary. Inter action Analysis System data were gathered live during the classroom teaching sessions while the Nebraska Skill Analysis data were coded at a later date by replaying the video tapes.

The Interaction Analysis System (see Figure 1) is composed of 39 mutually exclu sive sub-categories based on a modification of Flanders' 4 original 10 Interaction Analysis categories. All teacher statements are classi fied as direct or indirect.

The second observational tool, the Ne braska Skill Analysis System (see Figure 2) focuses upon verbal and nonverbal skills exhibited by the teacher. The instrument is

- Alan T. Seagren e t at. An Evaluation of Self-Assessment Techniques. Kansas City, Missouri: Mid-Continent Regional Educational Laboratory, Inc , 1969. Appendix A.

:1 Ibid.. Appendix B4 Ned A. Flanders. Teacher Influence: Pupil

Attitudes and Achievement. F inal Report. Univer sity of Minnesota Project 397. Washington, D.C.: US. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Cooperative Research Program. Office of Education. 1960.

December 1974

Sub-category Description ot verbal behavior

Teacher talk1* accepting student feelings II teacher's personal teelings expressed 1h reaction to student humor 2* positive feedback, reinforcement, encouragement

of individual student2c positive feedback, reinforcement, encouragement

of classIndirect 2h teacher humorinfluence 3* teacher accepts-develops student idea

3r teacher repeats student response 3? teacher refers student idea to another student 4* teacher asks question S4 gatekeeper followed by questions 4/4 series of questions by teacher 4S questions followed by gatekeeper 4? process or structure question

Direct influence

5- 5x 6' 6c

7c 71 7-

Studen talk

9' 9? 9c

9-9/9

teacher gives information, opinion, instructionalorientation

teacher indicates lack of information teacher explains at request of student teacher gives directions to individual teacher gives directions to class teacher gives assignments teacher criticizes student

teacher defends self or procedures teacher indicates incorrect answer or negative

feedback

Student talkstudent responds as expected unison response, class or several students

respond student asks question about what teacher

expects student states that he does not know or does

not wish to answer student responds as expected followed by

another expected student response student responds as expected followed by

student initiated response student initiates information student initiates question unison response by class not solicited by

teacherstu nordisruptive comments by student or students a series ot students initiate information

Silence10' silence or confusion 10m silence making mechanical adiustments.

blackboard work, etc 10i external interruptions, verbal behavior not

related to instructional process

Figure 1. Sub-categories for Interaction Analysis System

made up of 40 mutually exclusive sub-cate gories. These sub-categories are an elabora tion of the micro skills developed by the Stanford University Micro Teaching Clinic in California and quantify qualitative aspects of verbal and nonverbal communication skills. The development and validation of the Interaction Analysis System and the Nebraska Skill Analysis System as objective observation instruments are reported in detail by Seagren e t al. T>

Data collection for student teaching interaction patterns occurred two times: (a) in the middle of the semester, and (b) near the end of the semester. Each data collection

5 Seagren e t al., op. cit.. Appendix A and B.

227

———————————————————————————— The investigator's association with theSub-category Deicrlption ot verbal and nonverbal behavior &—=«<•__________________________ Mid-Continent Regional Educational Labora-1 v isualization. The teacher presents verbal or picioriai stimuli tory at the University of Nebraska as atvn verbal visualization introduces new material R e-cpari-Vi Accn^iate nrnviripH siiffiripnt famili-1vr verbal visualization used lor review nCSCarcn /VSSOCIdie proviueu bumciem Idllllll1vd verbal visualization used to develop or illustrate a rifv uritVi rihcprvarinnal tprhninnpc tn nprmirIvl verbal source referred to or leacher oners to provide il in arlly W1U1 ODSeiVdUOIldl lecilllique!) IU peilllll

ipn pi«o>riaLli"J.™uaiization introduces new material self-instruction in both the Interaction Analy-ipr pictorial visualization used for review „:_ Cvstpm and tKip Nphracka <?kill Analvsi"!1pd pictorial visualization used to develop or illustrate s ls> oybiein ana me INUUIdbKd 3KJ11 rtlldiysia1 Pf reference^to^Wori.l visualization or oner made to provide System. TwO measures of reliability Were

