Julia Raymond Lorenz (2000) PDF
Julia Raymond Lorenz (2000) PDF
by
A Thesis
Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of
Master of Science
With a Major in
Home Economics
________________________
Dr. N. Amanda Branscombe
Investigation Advisor
ABSTRACT
Lorenz, Julia R.
The purpose of this study was to examine the locus of control and self concept of
particular situation.
Preservice teachers have been studied at length, giving both teachers and
researchers a rich source of information. According to Berliner (1987), the efforts have
attempted to clarify the nature of teaching expertise and to identify teacher education
practices that facilitate its development. Thus, many studies have focused on the
development of intending teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about good teaching during
the course of training (Hollingsworth, 1988; Lin, Taylor, and Gorrell, 1999; Wilson and
Cameron, 1996).
ii
Locus of control generally refers to the extent to which an individual believes his or
her behavior determines specific life events (Rotter, 1966; Rotter, Chance, and Phares,
1972; Lefcourt, 1981). People with an “internal” locus of control tend to believe they are in
control of their destinies and are able to cause certain events. People with an “external”
locus of control tend to believe that events are caused by factors beyond their control: fate,
none correlating preservice teachers’ locus of control with guidance practices. Internal
In very general terms, self concept is defined as “the image we hold of ourselves”
(Hoge and Renzulli, 1993, p. 440). To go further, self concept can be defined as
attitudes, feelings, and knowledge that individuals have about their skills, abilities,
appearance, and social acceptability (Byrne, 1984). Like locus of control, self concept of
preservice teachers has been studied over several decades, but no studies have
control, self concept and preferred approach to guidance: the Tennessee Self Concept
Test, the Locus of Control for Teachers survey, and a guidance scenario from the Early
iii
instrument.
Computing Center. Frequency counts and percentages were computed on all items of
the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Mean scores were determined on the responses of the
Locus of Control Scale for Teachers. Total response scores were entered and converted
The data was analyzed using a Pearson Correlation Coefficient Matrix on all
strategy in preservice teachers. The data analysis suggests that external locus of control
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to acknowledge the guidance and expertise of her thesis advisor, Dr.
N. Amanda Branscombe. I appreciate her excitement about this project and her
enthusiastic support of it. I wish to thank Dr. Marian Marion for the use of her coded
guidance scenario which was integral to the study. I thank Dr. Karen Zimmerman for
her advice and assistance with this project. Christine Ness of the Academic Computing
assistance in analyzing the data. The students who participated in the study are
seemed to take precedence over the laundry, for some reason). And finally, I am deeply
grateful to my colleagues at the Child and Family Study Center, particularly Heidi
Weber and Julie Scharlau, for their kindness to me and their good humor during this
Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Table of Contents
Assumptions ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Early Childhood Preservice Teachers Beliefs about Guidance and Discipline ..10
Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………… 23
Purpose .………………………………………………………………………………………………. 24
Participants ……………………………………………………………………………………………25
Instrumentation ………………………………………………………………………………..…. 26
Findings ………………………………………………………………………….…………………… 30
Chapter 4, continued
Discussion ………………………………………………………………………………………….. 34
Summary ……………………………………………………………………………………………. 39
Conclusions …………………………………………………………………………………………. 41
References ……………………………………………………………………………………………………. 44
APPROACH TO GUIDANCE
Chapter 1
Introduction
teacher educators’ highest hopes for educational reform . Currently, most early
Bredekamp and Copple, 1997). As the movement towards that reform gains
change.
(Bredekamp and Copple, 1997); thus, guidance and classroom management practices
learn the boundaries of social behavior and interactions. Skillful teachers help to
encompasses a wide range of areas. Along with materials, curriculum, and program
practices, teachers’ beliefs and practices are being quantified as never before. In this
way, we hope to arrive at the best possible environment to nurture young children’s
It follows, then, that one way to gauge the impact of current teacher education
and to examine their practices in the realm of guidance and classroom management.
childhood preservice teachers come to their experiences with other forms of background
knowledge. Perhaps they have spent time in one or another early childhood setting, for
example. Most importantly, students have personal experiences with a family of origin
during their own childhood and adolescence. This last knowledge, personal history/
personality, informs every thought and action—is a screen through which individual
3
Locus of control generally refers to the extent to which an individual believes his
or her behavior determines specific life events (Rotter, 1966; Rotter, Chance, and
Phares, 1972; Lefcourt, 1981). People with an “internal” locus of control tend to believe
they are in control of their destinies and are able to cause certain events. People with an
“external” locus of control tend to believe that events are caused by factors beyond their
control: fate, luck or powerful others (Parkay, Greenwood, Olejnik, and Proller, 1986).
How does locus of control influence a teacher’s approach? For one thing, “where
one falls on a continuum ranging from external to internal locus of control appears to be
related to the degree of stress one perceives and how well one is able to cope with that
stress” (Parkay et al). Those with an external locus of control orientation “respond to
stress with more anxiety, neurotic symptoms, and self-punitiveness” (Butterfield, 1964;
(Sadowski et al 1982).
(Sadowski, et al, 1982; Parkay et al, 1986; Piegge & Marso, 1994; Norton, 1997), there
is little research documenting early childhood preservice teachers’ locus of control, and
4
none correlating early childhood preservice teachers’ locus of control with guidance
practices. Internal locus of control has been correlated to a “less custodial attitude” in
Self concept, the second characteristic explored in the study, has been defined in
very general terms as “the image we hold of ourselves” (Hoge and Renzulli, 1993, p.
440). To go further, self concept can be defined as attitudes, feelings, and knowledge
that individuals have about their skills, abilities, appearance, and social acceptability
(Byrne, 1984).
