PHILOSOPHY WITHIN PRACTICE: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN

PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATIONS AND TEACHING STYLES OF FACULTY

IN EARLY CHILDHOOD TEACHER PREPARATION PROGRAMS

by

Lisa J. Strout

CAROLINE BASSETT, PhD, Faculty Mentor and Chair

VICTOR KLIMOSKI, PhD, Committee Member

ELAINE GUERRAZZI, PhD, Committee Member

James Wold, PhD, Interim Dean, School of Education

A Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment

Of the Requirements for the Degree

Doctor of Philosophy

Capella University

SEPTEMBER 2015

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERSThe quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscriptand there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,

a note will indicate the deletion.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States CodeMicroform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.789 East Eisenhower Parkway

P.O. Box 1346Ann Arbor, MI 48106 - 1346

ProQuest 3746854

Published by ProQuest LLC (2016). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

ProQuest Number: 3746854

© Lisa Strout, 2015

Abstract

This causal-comparative research study identified the individual adult education

philosophical orientations and teaching style preferences of early childhood education

faculty members. It also examined the relationship between the educational philosophies,

teaching style preferences, and the following demographics: gender, age, academic rank,

years of teaching experience, and terminal degree. In addition, this study examined the

relationship between theory and practice based on the Principle of Congruity. The

concept of adult education philosophical orientations was identified and measured by

Zinn’s (2007) Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI); the concept of teaching

styles was identified and measured by Conti’s (1982) Principles of Adult Learning Scale

(PALS); and the Principle of Congruity was identified by Katz (1977). The target

population included all higher education faculty members teaching in early childhood

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in the Northern

New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont during the

2015 Winter/Spring semester. Purposive sampling was employed and a total of 45

faculty members completed the online survey. The majority (55.6%) of faculty members

reported their primary educational philosophy of adult education was progressive,

followed by 17.8% identifying with the behavioral orientation. The results also indicated

that 62% of the faculty members had an adult educational philosophy that was congruent

with their respective teaching style and of the sample (N=45), 57.8% faculty members

identified with a learner-centered preference and 42.2% faculty members identified with

the teacher-centered approach. Further, the results indicated that 22 (49%) faculty

members identified their educational philosophy (progressive, humanistic, and

radical/critical) and teaching style preference (learner-centered) were congruent with the

Principle of Congruity. Data was analyzed using the Pearson correlation coefficient and

ANOVA. Findings suggested there were statistically significant relationships between

several of the adult educational philosophies and the overall teaching style; between

several philosophical orientations and various factors of the teaching style; as well as

between two demographics (age and terminal degree) and various philosophical

orientations and teaching style factors. Lastly, the research hypothesis could not be

supported and the null hypothesis was retained because no statistically significant

relationships were suggested between the progressive and humanistic higher education

faculty members and the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical faculty members in

preferences of teaching style.

iv

Dedication

“Lately it occurs to me, what a long strange trip it’s been” (Grateful Dead, 1977, track 3)

I could not have taken this journey without the support and encouragement of my

husband. I would like to dedicate this to Loren, my soulmate, who has always been by

my side and has encouraged me to pursue my dreams. Thank you for understanding my

need to work many early mornings, days, nights, weekends, months, and years to

complete this academic milestone. You have the power to lift me up when I need

support; remind me when it is time to play and when it was time to work; knows “15

more minutes” is code word for an hour; and is always guaranteed to play the right tunes

to motivate me and the best songs on a Sunday afternoon. Your examples of strength,

resiliency, determination, and motivation kept me going during those times when I did

not think I could go any further.

“People tell me it's a sin

To know and feel too much within

I still believe she was my twin

But I lost the ring

She was born in spring

But I was born too late

Blame it on a simple twist of fate”

Bob Dylan, 1975, track 7

Most days you know me better than I know myself. As Lennon and McCartney

(1969) shared “And in the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make” (track 8).

Thank you for believing in me and not losing the ring so many years ago.

v

Acknowledgments

First I would like to acknowledge and provide my sincerest thanks to my

dissertation chair, Dr. Caroline Bassett, for recognizing, accepting, and accommodating

my writing process. Dr. Bassett embodied the principles of learner-centered teaching and

offered practical advice, while keeping me focused on the here and now, and providing

the patience and support needed in order for me to complete this dissertation. I would

also like to thank my committee members, Dr. Victor Klimoski and Dr. Elaine Guerrazzi,

for their time, expertise, and recommendations along the way.

Next, I would like to thank the Rivier University community and my fellow

colleagues for their resources, support, and time throughout the doctoral process.

Additionally, I would like to acknowledge the many educators who participated in this

study, along with the many early childhood professionals who have been doing this work

for a while; all of which continue to collaboratively create theories, practices, and

principles that improve the teaching and learning process not only for adult learners, but

also the children they educate.

Finally, I would be remiss in not acknowledging the true champions in my life

who listened to my frustrations and helped make this dream a reality: Dr. Jacqueline

Lyew-Armstrong, Denise Corvino, M.S., Dr. Tonya Dixon-Thompson, Tessa McDonnell,

M.Ed, Gwen Morgan, M.S., Jennifer Stickney M.S., and Jessica Sugrue, M.S.

“Second chances in the midst of difficulty: When we are at our worst, we have the

greatest opportunity. When we are most threatened, we can call upon our greatest tool of all:

courage. When we feel hopeless or overwhelmed, we still have a choice” (Bruno, 2015, p. 44-45).

vi

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments v

List of Tables ix

List of Figures x

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

Introduction to the Problem 1

Background, Context, and Theoretical Framework 3

Statement of the Problem 12

Purpose of the Study 13

Research Questions 13

Rationale, Relevance, and Significance of the Study 14

Nature of the Study 21

Definition of Terms 23

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations 25

Organization of the Remainder of the Study 27

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

Introduction to the Literature Review 29

Theoretical Framework 31

Educational Philosophies of Adult Education 34

Teaching Styles 43

Principle of Congruity 53

Review of Research Literature 57

Review of Research Regarding the Influx of Adult Learners 58

vii

Review of Research Regarding Early Childhood Teacher

Preparation Programs 63

Review of Methodological Literature 79

Synthesis of Research Findings 86

Critique of Previous Research 88

Chapter 2 Summary 90

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

Introduction to Chapter 3 92

Research Design 94

Target Population, Sampling Method, and Related Procedures 96

Instrumentation 101

Data Collection 104

Operationalization of Variables 108

Data Analysis Procedures 109

Limitations of the Research Design 112

Internal and External Validity 113

Expected Findings 114

Ethical Issues 114

Chapter 3 Summary 118

CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

Introduction to Chapter 4 120

Description of the Sample 122

Summary of the Results 124

viii

Detailed Analysis 126

Research Question One 127

Research Question Two 146

Chapter 4 Summary 176

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

Introduction to Chapter 5 180

Summary of the Results 181

Discussion of the Results 186

Discussion of the Results in Relation to the Literature 196

Limitations 203

Implication of the Results for Practice 205

Recommendations for Further Research 207

Conclusion 209

REFERENCES 211

APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK 234

APPENDIX B. ONE-WAY ANOVA: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATIONS 236

APPENDIX C. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATIONS 239

APPENDIX D. ONE-WAY ANOVA: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

TEACHING STYLE 243

APPENDIX E. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

TEACHING STYLE 247

ix

List of Tables

Table 1. Frequency Distribution: Philosophical Orientations 128

Table 2. Descriptive Statistics: Philosophical Orientations 129

Table 3: Frequency Distribution: Teaching Styles 136

Table 4: Descriptive Statistics: Teaching Styles 137

Table 5: Pearson Correlation Coefficients: Philosophical Orientations and

Teaching Style 153

Table 6: One-Way ANOVA: Philosophical Orientations and Teaching Style 161

Table 7: Descriptive Statistics: Philosophical Orientations and Teaching Style 162

Table 8: Pearson Correlation Coefficients: Hypothesis 175

Table 9: One-Way ANOVA: Hypothesis 176

x

List of Figures

Figure 1. Number of Years Teaching 124

Figure 2. Frequency Distribution: Liberal Adult Education Philosophy 131

Figure 3. Frequency Distribution: Progressive Adult Education Philosophy 132

Figure 4. Frequency Distribution: Behavioral Adult Education Philosophy 133

Figure 5. Frequency Distribution: Humanistic Adult Education Philosophy 134

Figure 6. Frequency Distribution: Radical/Critical Adult Education Philosophy 135

Figure 7. Frequency Distribution: Factor One 139

Figure 8. Frequency Distribution: Factor Two 140

Figure 9. Frequency Distribution: Factor Three 141

Figure 10. Frequency Distribution: Factor Four 142

Figure 11. Frequency Distribution: Factor Five 143

Figure 12. Frequency Distribution: Factor Six 144

Figure 13. Frequency Distribution: Factor Seven 145

Figure 14. Scatter Plot: Liberal Philosophy and Total Teaching Style 148

Figure 15. Scatter Plot: Progressive Philosophy and Total Teaching Style 149

Figure 16. Scatter Plot: Behavioral Philosophy and Total Teaching Style 150

Figure 17. Scatter Plot: Humanistic Philosophy and Total Teaching Style 151

Figure 18. Scatter Plot: Radical Philosophy and Total Teaching Style 152

1

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

The importance of improving early childhood education has been documented in

President Obama’s 2013 plan for Early Education for All Americans. Some of the focus

is on having qualified teachers who are well trained and can provide rigorous curriculum

in their classrooms based on research-based practices (Office of Press Secretary, 2013).

A bipartisan legislative bill introduced in 2013, “Start Strong for America’s Children,”

called for an increase in qualified early childhood educators who specialize in home

visiting, infant and toddler care, preschool teaching, and the expansion of preschool

education and Universal Pre-K classrooms (National Association for the Education of

Young Children, 2013). Passed in the U.S. Senate in 2014 but not in the House (National

Association for the Education of Young Children, 2014), the legislation was reintroduced

in May 2015 both to the U.S. Senate and U.S. House of Representatives (National

Association for the Education of Young Children, 2015) but failed to pass in the Senate.

Initiatives, such as this legislative bill, highlight the importance of having

qualified early childhood educators (with bachelor degrees and specialized training) to

ensure young children are having successful outcomes in both social and academic

domains (Barnett, 2003; Lobman, Ryan, & McLaughlin, 2005; Whitebook, 2003).

Variations, however, continue to exist in the professional qualifications needed for early

childhood educators to work with young children birth to age 8. For this reason, the need

for increased educational requirements in early childhood education is on the rise and has

2

been documented in programs such as “Head Start and publically funded pre-K, [where]

ECE teachers are increasingly attending college or university programs to complete

required credits or to earn degrees while employed” (Whitebook, 2014, p. 9).

Furthermore, by 2022, the U.S. Department of Labor is projecting a 17% estimated

increase in the need for preschool teachers with a bachelor’s degree (or roughly 100,000

new preschool teachers), in addition to another 12% increase in K-12 teachers and 14%

increase for teachers working in child care settings serving children birth through age five

(United States Department of Labor Statistics, 2012; Whitebook, 2014). For this reason,

“it is becoming increasingly necessary to both upgrade the qualifications of teachers

currently working in classrooms as well as induct new members to the field through

teacher preparation programs” (Lobman et al., 2005, p. 1).

In order to raise the educational standards of the early childhood education

workforce to meet the increasing qualifications, an increase in higher education faculty

and preparation programs is required for the influx of diverse learners expected to enter

higher education institutions. Research is underway to identify the national landscape of

early childhood teacher preparation programs in the United States. Whitebook et al.

(2012) pointed out the intricacies involved in teaching performance in early childhood

higher education settings and noted research was needed to understand and identify

which dimensions and variations were related to student learning and the adult learner’s

ability to implement effective teaching practices with young children.

Educational philosophies and teaching style preferences are a component of the

teaching-learning process. This research utilized a causal-comparative methodology to

study the educational philosophy and teaching style preferences of faculty members in

3

early childhood teacher preparation programs in four New England states (Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont). The purpose of this study was to identify

the philosophical orientations of adult education and teaching style preferences of higher

education faculty members teaching in early childhood teacher preparation programs. In

addition, the purpose was to determine if the faculty members’ educational philosophy

aligned with their teaching style preference when working with adult learners who are

learning to teach in early childhood education settings with young children birth through

age eight.

Background, Context, and Theoretical Framework

The background and context begins with information on research that has been

conducted nationally on teacher preparation programs within the United States. It then

provides a brief overview of the relationship between educational philosophy and

teaching styles based on the research of post-secondary adult education and the discipline

of early childhood education. Equally important, following the background and context

of the study, this section introduces the theoretical framework that forms the basis of the

research study. Information on Zinn’s (2007) educational philosophies of adult

educators, Conti’s (1982) teaching style preferences, and Katz’s (1977) Principle of

Congruity will be shared.

Background and Context of Study

Efforts to create a unified early childhood education workforce in educational

knowledge, consistent practices, and national content standards are underway, but

Rhodes and Huston (2012) asserted that many educators in the workforce are “hampered

by a lack of shared purpose and identity, insufficient or ineffective training, poor

4

compensation and lack of institutional supports” (p. 10). Furthermore, Whitebook et al.

(2012) noted “as indicated by the ubiquitous ‘early childhood-related’ label widely used

to describe the educational backgrounds of teachers of young children, there is no

accepted and agreed-upon standard for what constitutes a high-quality program of study

for ECE practitioners” (p. 1). Research, however, is underway. According toWhitebook,

et al. (2012) the “proposals to investigate the quality of teacher education programs, and

their influence on teacher practice in pre-kindergarten settings, are gaining traction

(Bornfreund, 2011; Chu, Martinez-Griego, & Cronin, 2010; Hyson, Tomlinson, &

Morris, 2009; United States Department of Education, 2011; University of Chicago

Urban Education Institute & Ounce of Prevention Fund, 2010; Whitebook, Gomby,

Bellm, Sakai, & Kipnis, 2009; Whitebook & Ryan, 2011)” (p. 1).

Published research studies include a 1999 national study conducted by the

National Center for Early Development and Learning (Early and Winton, 2001), a follow

up study conducted by the National PreKindergarten Center in 2004 (Maxwell, Lim, and

Early, 2006), as well as four individual state studies, three of which were published in

2013 (New Hampshire, New Jersey, and Rhode Island) and one in 2015 (California) by

the Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. Findings from these studies have

focused on topics such as faculty characteristics, course offerings, practicum experiences,

curriculum content, program goals, child-age group focus, and faculty professional

development needs. Whitebook et al. (2012), however, emphasized that appropriate

research methodologies need to continue to be addressed in order to consider and

recognize the “important variations in program content and delivery, and provide solid

evidence to inform policy and practice” (p. 1).

5

In addition to studying the variations within teacher preparation programs,

research in the field of post-secondary and adult education suggests that a positive

relationship must exist between an educators’ educational philosophy in relation to their

ideals, beliefs, values, and attitudes and the choices, decisions, and the actions they

perform in their daily teaching practices (Brookfield, 2010; Galbraith, 1990; Merriam &

Bierema, 2014; Zinn, 1990). Knowles (1970) considered the educator as the most

important “variable in the classroom” (Conti, 1990, p. 79) and as such, the teaching style-

teacher-centered or learner-centered, implemented in the classroom is directly related to

one or multiple orientations of educational philosophy utilized by the teacher. In fact,

Tisdell and Taylor (1999) believed that the ability to critically examine practices was

influenced by how one defined their educational philosophy and this impacted what was

done in the classroom.

Research in the field of early childhood education has also addressed the

important relationship between educational philosophies and teaching practices in adult

education (Alexander, 2014; Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue, 2011; Dobson &

Dobson, 1983; Fulton & Myers, 2014; Jones, 1985, 1986, 1993; Katz, 1977, 1999;

Maakestad-Wolf, 1999; Marshall, 1996; Roach & Riley, 2006; VanderVen, 2000;

Vardanyan, 2013). Schön (1987) asserted that all practitioners “share a common body of

explicit, organized professional knowledge – the set of values, preferences, and norms …

which make sense of practice situations, formulate goals and directions for actions” (p.

33). Teacher performance in higher education, as shared earlier, is complex in early

childhood and understanding the differences within the programs needed to be researched

6

in order to identify which dimensions and variations are “most relevant to student

learning and teacher practice with young children” (Whitebook et al., 2012, p. 1).

Despite the research that has been studied on early childhood faculty

characteristics and professional development in recent years, little research has been

conducted to identify the educational philosophies and the teaching style preferences of

higher education faculty members teaching in education departments, and no research has

been conducted specifically on faculty teaching. Of the research studies that have been

conducted, two have been in the divisions of Education (Fries, 2012; Hughes, 1997) and

the findings show an inconsistency in results between the educational philosophies held

by education faculty members and the teaching styles that were reportedly implemented

when teaching adult learners. Further, Fries (2012) addressed in her recommendations

“Further research should be conducted to determine if there is dissonance or concurrence

between the educational philosophy and teaching style among teacher education faculty

at other institutions” (p. 100).

Theoretical Framework

The educational philosophies of adult educators (Zinn, 2007), teaching styles

(Conti, 1982), and the Principle of Congruity (Katz, 1977) form the theoretical basis for

this study. Elias and Merriam (2005) identified seven key educational philosophies-

liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic, radical/critical, analytic, and post modern,

with Zinn (2004) recognizing and including the first five orientations in her work on

identifying educational philosophies of adult educators. Both Zinn’s (2004) and Conti’s

(1990) findings support the belief that direct relationships exist between one’s

philosophical orientation and one’s teaching style. Conti (1990) shared that “while

7

several philosophy [philosophical] schools exist, the basic assumptions related to

teaching can be divided into two major categories” (p. 81): teacher-centered

(noncollaborative) and learner-centered (collaborative). According to Conti (1990) the

teacher-centered approach “assumes that learners are passive and that they become active

by reacting to stimuli in the environment” (p. 81). In a learner-centered approach, on the

other hand, “learners can be expected to be proactive and to take responsibility for their

actions” (Conti, 1990, p. 82).

Theory in practice “involves identifying and critiquing the informal theories or

tacit knowledge practitioners apply to their work as a means of improving practice”

(Merriam & Bierema, 2014, p. 249). This idea is based on Argyris and Schön’s (1974)

theory that professionals have the ability to use action inquiry to identify learning loops

in order to examine their espoused theory versus their theory-in-use. Brookfield (2010)

shared that the process of theory development is based on a collective of ideas “by, and

with, colleagues” (p. 71), and Merriam & Bierema (2014) wrote an assumption of theory

in practice is “that practitioners base their work on theory, and theory can be derived

from practice” (p. 249). The Principle of Congruity (1977) serves in part as a principle

for adult educators in early childhood education to not only practice what they preach but

to be mindful that they are also role models and to teach by example. It also serves as an

assumption that adult educators need to be aware that there is a set of teaching principles

which are applicable for all ages of learners. Following the Principle of Congruity

(1977), faculty members using a progressive, humanistic, or radical/critical approach

would utilize learner-centered teaching preferences; whereas, faculty members who

identify with the orientations of liberal or behavioral would implement preferences that

8

were teacher-centered. As a point of reference for the study, brief overviews of each of

the three theoretical frameworks (educational philosophies of adult educators, teaching

styles, and the Principle of Congruity) are shared next.

Educational philosophies of adult educators. Patricia Cranton (1998) believes

instructional practice “without a rationale or mission makes us technicians rather than

professionals” (p. 71). Elias and Merriam (2005) further noted that “theory without

practice leads to an empty idealism, and actions without philosophical reflection lead to

mindless activism” (p. 4). By discussing the importance of exploring their educational

philosophies with faculty members in higher education, Elias and Merriam (2005)

believed it may add clarity to their teaching process and create a conscious environment

for purposeful engagement between theory and practice. This engagement, in the process

of philosophic reflection, may begin to “raise questions about what we do and why we do

it” (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 5), further addressing the conversation of whether the

educator is putting his/her espoused theories of teaching into action in their daily teaching

practices.

As education continues to change, educators will need to guide learners through

the process of understanding “how things are and should be” (Galbraith, 1990, p. 41).

Zinn (1990) suggested with awareness, educators can ensure their personal philosophy is

consistent with their espoused theories and theories-in-use. In 2007, Zinn pointed out “a

Philosophy of Education represents a comprehensive and interrelated set of values and

beliefs as applied to education including beliefs about the purpose and nature of human

life, the role of the individual in society, purposes or goals of education, role(s) of

teachers and learners, important subject matter, and effective teaching approaches” (p.