2 Reinforcement. The teacher supports, encourages, or rales Computed for the Interaction Analysis System

2a' 'TroaiTab" .Tot uh huh. ves. yeah and the Nebraska Skill Analysis System ma lt n n^rffi'poStrre'in^en, jor categories and sub-categories. Reliability L ^&Z&Z."£M££lm, for both observational tools was set at .90 for2** partial or ambiguous reinforcement m sinr i^atprynripc QnH RO fnr Cllh ratpffnripQ2r rating, judging, or evaluating a student major CategOHCS ana .OU TOT SUD-CaiBgOneb.In ;on«rbianiahahb,t'ccu">cy °' c°n""" ' *" """*" discusslon The inter-observer reliability coefficients,3 f.etfoac* The teacher appraises the progress of a student Computed with a formula Suggested by ScOtt,"

3s ° r '"s'u^" «ked to rev,.« ranged from 91.4 to 95.8 for the major cate-3" C l "mmpap™e5)a ' "eacher a sks anyorle 1 0 rev ' ew o r gories and 88.3 to 94.2 for the sub-categories.3r teacher refers to apparent student confusion T nrpranHnn AnalvQic ^vctpm and "Mp-3c teacher seeks clarification ot a student response i nteraction Analysis System ana 1N6

< ouesr/oninj The teacher asks a question with the expecta- braska Skill Analysis System data weretion that the student(s) will respond. , . ,

4sf specific student asked a factual, content-oriented question prOCCSSCd With a Computer program Spe-

1« splenic Ju^rJSc.V.'n^Vni'zltir.T'q^a.ion cifically designed for the Mid-ContinentJcr c,»| «k^ l^^ep^r'"1 questi ° n Regional Educational Laboratory at the Uni-s^reacnoTr*/*" The "'re'se'^a'tioT o'Tn'ornation or otner activi versity of Nebraska. Data derived from the

ties (not included as a skin) two observational instruments included ma-6 Obtaining Attending Behavior Teacher seeks to gam or main- \ nr r atpffnrv matrirpQ ciih rptpcrnrv maf-rifpctain student attention and interest Jor category matrices, suo-category matnces,T, pr,,,iUhra?emeyrcahM[ng attention to points or procedures a"d behavioral key data for both Student

" ,hpre.,*"f"1 ',ensi'Jtrcs: ru«d?oe"or;dmand attention teaching and independent classroom teach-en nonverbal attempts to gain attent,on i ng Descriptive and comparative data con-7 Control ot Participation. Teacher urges or limits student - - .. _ .panic.pat.on in the teaming situation cerning interaction patterns were reported/n nr,^.?con°rVoSflupdarci Pa,ion for the nine teachers. The hypothesis was77,8 ^°^l^ a^^^o° c ominue a response tested statistically with the correlated t-test.77e, teach., both encourages and limits student spamc.pation ^ corre] ated £.test forrnu]a takes jnto ac.8 Student talk9 silence or contusion count the correlation between the paired—————————————————————————————— measurements. Significance of correlations

Figure 2. Sut^categor^for^Nebraska Skill was based Qn a two.taiied test and levels of

p < .05 and < .01 were reported, included two class periods, making a total of four observations for each teacher. Each FindindS class period averaged 40 minutes, for a totalobservation time of approximately 160 When interaction patterns from inde- minutes. pendent classroom teaching were compared

Likewise, data collection for indepen- wim student teaching interaction patterns dent classroom teaching interaction patterns significant differences were found for eight occurred twice: (a) in the middle of the Out of the 19 Interaction Analysis System and semester, and (b) near the end of the semes ter. Each data collection included two class ,-, w. A. Scott. "Reliability of Content Analy-periods, making a total Of four Observations sis: The Case of Nominal Coding." Public Opinionfor each teacher. Each class period averaged Quarterly 19. 321-25; 1955.40 minutes, for a total observation time of D 'George A. Ferguson. S tatistical Analysis in

, , „„ Psychology and Education New York: McGraw-approximately 160 minutes. Hill Book Company, 1969. PP . 169-71.