Like locus of control, self concept is an aspect of the teacher’s character that has
been studied over several decades (Combs, 1965; Purkey, 1970; Brophy and Good, 1974;
Tonelson, 1981; Jersild, 1985; Juhasz, A., 1990; Sherman and Christian, 1999, and
The assumption is that in order to build positive high self-esteem in others, one must
According to Tonnelson (1981), teachers with high self concept treat students
with dignity and worth, encourage self-acceptance, and serve as facilitators. Does the
same hold true of early childhood preservice teachers? There has been some research
regarding early childhood preservice teachers, but none that specifically corresponds
It also seems possible that those with a good self concept would have an internal
locus of control. How do these two factors correlate with one another?
5
teachers’ locus of control as measured by the Locus of Control Scale for Teachers, their
self concept as measured by the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, and their approach to a
particular guidance situation, as measured by a coded guidance scenario from the Early
Assumptions
For the purposes of this study, the researcher made certain assumptions about
guidance strategies. Answers to the guidance scenario were coded into twenty-three
categories according to work done by Marion & Swim (2000) (See Appendix H). The
researcher made the assumption that the following behaviors could be classified as
labeling/validating the feelings of the child or children; giving the child or children
logical); talk with one child about behavior or how to solve the problem; assist both
children with solving the problem; and attempt to arouse empathy in aggressor. The
researcher made the assumption that the following behaviors could be classified as
custodial or mandating behaviors: solve the problem for both children; negate the
problem; make the aggressor apologize or make the aggressor comfort the victim (deals
6
with child only); punish the child by: threatening to remove from area, actually
removing from the area, threatening to put in time-out, or actually putting in time out;
and other forms of punishment. The researcher made the assumption that the following
behaviors were unclear or would need more information to determine a category: ask
question of child who is the aggressor (question clearly is not as part of no-lose problem
solving); state or review classroom rules; redirect the child or children; ignore behavior
of child or children; talk with parents; items that do not fit into any other category.
The study is limited in a number of ways. First of all, the population sample is
small (46 completed surveys). Secondly, the study participants are all students at the
same university. Thirdly, the 23 guidance scenario responses were classified into three
Specific Objectives
The purpose of this study was to examine locus of control and self-concept in
Definition of Terms
facility that serves children from birth through age 8. Early childhood programs include
child care center, family child care homes, private and public preschools, kindergartens,
her behavior determines specific life events (Rotter, 1966; Rotter, et al 1972; Lefcourt,
1981). People with an “internal” locus of control tend to believe they are in control of
their destinies and are able to cause certain events. People with an “external” locus of
control tend to believe that events are caused by factors beyond their control: fate, luck
have about their skills, abilities, appearance, and social acceptability. (Byrne, 1984)
Global self concept is defined as the way (positive or negative) people feel about
esteem and self concept are used synonymously in this study. They are defined in very
general terms as “the image we hold of ourselves” (Hoge et al, 1993, p. 440).
professionals making decisions about the well-being and education of children based on
at least three important kinds of knowledge: (1) what is known about child development
and learning; (2) what is known about the strengths, interests, and needs of each
individual child in the group; and (3) knowledge of the social and cultural contexts in
controlled setting concerned primarily with the maintenance of order” (Lunenburg and
Cadavid, 1992).
personal responsibility for their behavior and to judge between right and wrong for
Chapter 2
Review of Literature
There is a wide body of research which examines teachers’ attitudes, beliefs, and
practices in the classroom. Locus of control orientation has been studied in relation to
teachers and preservice teachers. Self concept has been studied as well. Likewise, there
are many research papers that explicate preservice teachers’ feelings about first
of control orientation and self concept with guidance strategies, the researcher will
investigate three main areas of educational research to discover how they are linked to
First, there is the matter of preservice teachers’ own beliefs and perceptions
situations. All of the students have had similar courses, so one might predict that their
beliefs would be similar. But the students come to their classroom experience with
varying backgrounds and personalities, factors that heavily influence their perceptions
of this highly personal issue. This review will focus on preservice teacher’s
classroom experiences.
orientation in teachers. This topic (which encompasses both preservice and experienced
10
teachers) has resulted in a fairly diverse body of research. This review will focus on
typical characteristics found inherent to each control “type,” and their perceived impact
Thirdly, the researcher will investigate self concept in teachers—how it has been
defined, how it impacts the educational process, and how it plays into guidance and
classroom management.
one of the most important points at which to examine teacher beliefs. Certainly it is an
opportunity to see whether the academic preparation of students will correspond with
how well preservice teachers can translate academic knowledge into effective teaching.
(1988) states:
Good classroom management implies not only that the teacher has elicited the
effectively when misconduct occurs, but also that worthwhile academic activities
are occurring more or less continuously and that the classroom management
11
system as a whole (which includes but is not limited to the teacher’s disciplinary
How does successful management and discipline factor into the preservice
teacher’s experience in a classroom? Emmer and Hickman (1991) have called attention
outcomes that are not immediately linked to student learning but rather to achieving
order and cooperation” (p. 757). In other words, the ability to create an environment
conducive to learning is a somewhat different skill than the ability to influence learning
or achievement outcomes, although the two are certainly linked. Thus classroom
skills.