9

13). Research study findings support a direct relationship between educational

philosophies of teaching and teaching styles (Conti, 1990; East, 2013; Floyd, 2010; Fries,

2012; Swetnam, 2011; Zinn, 1990, 2007).

Teaching styles. Conti (1989) described teaching style as “the range of behaviors

in which a teacher can operate comfortably according to a certain value system” (p. 4).

Equally important, Conti (1990) believes there is a direct link with an adult educator’s

teaching style and Zinn’s philosophy of adult education and confirms that educators use

multiple schools of philosophy when engaging in adult education. Teaching styles affect

the total atmosphere of the engagement that is created by the teachers’ view of learning

and their approaches to teaching, and admitted by Zinn (1990), is “the operational

behavior of the teachers’ educational philosophy” (p.55).

Fries (2012) emphasized, “Teaching style is not the same as teaching method”

and “cannot be determined by looking at a single isolated action of the teacher” (p. 21).

Conti (1990) suggested that there are two schools/or categories of teaching style: teacher-

centered (non-collaborative) and learner-centered (collaborative) and acknowledged that

the teacher-centered approach follows Skinner’s philosophy which describes learners

who are passive in environments and the teacher determines the values to transmit as well

as the beliefs to be reinforced. In contrast, the learner-centered teaching style, as shared

by Conti (1990), follows the philosophies of theorists such as Rogers’ (1969) theories of

learning and Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs (1954). It also provides learners with the

potential for growth, which is unlimited, proactive, and allows the learners to be

responsible for their own learning. Learner-centered teaching practices are directly

linked with the philosophical orientations of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical

10

philosophical orientations, whereas teacher-centered teaching styles are aligned with the

adult education philosophical orientations of liberal and behavioral. Learner-centered

teaching practices are also identified in teaching of early childhood education, both in

adult learners in the higher education classrooms and educating young children in early

learning and elementary settings. At the core of the Principle of Congruity, as identified

by Katz (1977), the act of learner-centered teaching links theory and practice in early

childhood teacher preparation programs.

Principle of congruity. The relationship between theory and practice has been

explored for many years. Argyris and Schön (1974) believed “theories are for

explanation, prediction, or control” (p. 5) and in order “to be effective one must act

according to theory-in-use clearly and decisively, especially under stress” (p. 27).

Merriam and Bierema (2014) agreed with the importance of Argyris and Schön work and

further expanded the link between theory and practice to include Brookfield’s (2010)

theoretical belief in which “theorizing is one of the most practical things adult educators

do” (p. 71). Believing that faculty members all make assumptions, utilize instincts, and

rely on theories to make teaching and learning decisions, Brookfield (2010) noted that

three conditions must exist in order to move a framework of ideas and decisions to the

actual guidance of our theoretical practices. These include “(a) it generalizes beyond the

case of individual experience…; (b) it is predictive…; and (c) it covers a whole category

of events…” (p. 71). Further, the collective process of theory development is based on

the awareness that what appears to be a private or isolated idea/experience, is in fact

linked to a larger body of ideas and practices that are “collectively developed by, and

with, colleagues” (Brookfield, 2010, p. 71). Moon (2013) however, cautioned “in

11

professions such as social work and education, there is not a body of secure knowledge

that can be used instrumentally to guide practice and [as such,] this results in a state of

confusion” (p. 41).

In 1975, Katz (1977) shared her theories of teaching adult learners in early

childhood. Presented to the Australian Association of Early Childhood Educators, Katz

shared an interrelated set of four principles to be utilized when teaching adults. These

included the principles of congruity, knowing the learners’ understandings, timing, and

sociointellectual ambiance. With each teaching experience to be distinct and unique to

the learners in the environment, Katz (1977) pointed out “The use of the term ‘congruity’

is intended to suggest a kind of consistency, harmony, or concordance between the way

we teach teachers and the way we want them to teach. In no way is it intended to imply

isomorphism or identicality between teaching teachers and teaching children” (p. 4). In

1986, Jones furthered the conversation in her book, Teaching Adults: An Active Learning

Approach, when she declared “I believe people who are going to become teachers of

young children should be taught in the same way I hope they will teach” (p. xi).

Furthermore, Jones (1986) wrote, “Katz (1977) has called this the Principle of

Congruity—that adults be treated according to the developmental principles they must

follow when working with young children” (p. xi).

Dobson and Dobson (1983) thought, “Teaching practice without the support

provided by a well-developed philosophy (set of beliefs) proceeds at random, blindly” (p.

21). Further Alexander (2014) noted, “The failure to recognize inconsistencies between

what teachers say and do could be perceived as a value conflict for which there is no

clear solution to guide or manage the gap” (p. 4). By considering the educational

12

philosophies of adult education, as well as teaching style preferences and the Principle of

Congruity, the adult educator has the ability to reflect on how their working philosophy

influences the decisions made in preparation, implementation of course materials, and the

design of the educational environment for adult learners (Brookfield, 2010; Maakestad-

Wolf, 1999). These theoretical considerations set the framework for this research study.

Statement of the Problem

It is not known how or to what extent higher education faculty teaching in

preparation programs have an awareness of and can identify their educational

philosophical orientation and teaching style within their practices in college and

university settings located in the four Northern New England states. Fries (2012) noted,

“What teachers believe and practice in the classroom is related to educational philosophy

and to teaching style” (p. 2). Findings from Fries’ (2012) study noted a discrepancy

between the higher education faculty educational philosophies and their teaching styles

while teaching in a teacher preparation program at a state university. Specifically, the

results from the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) showed the progressive

philosophy dominant with the humanistic philosophy scoring high. The results from the

Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) identified the teaching style as teacher-

centered practices, which are in conflict with the teaching style of the two main

educational philosophies of progressive and humanistic (Fries, 2012). Based on the

findings, Fries (2012) recommended “further research should be conducted to determine

if there is dissonance or concurrence between the educational philosophy and teaching

style among teacher education faculty at other universities” and as such, that “research

would either confirm or put into question the findings of this study” (p. 100).

13

Marshall (1996) addressed teaching practices much earlier than Fries’ 2012

findings when he questioned why higher education faculty were using outdated teaching

practices to teach with, when they themselves did not benefit from this style of teaching

in their preparation programs. With the goal of educating pre-service educators to meet

the needs of future generations and help them fulfill their lifelong potential for learning

(Jacobs, 2001), the use of effective learner-centered teaching practices are needed to align

with the orientations of progressive and humanistic philosophies in order to meet the

needs of the diverse 21st century learners.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this causal-comparative study was to identify the individual

educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of higher education faculty

teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in the

Northern New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont.

The study examined the relationship between the educational philosophies of early

childhood education higher education faculty using Lorraine Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory (PAEI, revised 2007) and the concept of teaching styles measured

through Gary J. Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS, 2004) instrument.

Research Questions

This study addressed the statement of the problem and the purpose of the study by

responding to the following research questions:

Questions:

1. What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s Philosophy of

Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences (according to

14

Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty

teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located

in Northern New England?

2. What are the relationships between the educational philosophies (PAEI) and

teaching styles (PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in Northern New England?

Hypotheses:

H01. It is hypothesized that there will be no significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral,

and radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher

preparation programs in college and university settings located in the four

Northern New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and

Vermont).

Ha1. It is hypothesized that there will be a significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral,

and radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher

preparation programs in college and university settings located in the four

Northern New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and

Vermont).

Rationale, Relevance, and Significance of the Study

This section provides justification for the rationale, relevance, and significance of

the study. The rationale will share the problem addressed in the research study, as well as

discuss the potential benefits to early childhood faculty. Further, justification is

15

supported with scholarly research in which the problem emerged from and the rationale is

provided for the importance of this study to further extend the knowledge base previously

established by Hughes (1997) and Fries (2012). Further, the relevance section will

address the value of the findings in regards to dominant philosophies; relationships

between the educational philosophies and teaching styles; and the Principle of Congruity.

Finally, this section will discuss the significance of the study in relationship to the early

childhood education community.

Rationale

“All adult educators have an educational philosophy which is embedded in both

what is believed about learning and teaching, and what is done in practice whether or not

it can be articulated well” (Walker, 2008, p. 28). Walker’s belief was based on Tisdell

and Taylor (1999) understanding of the importance of self-examination and the

awareness that by using critical inspection, “we often become conscious of some of our

unconscious beliefs or behaviors that affect our practice” (p. 6). Equally important, Elias

and Merriam (2005) believed that the clarity within educators’ teaching practices and

their philosophy may create a conscious environment where purposeful engagement

between theory and practice may occur. With the faculty member viewed as the central

variable in the classroom environment, having a positive relationship with their

educational philosophy (ideals, beliefs, values, attitudes, choices, decisions, and actions),

and teaching style preferences has the ability to influence their teaching practices

(Brookfield, 2010; Galbraith, 1990; Merriam & Bierema, 2014; Zinn, 1990). By utilizing

these philosophical orientations, adult educators can create opportunities for learners to

engage in different methodologies such as constructivist and inquiry based learning,

16

promotion of self-awareness, and encouragement to explore and develop an

understanding of varying theories in relation to practices with children.

This study will have the potential to benefit early childhood higher education

faculty and teacher preparation programs in identifying a working philosophy and

examining the relationship between espoused theories and theories-in-use. Participants in

this study can identify their dominant educational philosophy and teaching style

preferences; interpret their own results; as well as reflect as to what, if any, extent their

individual educational philosophies align with their identified teaching style. This

process can raise awareness for and consideration of the connection between actions and

beliefs, as well as have a potential impact on teaching practices and student learning in

their classroom and teacher preparation program of studies. Conti (1985) believed that a

variety of factors influence an educator’s teaching style including educational

philosophy, academic training, and increased age. By researching and understanding

educational philosophies and teaching style preferences, while considering the extraneous

variables of gender, age, academic rank, experience, and terminal degree, this study has

the potential to help adult educators learn how to focus what they are doing. It can guide

them to question their teaching practices and style as well as bring forward the awareness

that others in the field are also looking for ways to engage adult learners.

This study can also provide faculty members with an opportunity to explore their

roles in future professional development and teaching practices. In their workshop

session, Exploring the Influences that Impact our Work with Faculty Learners, Curry and

Qualters (2014) shared “We are in a state of transitional teaching. It is important to

address this work without the ‘right answers’; we must seek like-minded educators who

17

also want to improve practices in order to explore and grow our own philosophies”

(Personal Communication, May 30, 2014).

This study can also address whether there are contradictions in practice between

espoused theories and theories-in-use in relation to orientations and teaching styles. Fries

(2012) research of 45 faculty members teaching in a university teacher preparation

program confirmed such a contradiction in practice was present between the espoused

theories of the faculty members (progressive and humanistic) and the faculty members

theories-in-use (teacher-centered). In particular, the findings disclosed that 53% of the

faculty members surveyed had a dominant preference for the progressive philosophical

orientation, with 17% of the faculty expressing a preference for the humanistic

philosophy, and the overall raw scores showing an agreement with the liberal,

progressive, behavioral, and humanistic philosophies but not with the radical/critical

orientation. Similarly, Fries (2012) findings in relation to teaching style preferences

shared that “the majority of the teacher education faculty (71%) identified with a support

for teacher-centered teaching style” (p. 86).

Kember and Grow (1994) believed “the methods of teaching adopted, the learning

tasks set, the assessment demands made, and the workload specified are strongly

influenced by orientation to teaching” (p. 69). Further, discussions of philosophies and

teaching styles identified in the two studies (Fries, 2012; Hughes, 1997) can raise

awareness for the importance of this topic in relation to teaching and learning as well as

provide evidence of dissonance or concurrence with Fries’ (2012) findings. Perceptions

and assumptions of the function of learner-centered teaching practices such as content

knowledge, the responsibility for learning, shifts in the role of teachers and learners, and

18

addressing new teaching strategies have the potential to be uncovered through

discussions, the intentional development and delivery of workshops on the topics, as well

as readings and various professional development opportunities.

Relevance

Brookfield (2013) believes that “To teach is to help someone learn… The point of

teaching is to help someone acquire information, develop skills, generate insights, and

internalize dispositions they did not know before” (p. 14). Differences in how adults

learn, their purposes, and the cultural, political, and social dynamics all influence the way

educators plan and teach in postsecondary and adult education settings (Brookfield, 2013;

Pratt & Collins, 2010). Further understanding of the orientations and teaching styles, as

well as identifying possible causes and effects between the two instruments, has the

potential to provide additional insight into what philosophies are dominant. It can also

provide insight into whether the educational philosophies and teaching styles are in

alignment with the current ideology of the Principle of Congruity (Alexander, 2014;

Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue, 2011; Dobson & Dobson, 1983; Fulton & Myers,

2014; Jones, 1985, 1986, 1993; Katz, 1977, 1999; Maakestad-Wolf, 1999; Marshall,

1996; Roach & Riley, 2006; VanderVen, 2000; Vardanyan, 2013).

“Philosophical query asks why practitioners conduct practice in the manner they

do, in order to (a) provoke reflection, (b) systematically analyze and evaluate procedures,

and (c) determine the appropriate philosophy or philosophies to back or drive the

practice” (Strom, 1996, p. 77). Personal reflections and discussions allow the educator

the opportunity to explore their beliefs, attitudes, and actions which conscious or

unconsciously influence their teaching practices and influence student learning (Conti,

19

1982, 2007; Elias & Merriam, 1995; Fries, 2012; Graham & Havlick, 2005; Heimlich &

Norland, 1994; Kauchak & Eggen, 2010; Pratt, 1998; Pratt & Collins, 2010). This study

has the potential to contribute to research theory in the fields of postsecondary (teacher

educators) and early childhood education (teacher education programs) by helping

educators understand the connections between philosophy and teaching styles and how it

can help to improve professional practices in the classroom setting. Research on

philosophies and teaching styles have utilized versions of Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory and Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale, but only Hughes

(1997) and Fries (2012), have focused specifically on higher education faculty and

teacher preparation programs in university settings.

The findings from this study have the potential to generate new theory, as

different orientations and connections to teaching styles could emerge due to factors such

as the demographics of the faculty or the cultural location (Midwestern as opposed to

New England), for example. The findings may also add to the existing theory, with the

results aligning similarly to Fries’ (2012) study (Education faculty had a progressive

orientation that was dominant and utilized teaching styles that were teacher-centered).

For that reason, this research study tested the current ideologies in higher education

teacher preparation programs to determine if they are following the Principle of

Congruity in which the faculty member’s philosophical orientation aligns with their

teaching style, as well as, the alignment of the philosophical orientations of progressive

and humanism, and the learner-centered teaching style.

20

Significance

It is not known how or to what extent higher education faculty teaching in

preparation programs in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, or Vermont can identify

their philosophical orientation of adult education or teaching style within their practices.

With an increase in teacher qualifications needed in the field of early childhood

education, a demand for higher education teacher preparation programs is required to

meet the demands of the influx of diverse 21st century learners needing to attend post-

secondary institutions to meet the increased workforce professional development

standards. Faculty, with an understanding of the how philosophical orientations and

teaching styles impact the relationship between the faculty and adult learner in the higher

education classroom, can create environments that will support the teaching and learning

process.

This study may advance the scientific knowledge base in two significant areas:

expansion of theory and addition to the literature. Not much has been published about

the philosophical orientations and teaching styles of higher education faculty and teacher

preparation programs in post-secondary institutions. Two studies were located that

focused on divisions of Education, Hughes (1997) study at Ricks College and Fries’

(2012) of a Midwestern university. Hughes’ (1997) study reported a congruent

relationship with findings of adult educators using a behaviorist philosophy (as measured

with the PAEI instrument), and implementing teacher-centered teaching style preferences

with adult learners. Fries’ (2012) study, on the other hand, showed that a dissonance was

reported between the Education faculty members’ identified educational philosophy, their

teaching style (as measured with the PALS instrument), and the mission of the school of

21

education. Further, the results showed no statistical differences in relation to the

demographic data, and showed participant scores had a dominant philosophical

preference for the progressive philosophy, with the humanistic philosophy also scoring

high. The findings also concluded that in the dominant orientation of the progressive

philosophy, 62% had reported an accompanying teacher-centered teaching style. These

findings show a dissonance between the faculty members’ philosophy and their teaching

style. The significance of this research study further explores the recommendation by

Fries (2012) “to determine if there is dissonance or concurrence between the educational

philosophy and teaching style among teacher education faculty at other institutions” (p.

100). This causal-comparative study utilized the same instruments as both Hughes

(1997) and Fries (2012) to collect data on teacher education faculty in four New England

states in teacher preparation programs.

Nature of the Study

A non-experimental causal-comparative research study, or ex-post facto research,

was conducted “to explain [the] differences between groups by examining differences in

the experiences of the group members” (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010, p.31).

Kalaian (2013) stated that the causal-comparative study “describes the state of existing

differences among groups of individuals or objects as they existed at a given time and

place and attempts to determine the possible causes or reasons for the existing

differences” (p. 729). In this study, the researcher recruited anonymous participants by

emailing the education degree program leaders (deans, program directors, department

chairs, provosts, and professors) of 86 identified institutions of higher education in the

four New England states. With 45 faculty members completing the survey from the

22

original 56 respondents (self-reported early childhood education faculty members), the

researcher then selected groups within existing differences (philosophical orientations of

higher education faculty members/independent variable) and attempted to identify

plausible reasons for the differences based on the literature.

This methodology defined the independent (educational philosophy) and

dependent (teaching style) variables and selected participants from pre-existing groups

(data obtained from demographics and PAEI results) to control for extraneous variables.

For this study, a purposive sample consisted of early childhood education faculty

teaching in institutions of higher education located in land-based campuses in Maine,

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. By using a purposive sample, the

researcher acknowledged the awareness that the findings may not be generalized to the

larger population.

Data on the independent and dependent variables were collected through the

administration of two instruments combined to create a one-time online survey through

Survey Monkey. In this study, the instruments of the Philosophy of Adult Education

Inventory (PAEI) and Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) were merged into one

survey tool and was administered at the beginning of the collection phase. These

variables were measured using statistical measurements such as descriptive statistics,

frequency distributions, correlational statistical tests, and analysis of variance. The

correlated continuous data to guide the interpretation of the analysis included graphic

supports of bar graphs, histograms, scatter plots, and correlation matrices.

23

Definition of Terms

In this study, the following terms are defined as:

Adult Education Philosophy

“The attitudes and ideas teachers and instructors possess and incorporate,

intentionally or unintentionally, into their learning environment and lesson content”

(Floyd, 2010, p. 6). The five western educational philosophies are liberal, progressive,

behavioral, humanistic, and radical/critical (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007).

Andragogy

According to Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (2012), the term andragogy literally

means “The art and science of helping adults learn” (Knowles, 1980, p. 43). It is process

oriented and is a “systematic formulation laying out the differences between children and

adult learners” and “contributed to the development of the field of adult education at a

time when adult educators were struggling to establish their own identity separate from

childhood education” (Merriam & Bierema, 2014, p. 46).

Early Childhood Education

“Early childhood education refers to systems of education and care for young

children from birth through 8 years old by people other than family members in settings

outside of the child’s home” (Follari, 2015, p. 7).

Educational Philosophy

“Philosophy of education is a field where philosophical inquiry is pursued that

focuses upon issues arising within the domain of education” (Phillips, 2010, p. 18).

24

Learner-Centered Teaching Styles

Fries (2012), acknowledging Elias and Merriam (1995) and Conti (2007), asserted

it was “An interactive learning process in which the learners are actively engaged in

experiences and role of the teacher is to serve as a facilitator who is focused on the

students’ abilities and needs” (Fries, 2012, p. 9). Further, a “learner-centered style is

consistent with the western philosophies of pragmatism, existentialism, reconstructionist,

and the educational philosophies of progressivism, humanism, and realism” (Fries, 2012,

p. 9).

Pedagogy

Focused on content delivery more so than process, Martin and Loomis (2007)

noted pedagogy can simply be defined as “Ways of teaching” (p. 172). In other words,

pedagogy is “knowledge of general principles of teaching and learning, such as the ability

to maintain an orderly and learning focused classroom or to guide student learning with

questions” (Kauchak & Eggen, 2010, p. 16).

Principle of Congruity

One of four guiding principles proposed by Katz (1977) related to teacher

preparation for adult learners that asserts “the way we teach teachers should be congruent

in many basic aspects-but not all-with the way we want them to teach children” (p. 4).