228 Educational Leadership

Nebraska Skill Analysis major categories (see Figure 3). After two years of classroom ex perience, the teachers revealed significant increases in positive reinforcement, accept ing and using student ideas, questioning, and direction giving. Teacher lecture or informa tion giving (direct influence behavior) ex hibited a significant decrease in frequency.

Behavioral differences as measured by Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis sub-categories showed 22 out of 79 verbal and nonverbal behaviors (see Figure 4) to be significantly different at the .05 or .01 level. During independent class room teaching, teachers used more reinforce ment, humor reinforcement, verbal habit reinforcement, supporting the accuracy of content, and repeating student responses. Teachers were using more questions with special emphasis on organizational kinds of questions while individual student questions and series of questions were used less frequently.

Independent classroom teachers were

using more pictorial visualization to intro duce new material while using less pictorial visualization to develop or illustrate class room concepts. Independent classroom teach ers used more direct influence behaviors such as directions to individuals and directions to class. Teacher nonverbal control of student participation increased significantly. Students of independent classroom teachers were ask ing more questions about what the teacher expected, exhibiting more unison response to teacher questions, but demonstrating fewer unison responses unsolicited by the teacher.

Examination of student teaching and independent classroom teaching interaction patterns revealed 40 out of 212 Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis selected matrix data (see Figure 5) to be statistically significant at the .05 or .01 level. Some of the more important teacher be haviors observed during independent class room teaching included using more humor during the information giving or lecture period and more reinforcing of anticipated

Symbolic

IA1IA2IA3IA41A5IA6IA7IA8IA9IA10

Student

1.0038564589

1234439544

1200700

13756144 789444

Independent

04466.448500

157.11276 11

26.0010.22

17067127.568044

Test of

Correlated T

1 05-7 71-5 14-222

284-4 04-084-1 84

0.30088

Level of

N.S.0101050501

N.S.N.S.NS.N S.

Symbolic

SA1SA2SA3SA4SA5SA6SA7SA8SA9

Student

33785267856

98 11416 4412335389

277 444667

Independei

31 111 15.11

5.0012700307.22

11.2255.78

2956751.67

Test of

It Correlated T

030-6.70

081-233

2460 30

-031-0.27-0.35

Level of

N.S01

N S.0505

N S.N.S.N S.N.S.

Figure 3. Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis Major Categoriesfor Which Statistically Significant and Nonsignificant Differences

Exist Between Student Teaching and Independent Teaching

Symbolic code

Test of Level ofMeans 1 significance significance

Student Independent Correlated T

Symbolii code

Test of Level ofMeans' significance significance

Student Independent Correlated T

ia2-ia2hi»3ria4*ias4

t»5'ia6*iaeciaeclaSq = 8?ia9c

• Means based on

teaching

36.11211

17.337978333

1633364.11

4225.331 440781 89

teaching

62444.11

47 67117 33

2.00967

24589789

11.33467333033

gross number of tallies con

test

-7.74-283-440-327

2002 49279

-2 10-3.10-292-2.71

240

verted to freq

01 alpn050101050505

alpda2aa2 +a2cB4COa5'

.05 sa6h

.01 sa6a

.01 sa7n05.05

jency per thousand.

teaching

11.332044236720 563,440.67

416 441 448221 22

teaching

24.335.11

4656136747.11

6.11307.22

4221 445.44

test

-2.233.17

-5,402 16

-624-280

246-3.57

298-570

.05

.01

.0105010505.010101

Figure 4. Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis Sub-categoriesfor Which Statistically Significant Differences