Discipline,” Emmer and Hickman (1991) indicate that teacher beliefs predict
preferences for certain strategies to deal with problems presented in vignettes, and
might help account for differences in teacher effort, and preferences for particular
discipline strategies. In fact, teacher’s beliefs about their abilities to influence student
outcomes have been identified as predictors of teacher effort, attitudes, and perceptions,
and of teacher success in promoting student achievement (Ashton and Webb, 1986;
Berman, McLaughlin, Bass, Pauly, and Zellman, 1977). Such beliefs appear to be tied to
perceptions about their initial teaching experience (e.g. Kropp, 1990, Mahlios and
Maxson (1995) Spodak and Saracho, 1993), classroom management and discipline
issues often rank high among the stresses preservice teachers report. Pigge and Marso
(1986) and Beyerbach and Smith (1990) drew similar conclusions about preservice
they take up their classroom duties. In his article entitled “Preservice teachers’
thoughts and fears about disciplining children,” Erwin (1998) pointed out that
challenge because current guidelines for best practice advocate for a child-
centered approach which is often different than the styles and approaches most
So the disparity between academic preparation for early childhood teaching and the
(1992) gave a poignant first-person view of her dive into preservice teaching. Trying to
custodial-minded supervising teacher left her feeling compromised and caught in the
middle of an evolution (Carter, p. 68). In a like manner, many preservice teachers must
On the other hand, some research shows that management and discipline are of
lesser concern. Silvernail and Costell (1983) and Evans and Tribble (1986) found
teacher candidates more concerned with traditional academic issues and the emotional
growth of their students. Evans et al (1986) attributed this lack of concern for potential
with the amount of time spent on academic instruction versus direct experience.
most early childhood teacher programs; the lack of direct experience seems to leave
many preservice teachers feeling unprepared for issues surrounding guidance and
a threat to classroom discipline. According to Brooks (2000), even pupils who are by
and large biddable and motivated see student teachers as “fair game,” a welcome
Not surprisingly, students feel that opportunities to work in real classrooms were
the most valuable aspect of their education. Garmon (1993) found that students
expressed highly negative attitudes about the heavy emphasis on educational and
developmental theory in their coursework. They worried about the lack of structured
opportunities to spend time in real classrooms, and insufficient preparation for the
a skill that must be honed through practice, preservice teachers appear to value the
“hands-on” classroom learning opportunities highly, and to crave experience with real
Dittmeier, and Shanker (1994), the ability to establish and maintain order is often
attention for student teachers. Discipline (or the lack thereof) is, in fact, a major factor
in student teacher failure (Rickman et al, 1981). The pressure to appear competent is
enormous.
what others said about their teaching. The opinions of others—cooperating teachers and
supervising teachers, for example-- was something they regarded as highly important in
15
their student teaching experience. Therefore, the opportunity to gain experience in the
area of classroom management and discipline, so that comments about their teaching
related to child guidance and discipline. Researchers have looked at preservice teachers’
beliefs about developmentally appropriate practice in general (Snider and Fu, 1990;
Spidell, 1988; Wing, 1989), comparing experiences in the classroom to the knowledge
perception of discipline (Veenman, 1984; Johnson, V.G., 1994; Erwin, 1998; ) and their
Tribble, 1986; Weinstein, 1988, 1989). A fairly recent study by Tully and Chiu (1995)
effectiveness (as decided by the preservice teachers). All of these studies help to give a
realistic picture of preservice teachers and their perception of guidance and classroom
management as they enter and make their way through student teaching.
teachers perceive discipline to be their most serious problem, expressing doubts about
their ability to successfully maintain order and guide behavior. This view is supported
by the research of Charles (1989) and Edwards (1993) as well. Effective guidance
continues to be one of the most universal and troubling aspects of preserive teaching.
In their article entitled “Student Teachers and Classroom Discipline,” Tully and
Chiu (1995) listed five types of discipline problems encountered by student teachers—
16
and the strategies preservice teachers used to handle those problems. Despite the
differences in the ages of the students with whom they interacted (elementary through
secondary levels), there was much similarity in the types of discipline problems
identified by the student teachers. By far the most common problems were concerned
with disruption, defiance and inattention (91%) with disruptions accounting for over
half of the discipline problems. Students who could develop strategies for effectively
with a well-run classroom. In the case of a power misconception, the preservice teacher
might try to rule by fear; a nurturance misconception might lead the preservice teacher
to fail to provide necessary structure and authority. Either of these might result in chaos
in the classroom, and that, according to Rickman and Hollowell (1981) can be a major
Preservice teachers have many thoughts and beliefs about guidance and
discipline. They feel that academic preparation is not always adequate, and that real life
17
situations do not always mesh with what they have learned in college courses. They
environment; they certainly long for practical experience to do so. The pressure to
successfully apply guidance and discipline strategies in a real classroom setting is one of
Working from a social learning perspective, J.B. Rotter (1966) defined locus of
described a proposed relationship between perceived locus of control and life events.
Generally, locus of control refers to the extent to which an individual believes his or her
behavior determines specific life events (Rotter, 1966; Rotter, Chance and Phares, 1972;
Lefcourt, 1982). A person who believes his actions have a major impact on deciding
events in life has an internal locus of control. By contrast, a person with an external
locus of control believes that life events are decided by random chance, destiny, or
efficacy (Parkay et al, 1982), Bandura (1977) distinguished between the two. According
defined as a person’s estimate that a given behavior will lead to certain outcomes,” while
18
an efficacy expectation is “ . . . the conviction that one can successfully execute the
In the academic setting, locus of control in teachers has generated and refined its
own body of measurement devices (Sadowski, Taylor, Woodward, Peacher, and Martin,
1982; Rose and Medway, 1981; Guskey, 1980; Rose, 1979; Armor, Condry-Oseguera,
Cox, King, McDonnell, Pascal, Pandy, and Zellman, 1976; Barfield and Burlingame,
1974). These include forced choice format (Guskey, 1980; Rose, 1979; and Vasquez,
1974) and a likert-type format (Sadowski et al, 1982; Armor et al, 1976; Barfield and
Burlingame, 1974).