This principle utilized in a model of professional development assumes “the mature

professional is one who is guided in his or her actions by a set of internalized personal

beliefs” (Dobson & Dobson, 1983, p. 20). Further, “this principle is ‘derived from two

presuppositions.’ One is that we serve as a model for both adult and child students; the

25

other is that there are generic teaching principles applicable to learners of all ages”

(VanderVen, 2000, p. 5).

Teacher-Centered Teaching Style

Based on Elias and Merriam (2005) and Conti (2007), Fries (2009) defined a

teacher-centered style of teaching as “A formal, controlled, and autocratic instructional

style which assumes the learners are passive. Teacher-centered teaching styles are

consistent with the western philosophies of idealism, realism, and the educational

philosophies of liberal and behaviorism” (p. 9).

Teacher Preparation Program

A teacher preparation program is, according to the United States Department of

Education, “a State-approved course of study, the completion of which signifies that an

enrollee has met all the State's educational or training requirements for initial certification

or licensure to teach in the State's elementary or secondary schools. A teacher

preparation program may be a regular program or an alternative route to certification, as

defined by the State” (Teacher preparation program, 2015).

Teaching Style

“Set of teaching behaviors employed in the learning context which are consistent

over time and context” and “when used in combination represents an individual’s

approach to teaching. The collaborative teaching mode, or learner-centered style, and the

teacher-centered style are two fundamental teaching styles” (Robinson, 2012, p. 30).

Assumptions, Limitations, and Delimitations

Assumptions, limitations, and delimitations are common in research studies. In

this section, a theoretical assumption and assumption about the sample are shared. In

26

addition, addressed are the potential weaknesses in the limitations and in the

delimitations key information is highlighted regarding the population in the sample.

Assumptions

Principle of Congruity: There is an assumption that faculty are not aware of but

teach using the Principle of Congruity (as identified by Katz, 1977).

Accuracy: Participants who completed the survey were honest and provided

accurate information regarding their teaching behaviors, as well as, demographic

information.

Limitations

Participant perceptions: Although there were no right or wrong answers,

participants were aware of the subject of the study: educational philosophy and teaching

style. Participants may have responded according to their espoused theories instead of

their theories-in-use based on current research of the two topics.

Sample Size: A small sample size can affect the statistical significance and the

assumptions of normal distribution in a research study, therefore raising questions of

generalizability to the larger audience.

Self-Reporting Anonymous Survey: Information may be inaccurate if the

participants misunderstood the instruments. The survey did not allow for participants to

share additional information about the instrument questions.

Survey Length and Time Commitment: The survey indicated it would take

20-25 minutes to complete. If the time had been shorter, it may have impacted the

number of faculty choosing to start and/or complete the study.

27

Time of year data collected: Data was collected during the first three months of

the Spring Semester/Winter Quarter. Faculty teaching during other terms may not have

been aware of or had the chance to complete the study.

Delimitations

Purposive Sample: Faculty were recruited from four New England states and in

colleges and universities with teacher preparation programs, therefore the results may not

be generalizable to all higher education teacher preparation programs due to the limited

scope of the study and the subjectivity of the researcher in deciding criteria for inclusion.

Unknown number of faculty: A formula was used to approximate a percentage

of the number of early childhood faculty; however, it was impossible to determine the

exact number of faculty members actually teaching in any given semester within the four

states. There was no requirement for faculty members to complete the survey, those who

did respond to the survey, did so voluntarily.

Teaching Behaviors: Participants were unable to share information about their

teaching behaviors beyond the confines of the questions listed on the survey.

Organization of the Remainder of the Study

Chapter 2 will address the theoretical framework for the study, along with the

presentation, analysis, synthesis, and critique of appropriate literature related to the

problem as identified in Chapter 1. Chapter 3 will describe the Causal-Comparative

methodology and answer the research questions. Chapter 4 will present the analysis of

the data collected and Chapter 5 will conclude the dissertation with a summary of

findings, conclusions drawn from the data collected, implications for practice, the

28

relationship with the literature review, and the recommendations for practice and future

research.

29

CHAPTER 2. LITERATURE REVIEW

This study identified and examined the educational philosophies of adult

education of early childhood education higher education faculty members and their

preferred teaching styles to gain an in-depth understanding of their orientations and

teaching practices in teacher preparation programs. The theoretical framework of the

philosophical orientations (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007), teaching styles (Conti,

1982; 1990), and the Principle of Congruity (Katz, 1977) provided the foundation of the

study. This also established the basis for the use of the two instruments to measure these

constructs in the study: Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) ©

and Principles

of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) ©

. Chapter 2 will address the five philosophies of adult

education in relation to the philosophical concepts, purpose of education, prominent

theorists, teaching style (learner-centered or teacher-centered), educator and learner roles,

and teaching methods. Following this framework, an overview of Zinn’s (2007)

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) ©

instrument is provided.

Additionally, the theoretical framework in chapter 2 will provide an overview of

the collaborative and non-collaborative teacher styles. Conti’s (1982) instrument

Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) ©

is shared, along with information on the

seven factors that identify specific factors of a teaching style: learner-centered activities,

personalizing instruction, relating to experience, assessing student needs, climate

building, participation in the learning process, as well as, flexibility for personal

30

development. Lastly, the theoretical framework in chapter 2 introduces the relationship

between theory and practice and the Principle of Congruity (Katz, 1977) in the field of

early childhood education.

The chapter continues with the literature review following the theoretical

framework and addresses adult learners in the field of early childhood specifically

focusing on the uneven qualifications of teachers in the field, the academic barriers, the

lack of professional standards, and compensation. The literature review then shares

information on early childhood teacher preparation programs in regards to national

studies, the academic and developmental approaches to curriculum development,

andragogy and pedagogy, and the relationship between theory and practice with

educational philosophy, teaching style, and the Principle of Congruity being addressed in

various research studies focusing on the teaching practices of the several programs of

study in early childhood higher education. The chapter will end with a review of the

methodological issues regarding research designs on educational philosophy and teaching

style preferences with a review of four research studies focused on higher education. It

will also focus on the rationale to utilize the causal-comparative research methodology

for this study. In addition, a synthesis of the literature review and a critique of previous

research will briefly be shared.

In addition to several resources provided by Dr. Gary J. Conti, Dr. Cindi Fries,

and Dr. Lorraine M. Zinn, a comprehensive literature review was completed through the

Capella University and Rivier University databases including: Academic Search Premier,

Credo Reference, ProQuest Dissertations and Thesis Global, EBSCO Host, Education

Research Complete, ERIC, Gale Virtual Reference Library, Google scholar, ProQuest

31

Education Journals, Sage Journals Online, Sage Research Methods, and Summon.

Additionally, the following specific journals were reviewed Adult Education Quarterly,

Adult Learner, Adult Learning, Dimensions of Early Childhood, Early Childhood

Education Journal, Early Childhood Research and Practice, Early Childhood Research

Quarterly, Exchange, International Research in Early Childhood Education, Journal of

Early Childhood Education Teacher Education, and YC Young Children.

Theoretical Framework

Philosophy raises questions of what we do and why we do it. In adult education,

according to Elias and Merriam (2005) these questions exist in the relationship between

theory and practice. Some researchers suggest these two independent variables belong in

different realms, while “others view one’s practice and action as being logically derived

from one’s theory and philosophy” (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 4). Philosophy of Adult

Education can take many forms or approaches such as utopian ideals that are

inspirational; a normative or prescriptive approach in which directions are clearly stated;

an investigative approach with a justification; or an analytical approach.

Philosophy of Adult Education is generally concerned with planning and

methodological instruction in which the adult educator is “more interested in skills than

in principles” (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 11) and a working philosophy, according to

Brookfield (1990), provides the answers of “why you’re doing what you’re doing” (p.

16). Because the emphasis is on the why of education, the focus tends to be on the ideals,

attitudes, and beliefs the educator teaches with, not what content or the process of how

they teach learners in the classroom (Brookfield, 1990; Elias & Merriam, 2005; Kumar,

2015). Day and Amstutz (2003) pointed out, “holding one set of beliefs does not

32

eliminate the possibility of holding additional belief-sets” (p. 93). To understand the

educational process, Conti (1985) believed that educators must consider their experiences

and use critical reflection in order to be aware of not only what, but also the reasons and

principles for why the educator makes decisions in the learning environment. As a result,

Conti (1985) believed an examination of teaching style was important as it places an

emphasis “on the actual behavior that the teacher demonstrates in the classroom” (p. 7).

Teaching style, for this reason, is the second theoretical construct of the

framework and helps to understand, examine, and explore the relationship in the

teaching-learning process (Conti, 1985; Conti & Welborn, 1986; East, 2013; Fischer &

Fischer, 1979; Floyd, 2010; Fries, 2012; Galbraith, 1999; Swetnam, 2011; Zinn, 2007).

Conti and Welborn (1986) declared that a teaching “style is the operational behavior of

the teacher’s educational philosophy” (p. 20) and a teaching style is a set of consistent

qualities or behaviors that persist over time in various educational experiences and

situations. Referencing Cross (1976) and Kolb (1984), Conti and Welborn (1986)

surmised a teaching style is not inclusive to simply the operational behavior, but can also

be referred to as the way a teacher “collects, organizes, and transforms information into

useful knowledge” (p. 20).

The third theoretical construct for the framework lies in the relationship of theory

and practice (Argyris & Schön, 1974; Brookfield, 2010) and the role of the Principle of

Congruity (Katz, 1977). Argyris and Schön (1974) suggested, “theories are for

explanation, prediction, or control” (p. 5) and believed in order to be effective, an

individual must act according to their theories-in-use and implement their espoused

theories when engaging in practice. Moon (2013) shared that public characterization of a

33

profession lies in the espoused theories and similar to Schön’s (1987) theory, Moon

reasoned it was in fact, the profession that developed the knowledge and beliefs regarding

the implementation and forms of practice utilized. Furthering this point, Brookfield

(2010) emphasized that theory development is a collective process that is linked to ideas

and practices that are “collectively developed by, and with, colleagues” (p. 71). Conti

(1985), however, pointed out that it was ultimately the responsibility of the educator to

improve “the delivery of services to the adult learner” (p. 8).

Galbraith (1999) believed “a working or guiding philosophy of educational

practice provides the foundation for all decisions, processes, and actions made about the

instructional and learning process” (p. 11). Based on this belief, Galbraith (1999) offered

an approach for educators “to examine their philosophical stance as it relates to the

instructional process” (p. 11). This process includes the educator examining the

principles of practice of adult education; engaging in identifying their beliefs, values, and

attitudes; then developing an instructional philosophy. After engaging in this process,

according to Galbraith (1999) the educator would benefit by having an organized vision

for individual practice and furthermore, would place the educator with a “coalition of

similar believers who attempt to practice the art and craft of instruction based on a shared

rationale” (p. 13).

When considering the role of theory and practice in early childhood teacher

preparation, Jones (1986) insisted, “I believe people who are going to become teachers of

young children should be taught in the same way I hope they will teach” (p. xi). This

sentiment is rooted in the Principle of Congruity as proposed by Katz (1977). Introduced

in literature and the field as early as 1975, this principle is one of four interrelated

34

principles for adult educators to consider when teaching adult learners and is based on the

notion of educating future teachers in a way that is congruent to the way we want them to

teach young children (Katz, 1977). The Principle of Congruity, along with educational

philosophies of adult education and teaching style preferences, form the theoretical

framework for this research study. Specific information on each of the three frameworks

is shared in the next three sections, in addition to two measuring instruments (Philosophy

of Adult Education Inventory and Principles of Adult Learning Scale).

Educational Philosophies of Adult Education

Zinn (2007) offered “A Philosophy of Education represents a comprehensive and

interrelated set of values and beliefs as applied to education including beliefs about the

purpose and nature of human life, the role of the individual in society, purposes or goals

of education, role(s) of teachers and learners, important subject matter, and effective

teaching approaches” (p. 13). Further, Merriam and Brockett (2007) pointed out that a

philosophy for education typically includes “terms, aims, and the roles of student and

teacher” (p. 28). Faculty members traditionally are responsible for selecting and making

decisions regarding the material and content they will cover in their coursework.

Therefore, they often choose what they believe is the most effective way of incorporating

this material into their syllabi, learning sessions, assignments, etc. While this is true,

Conti (2004) asserted that educators are often unable to “state their beliefs about

teaching” (p. 75), yet according to Zinn (1994), an educator’s personal philosophy

provides “a strong basis for making decisions and taking actions in the practice of adult

education” (p. 81). By being aware of the relationship between educational philosophy

35

and teaching practices, educators can reflect on their current practices and decide if they

wish to continue with similar practices or design and implement new practices.

Decisions regarding the best way to approach defining a personal philosophy are

numerous. Elias and Merriam (1980) offered three approaches including (1) educators

choosing a particular theoretical framework and building an educational philosophy upon

it; (2) educators choosing non-conflicting theories and specific elements and creating an

eclectic philosophical approach; or (3) educators choose one philosophy or determine

their approach is already espoused. On the other hand, Apps (1985) believed educators

could develop a working philosophy by considering philosophic questions and using a

scientific method of analysis. The philosophic questions, pointed out by Apps (1985),

would center around the learner, purpose of adult education, content/subject matter, the

learning process, and the beliefs of the role of the adult educator. Following the scientific

approach of analysis, Apps (1985) reasoned an educator could build upon his/her

philosophy as needed, by identifying with an educational philosophy, reviewing the

framework critically, determining how best their values and beliefs fit within the theories,

and adjusting his/her teaching practices to align with the philosophical schema. In 1983,

Zinn established and developed the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI,

revised 2007) to help adult educators determine their philosophical orientation(s) and

focused on five of the seven educational philosophies, which were originally identified

by Elias and Merriam (1995). These five philosophical orientations include liberal,

progressive, behavioral, humanistic, and radical/critical. Each of the five philosophies

are discussed below and include a description of the philosophy, along with the

philosophical concepts, purpose of education, prominent theorists, teaching style, the

36

roles of the educator and adult learner, as well as the teaching methods utilized in the

teaching environment supported by the individual philosophy.

Liberal adult education. The liberal philosophy of adult education is rooted in

the classical period of Greek philosophy and is the oldest Western educational philosophy

(Elias & Merriam, 2005; Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007). In 2007, the Association of

American Colleges and Universities (AACU) stated the purpose of a liberal education is

to prepare individuals “to live responsible, productive, and creative lives in a dramatically

changing world” (p. 1). Liberal educators view learning “for its own sake” and stress a

general education that is based on intellectual, traditional education and classic humanism

(Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007). Considered global and pluralistic, liberal

education “embraces the diversity of ideas and experiences that characterize the social,

natural, and intellectual world” (AACU, 2007, p.1) in order to “make a person literate in

the broadest sense-intellectually, morally, and spiritually” (Kumar, 2015, p. 40).

Theorists recognized in liberal education include classical Greek philosophers, Socrates,

Plato, and Aristotle, as well as the philosophers Mortimer Adler, Robert Hutchins,

Jacques Maritain, Mark Van Doren, Allen Bloom, and E. H. Hirsch (Elias & Merriam,

2005; Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007).

Further, the liberal philosophy considers historical and cultural perspectives in

relation to religion, philosophy, and humanities over the sciences and current societal

issues (Zinn, 2007). Liberal education, not to be confused with a liberal political view,

follows a teacher-centered teaching style and utilizes didactic methods such as lecture,

note taking, critical reflective readings, and study groups (Conti, 2007; Elias & Merriam,

2005; Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007). The role of the educator if often viewed as the expert,

37

or ‘sage on the stage,’ who transmits knowledge (one way-from the educator to the

student) and the educator dictates the learning outcomes in the classroom setting (Elias &

Merriam, 2005; Kumar, 2015). As such, liberal educators believe the role of the learner,

or ‘Renaissance person,’ is to be passive and non-interactive (Elias & Merriam, 2005;

Zinn, 2007); hence, the learner is one “who seeks knowledge rather than information”

and “has a cognitive capacity for conceptual and theoretical understanding” (Kumar,

2015, p. 40).

Progressive adult education. The origins of the progressive philosophy of adult

education date to the 16th

century European history with the works of Bishop Comenius,

Jean Jacques Rousseau, Johann Pestalozzi, Fredrich Froebel, and Charles Darwin. In the

early 20th

century of the United States, society was shifting to a more urban and

industrialized nation and educators such as John Dewey were instrumental in the

development and progression of the progressive movement (Elias & Merriam, 2005). In

fact, the basis of this philosophical orientation is rooted in pragmatism that “accepts both

relativism and pluralism of worldviews” and considers the attitudes of “the nature of

human beings and the evolving world” (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 53). Progressive

philosophy, like pragmatism, according to Elias and Merriam (2005), accepts the

methods of science, the inductive scientific method, consequences of actions, and has an

emphasis on social reform as the movement sought to not only understand, but also to

change the world.

With a focus on lifelong learning, as well as problem-solving, experience-based

educational practices, active inquiry, and practical knowledge, the purpose of this

philosophy is “to transmit culture and societal structures to promote social change” and to

38

“reform society” (Kumar, 2015, p. 40). Additional theorists in the realm of progressive

education include Herbert Spencer, William James, William Kilpatrick, Eduard

Lindeman, Paul Bergevin, Kenneth Benne, Ralph Tyler, Carl Rogers, Malcolm Knowles,

Paulo Freire, Cyril Houle, and Robert Blakely (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007). The

progressive philosophy follows a learner-centered teaching style as shared by Conti

(2007) and the teacher’s role is to educate “people to live responsibly and resolve

problems cooperatively within a democratic society” (Zinn, 2007, p.15). Knowledge is

actively constructed in a progressive educational philosophy and the educator is

considered a guide who promotes communities within the classroom. As a result, this

philosophical approach creates a collaborative learning model for learners to coordinate

and cooperatively engage in the process of solving situations related to real life (Zinn,

2007).

Subsequently, in the progressive philosophy, the role of the learner is one of an

active participant who is seen as having unlimited potential. The teacher and learner

engages in the constructivist learning process, in which, knowledge is actively

constructed and the learning experience, as well as the considerations of the learner’s

experiences, needs, and interests are attended to (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Kauchak &

Eggen, 2010; Zinn, 2007). Engagement in learning experiences may include integrated

curriculums, use of the scientific method, engaging in real life simulations and learning

experiences, project based learning, and the development of portfolios (Elias & Merriam,

2005; Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007).

Behavioral adult education. Founded in the 1920’s by James Watson, the

behavioral philosophy of adult education is a psychological system that focuses on the

39

observed science of behavior. According to Elias and Merriam (2005) “all human

behavior is the result of a person’s prior conditioning and is determined by external

forces in the environment over which a person has little or no control” (p. 83). The

purpose of this philosophical orientation lies in the ability to control the behavior of the

individual with a reward and punishment system, which will ultimately ensure

compliance with standards and societal expectations. Leading behavioral theorists

included Edward Thorndike, Ivan Pavlov, James Watson, and B. F. Skinner (Elias &

Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007).

With a focus on behavior modification, behaviorists emphasize the importance of

learning how to learn, acquiring job skills, individual success and deemphasizing

competition, as well as, “reinforcing cooperation and interdependence on a global level in

order that the world’s problems can be addressed” (Elias & Merriam, 2005, p. 92).

Mastery in competency-based learning, trial and error, skill training, computer-assisted

instruction, standardized testing, and the looping of performance, feedback, and

reinforcement are common methodologies. Considered as a manager or boss, the

educator utilizes a teacher-centered teaching style where learners are active participants

in the preprogrammed instructional process (Conti, 2007). As a result, the learners’ role

is to practice specific behaviors at their own speed, and in varying learning styles, until

they have mastery in achieving the course goals and objectives (Conti, 2007; Elias &

Merriam, 2005).

Humanistic adult education. The humanistic philosophy of adult education has

roots in various countries like China, Greece, and Rome with philosophers such as

Confucius, Plato, and Aristotle. Humanism, according to Elias and Merriam (2005)

40

“holds sacred the dignity and autonomy of human beings” (p. 111). In the United States,

the works of Maslow and Rogers started the humanistic movement in the 1950’s and

1960’s, and with the work of Knowles in the 1970’s, it has continued to develop.

Considered as a protest to behaviorist and Freudian positions, the concepts focused on in

this philosophy include freedom and autonomy, individuality and potentiality, self-

concept and the self, self-actualization, perception, and responsibility and humanity

(Elias & Merriam, 2005; Maslow, 1954; Rogers, 1969; Zinn, 2007).

