The evaluation of faculty development programs

This article reviews literature pertinent to the evaluation of faculty development programs and presents data from several studies conducted at two institutions. These data were consistent with those previously reported in that faculty participants consistently expressed satisfaction with development services. In addition, one study found that most faculty members voluntarily took some action to improve their instructional effectiveness, though only a minority pursued these efforts in depth. Volunteers who worked intensively with a faculty development consultant improved more on objective measures of effectiveness than did those who were only superficially involved in improvement efforts; those who received no consultative assistance failed to improve significantly. Evidence from a final study provided a control for faculty motivation and led to the conclusion that improvement was contingent both on faculty desire to improve and on the availability of professional assistance.     

Comparing preservice,elementary, and junior high teachers' perceptions of school psychologists: Two decades later

One hundred eighty-one experienced teachers (elementary and junior high), and 189 preservice teachers were surveyed regarding their perceptions of school psychologists. The survey instrument used essentially the same categories as Styles in 1965, including: (a) level of training, (b) effectiveness, (c) qualifications for tasks, and (d) usefulness in specific duties. Analysis of the survey data showed there were significant differences between preservice and experienced teachers' effectiveness ratings of school psychologists on eight tasks typically performed by school psychologists. Significant differences also were found between preservice and experienced teachers on their ratings of school psychologists' qualifications to undertake specific tasks, although almost half of the experienced teachers were unable to rate the effectiveness of school psychologists. There was a small, but significant, negative relationship between the amount of contact with the school psychologist and the perceived effectiveness. Limitations inherent in survey methodology and the need to foster greater teacher awareness of the school psychologist's role are discussed.     

Generalization of serial learning in the pigeon

Sequence learning in pigeons was studied in asimultaneous chaining paradigm: all stimuli and the opportunity to respond to each stimulus were available simultaneously. In contrast to the traditionalsuccessive chaining paradigm, a simultaneous chaining paradigm provides no differential feedback following each response (except the last). Subjects were first trained to perform on sequences of two (AB), then three (ABC), and then four colors (ABCD). Performance greatly exceeded that predicted by models of random choice. Generalization to novel arrays of three and four colors was complete. After training with a four-color sequence, the subjects were tested with subsequences consisting of all possible combinations of two and three of the four training colors (e.g., BD, AD, BC, ACD, BCD, etc.). The successful completion of these subsequences showed that the organization of the original sequence did not entail overt pecks to successive elements of that sequence. That subjects can respond accurately on nonadjacent subsets is not readily explained by a chaining theory, or by any theory that assumes that responding to element n provides a cue for responding to element n+1.     

Generating multiple solutions for a problem: A comparison of the responses of U.S. and Japanese students

A task involving simple mathematics, yet complex in its call for the generation of multiple solution methods, was administered to about 150 U.S. students, most of whom were in fourth grade. Written responses were examined for correctness, evidence of strategy use and mode of explanation. Results for the U.S. sample were also compared to those obtained from about 200 Japanese fourth-grade students. Students in both countries (a) produced multiple solutions and explanations of their solutions, (b) exhibited almost identical patterns and frequency of strategy use across response occasions, and (c) used the same kinds of explanations, with a majority of the responses involving solution explanations that combined both visual and verbal/symbolic features. Nevertheless, Japanese students tended to produce explanations involving more sophisticated mathematical ideas (multiplication rather than addition) and formalisms (mathematical expressions rather than verbal explanations) than did U.S. students.