Locus of control in teachers, then, has been studied a number of times and using
various forms of measurement over the years. Lefcourt (1982) and Spector (1982) both
reviewed locus of control research in its relationship to other teacher attributes. Czubaj
(1996) studied locus of control as it relates to teacher motivation. Cheng (1994) related
it to job attitudes. Parkay et al (1988) studied locus of control and its relationship to
stress. Alderman (1990) linked locus of control to teacher efficacy. Kremer and
Lefcourt (1982) explored a number of data realms and compared them to locus of
control. His research seems to suggest that internally controlled people have more of
“bright,” “intelligent,” and “successful,” while people exhibiting external control are
labeled “dull,” “inadequate,” and “failure ridden.” Lefcourt (1982 ) and Spector (1982)
19
control as one major construct of motivation, with internal locus of control a factor that
reduced teacher stress and therefore increased motivation. She went on to say, “When
appears that locus of control can have a profound impact on teacher-student dynamics.
Teachers with a belief in internal control tend to have a more positive job
and feeling of job challenge. They also tend to have more positive
While relating to teachers in Hong Kong, the findings were remarkably consistent with
from external to internal locus of control appears to be related to the degree of stress
20
one perceives and how well one is able to cope with that stress.” Those with an external
orientation, for example, tend to respond to stress with more anxiety, neurotic
symptoms, and self-punitiveness (Butterfield, 1964; Rotter, 1966; Tolar and Rezinkoff,
1967; Platt and Eisneman, 1968; Goss and Morisko, 1966; Hountras and Scharf, 1970).
On the other hand, internal locus of control correlates negatively with stress (Parkay et
al, 1986). Two additional studies support this finding; Meadow, 1981, and Kyriacou and
Alderman (1990) found that an internal locus of control correlated with high
efficacy in teachers.
plays an important role in the teacher’s perception of his or her perceived job, in job
satisfaction, in student and teacher relationships, and even in the ability to teach well
and motivate. Not surprisingly, a person’s place on the continuum ranging from
external to internal locus of control has been shown to be related to the preservice
teacher’s success in student teaching as well (Radford, Cashion, and Latchford, 1993).
Locus of control has been correlated to anxiety level (Pigge and Marso, 1994), self
concept as a teacher (Thomson and Handley, 1990) and reflective thinking (Norton,
1994). Kenneth Smith (1997) notes that in general, the preservice teacher with an
internal locus of control orientation is less anxious, seen as more successful, and is more
Locus of control orientation has also been studied to determine its impact on
teachers with an internal locus of control were seen as having a “less custodial attitude”
primarily with the maintenance of order. Martin and Baldwin (1992) correlated an
internal locus of control in preservice teachers to a “less intrusive discipline style.” Thus
Self concept
Super (1957, p. 196) stated that “In choosing an occupation one is, in effect,
choosing a means of implementing a self concept.” Self concept literature supports the
notion that how individuals perceive themselves can impact all phases of their lives
(Sherman et al, 1999). This seems to point to the idea that self concept directs much of
the individual’s motivation; thus it follows that self concept would also represent an
In this study, self concept and self-esteem are used synonomously, as they are in
the 1993 Hoge and Renzulli study entitled “Exploring the link between giftedness and
self concept.” Self concept, or self-esteem, has been defined in very general terms as
22
“the image we hold of ourselves” (Hoge and Renzulli, 1993, p. 440). To go further, self
concept can be defined as attitudes, feelings, and knowledge that individuals have about
Like locus of control, self concept is an aspect of the teacher’s character that has
been studied over several decades (Combs, 1965; Purkey, 1970; Brophy and Good, 1974;
Tonelson, 1981; Jersild, 1985; Juhasz, A., 1990; Sherman and Christian, 1999, and
others). The studies, predictably, have been related to their behaviors in the classroom
in some fashion. That is, teachers’ esteem is studied in relationship to their ability to
teach and interact with students in ways which enhance student self-esteem. The
assumption is that in order to build positive high self-esteem in others, one must also
Wylie (1979) determined that academic success and achievement may have a
causal role in determining global self concept. This theory is also supported by Purkey,
Raheim & Cage (1983) and Rosenberg (1979). These researchers used a skills-
would lead to success in that area, and thereby enhance self concept. According to this
approach, a teacher’s self concept impacts his or her ability to achieve successful
learning outcomes with students and may indeed impact students’ self concept.
How might a preservice teacher’s self concept affect the strategies used in a
with themselves and their own internally-held beliefs regarding themselves—that is, self
concept should be a reflection of our action towards others. As Glasser says, “We are as
we act” (1984). If this is true, we might expect that teachers with a healthy self concept
treat oth ers as though they matter, too. And this seems to be the case.
Tonnelson (1981) found that teachers with high self concept treat students with
dignity and worth, encourage self-acceptance, and serve as facilitators. They also
display warmth, acceptance, and permissiveness in the classroom and are secure enough
to see the students’ point of view (Juhasz, 1990). These attributes tie into
The research points toward a hypothesis that preservice early childhood teachers
who exhibit a high self concept will use positive (constructive or teaching) guidance
strategies. But as yet no research has been done that specifically correlates preservice
early childhood teachers’ self concept with their approach to discipline in a particular
instance.