Rogers (1969) followed a student-centered approach and believed that human

beings were proactive and free to make choices, that external forces or urges did not

determine these choices, and that the behaviors exhibited were as a result, the

consequences of the individual’s choice. Maslow’s (1954) hierarchy of needs was the

basis for self-motivation and recognized that humans, in an attempt to be fully

functioning, moved through five levels (psychological, safety, social, and esteem) in a

desire for self-actualization. Knowles’ (1970) awareness that learners who had

unsuccessful experiences in learning had little confidence and as such, negative self-

concepts to the experiences, proposed the European concept of andragogy in support of

the development of adult learning. Experiential learning, openness, cooperation,

individuality, and authenticity are often synonymous with this orientation (Kumar, 2015)

and the purpose is to enhance growth and personal development in order to reform

society (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007).

Humanistic theoretical roots can be found in the earlier works of Martin

Heideggger, Jean Paul Sartre, Albert Camus, Gabriel Marcel, and Martin Buber, as well

as theorists such as Rollo May, Gordon Allport, Erich Fromm, and Allen Tough.

41

Equally, humanistic writings are also in the works of Stephen Brookfield, Sherman

Stanage, Jack Mezirow, and Peter Jarvis (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007). Utilizing

a learner-centered teaching style, the role of the educator becomes one of a facilitator for

learning as the teacher mentors and partners with the learner to promote learning; acts as

a resource; and engages in the teaching-learning process (Zinn, 2007). For this reason,

the learners take responsibility for their own self-direction, development of, and role in

the engagement in the teaching-learning process. Teaching methods common in this

philosophy include experiential learning, group work and discussions, individual studies

and independent projects, self-assessments, and discovery methods (Elias & Merriam,

2005; Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007).

Radical adult education. The radical (or critical) philosophy of adult education

has its origins in the roots of Marxism, Anarchism, Freudianism, and Socialism beliefs

(Elias & Merriam, 2005). Expansion of this philosophy included works by the theorists

in the 1930’s from George Counts and Theodore Brameld, and by the 1960’s theorists

such as Jonathan Kozol, John Holt, Paul Goodman, Ivan Illich, John Ohlinger, and Paulo

Freire (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007). The radical philosophy has expanded to

include the work of Jurgen Habermas’ Critical Social theory and the perspectives of

Colin Griffin, Michael Collins, Michael Welton, Matthias Finger, Arthur Wilson, and

Stephen Brookfield. Furthermore, an expansion has occurred with a focus on the

Feminist theory (or feminist pedagogy) with the support of Frances Maher, Mechthild

Hart, Sue Blundell, and the work from Mary Field Belenky, Blythe McVicker Clinchy,

Nancy Rule Goldberger, and Jill Mattuck Tarule (Elias & Merriam, 2005).

42

As a force for transforming society, the radical (or critical) philosophy provides

an “awareness and understanding of the influences of cultural, political, and economic

factors on individuals within a society” (Zinn, 2007, p. 15). While the other philosophies

recognize the societal values and seek to advance accordingly within their respective

orientation, the radical philosophy is seen as a praxis with the purpose to “bring about

fundamental, social, political, & economic changes in society through education” and “to

change culture & its structure in order to eliminate various inequalities, dominations, and

exploitations” (Kumar, 2015, p. 40).

The role of the educator in this learner-centered teaching style is to create

opportunities for critical thinking and autonomous learning. The educator, aware of the

role to reconstruct society, acts as a convener and suggests, but does not direct, the

learning in the educational process (Kauchak & Eggen, 2010; Zinn, 2007). The learner,

whose role is to work equally with the educator, engages in dialogues, discussion groups

with peers, and utilizes critical pedagogy along with problem posing methods, reflection,

and action to ensure maximum interactions as they co-create their cultural values

(Kumar, 2015; Zinn, 2007).

McKenzie (1985) asserted that there is no superior or correct philosophy, nor is

there one philosophy that should be promoted over another philosophy. However, by

having an awareness of the various philosophies, McKenzie (1985) reasoned, educators

can make decisions and commit themselves based on the arguments of the various sides.

Galbraith (1999) asserted that the use of the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory

(PAEI) as “an informal activity of reflection is an excellent way of getting started in the

43

development of an instructional philosophy” and the instrument provides “labels or gives

terminology to our lists of beliefs, values, attitudes and practices” (p. 13).

Philosophy of adult education inventory (PAEI) ©. For this study, the

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) was utilized to measure the independent

variable of the educational philosophy. The PAEI was developed by Dr. Lorraine M.

Zinn and was “designed to help adult educators identify a personal philosophy of

education and compare it with prevailing philosophies of adult education” (Zinn, 2007,

p.1). The PAEI is an assessment instrument that is self-administering, self-scoring, and

self-interpreting and as acknowledged by Zinn (2007), “THERE ARE NO RIGHT OR

WRONG ANSWERS” (p. 3).

In summation, the first framework identified the five educational philosophies of

adult education and provided an examination of each philosophy in relation to how it is

defined in terms of concepts, purposes, roles, and teaching methods. Because

philosophy questions consider the what and why we do something, it is important to

address the relationship of philosophy to theory and practice. The next framework to be

introduced, teaching styles, or as noted by Conti and Welborn (1986) the operational

behavior of the educator’s educational philosophy, will explore and examine the

relationship in the teaching-learning process.

Teaching Styles

Noting that many of the traits associated with a teaching style are developed

slowly over time and reflect the individual characteristics of the educator , Conti and

Welborn (1986) pointed out, “Style refers to a person’s pervasive qualities that persist

even though situational conditions may change” (p. 20). As noted earlier by Fries (2012),

44

a teaching method is not the same as a teaching style because a method is a single

incident in the classroom, whereas a teaching style is based on many variables and

factors. Conti (1978) recognized two fundamental teaching styles practiced in

classrooms: teacher-centered (collaborative) and learner-centered (non-collaborative) and

believes educators teach a range of behaviors on the continuum. According to Conti

(1989), each teaching relationship is based on four interacting variables including “the

nature of the learner, the teacher, the situation, and the content” (p. 6). Various factors

also influence the educator’s style including educational philosophy, academic training,

age, and experiential background. Knowledge of the interacting variables and individual

factors can provide the educator with important information that can be used to identify

strengths and weaknesses, as well as understand their approaches to specific classroom

behaviors (Conti, 1985). Robinson (2012) wrote, “that despite widespread promotion by

scholars and practitioners to adapt a collaborative-teaching mode (Barrett, 2004; Conti,

1985; Dupin-Bryant, 2004; Seevers, 1995) and evidence that learner-centered

environments lead to desired learner outcomes (Conti & Welborn, 1986; Wigington,

Tollefson, & Rodriguez, 1989), facilitators in many settings operate from a teacher-

centered mode (Barrett, 2004; Clow, 1986; Seevers, 1995; Spoon & Schell, 1998; Stover,

2006; Willson, 2006; Wilson, 1994)” (p. 5). This study measured the teaching styles of

teacher-centered and learner-centered, as well as identified the seven factors, according to

Conti (1985) that is known to establish a general teaching mode of an adult educator.

Detailed information on each of the two teaching styles, as well as the seven factors are

outlined next.

45

Teacher-centered teaching style. A teacher-centered teaching style follows a

liberal or behavioral educational philosophy of adult education (Conti, 1985). According

to Brown (2003), “The teacher uses her expertise in content knowledge to help learners

make connections. The effort to get to know the learner and how he processes

information is secondary” (p. 50). As a result, the role of the educator involves directing

the learning experience, determining goals for the learners, and producing desired

behavioral changes in the classroom. Aaronsohn (2003) further noted, that “teacher-

centered education appropriates to the teacher the role of expert, sole resource,

transmitter of knowledge, fountain of meaning, decision maker, owner of right answers,

primary talker, and primary thinker” (p. 144). Burns (2002) shared that in a teacher-

centered approach, educators are often demonstrating, guiding group discussions, and

lecturing, which according to Burns (2002) “is considered the most overused and

ineffective method of teaching” (p. 265). Learners in a teacher-centered environment are

often passive as they receive information from the educator. In contrast to the teacher-

centered teaching style where the educator directs the teaching-learning process, the

learner-centered teaching style involves both the educator and the learner in the process.

Learner-centered teaching style. A learner-centered teaching style aligns with

the educational philosophies of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical (Conti,

1985). Educators following this teaching style serve as a facilitator or guide to the

learner and according to Weimer (2013), “show[s] those who follow the way, but those

who follow walk on their own” (p. 60). As educators engage in the teaching-learning

process, learners are mutual partners and as active participants, are responsible to share

their previous experiences and discuss their individual needs. As a result, the learning

46

environment provides opportunities for cooperative and collaborative learning

experiences, personalized instruction, flexibility for personal development, as well as

engagement in inquiry and problem-based learning (Conti, 2004; Elias & Merriam, 2005;

Weimer, 2013).

Learner-centered approaches to teaching support active learning and build

communities of learners through meaningful, respectful, constructivist, experiential, and

transformational learning experiences. These experiences build a sense of self-efficacy

through cooperative inquiry learning that support the learners in linking their experiences

and content knowledge to real life scenarios (Belenky, Clinchy, Goldberger, & Tarule,

1986; Bowman & Stott, 1996; Bufkin & Bryde, 1996; Jacobs, 2001; MacDermid, Jurich,

Myer-Walls, & Pelo, 1992; Merriam & Bierema, 2014; Svinicki & McKeachie, 2011;

Swick, DaRos, & Pavia, 1998; Weimer, 2013).

Weimer (2013) shared learner-centered teaching is teaching

“that engages students in the hard, messy work of learning” (p. 15),

“motivates and empowers students by giving them some control

over learning processes” (p. 15),

“encourages collaboration, acknowledging the classroom (be it

virtual or real) as a community where everyone shares the learning

agenda” (p. 15),

“promotes students’ reflection about what they are learning and

how they are learning it” (p. 15), and,

“includes explicit learning skills instruction” (p. 15).

Weimer (2013) examined Trigwell’s 2010 findings and noted that teacher-

centered practices are “strongly and positively associated with surface and non-deep

approaches,” whereas learner-centered teaching, “promotes a different, deeper, and better

kind of learning. It is a kind of learning that lasts, and learning that enables higher

education to achieve some of its broadest and highest goals” (p. 33). The concept of deep

47

and surface learning is based on the seminal research of Marton and Saljo in 1976, which

was later updated in 1997 with Marton, Hounsell and Entwistle’s study. In this study,

learners were asked to read academic text and then describe what they had read. Learners

who memorized the facts and details while failing “to differentiate between evidence and

information, were unreflective and saw the task as an external imposition” (Weimer,

2013, p. 31). This type of learning was considered surface and was in direct contrast to

the deep learning where learners “focused on what the author meant, related new

information to what they already knew and had experienced, worked to organize and

structure the content, and saw the reading as an important source of learning” (Weimer,

2013, p. 31).

Adult educators implementing learner-centered practices also have the

opportunity to consider the balance of power between educator and learner, the function

of content, and the responsibility for learning (Weimer, 2013) with an awareness to

design and create environments that address the diversity and needs of the changing

demographics of adult learners in the classroom setting (Merriam & Bierema, 2014).

Awareness and recognition of these two varying approaches allows for differentiation of

learning styles in the adult learners and can create opportunities for the different

methodologies to emerge as the learners engage with the material and education of the

profession. Furthermore, Conti (1985) believed being aware of and recognizing the two

approaches (teacher-centered and learner-centered), was just one step in the process and

understanding the seven basic elements, or factors, of a teaching mode would be the next

step in understanding how specific behaviors align with a teaching style.

48

Teaching style factors. Conti (1985) identified seven factors that he considered

to be “the basic elements that make up an instructor’s general teaching mode” (p. 9) and

believed that having an understanding of their preferred teaching style, the educator could

then utilize the seven factors to identify specific behaviors. These factors included

learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction, relating to experience, assessing

student needs, climate building, participation in the learning process, as well as,

flexibility for personal development (Conti, 1985). By analyzing the various factors,

Conti believed that educators could determine which teaching practices aligned with their

teaching style and which ones were in contrast, and as such, the educator could make

decisions in the classroom that supported their preferred teaching style (Conti, 1985).

Each of the seven teaching style factors, as identified by Conti (1985), is explained in

more detail below in an effort to illustrate the differences of each.

Factor one: learner-centered activities. Learner-centered activities can “relate to

evaluation by formal tests and [be] a comparison of students to outside standards” (Conti,

1985, p. 9). A teacher-centered approach favors formalized testing, prefers learners to

accept values such as those of the middle-class, and utilizes traditional teaching methods

such as quiet deskwork to complete the educational objectives set forth by the educator.

Learner-centered educators, on the contrary, recognize that learners engage in different

learning styles, consider different values and perspectives, and encourage learners to

“take responsibility for their own learning” (Conti, 1985, p. 9).

Factor two: personalizing instruction. Personalizing instruction refers to the

ability of the educator to meet the needs of each learner. The teacher-centered teaching

style would include lectures, timed instruction, and competitive learning environments.

49

The learner-centered style, on the other hand, recognizes each learner as unique, supports

the individual’s pace for instruction, teaches in varying methods, and uses a variety of

materials and assignments for learning in the cooperative environment (Conti, 1985,

1989).

Factor three: relating to experience. Relating to experience involves whether the

educator takes into consideration the experiences of the learner in the development and

implementation in the learning environment. Educators using a teacher-centered teaching

style promote dependence upon the educator for knowledge. Learning activities are not

directly related to the learner’s experiences and learners are expected to be passive and

receive the information. A learner-centered teaching style, however, considers prior

experiences and prioritizes activities so that learners are able to make connections with

their everyday life. Learners are “encouraged to ask basic questions about the nature of

their society” (Conti, 1985, p. 10) while educators support their independent growth.

Factor four: assessing student needs. Assessing student needs occurs in learner-

centered classrooms. A teacher-centered educator does not consider the individual needs

of the learner when determining learning experiences, assignments, or as part of the

curriculum development phase. Learner-centered educators, at the same time, recognize

that learners are adults and have existing gaps in their knowledge base (Conti, 1985).

Educators using this teaching style engage in conversations with learners to determine

their wants and needs and support the learners’ goals by creating short and long-term

objectives.

Factor five: climate building. Climate building considerations create friendly and

informal environments that focus on the comforts of both the educator and learners’

50

physical and psychological needs (Conti, 1985, 1989). Teacher-centered educators do

not encourage risk-taking, nor do they accept and understand the benefits of errors in the

learning process. Unlike the teacher-centered approach, the learner-centered educator

teaches with an expectation that learners need breaks, that dialogues with other learners

are needed, and recognizes that risk-taking and errors are part of the process of learning

and comes with the learners’ ability to experiment, practice problem solving, and engage

in reflective feedback to grow.

Factor six: participation in the learning process. Participation in the learning

process, as shared by Conti (1989), “addresses the amount of involvement that the

student has in determining the nature and evaluation of the content material” (p. 10) and

as such, educators following the teacher-centered style provide less opportunities for

learners to engage in the determination of assignments or the way to evaluate them.

Conversely, the learner-centered teaching style engages learners in the process of

choosing topics, identifying problems, in addition to developing criteria for evaluation.

Factor seven: flexibility for personal development. Flexibility for personal

development considers the role of the educator and learner in the classroom experience.

Educators with the teacher-centered teaching style impart knowledge on the learners,

establish educational objectives, and establish and maintain a “well-disciplined

classroom” in order to create a “stimulus for learning” (Conti, 1985, p. 10). While this is

true, the learner-centered teaching style focuses on the learner and considers their role as

facilitators, adjusts the environment and curriculum to meet the diverse learners needs,

and addresses issues that relate to values in order to build a learner’s self-concept and

stimulate understanding of the diverse perspectives.

51

Elias & Merriam (2005) alluded to the fact that an important step in developing as

a professional is to consider the variables, factors, and overall teaching style preferences.

Conti (1985) addressing the role of teaching, stated, “if those entrusted with this crucial

position are to function as professional, they must be aware of what they do and why the

do it” (p.11). One way to determine to what degree of teaching style preferences are

exhibited in their educational practices is to utilize the Philosophy of Adult Learning

Scale (PALS).

Principles of adult learning scale (PALS)©. For this study, the Principles of

Adult Learning Scale (PALS) was utilized to measure the dependent variable of teaching

style. The PALS was developed by Dr. Gary J. Conti and upon completion of the survey

tool, a teacher “can gain a clearer understanding of his/her classroom behavior” (Conti,

1985, p. 10). Similar to the PAEI, the PALS is an instrument that can be self-

administered, self-scored, and self-interpreted and the results offer the educator the

opportunity to determine their teaching style, in addition to the scores for seven factors

that can be analyzed to determine if behaviors in the classroom are inconsistent (Conti,

1985).

As mentioned, Conti (1985) shared that teaching styles range from collaborative

(learner-centered) to non-collaborative (teacher-centered) and he identified seven factors

within a style of teaching. Educators considering their personal philosophy would benefit

from having awareness not only of their philosophical orientations, but also their teaching

style. This consciousness would allow the educator to consider and examine decisions in

the planning process (as part of their educational philosophy) in conjunction with

considerations of their actual behaviors (as part of their teaching style). This active

52

process of reflection would help educators determine if the decisions they are currently

making are in alignment with the practices they wish to implement in working with adult

learners. By having a consciousness of what governs his or her actions in the teaching-

learning process, Argyris and Schön (1974) believed educators could observe their own

behavior and determine whether their espoused theories were being implemented in

direct practice. For this reason, Argyris and Schön (1974) suggested through a

systematic process of theory to practice, the espoused theories of the educator working in

concurrence with theories-in-use had the potential to achieve desired results in the

educational environment.

In fact, Argyris and Schön (1974) reasoned espoused theories are theories in

which the educator “gives allegiance, and which, upon request, he communicates to

others” (p. 7). Moon (2013) added to this assertion noting “espoused theories tend to be

the theories taught to novices and held publically to characterize the professions” (p. 40).

Theories-in-use, in this case are the actual practices in which the faculty member

engages. This would involve a single-loop or double-loop learning process in which the

educator is deciding upon their preference to maintain a “sense of consistency” or if the

educator is looking to make changes. Referencing Schön’s beliefs, Moon (2013)

suggested “that espoused theory does not, and cannot, guide practice and that the

epistemology of professional knowledge and practice is related to the manner in which

professions have developed and their beliefs about their forms of practice” (p. 41).

Brookfield (2010) acknowledged that the development of theories was created by, and

with the work of, colleagues. This study recognizes the Principle of Congruity (Katz,

53

1977), a professional belief documented in the relationship between adult educators and

early childhood teacher preparation programs.

Principle of Congruity

The Principle of Congruity is the third theoretical framework in this research

study and addresses the connection between theory and practice in teacher preparation

programs. First introduced in the mid 1970’s, this principle is one of four offered to

educators to consider when engaging in the professional development of the adult learner

who works with young children. Katz (1977) offered, “the way we teach teachers should

be congruent in many basic aspects-but not all-with the way we want them to teach

children” (p. 4). Moreover, Katz believed that two assumptions needed to be considered

by educators: “One is that we serve as a model for both adult and child students; the other

is that there are generic teaching principles applicable to learners of all ages”

(VanderVen, 2000, p. 256).

Carter and Curtis (1994) also discussed theory and practice when engaging adult

learners in the knowledge of early childhood education. With experience as college

professors, they developed a teacher education model based on constructivist principles

that considered training for dispositions, the roles of teachers, and how to embrace

diversity. Within this model, they advocated for learning experiences that would be

active and reflective and believed constructivist teaching was best practices not only for

adults but also for children. Carter and Curtis (1994) wrote, “whatever methods are used

to educate teachers will surely be duplicated in their work with children. We can turn out

clones and robots who will do what they are told, or we can foster a love of learning,

produce critical thinkers, and develop creative, socially responsible citizens” (p. 1).

54

In 2014, Fulton and Myers (2014) wrote about the dilemmas faced in teacher

education and the importance of preparing early childhood students. Noting a personal

communication the author had with Katz who asked, “How do we teach in ways that we

want our students to teach?” Fulton and Myer (2014) considered the work of

Baumgarten, Buchanan, & Casbergue (2011), who “echoes Katz’s question” (Fulton &

Myers, 2014, p. 5) and confirmed that “literature indicates that developmentally

appropriate teaching practices for college age students should clearly reflect current

knowledge about how adults learn” (Baumgarten et al., p. 332).