Exist Between Student Teaching and Independent Teaching

December 1974 229

Symbolic code

ia4'-ie8qJa4'-(ia8-ia8g)IB&S + ia9sia5'-ia2hIA(B'IAq)-IA2IA2-IA9i«2'-ia3r-Ha3r-2'ia8--(ia8--ia9'jEXT IA2EXT IA3IA4-IA8IA6-IA8IA6-IA9IA EXT3IA8-IA9 SHI-FTIA 348

Test of Level ofMeans * significance significant

Student Independent Correlated T Teaching teaching test

-231-2 95

2 21-1 89-498-2.11-4 57-2 53-2 97-283-304- 1 99-253-2 25

348-2 31

Test ofMeans * s ignificance

Student Independent Correlated T teaching teaching lest

02241 565.67078

31 893007 560 111 11

13 5641.781.000 5652213332589

1 5664.112331.33

51.675.33

25.330 564.22304465672891 44

1 1 674 67

51 56

• Means based on gross numb

Figure 5.

05010505010501050105010505050105

ncy per

sa2 + -SA4sa2c-SA4S32C-SA5sa2c-SA8SA3-SA8sa4cr-SA7sa4sr-SA8sa4cf-SA8sa4cr-SA9SA5'-sa4crsa7e-SA8SA8-sa2aSA8-sa2 +SA8-S82CSA8-sa3cSA8-SA6SA8-SA7SA9-SA4SA EXT 2SA 482SA 5482SA 782LEC-VISBSI-VIS

thousand

4 000891 220.331 895 781 444 781.677220 11

21 0015892331 561.226 674 33033

332211.1114.44

4 110.67

23312 7813893673 782 564.44

16 780783 111 89

42 336 33

22 893222.783 679 11311

80 56108925.448222.11

2.18-4 13-4 43-333-205

2.77-200-3 10

2 29294

-202-537

3.28-3 14-2 13-248

2.04-2.05-2.25-306-1.98-2.69-286-1 89

05010101.05.0505010501.0501.01.01.050505.050501.05.05-05.05

Interaction Analysis System and Nebraska Skill Analysis Selected Matrix Datafor Which Statistically Significant Differences

Exist Between Student Teaching and Independent Teaching

student comments. More student-initiated comments were occurring after teacher rein forcement. Independent classroom teachers were taking more time (six seconds or longer) to reinforce and build on student ideas. More students were complying with teacher direc tions but were also initiating their own ideas after directions were given. More student comments were asking for clarification when responding to specific teacher questions. Sup porting the accuracy of content was a more common practice. Reflective questions di rected to the total class followed by silence noted a significant decrease.

Conclusions1. Interaction patterns of the nine

teachers changed significantly after two years of independent classroom experience.

2. Increased indirect influence behav iors revealed that the majority of teachers became more indirect in their teaching style during independent classroom teaching.

Implications

Perhaps the most interesting outcome of this study concerns the transition of inter action patterns from student teaching to independent classroom teaching. This find

ing has broad implications for teacher edu cation programs providing comprehensive preservice training experiences for students. If this transitory nature of interaction pat terns is characteristic of teachers between these two time periods, preservice training should provide a variety of experiences which will help inform and prepare teachers for this eventual shift or change in teaching style.

Previous studies cited in the literature have shown behavioral analysis systems based on the concept of self-analysis to be an important component in teacher growth and change. Research evidence has also pointed out that teachers who utilize observa tional techniques to pinpoint specific verbal and nonverbal behaviors at various stages of teaching are better able to make substantial changes and increase flexibility in their in structional style. Sensitization to and prac tice in behavioral analysis techniques during the pre-service period and continued utiliza tion during independent classroom teaching would appear to be a realistic approach in maximizing teacher ability and/or desirability in controlling interaction pattern change.

—GERALD D. BAILEY, Assistant Profes sor, Department of Curriculum and Instruc tion, College of Education, Kansas State University, Manhattan.

230 Educational Leadership

Copyright © 1974 by the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. All rights reserved.