Summary
Chapter 3
Methodology
Purpose
The purpose of this study was to examine preservice teachers’ locus of control
and their self concept as compared to their approach to guidance used in a particular
In this study triangulation was achieved through the use of the following
measures:
small samples and qualitative studies in general. Triangulation, with its multiple
evidence. This network base enhances validity and reliability and allows
Participants
during which the student spends three hours each week in a preschool classroom
curriculum, working formally and informally with small groups, and practicing guidance
and room management skills. A second experience is student teaching, during which
the student spends one quarter (about eight weeks) in a preschool classroom
environment, and gradually takes over complete control of the classroom for at least two
weeks. This is a culminating experience, where the student is evaluated in key areas
Early Childhood Education students at these two key points in their education
were thought to be a logical population from which to gather data about preservice
regarding guidance strategies and locus of control, a survey was handed out to 38
teachers during the Spring 2000 and Summer 2000 semesters of UW-Stout. The
researcher handed out the survey in the DAP morning lab meetings and individually or
in small groups to the student teachers. Participants were assured that completion of
the survey was voluntary and that the results would be kept confidential. Envelopes
holding the completed surveys were gathered after each group of students completed the
survey. Thirty-five DAP students and 11 student teachers completed and returned the
survey.
27
Instrumentation
In this study, three testing instruments were combined to develop a survey. The
first instrument is the Tennessee Self Concept Scale, Second Edition, developed by
Western Psychological Services. This scale was developed in the 1960s and is well-
the fields of education, psychology, and the social and health sciences (Fitts and
Warren, 1996). The scale was used to determine the participants’ self concept in a
number of areas including family, academic, physical, moral, personal and social. These
were summarized in a total self concept score. The test includes four sub-tests to
The second instrument is the Locus of Control Scale for Teachers, developed by
Sadowski, Taylor, Woodward, and Martin in the early 1980s. The scale was developed
because the researchers determined that other scales available to them contained too
few pieces of data to adequately determine true locus of control in teachers. The
researchers initially asked 100 questions relating to a teacher’s locus of control and,
through testing for reliability and internal validity, narrowed the number of questions
down to twenty, which comprises the current scale. This Likert-type scale was tested for
validity, reliability, and internal consistency, and was used in several studies by various
combinations of the authors. This scale was developed especially to determine the locus
The third, qualitative part of the instrument was taken from coded guidance
scenario in the Early Childhood Teacher Beliefs About Discipline Survey. This scenario
was developed in 1999 by Marion and Swim to assist in their research regarding
situation for which participants are asked to give an open-ended response as to how best
to handle it. Responses were coded into 23 different categories for the purposes of the
For the purpose of this survey, the 23 response categories were further coded
into three categories: responses that were considered teaching (or constructive)
responses, mandating (or custodial) responses, and responses which were unclear, or
for which more information was needed. (See Assumptions in Chapter 1.) These
responses were tallied for each participant and the total number in each category
converted to a percentage.
Data Analysis
Academic Computing Center. Frequency counts and percentages were computed on all
items of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. Mean scores were determined on the Likert-
type scaled responses of the Locus of Control Scale for Teachers. Total response scores
were entered and converted to percentages for the guidance scenario portion of the
survey.
The data was then analyzed using a Pearson Correlation Coefficient matrix on all
combinations of data for the total group of respondents. This approach allowed all
29
factors in the study to be compared to one another to determine whether there was
T-tests were also computed on selected variables. The first t-test was computed
test was computed to analyze differences in responses based on the participant’s level of
university coursework completed (i.e. whether a DAP lab student or a student teacher).
The third t-test was computed to analyze differences in responses based on the amount
of classroom experience participants had prior to the survey. A fourth t-test was
student teacher). The fifth t-test was computed to analyze individual responses to the
Chapter 4
Locus of Control and Self concept as Compared to Their Approach to Guidance” are
presented in this chapter. The data pertains to the responses from 46 surveys, 35
by student teachers. The findings have been highlighted with tables and grouped
Findings
Correlations were computed between the locus of control scale total mean
response (for internal, external, and total locus of control scores) and the percentage of
constructive or custodial behaviors. A t-test correlated responses to all items with the
statistical differences were found. A t-test correlated responses to all items with the
years of experience in an early childhood program, less than two years compared to two
locus of control, percent of mandating/custodial behaviors, self concept total raw and t-
control scale item based on two factors: level of university experience completed, and
between locus of control of early childhood preservice teachers and their approach to
guidance.
significant degree (.05) . The percent of custodial behaviors correlated with external
locus of control (significant to .028) and total locus of control (significant to .030). See
On the t-test which correlated locus of control with years of experience, three
factors correlated to a significant degree (.05). Participants with two years or less of
(.018) and total locus of control (.027). A related factor is the percent of custodial
behavior, which was not significant to .05, but was fairly close at a degree of significance
of .062, higher for participants with less than two years experience in an early childhood
program. Participants with two years or less of experience also scored significantly
higher (.027) on the negative items subscale of the Tennessee Self Concept Scale. See
On the t-test for individual locus of control items that related responses to an
significantly different to .05, and one item registered as significantly different to .01.
32
Question 083 (see Appendix F) was significant to .024. Question 095 (see Appendix F)
was significant to .023. Question 098 (Appendix B) was significant to .042. Question
102 (see Appendix F) was significant to .009. See Table 3, Appendix C, for statistical
data.
On the t-test for individual locus of control items that related responses to an
individual’s level of university experience (DAP student or student teacher) one item
registered as significant to .05, and one item was close but not significant to .05.