Elias and Merriam (2005) shared, however, that one or more educational

orientations are used in combination, for single or multiple course instruction and that a

faculty member’s teaching style is directly related to and guided by their personal

educational philosophy (Elias & Merriam, 1995, 2005; Zinn, 1983, 2004, 2007).

Currently, two educational philosophies, progressive and humanistic, align with the

researched ideologies of early childhood teacher preparation programs in the United

States. In particular, the progressive philosophical orientation is associated with

constructivist teaching and inquiry learning (Alexander, 2014; Baptiste, 1996;

Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue, 2011; Bufkin & Bryde, 1996; Byler, 2000;

Dobson & Dobson, 1983; Fries, 2012; Fulton & Myers, 2014; Hughes, 1997; Jones,

1985, 1986, 1993; Katz, 1977, 1999; Kauchak & Eggen, 2010; Marshall, 1996;

McGlynn, 2001; Sluss & Thompson, 1998; Swick, DaRos, & Pavia, 1998; VanderVen,

2000; Vardanyan, 2013; Vella, 1994). Additionally, the humanistic philosophical

orientation promotes self-understanding and the encouragement of learners to grow

55

through an awareness of options (Bowman & Stott, 1996; Conti, 2007; Fries, 2012;

Jacobs, 2001; Riley, 2003).

Weimer (2013) pointed out a direct relationship exists between constructivism

and learner-centered teaching styles and confirmed “at the core of this currently

prominent educational theory is the relationship between learners and content” (p. 21).

Elias and Merriam (2005) argued that “Dewey and other progressives criticized

traditional education for being too concerned with the learning of certain academic

disciplines and not attending sufficiently to the impulses, interests, and purposes of

learners” (p. 64). Constructivist approaches, as illustrated in the progressive educational

philosophy, focus on active construction of knowledge versus a passive reception of

information being transferred from the teacher or books. Moreover, Stage et al. (1998)

stated “knowledge cannot simply be given to students: Students must construct their own

meanings” (p. 29). In the same manner, Fosnot (1996) contended, “teachers need to

allow learners to raise their own questions, generate their own hypotheses and models as

possibilities and test them for validity” (p. 21).

Consequently, by following Katz’s (1977) Principle of Congruity, the higher

education faculty member would model and utilize collaborative teaching practices

(progressive and/or humanistic) that they wish their learners to utilize in their own

teaching practices (learner-centered) with young children. Case in point, Baumgartner,

Buchanan, and Casbergue (2011) engaged in a process where they were practicing what

they preached and followed the Principle of Congruity in their teacher preparation

program. Collectively, the educators created a degree program that was “based on an

assumption that if teacher education students participate in developmentally appropriate

56

instruction as students, they will develop a deep and meaningful understanding of

developmentally appropriate practices (DAP) (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997) that they can

implement in their teaching practices” (p. 332).

In conclusion, the research findings in this theoretical section confirm there is a

positive relationship in adult educators knowing what educational philosophies they

espouse and how their teaching style may affect their behaviors in the classroom, or

theories-in-use. Equally important, research findings on the relationship between theory

and practice, specifically on adult educators and early childhood teacher preparation

programs in the United States, found that the educational philosophies of progressive and

humanistic were present. Findings also supported the use of a learner-centered teaching

style in both early childhood classrooms teaching children and in higher education

teacher preparation program classrooms. Finally, the research findings in early childhood

teacher preparation programs aligned with the research on the Principle of Congruity that

reasons adult educators teaching in teacher preparation programs should teach their adult

learners (who will be or are early childhood teachers working with children) in the same

way they want the adult learners to teach young children.

Research on teacher preparation programs have been published recently but none

have published findings regarding the philosophical orientations or teaching styles of

higher education faculty in early childhood teacher preparation programs in post-

secondary institutions. Additionally, two research studies (Hughes, 1997; Fries, 2012)

have been published identifying the educational philosophies and teaching styles

completed in divisions of Education. This research study will advance the scientific

knowledgebase by expansion of a theory and addition to the literature. By completing

57

the analysis and interpreting the data, findings from this research study will identify the

educational philosophies of the adult educator, as well as their teaching style preference.

Further, the study results will determine whether the educational philosophies and

teaching styles are congruent with one another in this sample of adult educators, and

whether these results are similar to the findings in Hughes’ (1997) or Fries’ (2012)

studies.

Review of the Research Literature

The purpose of this causal comparative research study was to identify the

individual educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of higher education

faculty teaching in teacher preparation programs in four New England states and to

determine if the educational orientation and teaching style preference are in congruence.

As documented, there is a need for increasing the educational qualifications of adult

learners who are working with young children or pre-service teachers being inducted into

the discipline of teaching early childhood. As such, it is projected an increase in higher

education faculty and teacher preparation programs will be needed for the influx of

diverse learners expected to enter higher education to pursue degrees in early childhood.

Further, Whitebook et al. (2012) acknowledged there is a lack of research in teacher

preparation programs involving adult educators and the various dimensions and

variations that relate to student learning. This literature review begins with information

on what is known about early childhood teachers working in educational settings teaching

with children birth through age 8 and addresses research on the uneven qualifications,

academic barriers, lack of professional standards, and compensation. Next, the literature

review provides what is known from the research findings of multiple national studies on

58

early childhood teacher preparation programs in the United States. Following that, the

literature review reports on the role of the two curriculum approaches in early childhood

(developmental and academic) and consideration of intentional teaching. Finally, the

literature review highlights how andragogy and pedagogy are defined in early childhood

education and the research findings providing a positive relationship between educational

philosophy, teaching style preferences, and the Principle of Congruity in several early

childhood teacher preparation programs in post-secondary institutions.

Review of Research Regarding the Influx of Adult Learners

Entwistle (2010) believed “higher education should… be concentrating on

helping students develop skills, attitudes, knowledge, and understanding that will be of

maximum value beyond academe; not just an induction into the world of work in a

specific profession, but also an effective preparation for life in the 21st century” (p. 20).

When considering the role of the adult educator, Merriam and Bierema (2014)

emphasized it was important to determine the demographics of the classroom, as well as

to get to know the learners and their needs in the course in relation to aspects such as age,

experience, culture, socio and economic level, oppression, political, and gender needs.

Research in the field of early childhood education has provided some of this information.

For instance, it is well documented in the field of early childhood education, variations

exist widely in the standard of educational requirements necessary for educators working

directly with young children (Goffin & Washington, 2007; Kagan, Kauerz, & Tarrant,

2008; Neugebauer, 2013). As a result, uneven standards range significantly from region

(county/neighborhoods) to region, as well as, state to state (national) and “most states do

not require teachers to have education or training in early childhood development to teach

59

in centers for children younger than 5” (Feeney, 2012, p. 20). As a result, some

educators have extensive knowledge of, and formal experiences working in, the field of

early childhood education and other educators are working in conditions with minimal to

no education and a lack of quality experiences in order to support their practices with

young children. As the field continues to expand to support the increase in educational

requirements needed, more learners will enter teacher preparation programs and adult

educators will need to be aware of the lack of uniformity that exists for those working

with children ages birth though eight in private and public settings and consider how this

will impact their specific teaching practices (Feeney, 2012; Whitebook, 2014). This

literature review searched for valid information that identified the demographics

regarding the early childhood workforce and current research on teacher preparation

programs in the United States.

As Belanger (1996) noted, “the question is no longer whether adult learning is

needed, and how important it is. The issue today is how to respond to this increasing and

diversified demand” (p. 21). “At one time an after-thought in the educational landscape,

adult learners are now a major population actively courted by countless institutions.

There are more than seven million adult learners studying today, and more than eight

million predicted by 2015” (Culver, 2008, p. 13). Adult education, as defined by

Merriam and Brockett (2007) are “activities intentionally designed for the purpose of

bringing about learning among those whose age, social roles, or self-perception, define

them as adults” (p.8). Merriam and Bierema (2013) shared that adult learners

differentiate from children in three dimensions: they have different position, roles and

responsibilities than children; they have more and different life experiences that can be

60

drawn upon; and adults are developmentally in a different life cycle stage with social

roles and psychosocial tasks to consider.

Whitebook’s (2014) report on Building a Skilled Teacher Workforce: Shared and

Divergent Challenges in Early Care and Education and in Grades K-12, estimated that

an additional demand of roughly 100,000 bachelor degreed preschool teachers are

expected to be needed by the year 2022, up from 2012 as forecasted by the United States

Department of Labor Statistics (United States Department of Labor Statistics, 2012;

Whitebook, 2014). In the report, this researcher shared that dialogue on “how to recruit

teachers and strengthen their initial teacher preparation” (p. 3) was underway. When

reviewing teacher education and certification, Whitebook (2014) pointed out that most

would agree that educators should have a bachelor’s degree if they are working with

young children across the early childhood age range. However, as pointed out, the

educational requirements vary for teachers working in early childhood settings from birth

through grade 3.

Whitebook (2014) shared in K-3 programs teachers have a bachelor’s degree and

roughly half have an advanced degree. In contrast, in early childhood settings serving

children birth through age four, the requirement is often set forth by the state licensing

standards where some programs are taught by a master’s degree teacher and other

programs have teachers with no college credits. As such, it is estimated in 2012, 45% of

teachers teaching three to five year olds had a bachelor’s degree or more, 17% had earned

an associate’s degree, 24% had some college education, and 13% had either not finished

or graduated from high school. In addition, Whitebook (2014) shared that racial, ethnic,

and linguistic diversity exist across the range and education of the teachers. It is reported

61

that 84% of K-3 teachers are white, whereas it is estimated that between one-third and

one-half of teachers who work in early childhood settings are of color (Whitebook ,

2014); furthermore, those in early childhood settings in the role of lead teaching and

positions of directing, were more likely to be white and speak only English.

Early childhood teachers often shift between careers in private and public settings.

Abbate-Vaughn and Paugh (2009) research study on ten paraprofessionals in a large,

urban college setting utilized qualitative tools such as surveys, interviews, and field

notes, to identify several themes as barriers to going back to school. Two identified

themes, academic and life-context, have implications for early childhood learners in

higher education settings. In their findings, the academic barriers that existed were

related to writing and English skills, and the life-contextual barriers were time

commitment and the balance of academic requirements of the course materials.

Stockman (2006) also noted the academic barrier as she wrote, “lack of basic skills in

writing, reading and math (to a lesser degree), is a barrier to many in the child care field

who are encouraged to take higher ed classes to pursue a degree” (Neugebauer, 2006, p.

22).

In addition to academic and life-contextual barriers, research shows there is a lack

of professional standards in the field. In her book Professionalism in Early Childhood

Education: Doing Our Best for Young Children, Feeney (2012) addressed this very

question when she asked “Does early childhood education have standards of practice?”

(p. 21). Noting the need for a set of professional standards as supported by Katz (1984)

who claimed “one of the major functions of a professional organization is to set standards

of performance based on the best available advanced knowledge and practices” (p. 3) and

62

further, followed up with the belief “one of the major tasks ahead for early childhood

educators is to develop and articulate the perceptions of professional standards” (Katz,

1988, p. 79). Feeney goes on to explain that having a unified set of standards would

create a workforce that not only defined and agreed upon the standards, but would also

put these into practice to establish a system of education that supports the educator.

Referencing the NAEYC’s position statement on Developmentally Appropriate Practices

(Copple & Bredekemp, 2009), Feeney (2012) pointed out that these are the “framework

of principles and guidelines for best practice when working with children and can be

regarded as an important step in the direction of developing standards of practice” (p. 22).

Further noting, Feeney (2012) implied if early educators were to be educated in a system

with clear goals, objectives, course content, and outcomes, they could perform more

confidently and effectively in their work with young children.

When considering the implications on the early educator, Barnett (2011) stated, “a

number of studies have reported finding no relationship between teacher qualifications

and teaching practices on children’s learning” (Zigler, Gilliam, & Barnett, 2011, p. 51).

The author presented several studies that related to increased sample sizes (934

educators) and discussed the limitations of a linear model for collecting data, focusing

specifically on child care centers, and of the sample size, only 223 observations of quality

were observed, and it skewed the relationship of quality teachers to salary. Implications

of the study suggested that further research and study was needed to be devoted to this

topic as there is “less certainty about the benefits of requiring a bachelor’s degree and

higher salaries” (Zigler et al., 2011, p. 53).

63

Compensation of an early childhood educator came forth numerous times in the

literature research review (Neugebauer, 2006; Zirkle 2001; Weaver-Hightower, 2011;

Feeney, 2012; Goffin & Washington, 2007). In each study, research indicated that salary

for early childhood educators is low. Gwen Morgan (2006) shared that “the reason for

the loss of capacity in higher education is tied to the salary issue in the early childhood

field” (Neugebauer, 2006, p. 22). Further noting is Hernandez (2006) who noted “folks

returning to school in order to keep their jobs in ECE… many with poor school

experiences, limited academic exposure… issues with literacy levels and the FEAR of

having to take other classes like required MATH or science in order to complete a

degree… the pressures on family life... and the pressure of the economics in getting the

degree” noted, “Will this truly make a difference in my paycheck?”(Neugebauer, 2006, p.

22).

Review of Research Regarding Early Childhood Teacher Preparation Programs

This literature review examined the research findings from several nationally

completed studies of teacher preparation programs in the United States. Research was

also conducted on the two approaches to teacher preparation curriculum development

(developmental and academic); noting, that there is no national consensus on best

practices but suggests the role of an intentional teacher promotes an integration of both

curriculum methodologies. The literature review further explored the research of

andragogy and pedagogy in the discipline of early childhood, as well as, the relationship

between theory and practice with educational philosophy, teaching style preferences, and

the Principle of Congruity in several early childhood teacher preparation programs in

post-secondary institutions.

64

Several studies focusing on early childhood teacher preparation programs have

been published since 1999 including the first published national study of “early childhood

teacher preparation programs that prepare individuals to work with children from birth to

age 4” (Maxwell, Lim, & Early, 2006, p. 1) by The National Center for Early

Development & Learning (NCEDL). In their findings, data about “the goals, capacity,

supports, and challenges” were reported (Maxwell et al., 2006, p. 1). In 2001, Early and

Winton shared the data received from 438 chairs/directors of teacher preparation

programs focused on early childhood education in 2-and 4-year institutions of higher

education. Their findings focused on faculty characteristics, courses and practicum

experiences, compared the early childhood programs and institutions, as well as

discussed challenges that faced the programs of study.

In 2004, the National Prekindergarten Center (NPC) expanded the scope of their

study and focused on the types and number of programs in addition to the characteristics

of the faculty, coursework, and practicum experiences. In this study, researchers

Maxwell, Lim, & Early outreached to 1,581 institutions, utilized questions from the

original 1999 study and included questions regarding curriculum content areas such as

math and literacy. This data has been utilized to form an understanding between the

relationship between professional preparation programs and the experiences of the

educator in relation to program design, characteristics, and quality (Maxwell, Lim, &

Early, 2006; Whitebook, et al., 2012).

In 2012, research on early childhood degree programs in higher education began

to identify gaps and opportunities available to adult learners. The Center for the Study of

Child Care Employment (CSCCE) at the University of California at Berkeley was

65

contracted by four individual states and began to administer the Early Childhood Higher

Education Inventory in institutes of higher education. In 2013, the states of New

Hampshire, New Jersey, and Rhode Island had completed the Inventory and by 2015,

California had also completed the Inventory and published their results. Posted on their

website, the introduction to the CSCCE Early Childhood Education Inventory Report

(2015) states,

The Inventory is a mechanism to describe the landscape of a state’s early

childhood degree program offerings, at the associate, bachelor’s, master’s, and

doctoral levels. The Inventory captures variations in program goals, content, child

age-group focus, student field-based learning, and faculty characteristics and

professional development needs. This information allows policy makers,

institutions of higher education and other stakeholders to identify the gaps and

opportunities in the available offerings, make informed policy decisions, and

assess the capacity of the higher education system over time.

The findings from the Inventory reports have been cited in recent research on

student teaching feedback, evaluation, and assessment tools (La Paro, et al., 2014).

When addressing the “shared and divergent challenges in early childhood and grades K-

12,” Whitebook (2014) noted, “the pipeline for teacher educators with ECE-specific

backgrounds is limited due to a dearth of ECE doctoral programs” (p. 9) when referring

to Teacher Career Pathways, Teacher Preparation and Professional Development Systems

in early childhood. Furthermore, Austin (2014) acknowledged the Inventory reports in

regards to leadership; addressing the age of faculty; and “the need for more leaders who

reflect the varied experiences of children, their families and the workforce who cares for

[and] educates them” (p. 41).

In addition to national studies addressing teacher preparation programs in the

United States, Neugebauer (2013) published a status report on the training of early

66

childhood teachers. In the report, he suggested that there is a “90% agreement among

early childhood professionals in the United States that the skills and attitudes of teachers

are critical to the quality of care that children receive” (p. 28). With similar findings to

Whitebook (2014), Neugebauer (2013) noted the variations to educational attainment

differed across the states in the field of early childhood but often occurred in one of four

forms: formal education, credentialing, specialized on-the-job in-service training, or

coaching. In a 2009 poll conducted, Neugebauer (2013) shared that of the responses,

taking college courses as part of formal education had ranked moderately high for both

experienced and inexperienced teachers. Neugebauer (2013) also shared another poll

conducted in the summer of 2010, which focused on educational training topics in his

report. Curriculum topics related to developmental aspects such as challenging

behaviors, assessments, scaffolding play, developmentally appropriate practices, etc.

ranked high. As noted by Neugebauer (2013), changes in educational requirements and

ongoing training are also shifting priorities as “findings in brain research are causing

states to take a closer look at the developmental value of exploration, play, and child-

centered learning at the same time that intense pressure to promote school readiness

through early childhood settings is moving the delivery of academic skills to the

forefront” (p. 30). These findings are part of a larger discussion of early childhood

curriculum regarding the academic and development approaches.

In the field of early childhood education, “historically, preschool education—

from its inception to about the 1980s—has been play-based, child-directed, and taught via

developmentally appropriate techniques. However, this trend, which is beneficial and

highly regarded by many child development specialists and teachers, quickly changed to

67

teacher-directed academic preschools after the release of A Nation at Risk (Gardner et al.,

1983)” (Vardanyan, 2013, p. 57). Currently, early childhood teacher preparation

curriculum tends to follow one of two approaches: Academic or Developmental (Berk,

2000; Daniels & Shumow, 2003; Elkind, 2001; Grisham-Brown, 2009; Katz, 1996, 1999;

Vardanyan, 2013). In a developmental approach, the teaching practices are guided by

developmental theories including Bandura's social learning theory, Piaget’s cognitive-

developmental theory, Vygotsky’s social constructivism, and Bronfenbrenner’s

ecological theory (Berk, 2000; Daniels & Shumow, 2003). In contrast, an academic

curriculum approach guides the teaching practices by Skinner’s theory on behaviorism,

specifically the operant conditioning theory (Daniels & Shumow, 2003; Grisham-Brown,

2009). Elkind (2001) reasoned that

It is hard to make a case for early academic instruction, [yet] the demands upon

early childhood educators to engage in such practices is growing. All too many

kindergarten teachers are being pressured to teach their children numbers and

letters and to administer standardized tests. In some kindergartens, children are

even given homework in addition to the work sheets they must fill out during

class time. In a developmentally appropriate classroom, in contrast, children are

busy taking care of plants and animals, experimenting with sand and water,

drawing and painting, listening to songs and stories and engaging in dramatic

play. It is hard to believe that children learn more from worksheets than they do

from engaging in these age appropriate activities. (p. 13)

At this time, there continues to be much debate in the literature on what the role

of the early childhood teacher should be, as well as what is the most effective curriculum

for teaching children. However, what can be agreed upon, according to Elkind (2001) is

a general agreement that “education must start with the child, not with the subject matter

to be taught” (p. 4) and “the guiding principle of early childhood education is, then, the

68

matching of curriculum and instruction to the child’s developing abilities, needs and

interests” (p.4).