Question 090 (see Appendix F) was significant to .05. Question 083 (see Appendix F)
was rated significant to .094 (not statistically significant but close). See Table 4,
Correlations were computed between all subscales of the Tennessee Self Concept
Scale and the percentage of constructive or custodial behaviors. While no scores were
statistically significant, the correlation between the TSCS self-criticism scale and the
Correlations were computed between the locus of control scale total mean
response (for internal, external, and total locus of control scores) and the percentage of
constructive or custodial behaviors. T-tests correlated the locus of control scale total
scale item based on two factors: level of university experience completed, and level of
significant degree (.05) . The percent of custodial behaviors correlated with external
locus of control (significant to .028) and total locus of control (significant to .030). See
Table 1, Appendix A, for statistical data. On the t-test which correlated locus of control
Participants with two years or less of experience in an early childhood program scored
higher on external locus of control (.018) and total locus of control (.027). See Table 2,
On the t-test which correlated locus of control with level of university experience,
On the t-test for individual locus of control items that related responses to an
significantly different to .05, and one item registered as significantly different to .01.
Question 083 (see Appendix F) was significant to .024. Question 095 (see Appendix F)
was significant to .023. Question 098 (Appendix B) was significant to .042. Question
102 (see Appendix F) was significant to .009. See Table 3, Appendix C, for statistical
data.
34
On the t-test for individual locus of control items that related responses to an
individual’s level of university experience (DAP student or student teacher) one item
registered as significant to .05. Question 090 (see Appendix F) was significant to .034.
Correlations were computed between all subscales of the Tennessee Self Concept
correlating responses to all items with the level of outside experience in an early
correlating responses to all items with the level of university experience (DAP or student
Correlations were computed between the total t-score of the Tennessee Self
Concept Scale and the mean scores for internal, external, and total locus of control of
significant correlation between total t-score and locus of control mean scores.
Discussion
teacher’s locus of control and their approach to discipline in a particular situation?”) can
be answered yes, there is a correlation between the external locus of control mean score
between total locus of control mean score and the percent of custodial/mandating
behavior. One can make the connection that students who participated in this survey
tend toward having an external locus of control. Also, the external locus of control
from the opposite direction. Henderson (1982) identified teachers with an internal
atmosphere with a rigid and highly controlled setting concerned primarily with the
maintenance of order)”. Martin and Baldwin (1992) correlated internal locus of control
to a “less intrusive discipline style.” Researchers have not correlated external locus of
to an external locus of control to a significant degree, and was closely related (although
Individuals with less than two years of experience were more likely to operate under an
more often than those with more than two years of experience in an early childhood
years of experience in an early childhood program revealed those with less years of
experience to be strongly external in their locus of control on three items. Item 083
(Once a child gets headed in the wrong direction, it is not up to me to straighten him or
her out), 095 (I don’t feel there is much a teacher can do to influence the standardized
test scores which are dropping each year), and 098 (I feel like I cannot accomplish
by the less experienced group. This may simply be an expression of their lack of the
skills needed to influence young children, or may be related to true external locus of
control in teaching. Interestingly, the less experienced students also showed a much
stronger agreement with one very positive statement than those with more years of
appropriate techniques, even the most difficult behavior problems can be managed).
This seems like a somewhat sophisticated message; does it reflect their understanding
their hopes for future success? See Table 3, Appendix C, for statistical representation of
this data.
The t-test which compared individual locus of control items to level of university
experience (DAP student or student teacher) had one statement (090, A teacher has a
great amount of influence on the personality and attitudes of students) which correlated
37
significantly with level of university experience. The DAP students had a stronger
agreement to this statement. This information seems conflicted-- that the same
students who agree so strongly that they can have influence on personality and attitudes
of students also feel that they cannot accomplish anything in the teaching profession.
Once again, one feels that there is a dichotomy between the students’ perceived abilities
in the classroom currently, and the way they hope to interact with young children in the
answered yes, at least as far as external locus of control is concerned. That is , the study
revealed that there is a significant correlation between the external locus of control
mean score and the percent of custodial/mandating behavior. There is also a significant
correlation between total locus of control mean score and the percent of custodial/
(1982) and Martin and Baldwin (1992) . These researchers correlated internal locus of
control to less intrusive discipline and a less custodial attitude on the part of the teacher.
Researchers have not correlated external locus of control in early childhood preservice
teachers to a particular discipline style. The current study clearly correlates external
The data from this study did not support any evidence of an internal locus of
the studies cited were almost always tied to internal locus of control, this lack of results
was disappointing. The data from this study did not support any evidence of self
The data from this study did not support any evidence of an internal locus of
the studies cited were almost always tied to internal locus of control, this lack of results
was disappointing.
The data from this study did not support any evidence of self concept being correlated to
early childhood preservice teachers’ approach to guidance, or to locus of control and self
Chapter 5
conclusions have been drawn based upon the findings, and recommendations made
Summary
The researcher began the study with five questions about locus of control and
self concept, and their possible correlation to early childhood preservice teachers’
approach to guidance. A review of the literature indicated that while both locus of
control and self concept have been studied in relation to teachers, no research has
hoped that gathering information regarding this correlation might help to clarify how
early childhood preservice teachers see themselves and how this affects their approach
The purpose of the research was to determine the relationship between preservice
teachers’ locus of control, their self concept, and their approach to a particular guidance
situation. The objective of the research was to gain insight into the ways early
childhood preservice teachers view themselves, and how this might affect their approach
In Spring and Summer 2000, the researcher compiled a survey composed of the
Tennessee Self Concept Scale, the Locus of Control Scale for Teachers, a coded guidance
scenario from the Early Childhood Teacher Beliefs About Discipline Survey. Additional
questions covered demographic data such as level of university experience and years of
experience in an early childhood program setting. The survey was distributed to 51 DAP
Academic Computing Center. Responses were analyzed using the Pearson Correlation
Coefficient Matrix on all combinations of the data for the total group of respondents. T-
Within the limitations of the study, two of the five research questions were
verified. Research question 1 (Is there a relationship between the locus of control of
situation?) was shown to be true in that an external locus of control was correlated to a
given situation?) was also shown to be true in that external locus of control was
The other three research questions were not verified by the research done in this
study. Self concept was neither correlated to early childhood preservice teachers’
approach to discipline, nor to being a significant predictor of that approach. Also, self
41
correlation.
significant degree (.05) on three locus of control items, and to a very significant degree
(.001) on one of the locus of control items. Years of experience in an early childhood
program correlated with locus of control to a significant degree (.05) on one locus of
control item.
responses, participants with less than two years of experience scored significantly higher
on the external locus of control measure than those having two or more years of
experience. The more experienced group scored significantly higher (.05) on self
Conclusions
Within the limitations, this research study supports earlier studies in which locus
custodial attitude (Henderson, 1982) and discipline style (Martin and Baldwin, 1992)
have been correlated to locus of control. This research study is unique in that it
whereas the earlier studies correlated internal locus of control to “a less custodial
attitude” (Henderson, 1982) and “a less intrusive discipline style” (Martin and Baldwin,
1992).
42
teachers to the level of university experience and the years of experience in an early
childhood program. In each of these cases the data suggests that participants with less
experience in either area had more responses indicating significantly higher external
locus of control on the Locus of Control Scale for Teachers than the participants with
more experience those areas. Whether this lack of experience accounts for the external
locus of control in these instances cannot be determined from the data. But it would
make sense that as a teacher gains more knowledge and experience, the feelings of being
The results obtained from studying the correlation between early childhood
preservice teachers’ locus of control, self concept, and approach to discipline has
indicated that further research should be done. The following recommendations are
• A study which compares DAP students at the very beginning of their laboratory
experience and student teachers at the end of their three student teaching
beginning of their DAP laboratory experience and at the end of their three student
teaching placements might help to answer the question of whether locus of control in
REFERENCES
Armor, D., Condry-Oseguera, P., Cox, M., King, N., McDonnell, L., Pascal, A.
Pauly, E., & Zellman, G. (1976). Analysis of the school preferred reading program in
Ashton, P., & Webb, R. (1986). Making a difference: Teacher’s sense of efficacy
Barfield, V., & Burlingame, M. (1974). The pupil control ideology of teachers in
Berman, P., McLaughlin, M., Bass, G., Pauly, C., & Zellman, G. (1977). Federal
programs supporting educational change. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation (ERIC
with young children: Educational and Developmental issues. Young Children, 45 (1),
19-24.
Young Children.
45
in early childhood programs (Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the
4674.
456.
Macmillan.
Erwin, E.J. (1998). Preservice teachers’ thoughts and fears about disciplining
55-61.
Erwin, E.J. (1997). Fear and exhilaration: Students reflect on their first
Evans E. D., & Tribble, M. (1986). Perceived teaching problems, self-efficacy, and
80, 81-85.
York: Merrill.
a teacher preparation program. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American
external control and the MMPI with an alcoholic population. Journal of Consulting and
Hoge, R.D., & Renzulli, J.S. (1993). Exploring the link between giftedness and
Hountras, P. T., & Scharf, M. C. (1970). Manifest anxiety and locus of control of
Jersild, A. (1985). When teachers face themselves. New York: Teachers College
Press.
forgotten dimension.
performance. A paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Midwest Association for
Kyriacou, C., & Sutcliffe, J. (1979). A note on teacher stress and locus of control.
Lefcourt, H. (1982). Locus of control: current trends in theory and research (2nd
Lefcourt H. (1981). Research with the locus of control construct, Vol. I. New
Lin, H., Taylor, J., Gorrell, J., Hazareesingh, N., Carlson, H.L., & Asche, M.
(1999). Early childhood and elementary preservice teachers’ beliefs. Paper presented at
Martin, N., & Baldwin, B. (1992). Beliefs regarding classroom management style:
McDermott, P., Gormley, K., Rothenberg, J. & Hammer, J. (1995). The Influence
579).
Parkay, F.W., Olejnik, S., & Proller, N. (1986). A study of the relationships
among teacher efficacy, locus of control, and stress. Paper presented at the annual
type and locus of control orientation with changes in their attitude and anxiety about
Piland, D. & Anglin, J. (1993). It is only a stage they are going through: the
time perspective, adjustment, and anxiety. Journal of General Psychology, 79, 121-128.
Prentice Hall.
Radford, K., Cashion, M., & Latchford, S. (1993). Locus of control and teachers:
Rickman, L.W., & Hollowell, J. (1981). Some causes of student teacher failure.
Rotter, J.B., Chance, J., & Phares E.J. (Eds.) (1972). Application of a social
Sadowski, C. J., Blackwell, M. W., & Willard, J. L.(19 86). Locus of Control and
Sadowski, C.J., Taylor, R. C., Woodward, H. R., Peacher, R. K., & Martin, B. J.
(1982). The reliability and validity of a Likert-type locus of control scale for teachers.
Sherman, H.J. & Christian, M. (1999). Mathematics attitudes and global self-
Sherman, H.J. & Richardson, L.I. (1995). Elementary school teachers’ beliefs and
Silvernail, D. L., & Costello, M. H. (1983). The impact of student teaching and
practice: pattern, stability, and the influence of locus of control. Early Childhood
Spodek and O.N. Saracho (Eds.), Early childhood teacher preparation: Yearbook in
Super, D. E. (1957). “The psychology of careers.” New York: Harper & Brothers.
and teacher efficacy (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 327 508).
Tully, M., & Chiu, L. H. (1995) Student teachers and classroom discipline.