In addition to the two curriculum approaches, another contrast exists in the

understanding of andragogy and pedagogy in relation to teaching style preferences and

curriculum implementation in early childhood teacher preparation programs. Andragogy

is the theory of adult learning originally based on Lindeman’s (1926) initial beliefs of

democracy and social justice in which he identified five key assumptions: Adult

motivation, Life-centered learning, Experiences, Self-direction, and Individual

differences (Knowles, Holton, & Swanson, 2012). Knowles continued research, with

Holton and Swanson’s work (1998), identified a model of andragogy in practice.

Following one of two methods of teaching-andragogical (facilitator of knowledge) or

pedagogical (disseminator of knowledge), faculty members’ employ the methodology

premises in their teaching practices in the classroom environment.

In andragogical teaching (or facilitator of learning as described by Davenport &

Davenport, 1985), the higher education faculty member values the core principles of

andragogy and along with the learner, creates a mutual development of goals, establishes

a respectful, informal, and collaborative learning environment, and is “ready to learn,

motivated and ready to improve effectiveness in the classroom” (Moore, 2010). In

contrast, a pedagogical approach (or disseminator of information, Davenport &

Davenport, 1985) traditionally includes an instructional environment which is formal,

competitive, and more teacher-directed or controlled.

In the field of early childhood education, however, pedagogy is defined as “the

how of teaching and learning” (p. 48) and as pointed out by Bredekamp and Copple

69

(1997), pedagogy “has identified characteristics of effectiveness that have held up over

time, such as meaningful, active learning, and individualizing our teaching methods to

the learner” (p. 48). Epstein (2007) reasoned a relationship must exist between children’s

development, the traditional and academic domains, and the importance to integrate and

promote learning through outcomes and goals. Recognizing the differences between

“care” (forming relationships) and “education” (academic content) in the field, Siraj-

Blatchford (1999) shared “to be an effective pedagogue means to be skilled in the

selection of appropriate teaching techniques to facilitate learning” (p. 20). Siraj-

Blatchford (1999) also acknowledged there is a continuum in which some early

childhood educators use a variety of techniques to provide “effective transmission of

different forms of knowledge,” while others “recoil at the thought of ‘pedagogy’ as

teaching” (p. 21) and recognize these practices as “didactic and inappropriate for young

children” (p. 20). Epstein (2007) further reinforced the role of pedagogical teaching in

the field of early childhood education when addressing the role of intentional teaching.

Defining teaching as the “knowledge, beliefs, attitudes, and especially the behaviors and

skills teachers employ in their work with learners” (p. 5).

Whitebook (2014) acknowledged that developmental characteristics such as

nurturing and trust building relationships tend to be perceived as the only curriculum

when teaching young children. Moreover, Whitebook (2014) explained that early

childhood education is more than one didactic form of well established relationships, the

role of intentional teaching which is “often embedded in children’s play and daily

routines” (p. 4) is also needed. These report findings align with Epstein’s (2007) belief

that intentional teaching requires competency in the three areas of curriculum, pedagogy,

70

and assessment. Furthermore, Epstein (2007) reasoned that educators using a

combination of both developmental and academic curriculum aspects have the ability to

“recognize a teaching opportunity and [as such] are able to take advantage of it” (p. 1).

Moreover, the meshing of these two methodologies is intentional, as teaching is “planful,

thoughtful, and purposeful” (p. 1) and requires the knowledge of how children develop

and learn. Copple and Bredekamp (2009) wrote that intentionality was “a hallmark of

developmentally appropriate teaching” (p. 10) and a review of the literature research

endorsed this notion offering that developmentally appropriate practices (constructivist

perspective) are embedded in higher education teacher preparation programs (Alexander,

2014; Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue, 2011; Bowman & Stott, 1996; Bufkin &

Bryde, 1996; Fulton & Myers, 2014: Maakestad-Wolf, 1999; Marshall, 1996; Roach &

Riley, 2006; VanderVen, 2000; Vardanyan, 2013).

Alexander (2014) stated in her qualitative research study on preschool teacher

perceptions of developmentally appropriate practices that “the tenets of the NAEYC DAP

[National Association for the Education of Young Children Developmentally Appropriate

Practices] statement are embedded in the design of higher education teacher preparation

programs” (p. 2) and went on to share “teacher preparation programs often structure the

curriculum to include specific discipline-related knowledge, theory and pedagogy, and

authentic learning experiences such as fieldwork” (p. 2). Vardanyan (2013)

acknowledged the role of developmentally appropriate practices in higher education

programs in a published dissertation on the significance of national accreditation to

elevate the quality in early childhood programs. Noting courses such as “parent-teacher

communication, active listening, cultural sensitivity, and conflict resolution must be

71

included in teacher education programs” (p. 50), Vardanyan (2013) also recognized the

two approaches to curriculum (developmental and academic) exist and in her findings,

advocated an approach that supports a mesh of both perspectives. Courses of study in

teacher preparation programs vary in early childhood. Located somewhere on the

continuum, a degree program may focus content on subject matter and pedagogical

strategies, while another program may offer a “course of study within one of several

disciplines focused on children of any age” (Whitebook, 2014, p. 9).

Saracho (2013) confirmed that teacher preparation continues to be an issue of

discussion in relation to preparing effective teachers in early childhood education.

Saracho (2013) recognized that content and elements differ, but identified six

components, “recruitment and selection, general education, professional foundations,

instructional knowledge, field experiences and clinical practice, and programme

evaluation” (p. 1) that should be in all preparation programs. Lobman, Ryan, and

McLaughlin (2005) acknowledged in their report that the knowledge base (child

development curriculum and teaching) required in early childhood teaching continues to

change as policies to address content based learning are being introduced. Confirming

the work of Saracho (2013) and others (Hyson, 2003; Katz & Goffin, 1990; McCarthy,

1990; Saracho & Spodek, 1983; Spodek & Saracho, 1990), these researchers proposed

four key areas to be a part of all teacher preparation programs including foundation of

early childhood (child development and learning theory); pedagogical content (literacy,

math, social studies, science, and the arts); teaching practices and interactions (unique

practices recognizing diversity of children); and direct experience working with children

in field experiences. In an effort to develop a statewide (New Jersey) teacher preparation

72

system to meet mandated changes in state policy, Lobman, Ryan, and McLaughlin (2005)

utilized funding to develop a new system of teacher preparation “with the aim of

producing a highly qualified workforce within four years” (p. 1) and recruited 12

representatives who participated in the project by providing initial data collected by

phone. The researchers then completed interviews and based on the data collected, they

utilized the IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) to complete

descriptive and inferential statistics. The findings from their study included information

on routes to certification, resources, and content. Based on these findings, the three

researchers determined it was possible to create a more effective teacher preparation

program provided two factors exist: leadership and advocacy in the state, as well as,

financial resources. However, it should be noted, to date, however, there is no agreed-

upon national standards to define a high quality early childhood teacher preparation

program of study.

Research also recognizes that it is important for adult educators to consider their

role in the learning process. Maakestad-Wolf (1999) believed “the primary goal of a

teacher educator is to facilitate students’ abilities to make connections between their

knowledge and training in the college classroom (professional knowledge base) and their

teaching practices in an early childhood setting (practical knowledge base)” (p. 167).

Recognizing there are three “worlds” of the teacher educator including the historical,

philosophical, and theoretical foundations; teacher education and standards; and teaching

practices; Maakestad-Wolf (1999) believed it was the responsibility of the teacher

educator to help learners make the connections needed between these three realms. This

73

practice, known as theory to practice, is common in the field of early childhood teacher

education.

In 1983, Dobson and Dobson discussed the diversity in teaching practices and

noted it was critical for educators to recognize the role of values and beliefs in order to

ensure there was congruity between these beliefs and the teaching practices educators

implemented in the classroom. In their report, Dobson and Dobson (1983) stated that

each person was responsible for creating and following a belief system, as well as to

recognize how this belief system affected their teaching practices in the classroom

setting. In their research findings, Dobson and Dobson (1983) pointed out that it is

common to find a lack of consistency between educational philosophy and teaching

practices, and this lack of congruity disrupts the harmony of the teaching-learning

experience. Dobson and Dobson (1983) identified several possible reasons including the

time commitment that is needed to reflect and study alternate realities; the fact that values

were abstract concepts; the expectations of the teacher in their role in the classroom; and

the role of teaching is often reduced to a means to an end without purpose and

philosophy. As admitted by Dobson and Dobson (1983) “there are certain teaching skills

that can be taught and measured, [and] we reject the idea that teaching fundamentally

comprises the right mixture of techniques, methods, and skills” (p. 23). Implications

from their report acknowledged that balancing theory to practice is an active process that

requires reflection in regards to professional knowledge, personal experience, and

educational practices, as well as engagement in dialogue with like-minded individuals in

the profession.

74

In 2000, VanderVen proposed a model of teacher preparation in which she

emphasized, “the linchpin of the system is Katz’s own notion, the Principle of Congruity”

(p. 256) and addressed the concepts of theory to practice based on the principles.

Coining the phrase “Katzian Early Childhood Teacher Preparation System,” VanderVen

(2000) believed that this transformational system could address best practices in

“‘guiding principles’, or an underlying philosophy; goals; the curriculum, both content

and para curricular aspects; delivery structures; professional development; indirect

practice; and faculty characteristics” (p. 256). In the article, VanderVen (2000),

translated the empirical research on effective practices and considered the current

thinking on the theory to practice issues considered in the field. Proposed was a model

that focused on a reciprocal relationship, Senge’s concept of a “mental model,” the

development of hermeneutics in the work, and a nonlinear dynamical systems theory.

Implications of such a model, according to the researcher, would capitalize on Katz’s

(1977) Principle of Congruity as the linchpin and would shift practices from fragmented

and chaotic experiences to “an internal working model of practice, with an understanding

of contextual factors to improve practice” (p. 256).

The professional development of higher education faculty came up in several

literature reviews including Bufkin and Byrde (1996), Byler (2000), Marshall (1996),

McGlynn (2001), and Roach and Riley (2006). Byler (2000), on one hand focused a

study on the development of a professional development plan for adjunct faculty, while

McGlynn’s (2001) study focused on the process of change of one faculty member

shifting to a constructivist teaching approach. McGlynn (2001) reasoned, although the

“theory of active learning or constructivism becomes the generally advocated framework

75

for early childhood education, adults preparing to enter this field as teachers are often

receiving instruction in a type of educational process they themselves have rarely

experienced” (p. 1). McGlynn (2001) disclosed however, “few faculty-educators have

made the transition from acting as a teacher to being a facilitator of learning as required

by a constructivist orientation” (p. 1). Byler (2000) utilized constructivist teaching

experiences for the professional development model by having the educators engage in

seminars focused on adult learning theories and teaching practices, as well as, discussions

(formal and informal), and receiving additional resources such as newsletters. Attention

was focused on four key components: orientation, socialization, instruction, and

curriculum, and Byler’s (2000) research methodology compared the pre and post

treatment scores of the Self-Diagnostic Rating Scale Competencies for the Role of Adult

Educator/Trainer developed by Knowles, Holton, and Swanson (1998). Findings of the

study, confirmed that the program “had a significant effect on the participants perceptions

of their own understanding of adult learning, teaching principles, and practice” (p. 146)

and an overall improvement in four areas related to adult learning.

Roach and Riley (2006) addressed the relationship between theory and practice

when they addressed professional development of adult learners following a model of

developmentally appropriate practices. Focusing on how adults learn, their study

consisted of a statewide project of 150 classrooms in Wisconsin. Following a

constructivist approach, the researchers engaged in six sequenced core principles they

considered were the elements of an effective training model. These principles included

building a trusting relationship, shaping promising practices, generalizing effective

practices, providing conceptual labels, linking practices with research based knowledge,

76

and as a result, encouraging teachers self-exploration. Riley and Roach (2006) stated in

their findings that they “hope it becomes clear that their [teacher] excellence in teacher

training is not just a function of inborn personality, or something picked up intangibly

through long years in the profession, but represents a discrete set of skills that can be

learned, practiced, and perfected” (p. 369).

Marshall (1996) shared perspectives from a constructivist-teaching model. In the

peer-reviewed article, Marshall explored the five key assumptions. The first assumption

supported teaching using an active learner-centered style. The second assumption

engaged a dialogue regarding the role of universities in education reform in the

classrooms. The third assumption focused on the recognition of teaching practices in the

classroom setting and in supervisory experiences, as well as the role of research and best

practices. The fourth assumption discussed the importance of content knowledge and

instruction on the continuum of early childhood and K-12 settings and the fifth

assumption discussed the importance of putting theory to practice by having learners

engage with children and educational settings while engaging in coursework.

Bufkin and Bryde (1996) addressed the need for change in higher education and

advocated for a constructivist teaching approach. Citing the importance of recognizing

adult experiences and exploring their ideas in the classroom, Bufkin and Bryde (1996)

stated a change was needed in the curriculum approach to recognize and support the

changing demographics of learners in regards to age, culture, and background. Further

supporting the importance of pre-service teachers to be treated as adults in the learning

environment, they shared “using a variety of techniques also provides a good model for

teaching children and if pre-service teachers are to become strong teachers, they must see

77

good models” (Bufkin & Bryde, 1996, p. 58). Similarly, Bowman and Stott (1996)

emphasized the importance of child development knowledge in addition to instructional

teaching practices, when they advocated for teaching that modeled a community of

relationships that were meaningful, supportive, and transformational.

The last two literature reviews in this research focused on early childhood teacher

preparation programs that identify and follow the Principle of Congruity, as defined by

Katz (1977). Baumgartner, Buchanan, and Casbergue (2011) shared their development

of a university program based on the changes set forth by their state board of education,

whereas, Fulton, and Myers (2014) discussed in their article the relationship of teaching

learners in the field of early childhood and special education. Fulton and Myers (2014)

believed four principles are primary when working with learners:

The first three are: 1) All students can learn and so can we. 2) Persons learn in

relation to what they already know. 3) Learning is a dynamic process, moving

students from the known to the unknown. The fourth principle is borrowed from

The Courage to Teach by Parker Palmer. We found inspiration in Palmer’s

affirmation that “when we think things together, we reclaim the life force in the

world, in our students and in ourselves” (2007, p. 69). (p. 5)

Focusing on a dilemma of language, Fulton and Myers (2014) addressed social

context, pedagogy, and the content of learning while engaging learners in their classroom

through team building experiences that created a ‘community of learners’ thus bridging

the divide between expectations of public school (measured academic achievements) and

the philosophy of early childhood for a “whole child” perspective based on social,

emotional, cognitive, and physical development. In their concluding thoughts, these

researchers noted “although we come to our university teaching from differing

78

philosophical stances and professional practices, we share a passion for quality early

childhood education for all young children” (p. 10).

Baumgartner, Buchanan, and Casbergue (2011) also touched on these key

concepts when discussing the development of a new teacher preparation program.

Utilizing various stakeholders (faculty, primary and preschool teachers), they reported on

the development of a degree program that focused on developmentally appropriate

practices, adult education, staff development, teacher education, and assessment of young

children. Following an internship model, Baumgartner, Buchanan, and Casbergue (2011)

stated “faculty model developmentally appropriate practices by teaching in ways that are

appropriate for the age of the learners, for each individual, and for our particular cultural

context” (p. 332-333). The researchers also reported the pre-service teachers completed

projects, documented their learning, engaged in integrated experiences, and utilized

performance and standard based assessments. The implications of their research, over a

five year period, found that learners were more prepared and confident in their

experiences and the educators became advocates for effective change with young

children. Baumgartner, Buchanan, and Casbergue (2011) also noted that faculty

members shared that they needed to monitor and adjust their curriculum and approaches

to recognize the diversity of the learners, the various assessments needed in the

classroom, and to engage in methodologies that are more effective based on performance

in an effort to mirror the degree program’s approach to developmentally appropriate

learning they wanted learners to engage in with young children.

Understanding the research regarding teacher preparation programs in the United

States, in relation to curriculum development, the role of andragogy and pedagogy, and

79

variations in programming, has the potential to inform the adult educator on the current

early childhood landscape and provide insights to those faculty members who wish to

reflect on their working philosophy and consider how this affects their choices in making

decisions on how to engage with adult learners. The research on early childhood teacher

preparation programs, albeit valuable provides one perspective. However, when

combined with research on adult educational philosophies and teaching style preference

research conducted in other disciplines, it has the potential to provide a more complete

picture of the multiple dimensions and variations needed in order to consider how this

can impact adult learning in higher education. A review of the methodological literature

is next and considers issues in regards to studies on philosophical orientations and

teaching styles, addresses the decision for using the causal-comparative research

methodology and the two instruments of Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory

(PAEI) and the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) for this study, as well as

critiques previous research.

Review of Methodological Literature

Research on educational philosophies in adult education and teaching style

preferences is well documented. Studies have been completed utilizing the instruments

of Zinn’s (2007) Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) and Conti’s (1982)

Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PAEI) independently, as well as multiple research

studies have been conducted using a combination of both instruments. In addition,

studies have been completed using various research design methodologies including

qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods and studies have been completed in several

countries including Canada, Greece, Iran, and the United States to name a few.

80

Specifically, the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) has been used

with adult educators related to the disciplines of adult and graduate education (Lehman,

2003; Rodrigues, 2009; Spurgeon & Moore, 1997); agriculture (Boone, Gartin, Wright,

Lawrence, & Odell, 2002); business, religious, and graduate students (McKenzie, 1985);

community colleges (Wajler, 2012); continuing education (Carson, 1985); cooperative

extension (Price, 1994; Budak, 1998); distance education (Gularte, 2007); environmental

education (Zoellick, 2009); health care (Gago, 1985); literacy teachers (Zandevanian,

Safaei Moghaddam, Pakseresht, & Sepaci, 2009), middle school (Toney, 2012);

pharmacology (Robinson, 1998); primary teacher counselors (Gioti, 2010); title I teachers

(Watkins, 2006); and zoology (Diem, 1994).

The Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) has been utilized independently in

almost 100 studies in adult education. In particular, studies have been published on adult

higher education (Ahmed, 2006; Barden, 2000; Brosseau, 2000; Bryant, 2012;

Cummings, 1995; Elliot, 1996; Lee, 2004; Lemani, 2004; McCollin, 1998; Moore, 2010;

Reese, 1993; Reiseck, 1996; Ringler, 2004; Smith, 2008; Spoon, 1996; Stolt-Krichko,

1997; Taylor-King, 2001; Weigandt, 2005; Weitkamp, 2005; West, 2008; Wilson, 1994);

community colleges (Barrett, 2004; Hudspeth, 1991; Johnson, 1999; Moore, 1996;

Natale, 2007; Osborne, 2008; Roberson, 2002; Rogers, 2009; Scotney, 1986; Shedd,

1989; Waters, 1992; Wegge, 1991; Woodcock, 1994); dental hygiene (Bearor, 2012);

continuing and distance education (Buckhannon, 1985; Liaros, 2000; Nolte, 1994);

cooperative extension (Douglass, 1982; Eberle, 1993; Morales Osegueda,1997; Seevers,

1991); distance learning (Wang, 2002); nursing (McKenzie, 1987; Papes, 1998; Puksa,

1999; Quillin, 2004; Totin Meyer, 2002); paramedic educators (DeVito, 2008); physical

81

therapy (Karges, 2003); theological studies (Mulholland, 1995); and facilitators of

workplace learning (Fitzgibbon, 2002; Robinson, 2012; Stover, 2006).

As shared earlier, both the use of the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory

(PAEI) and the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) have been used in

combination in research studies focused of many disciplines including adult higher

education (DeCoux, Rachal, Leonard, & Pierce, 1992; Fries, 2012; Hughes, 1997;

Swetnam, 2011); cooperative extension (East, 2013: Rothamer, 2003; Williams, 1999);

English language learning (Fritz, 2008); rehabilitation educators (O’Brien, 2001); sign

language interpreters (Byrd, 2010); Special education teacher candidates (Foster, 2006);

and workforce education and entrepreneur (Floyd, 2010; Powell, 2006).

For the literature review of methodological issues, attention was focused on the

four published studies related to adult higher education and community colleges using

both the Philosophies of Adult Education (PAEI) and the Principles of Adult Learning

Scale (PALS). Specifically, attention for the literature review included research

conducted by DeCoux et al. (1992) on adult education graduate students; Fries’ (2012)

dissertation on higher education faculty teaching in the division of Education; Hughes

(1997) study on faculty members in various disciplines at Ricks college; and Swetnam’s

(2011) research on accommodating haptic learners in the higher education classroom.

Furthermore, the literature review will share details of the study including the

participants, methodology, and findings.