Weinstein, C., Woolfolk, A., Dittmeier, L., & Shanker, U. (1994). Protector or
priston guard? Using metaphors and media to explore student teachers’ thinking about
APPENDIX A
55
Table 1
Correlations between Percent Constructive and Percent Custodial Guidance
Compared to Locus of Control
*significant to .05%
55
APPENDIX B
56
Table 2
T-test correlating all factors of the survey
With years of experience in an early childhood program setting
APPENDIX C
58
Table 3
APPENDIX D
60
Table 4
APPENDIX E
62
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Early Childhood Preservice Teacher Personality and Discipline Survey
I would very much appreciate it if you would participate in this study. Please take about
twenty minutes to complete this survey. Return your completed survey to me in the
enclosed envelope. Your answers will be confidential and anonymous. The following
statement is the university’s official assurance that your participation is both valued and
protected:
I would be happy to talke with you about the results of this survey when the study
has been completed. Please feel free to contact me abou the results of the survey.
Julia Lorenz
Department of Child Development, Family Living, and Community Education
Services
University of Wisconsin-Stout
Menomonie, Wisconsin
Questions or concerns about participation in this research may also be addressed to Ted
Knous, Chair, UW-stout Institutional Review Board for the Protection of Human Subjects in
Research, 11 HH, UW-Stout, Menomonie, WI 54751, phone 715-232-1126.
63
Directions: This scale asks you to describe how you feel about yourself. There are no right or wrong answers,
so please just describe yourself as honestly as you can. When you are ready to begin, read each statement and
decide how well it describes you according to the scale below. Read each statement carefully. Then circle the
number that shows your answer. Circle only one number for each statement, using this scale:
If you wish to change a response, cross it out with an X, and circle the new response you have chosen.
1 2 3 4 5 1. I am an attractive person.
1 2 3 4 5 2. I am an honest person.
1 2 3 4 5 7. I am a friendly person.
1 2 3 4 5 26. I am a nobody.
Below are a number of statements about teachers and teaching. There are no right or wrong answers to the
statements. Please indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each statement by circling the one
answer which reflects your opinion. Please read each item carefully and indicate the response which most
closely corresponds to the way you personally feel.
SA A U D SD 83. Once a child gets headed in the wrong direction, it is not up to me to straighten him
or her out.
SA A U D SD 84. If the majority of my class does poorly on a test, the poor grades are generally
because I did not teach the related concepts well.
SA A U D SD 86. I believe I can help each student in my classes to experience success and self worth
in some area.
SA A U D SD 87. Some personalities just naturally clash and there is no way a particular student and
teacher can get along.
SA A U D SD 88. It seems as if absolutely nothing can be done about having to use physical
punishment on students.
SA A U D SD 89. When I can spend extra time with a slow learner, I soon see positive results.
SA A U D SD 90. A teacher has a great amount of influence on the personality and attitudes of
students.
SA A U D SD 91. There will always be classroom fights among students regardless of how hard
teachers try to prevent them.
SA A U D SD 92. Many student who seem overly passive undergo drastic personality changes when
a teacher designs an activity which challenges them.
SA A U D SD 93. On days when my class is calm, I know the calmness has nothiing to do with my
influence.
SA A U D SD 94. If a child is being teased a lot, I can often think of something to do to get the
teasing to stop.
SA A U D SD 95. I don’t feel there is much a teacher can do to influence the standardized test scores
which are dropping each year.
SA A U D SD 96. I often see a child who is a pawn and there is nothing I can to do help.
SA A U D SD 97. A child’s behavior problem can be adequately modified providing the teacher
finds the correct solution.
68
SA A U D SD 99. Realistically, a teacher can invest time in a particular student to the point of
diminishing returns, at which time further instruction is not productive.
SA A U D SD 100. If I study the situation hard enough, there are few classroom problems I
cannot solve.
SA A U D SD 101. If a student comes to me in time, I can help with almost any problem.
103. Scenario:
Matt is 4 years old and attends Honeyvale Child Care Center. He has been at the center for a year
with the same teacher, Ms. Hanson. Matt is an energetic child who seems to enjoy participating in
many activities at the center. On this day, Matt is in the block area with two other children.
Suddenly, Ms. Hanson hears Matt yell to one of the other children, “Give me that block.” Ms.
Hanson sighs as this is not the first time she has had to intervene when Matt plays with other children.
As she hurries towards the block area, she sees Matt and the other child struggling over the block.
Before she can actually reach the area, she observes Matt pushing the other child down and taking the
block.
104. My gender is
_____Male
_____Female
105. My age is
_____Under 21
_____21 to 25
_____26 to 30
_____31 to 35
_____36 to 40
_____Over 40
_____3.51 to 4.0
_____3.01 to 3.5
_____2.75 to 3.0
_____Yes
_____No
_____Yes
_____ No
110. How much experience have you had in a formal early childhood setting (preschool, day care, before-
or after-school care, bible camp, Sunday School, etc.)?
APPENDIX F
71
Talk with ONE child about behavior or how to solve the problem 19
Tell aggressor appropriate steps to get block in the future
Ask question of child who si the aggressor (question clearly is not as part of 23
no lose problem solving)
Ask, Why did you push?
Make the aggressor apologize or make the aggressor comfort the victim 26
(deals with child only)
Ask him to apologize for pushing
Punish the child or children by: threatening to remove from area, actually 27
removing from the area, threatening to put in time-out, or actually
putting in time-out
Remove child from area for the rest of the day
Give him the choice of either choosing another area in the
room to play – or allow him to continue playing in the area
as long as nothing like this occurs again
His choice is to be cooperative or sit at the table
Return object
Other:
items that do not fit into any other category 80
Missing Data:
respondent did not write an answer to the question 99