Review of Research using PAEI and PALS in Adult Higher Education

DeCoux, Rachal, Leonard, and Pierce’s (1992) research focused on 111 adult

education graduate students in an effort to explore a relationship and reveal the

82

predilections of the learners in a three year study focused on a specific graduate course.

Adult learners enrolled in the course were categorized as nurses, instructors, or other

(which included the fields of administration, counseling, military, and business and

industry). Using a quantitative design, the researchers administered three instruments

including the PAEI, PALS, and the Educational Orientation Questionnaire (EOQ) during

the semester but before the learners were exposed to the discussion of philosophy. The

use of ANOVA was utilized to compare the groups with regards to demographic

variables and occupations. Further, correlations were run with the Pearson product

correlation coefficient, first to measure correlations of the demographic variables and the

instrument scores, then secondly between the instrument scores.

Findings revealed significant correlations between PAEI and PALS. Moreover,

the humanistic philosophy orientation correlated with factor 2 (personalizing instruction)

and factor 6 (learning process) on the PALS. Weaker correlations were also found on the

cumulative scores of the liberal and behavioral philosophies and those who adhered to

these two orientations scored higher on factor 1 (learner-centered activities) and factor 7

(flexibility for personal development). When considering the demographic variables of

gender and age, DeCoux et al. (1992) findings shared that older graduate students tended

to follow a humanistic philosophy on the PAEI, and female learners identified more with

the progressive philosophy (mean 86.0 and males with 80.2) and the humanistic

orientations (mean 83.5 and males 76.4). Additionally, findings found that female

learners tended to be more in alignment with the collaborative learner-centered teaching

style based on the PALS identified scores.

83

Equally important is Fries’ (2012) descriptive research study that focused solely

on the division of Education at a four-year higher education institution. Outreaching

through email to 122 faculty members (adjunct, full time, and graduate faculty) either

teaching within or for the School of Education, the study received a total of 45 responses

who had completed both the PAEI and PALS instruments. The use of frequency

distributions, ANOVA, and chi square were run in order to establish the profiles of each

of the two instruments and the demographics, as well as to determine the relationships

between the instruments and demographic variables. Findings from this research

indicated the dominant educational philosophy represented by over 53% of the faculty

was progressive (mean of 86.02) and the second dominant philosophy held by 13% of the

faculty was humanistic (mean 79.62). Furthermore, results from the Principles of Adult

Learning Scale indicated 71% of the faculty members’ teaching style preference was

teacher-centered (mean 137.4).

Hughes (1997) completed a descriptive study using a case study design to focus

on 167 faculty members teaching within one of the nine academic divisions of a two-year

higher education institution called Ricks College in Idaho. Overall findings of the faculty

members indicated a preference for the progressive philosophy, followed by the

behavioral orientation as indicated on the PAEI and further revealed a teacher-centered

style of instruction based on the PALS findings. Additionally, when utilizing frequency

distributions and ANOVA, Hughes (1997) investigated how faculty differed on the PAEI

in relation to demographics and formal training and found no significant differences for

age groups but did find differences in regards to gender and the philosophies of

progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical (females had a higher mean score than

84

males). Moreover, when looking specifically at the results of the Education division’s

educational philosophy, as measured by the PAEI, faculty members indicated a stronger

preference towards the behavioral philosophy (mean 85.1) and indicated a teacher-

centered approach (mean 128.4) as measured by the PALS.

Swetnam’s (2011) study followed the case study design and considered the ability

of faculty members to accommodate haptic learners in the higher education classroom.

Learners and faculty were administered the Learning and Interpreting Modality

Instrument (LIMI). Additionally, faculty members were administered the instruments of

PAEI and PALS, were observed by the researcher, and upon completion of the course,

the faculty members’ end of the course survey were reviewed. Findings noted that 42%

of the learners identified dominantly as haptic, or tactile-kinesthetic learners, as well as

two faculty members. In addition, findings indicated that faculty members

accommodated the learners effectively and through frequency counts, the progressive

philosophical orientation was identified as the predominant teaching philosophy. Finally,

the faculty members identified with the learner-centered teaching style based on the

PALS results.

Based on the results of the four studies, the use of frequency distributions were

utilized for determining the philosophical and teaching style profiles for the PAEI and

PALS instruments. In addition, several studies utilized the Pearson product moment

correlation and ran ANOVA statistics when making determination of the differences

among the groups and variables within the two instruments and specific categories of

demographics. The decision to use a causal-comparative research design for this study

was intentional as the study was designed to consider one of the recommendations made

85

in Fries’ (2012) research study to determine if results of the educational faculty in this

study had similar findings to Fries (2012) results. As such, the study utilized frequency

distributions, correlations, and ANOVA.

The causal-comparative research is one of two forms of non-experimental

research methodologies. Similar in many ways to correlational research, this type of

research is designed to examine the differences of group member experiences captured at

a specific place and time without manipulating the variables (Lodico, Spaulding, &

Voegtle, 2010). It is also designed to determine possible “causes or reasons for the

existing differences” (Kalaian, 2013, p. 729). This research was appropriate for this

study because it was intended to describe the phenomenon using descriptive and

inferential statistics. Limitations in this study due to methodology include the inability to

randomize the sample because the groups were already formed prior to data collection, as

a result of this, the researcher had limited control and as such, caution must be used with

the interpretation of the results. Another limitation to the methodology includes the

recognition that only relationships between the variables may be established, not cause

and effect (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012). This study was designed to identify the

individual educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of higher education

faculty and to determine congruency. Limitations in this study identified seven areas of

consideration including the variations in teaching environments; the survey was

anonymous and self-reporting, and thus self-interpreting; perceptions of the participants

in the study may have been influenced by their espoused theory and not their actual

theory-in-use; data was collected only during the winter semester, hence some faculty

members may not have been aware it was taking place; it was unknown how many

86

faculty members actually teach in the four New England states, and a purposive sample

was utilized; and the reporting of teaching behaviors were limited to the survey questions

without the faculty members ability to provide additional information.

Another limitation to this methodology is the use of surveys as an instrument to

collect data. This survey combined two tools and it was anticipated the participant would

need 20-25 minutes, additionally, each participant was instructed they could stop at any

time by closing the survey web browser. A total of 54 participants began the survey,

however, only 45 completed the full survey. It is unknown as to why some faculty

members chose to not complete the full survey. Also, limitations in the survey design

can occur as participants interpret the answer options. For example, “somewhat

disagree” may be interpreted to have one meaning to a faculty member and a very

different meaning for another.

Synthesis of Research Findings

Galbraith (1999) believed a working philosophy would guide the adult educator

through the teaching and learning process and this could be reflected in his or her style of

teaching. Elias and Merriam (2005) identified the western educational philosophies of

adult education and Zinn (2007) focused on five specific orientations. Conti (1985) and

Zinn (2007) believed educators should have a consciousness of their educational

philosophies and how this affects his or her teaching style practices in the educational

environment. Further, having an awareness and engaging in the process of theory to

practice, as identified by Argyris & Schön (1974), educators could reflect on their beliefs

and actions and as such determine if they are in congruence, and if not, consider what

may be in conflict.

87

Educational philosophies focus on planning and instruction, whereas teaching

styles, according to Conti (1985) are the actual behaviors in the teaching-learning

process. Identified styles include the teacher-centered (non-collaborative) and learner-

centered (collaborative) styles. Further, seven factors are identified that influence the

general mode of teaching. Research in adult education studies and literature find a direct

relationship on the benefits of using the learner-centered style (Weimer, 2013), however,

multiple studies recognize this is not being implemented in current practice in higher

education settings including DeCoux, Rachal, Leonard, and Pierce (1992), Fries (2012),

and Swetnam (2011) to share a few.

This research focused on adult educators teaching in early childhood teacher

preparation programs. Review of the literature addressed the influx of diverse learners

entering the field, variations in the educational requirements due to a lack of national

standards, differences in curriculum offerings in teacher preparation programs, as well as

variations in nomenclature and considerations of the role of andragogy and pedagogy.

Despite research going on nationally to identify characteristics of faculty members in

teacher preparation programs, nothing is being collected in regards to philosophies and

teaching styles.

Findings located in the literature review also discussed the Principle of Congruity

(Katz, 1977) and supported the approach for adult educators to use this principle when

teaching learners who are pursuing degrees in the profession of early childhood

education. Moreover, studies related to teacher preparation programs and adult education

in the field of early childhood point to a congruent and positive relationship between the

implementation of the Principle of Congruity and the educational philosophical

88

orientations of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical and the learner-centered style

of teaching (Alexander, 2014; Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue, 2011; Dobson &

Dobson, 1983; Fulton & Myers, 2014; Jones, 1985, 1986, 1993; Katz, 1977, 1999;

Maakestad-Wolf, 1999; Marshall, 1996; Roach & Riley, 2006; VanderVen, 2000;

Vardanyan, 2013).

This research used descriptive statistics, frequency distributions, correlational

statistical tests, and analysis of variance to determine the relationship between the

educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of 45 faculty members teaching

in the states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. These statistical

tests were found in a review of four studies in higher education using the instruments of

the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) and the Principles of Adult

Learning Scale (PALS). Research studies with one, the other, or both the PAEI and the

PALS included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method methodologies. This study

utilized the causal-comparative quantitative methodology in order to examine the

differences within the members of the groups based on their experiences at a specific

time and place (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010). It also recognized that variables

could not be manipulated in this non-experimental study and could consider reasons or

causes for the differences that might exist within the data. The use of this methodology

also provided information on whether the findings of the study were similar to Fries

(2012).

Critique of Previous Research

A thorough review of the research studies using the Philosophies of Adult

Education Inventory and/or the Principles of Adult Learning Scale occurred. Each study

89

noted their limitations and delimitations, as well as shared their assumptions. All studies

referenced the validity and reliability of the two tools, as well as other tools used in their

studies.

Validity and Reliability

For this research, the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) was

created by Dr. Lorraine M. Zinn and the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) was

created by Dr. Gary J. Conti. Through a rigorous process, each tool was determined to be

valid and reliable.

Philosophy of adult education inventory (PAEI) ©

. For this survey instrument,

the content validity and construct validity were established. Content validity was

produced through a process of using a jury of six individuals and construct validity

through factor analysis. Additionally, 86 individuals, from six states and the District of

Columbia, provided the data for the factor analysis and testing for reliability.

Furthermore, internal consistency was determined by test-retest and use of the Pearson

product moment correlations.

Principles of adult learning scale (PALS) ©

. For this survey instrument, the

content and criterion-related validity were established through a two-phase process in

which a field test was run to identify teacher and learner-centered collaborative models,

as well as utilizing a jury of 57 practitioners in six states. This was further validated by

the use the Pearson product moment correlations to establish content validity and a

comparison with the Flanders Interaction Analysis Categories (FIAC) for criterion-

validity. Reliability was established using the test-retest with the Pearson product

moment correlation.

90

This study advances the literature as it will consider the results of Hughes (1997)

and Fries (2012). In Hughes’ (1997) study, faculty in the Education division utilized a

behaviorist philosophy and a teacher-centered style, which are in agreement according to

Elias and Merriam (1995, 2005), Conti (2007), and Fries (2012). The findings of Fries’

(2012) study, however, indicated that progressive and humanistic educational

philosophies were being utilized and Education faculty members identified with an

incongruent teaching style that was teacher-centered. In both studies, the teaching style

preferences identified by Education faculty members was teacher-centered which is in

contrast to the research on the positive benefits of learner-centered teaching practices.

Through this research study, data will be collected from early childhood education

faculty members in regards to educational philosophies and styles of teaching to

determine the profiles and their relationship with the research of Hughes (1997) and Fries

(2012).

Chapter 2 Summary

The relationship between educational philosophies and teaching style preferences

engages educators into questions regarding their personal beliefs and whether these are

implemented in the teaching practices with learners. Educators teaching in higher

education degree programs focused on early childhood utilize teaching practices that may

be developmental, academic based, or some combination of both. Having an awareness

of an educational philosophy allows the educator to consider the purpose of education,

teaching style preference, the roles of the educator and learner, as well as the teaching

methods used in the classroom. Additionally, educators have an opportunity to explore

their teaching style in relation to areas such as learner-centered activities, personalizing

91

instruction, relating to experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation

in the learning process, and flexibility for personal development. Congruency between

the educators’ espoused philosophical orientation and their theory-in-use teaching style

has benefits for both the educator and the learner.

There is an abundance of research on the changing demographics of learners in

the field of early childhood that focuses on qualifications, academic barriers, professional

standards, and the inequity of pay of early childhood teachers working with young

children (private or public school settings). Moreover, there is extensive research on the

continuum of curriculum development in teacher preparation programs and the balance

between the two approaches, developmental and academic, to support intentional

teaching. By recognizing the relationships of theory and practice, the Principle of

Congruity, and the philosophies of adult education and teaching styles, educators can

glean additional insights and further support the discussion of best practices in programs

of study in early childhood higher education.

92

CHAPTER 3. METHODOLOGY

This chapter will discuss the research design, data collection procedures, and data

analysis. Following an overview of the purpose of the study, research questions, and the

hypotheses, this chapter will address the research design, target population, sample size

and sampling method, setting, and recruitment of participants. This chapter will also

provide information on the instrumentation and data collection, and it will define the

operationalization of the variables. Information regarding the data analysis procedures,

limitations of the research design, along with internal and external validity of the study,

will be discussed along with the expected findings. A statement of the researcher’s

ethical issues in regards to research position statement, conflict of interest assessment,

researcher’s position, and ethical issues will conclude the chapter.

Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this causal-comparative study was to identify the individual

educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of higher education faculty

teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in the

Northern New England states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont.

The study examined the relationship between the educational philosophies of early

childhood education higher education faculty using Lorraine Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory (PAEI, revised 2007) and the concept of teaching styles measured

through Gary J. Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS, 1982) instrument.

93

Research Questions and Hypotheses

This research study identified two questions. The first question sought to identify

the specific adult education philosophical orientations, overall teaching style, and seven

factors. The second question focused on the relationships between the philosophies,

styles of teaching, and demographics. Finally, the null and alternative (or researchers’)

hypotheses are provided.

Research question 1: What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences

(according to Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education

faculty teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located

in Northern New England?

Research question 2: What are the relationships between the educational

philosophies (Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching styles

(Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in Northern New

England?

H01: It is hypothesized that there will be no significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Ha1: It is hypothesized that there will be a significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

94

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Research Design

According to Yin (1989), “The design is the logical sequence that connects the

empirical data to a study’s initial research questions and, ultimately, to its conclusions”

(p. 28). The causal-comparative research design provided an opportunity to collect

quantitative data from participants in several institutions of higher education in Northern

New England. According to Brewer and Kuhn (2010), a causal-comparative research

study shares these characteristics:

“Research occurs after the event or action has been completed;” (p. 125)

“The researcher investigates the effect of an independent variable on a dependent

variable by comparing two or more groups of individuals;” (p. 125)

It “investigates cause and effect;” (p. 125)

It does not “manipulate the variable;” (p. 125)

Groups are formed “prior to the study;” (p. 125)

It “involves group comparisons;” (p. 125)

It focuses “on differences of variables between groups;” (p. 125)

In addition, it “identifies variables for experimental exploration” (p. 125).

The study used a hypothetic-deductive method and made a general prediction, or

hypothesis, based on a theory, utilized data collection methodology, and analyzed the

results. The participants acted independently in this methodology in order to decrease the

bias and subjectivity; therefore, the researcher did not engage with the participants in the

sample. Through applied research, the study examined the effectiveness and use of

theories, teaching styles, and adult education philosophies in the study. Scientific realism

provided the framework as the researcher assumes the social and psychological world is

95

captured “by breaking complex phenomena and problems into smaller parts” and using

the numerical data of variables to answer questions (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010,

p. 13).

The purpose of this non-experimental research was to attempt to “find

relationships between [the] independent and dependent variables after an action or event

has already occurred” (Brewer & Kuhn, 2010, p. 125). This non-experimental

quantitative methodology collected data electronically at the onset of the study through a

survey in a single session using the instruments of the Philosophy of Adult Education

Inventory (PAEI) and the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS). Following this

methodology, a sample of 45 faculty members was studied and the variables were not

manipulated because they had already occurred.

Through an electronic survey tool that included Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory (PAEI) and Conti’s Principles of Adult learning Scale (PALS), the

statistical measurements determined the relationships and identified possible relationships

between the philosophical orientations and the teaching style preferences of the adult

educator. Specifically the PAEI measured the educational philosophy of participants

based on their responses to the survey questions. These responses aligned to adult

education, how adults learn, teachers’ role, beliefs about learners, and teaching methods

(Zinn, 2004), and the scores from the survey determined the relationship of the adult

educator to one or more of the five philosophical orientations (liberal, progressive,

behavioral, humanistic, and radical/critical). The PALS instrument specifically measured

the concept of teaching style in regards to teacher-centered and learner-centered, as well

as the seven factors: learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction, relating to

96

experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation in the learning

process, and flexibility for personal development (Conti, 1990). Further, higher scores on

the survey results indicated a teaching preference tendency towards learner-centered

teaching, middle scores towards an eclectic preference, and lower scores below the mean

represented teacher-centered teaching styles.

Target Population, Sampling Method, and Related Procedures

This section begins with identifying the target population and the characteristics.

It then addresses the sampling method, describes how it was conducted, and provides a

rationale for using a purposive sample. Next, the sample size is discussed in order to

identify and justify the sample size followed by the description of the setting and the

steps taken to recruit participants based on the sampling method.

Target Population

The research study sought information from early childhood faculty members

teaching in higher education settings (colleges and universities) where learners are

enrolled in pre-service early childhood teacher preparation courses in four New England

states: Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. To determine the larger

population to draw a sample from, the researcher located information from the Economic

Labor and Market Information (ELMI) and each of the four states’ Department of

Education (DOE) websites. Results from the ELMI included the following:

Based on the 2013 state and federal reports (Massachusetts Labor and Workforce

Development, 2014; United States Department of Labor, 2014a; 2014b; 2014e), the

number of post-secondary education teachers (code 25-1081) were:

Maine N=410

97

Massachusetts N=1440

New Hampshire N=240

Vermont N=250

Total N=2,340

Based on school year 2013-2014, the number of Approved Teacher Preparation

programs as well as, the number of community colleges approved to offer teacher

preparation courses that can be transferred included a total of 92 institutions of higher

education with 23 from Maine, 46 from Massachusetts, 16 from New Hampshire, and 7

from Vermont (New Hampshire Department of Education, 2014; Maine Department of

Education, 2014; Massachusetts Department of Education, 2014; Vermont Department of

Education, 2014). Unfortunately, the Bureau of Labor Statistics ELMI reports do not

break out specific details and two important variables are unavailable-institutions in

which the educator teaches and the breakdown of the different classifications of

education faculty members (secondary, elementary, early childhood, and special

education educators).

Sampling Method

According to Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2009), purposive sampling is “the process

of selecting a sample that is believed to be representative of a given population” (p. 134)

and “the researcher deliberately identifies criteria for selecting the sample” (p. 135).

Utilizing a purposive sample, this researcher recruited participants 21 years of age or

older meeting the following characteristics of the study:

A faculty member teaching in an institution of higher education;

Currently teaching in one or more of the following states: Maine, Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, or Vermont; and

Teaching early childhood education courses that can be transferred in or in an

approved teacher preparation program with a focus on early childhood education

98

certification, as authorized and documented on the state’s department of education

website.

Because this research study had a narrow focus, several institutions were

eliminated at the onset because they did not offer an early childhood education degree

program. Moreover, several types of education faculty members are commonly

employed within the same department or division, such as secondary education, special

education, elementary, and all postsecondary educators are classified in the same

category and referred to as education faculty in the ELMI reports. When determining the

number of faculty that may be identified as early childhood education faculty, this

researcher consulted the three State of Early Childhood Higher Education: Early

Childhood Higher Education Inventory reports (CSCCE, 2013).

According to these reports, in New Hampshire there were 16 higher education

institutions offering teacher preparation programs and 88 faculty members (fulltime and

adjunct) teaching in these institutions-roughly 37%; in New Jersey, there were 29 higher

education institutions and 212 faculty members (roughly 12% of the 1,760 Education

faculty as reported by ELMI); and in Rhode Island, there were 4 institutions and 40

faculty members (roughly 23% of the reported 170 faculty members identified by ELMI

statistics). Utilizing the highest percentage number of 37%, this researcher estimated

that there could be roughly 5.5 faculty members per institution and estimated that there

may be as many as 506 faculty members (92 institutions x 5.5) teaching in identified

early childhood teacher preparation programs.

99

Sample Size

Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2012) state “Some researchers cite a sample size of 30

as a guideline for correlational, causal-comparative, and true experimental research” and

go on to state “For causal-comparative and true experimental studies, a minimum of 30

participants in each group... is recommended, although in some cases it is difficult to

attain this number” (p. 139). This study proposed to collect data from 50 participants.

Fifty-six respondents started the online survey and a total of 45 faculty members

completed the full survey (both PAEI and PALS). As such, the research results and

findings of this study cannot be generalizable to the larger audience. This is due to the

use of purposive sampling, a lack of 30 participants in each group (N=45), and the

awareness of the uncertainty of the number of higher education faculty members teaching

in the four New England states (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012; Lodico, Spaulding, &

Voegtle, 2010; McMillan & Schumacher, 2010; Ravid, 2011).

Setting

The participants for this study were teaching in Northern New England including

the four states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont. Recruited

participants completed an online internet survey tool using SurveyMonkey.com.

Recruitment

Based on the sampling characteristics, this researcher outreached through email

contact with the deans and the department chairs of approved teacher preparation

programs (as identified on each state’s Department of Education and/or institutions

websites) in Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont requesting

participation of their early childhood faculty members in this study. Email contact was

100

also made to several early childhood organizations including New Hampshire College

Roundtable for Institutes of Higher Education and the Vermont Northern Lights Career

Development Center. A follow up email reminder occurred three weeks later.

The informational email included details about the research, the use of the study

results (participants would be completing an internet survey to provide data for a doctoral

dissertation), a letter to share with faculty members, and a copy of both instruments

(PAEI and PALS). In addition, the email stated the criteria for faculty member

participation, that the study would be anonymous (no names, school information, or

emails were requested), participation was voluntary (ability to close browser to stop

survey at any time), and asked if the contact person would be willing to forward the letter

and embedded electronic link to the faculty members (if the institution would be willing

to participate). On the SurveyMonkey.com website, participants were provided with a

link to the researcher’s website (additional information about the research including

copies of the tools so the participants could calculate their own results) and once on

SurveyMonkey.com, participants were asked to check the box approving consent. Once

consent was approved, the faculty member was directed to a series of questions in which

they completed a one-time data survey instrument that included two sections:

Section One: Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory with 15 incomplete

sentences and 5 responses ranging on a 7 point Likert scale from 1 (Strongly

Disagree) to 7 (Strongly Agree)

Section Two: Principles of Adult Learning Scale with 44 items ranging frequency

on a 6 point Likert scale from 0 (Always) to 5 (Never)

Furthermore, at the beginning of each subsection, the participants were provided a

link directly to the tools’ scoring guide if they wished to determine their own scores

101

while completing the survey. At the end of the survey, faculty members were directed to

a webpage that thanked them for participating and provided an opportunity for

participants to provide comments, suggestions, or ideas regarding the doctoral

dissertation study. Additionally, educators were offered to share their contact

information to have their individual results sent to them if they chose not to calculate the

results during the study.

Instrumentation

Two instruments were utilized to create the SurveyMonkey.com internet survey:

Lorraine M. Zinn’s (2007) Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) and Gary J.

Conti’s (1982) Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS). The PAEI measured the

concept of educational philosophy and the PALS measured teaching style.

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (Zinn, 1983, 1990, 2004, 2007)

The Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (Zinn, 2007) includes 15

incomplete sentences with five possible statements with a total of 75 responses in which

the participant selects from a degree of agreement on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from

(1) Strongly Disagree to (7) Strongly Agree and (4) as a neutral point. The PAEI

measured the concept of educational philosophy. With questions related to adult

education, how adults learn, the teachers’ role, beliefs about learners, and teaching

methods (Zinn, 2004), the participants’ responses determined the relationship to each of

the five philosophical orientations. The scores ranged from 15 to 105 with the highest

scores indicating agreement with and lower scores showing a disagreement with the

individual philosophy. The score range from 95-105 indicated a strong agreement, 66-94

102

indicated agreement with the philosophy, 56-65 indicated a neutral point, 55-24 showed a

disagreement, and the range of 15-25 indicted a strong disagreement.

“Validity refers to the degree to which an instrument measures what it is supposed

to measure and the appropriateness of specific inferences and interpretations made using

the test scores” (Ravid, 2011, p. 208). In this instrument, the content validity and

construct validity were established. Zinn (1983) noted “The inventory (PAEI) was

judged to have a fairly high degree of validity, based on jury mean scores of >.50 (on a 7-

point scale) for 93% of the response options, and communality coefficients of >.50 for

87% options” (p. 82) and

“Content validity was established by a jury of six individuals” (p. 8)

“Construct validity was established through factor analysis” (p. 8)

Additionally, “data for factor analysis and reliability testing were obtained from

86 individuals from six states and the District of Columbia” (p. 8).

“Reliability refers to the consistency of a measurement obtained for the same persons

upon repeated testing” and can be assessed through “test-retest, alternative forms, and

internal consistency approaches” (Ravid, 2011, p. 200). Zinn (1983) noted, “Reliability

testing procedures were designed to determine the internal consistency and test-retest

stability of the inventory” (p. 151) using Pearson product moment correlations (individual

responses, items, and overall scales). Zinn’s (1983) test-retest data “showed a tendency

toward moderately high stability” (p. 154) with “r of .48 to .83 for the five scales” (p. 8).

Additionally, Zinn (1983) reported that the internal consistency

“has a moderately high reliability level” (p. 154).

“Reliability Co-efficient of >.40 on 87% of the responses” (p. 8)

“Alpha Coefficients ranging from .75 to .86 on the five scales” (p. 8)

103

Principles of Adult Learning Scale (Conti, 1978, 1982, 1990, 2004)

The Principles of Adult Learning Scale (Conti, 1982) includes 44 questions, 22 of

which were positively stated and randomly placed within the survey. The purpose of the

PALS is to measure the frequency with which an educator practices one teaching style

over another. The instrument asked educators to consider the frequency with which he or

she participated in classroom activities and to select the degree of agreement on a 6-point

Likert scale ranging from Always (0), Almost Always (1), Often (2), Seldom (3), Almost

Never (4), and Never (5). The scores are determined by using reverse scoring for the 22

positively asked questions, then summing up all items together to provide a total score

that is aligned with the strength of a particular teaching style. Additionally, the scale

measures seven factors--learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction, relating to

experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation in the learning

process, and flexibility for personal development (Conti, 1990) and provides a score with

a standard deviation for each factor. Participant responses range in scores from 0-220

(with a mean of 146 and standard deviation of 20) with high scores indicating a learner-

centered teaching preference, scores near the mean of 146 indicative of an eclectic

preference with elements from both the learner-centered and teacher-centered approach,

and scores lower on the range representing a teacher-centered teaching style preference.

According to Conti (1982), the “PALS is a valid and reliable instrument” (p. 145).

In this instrument, the content validity and criterion-related validity were established

through a two-phase process in which a field test was run to identify teacher and learner-

centered collaborative models and 57 practitioners in six states completed the scale

(Conti, 1982). Content validity was determined by Pearson product moment correlations

104

and criterion-validity was established by comparing the scores of the participants who

scored two standard deviations from the mean to the scores on the Flanders’ Interaction

Analysis Categories (FIAC). Conti’s results indicated Pearson product moment

correlations of r=.85 on the Teacher Response ratio; r=79 on the Teacher Question ratio;

and r=82 on the Pupil Initiation Ratio. Conti (1982) pointed out that “the FIAC ratio

scores confirmed the existence of a high degree of congruency between professing a

teaching-learning mode on PALS and actually practicing behaviors characteristics of the

mode in the classroom” (p. 142).

Reliability for the PALS included test-retest and internal consistency measures for

stability. After a seven-day period, 23 practitioners participated in the test-retest

methodology and utilizing the Pearson product moment correlation, results yielded a

“Reliability Co-efficient of .92” (Conti, 1982, p. 142). Internal Consistency at .89 was

measured using Cronbach’s alpha and an “analysis of 778 cases indicated that descriptive

statistics for PALS are stable” (Fries, 2012, p. 47).

Data Collection

An approval letter from Capella University’s Institutional Review Board, as well

as approval from the dissertation committee began the data collection process. The

survey was created using the Select plan on SurveyMonkey.com in which the PAEI and

PALS were loaded into one survey instrument that was password-protected. In addition,

a web link to the researcher’s website (lisajstrout.weebly.com) was embedded in the

survey. Following the web link, participants were provided additional information on

three webpages:

105

Page One: Informed Consent and IRB including a word document for the

consent form and an image of Capella’s Exempt IRB approval.

Page Two: Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory including three

documents: the PAEI, the assessment instrument, and the interpretation

guide. Page Three: Principles of Adult Learning Scale including two instruments,

the answer sheet and the factor worksheet.

From late December to the middle of March 2015, letters were emailed to

institutes of higher education, as well as early childhood organizations and posted on

Facebook, Twitter, and LinkedIn. Information regarding the survey directions, the two

tools, and an information letter for faculty members were attached as Adobe PDF files

and a web link to both the survey and the researchers’ website (pages included IRB

Consent Form, PAEI, and PALS) were embedded as a hyperlink in the email invitation.

Of the ninety-two identified schools within the 2013-2014 data, six institutions

were initially excluded from the survey. Four schools were no longer providing a degree

in early childhood education or the program was not approved through the individual

state’s department of education, and two schools were excluded because the researcher

had a professional working relationship with the institution within the past five years.

After the email distribution of the survey, four additional institutions were excluded from

the study. Three schools denied the invitation after receiving the request to participate,

and one of the schools deferred the researcher to the institution’s IRB; however the

process was lengthy and notification of the decision (approved or denied) would have

come in after the survey was closed.

From the recruitment letters sent to the eighty-six identified deans, program

coordinators, department chairs, associate deans, directors, and/or provosts (as identified

on the individual IHE’s website), two institutions requested IRB approval. For this study,

106

IRB was pursued for one of the two institutions because it fit within the timeframe of the

study (school IRB met monthly). One institution’s IRB was not pursued due to the

lengthy process that would have extended beyond the study’s data collection timeline

(school IRB meets quarterly). Because the researcher was unaware of who had

completed the survey, eighty-two institutions received a follow-up email request three

weeks later.

Once the participants clicked on the SurveyMonkey hyperlink, they were

forwarded to the research study’s introduction page on the dedicated URL website. The

first two pages included the informed consent form with information about the study

including the title of the study, criteria for inclusion in the study, number of people in it,

and details of the purpose and compensation. Furthermore, on the second page,

participants were informed of what would happen in the study, disclosure of voluntary

participation, who would use and view the information, as well as whom to talk to if the

participant had any questions. At the end of the informed consent information, the

participants were advised to print a copy of the informed consent before making the

choice to click yes or no to the following question: By clicking on the link below, "I

agree" to the above statement and I understand I have agreed to the informed consent

form. Fifty five participants checked yes and were forwarded to the demographic

information; one participant checked no and was forwarded to the last page of the survey

thanking them for their interest.

Page three of the survey included the two instrument scoring guides, along with a

request for demographic information (gender, age, current academic rank, number of

years teaching in higher education, and terminal degree). Page four included a link for

107

the PAEI scoring guide and directions on how to complete the PAEI with a request to

answer every question and to not leave any blank. Pages five through seven included the

15 PAEI questions along with their five sentence stems. Pages eight included a link for

the PALS scoring guide along with directions on how to complete the instrument and

pages nine and ten had the instrument questions. On the last page (11), participants were

thanked for taking the survey and it noted:

If you did not get a chance to download the instruments or scoring guides to

determine your results, you can download them at http://lisajstrout.weebly.com/

If you would like the researcher to determine your scores or send a copy of the

dissertation findings, please share your contact information and a copy of your

results will be emailed to you.

Please feel free to share any comments, suggestions, or ideas regarding this

doctoral research study.

According to SurveyMonkey, the first participant completed the survey on

January 19th

and the last participant completed the survey on March 23, 2015. The

results were sent over the secured encrypted Secure Sockets Layer (SSL) and Transport

Layer Security (TLS) technology. The results were kept in a password-protected

computer and paper files were locked in a safe in the researcher’s office. Data collected

was exported as a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet from the website SurveyMonkey.com and

was later imported into IBM Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software

program 23. The researcher completed several data transformations. This included

recoding the data headers by changing the SurveyMonkey-produced Excel headers from

question numbers to instrument codes (e.g. #1c was changed to z1c; PALS #1 to P1). In

addition, reverse scoring needed to be completed for the PALS instrument questions of 1,

3, 5, 8, 10, 14, 15, 17, 18, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 28, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 39, 42, 43, and 44.

108

Also, the PAEI raw scores were standardized to a percentage score to determine each of

the individual schools in relation to the total score. Finally, the open-ended responses,

some of which contained identifiers such as a name or email address, were moved and

placed in a separate Excel file to no longer be linked to the data (maintain confidentiality

of respondents). SPSS 23 ran the statistical tests of descriptive statistics, frequency

statistics, and correlational statistical tests.

Operationalization of Variables

Causal-comparative research “examines the effect of an independent variable (the

past experience) on a dependent variable while also trying to control [for the] extraneous

variables” (Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010, p. 31). In this research, the independent

(or grouping) variable is the educational philosophy of the faculty member as identified

by the PAEI instrument. Written in the directions (in capital letters) for completing the

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, Zinn (2007) emphasized, “THERE ARE NO

RIGHT OR WRONG ANSWERS” (p. 3). The numerical scores of each philosophy

(liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic, radical/critical) were calculated based on the

individual scores reported in the survey.

Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2009) stated, “The basic causal-comparative design

involves selecting two groups that differ on some variable of interest and comparing them

on some dependent variable” (p. 220). The dependent variable was the identified style of

teaching (teacher-centered or learner-centered) as self-reported by the faculty members in

response to the PALS instrument questions. In addition to the overall score to determine

the teaching style preference, the seven specific elements (factors) were measured within

the teaching style: learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction, relating to

109

experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation in the learning

process, and flexibility for personal development.

Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegtle (2010) confirmed “if two groups are formed

because they differ on the independent variable, but they also happen to differ on other

extraneous variables, the researchers will not know whether group differences on the

dependent variable are caused by the independent or extraneous variables” (p. 269). This

research study identified the extraneous variables as gender, age, current academic rank,

number of years teaching in higher education, and terminal degree. This data was

collected at the beginning of the survey on the demographic information page where

participants could not skip any questions.

Data Analysis Procedures

In a causal-comparative design approach, the researcher is selecting “two groups

that differ on some variable of interest and comparing them on some dependent variable”

and in this study, “both groups have the characteristic but to differing degrees or

amounts” (Gay, Mills, Airasian, 2009, p. 220). Correlational analysis and the statistical

tests of descriptive statistics, frequency statistics, and correlational statistic tests were run

to determine the relationships among the variables of educational philosophy and

teaching style preferences. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was utilized to determine

whether scores from the two groups were significantly different based on the probability

level.

Research question 1: What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences

(according to Conti’s Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education

110

faculty teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located

in Northern New England?

According to Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2009), descriptive statistics are “data

analysis techniques that enable a researcher to describe many pieces of data meaningfully

with numerical indices” (p. 601). In this study, descriptive statistics and histograms were

run through SPSS 23. This included central tendency and measures of variability such as

mean, standard deviation, minimum, maximum, and range. Additionally, descriptive

statistical methods established the individual profiles for each of the two instruments:

PAEI and PALS.

Lodico, Spaulding, and Voegtle (2010) shared “one way to depict the overall

performance of a group is to display the frequency of each score in a frequency

distribution” (p. 49). Using SPSS 23, Frequencies, histograms, and bar charts were run

for the individual educational philosophies (PAEI) and individual teaching style

preferences (PALS).

Research question 2: What are the relationships between the educational

philosophies (Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching styles

(Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in Northern New

England?

When trying to determine the relationships in a causal-comparative research,

“scores for two (or more) variables of interest are obtained for each member of the

sample, and the paired scores are then correlated” (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009, p. 197).

In this study, the use of the Pearson’s product moment correlations test was completed in

111

SPSS 23 using the transformed data. The use of the Pearson product moment correlation

coefficient (Pearson’s r) provided the researcher with quantifiable information on the

relationship of the direction, form, degree, and strength of the correlation between scores

(Creswell, 2015; George & Mallery, 2012). In addition, graphics provided a visual

representation of the association between the scores to help interpret the relationship

between the PAEI’s five educational philosophical orientations and the PALS teaching

styles preferences. After obtaining the correlation coefficient, the researcher evaluated

and interpreted the results based on the visual graphics of scatter plots and correlation

matrices. At the same time, the researcher also reviewed the continuous numerical data

to analyze and interpret the direction (positive or negative), form (linear or nonlinear),

degree (magnitude), and strength (+1.0 and -1.0) of the correlation between scores. This

helped to determine the relationships between the educational philosophies and the

teaching style preferences (Creswell, 2015; Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2009; George &

Mallery, 2013; Ravid, 2011).

Analysis of variance (ANOVA) can be viewed as “studying the difference in

things in detail,” which according to Jones and Kottler (2006), “would thus be the

analysis of variance” (p. 117). ANOVA is a parametric tool using interval data with one

or more independent variables and one dependent variable (Creswell, 2015; Gay, Mills,

& Airasian, 2009; Jones & Kottler, 2006; Ravid 2011). The use of the ANOVA test

provides the researcher with valuable information as it “compare[s] the means of two or

more independent samples and test[s] whether the differences between the means are

statistically significant” (p. 158). In this study, the analysis of variance (ANOVA)

parametric test was completed in the multiple group comparisons along with Levene’s

112

homogeneity of variances, descriptive statistics, and the Tukey HSD Post-Hoc

comparisons tests. Furthermore, the ANOVA was used to examine the relationship

among the educational philosophies (PAEI) and the five demographic extraneous

variables, as well as the teaching style preferences (PALS) and the seven teaching style

factors.

Limitations of the Research Design

There are clear advantages of using this research design: the variables can be

investigated without experimental manipulation, which can help facilitate decision

making, and costs less. The limitations of using the causal-comparative research design

are serious. According to Gay, Mills, and Airasian (2012), potential challenges (and thus

weaknesses in the research design):

Because the groups being studied are already formed at the start of the study,

the researcher has limited control over the study and extreme caution must be

applied in interpreting results.

An apparent cause-effect relationship may not be as it appears. In causal-

comparative research, only a relation is established, not necessarily a causal

connection.

Lack of randomization, manipulation, and control area all sources of weakness

for causal-comparative research (p. 228).

The sampling technique has limitations including a lack of randomization within

the already formed group, the researchers’ defined criteria for inclusion of participants,

and the size of the sample was based on estimated numbers from several sources of data.

It is unknown what the true sample population is of faculty members teaching in early

childhood education teacher preparation programs in the four New England states. Due

to this fact, the researcher is unable to generalize the findings to the larger population.

113

Internal and External Validity

In this section, strategies for ensuring the internal validity of the research design is

addressed along with the external validity of the research study. A discussion of the use

of the purposive sample will address the worthiness of the research study results.

Internal Validity

It is important that the data in this research study measure what it is intended to

and that the data will produce valid correlation results. The research study was designed

to measure the constructs of educational philosophical orientations and teaching style

preferences. In this study, criterion was established for determining if the participant was

eligible for the study. Those faculty members who met the criteria were then provided

with the same five demographic questions, 75 questions for PAEI, and 44 questions for

PALS.

The validity of the two instruments utilized in this research, Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory (PAEI) and the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) were

addressed in relation to the degree of validity. The PAEI provided data on the content

validity (established through a jury of six individuals) and construct validity (established

through factor analysis), however, the criterion-related validity was not established. The

PALS instrument provided content and criterion-related validity information based on the

two-phase process completed through a field test with 57 practitioners. Conti utilized the

Pearson product moment correlation to establish content validity and compared the scores

of participants on the FIAC to establish the criterion-validity. Finally, a common threat

recognized for internal validity is the potential of the groups not being equivalent on one

114

or more variables. In order to control for extraneous variables, this study matched

participants into homogenous subgroups.

External Validity

Kalaian and Kasim (2008) acknowledged “External validity refers to the extent to

which the research findings based on a sample of individuals or objects can be

generalized to the same population that the sample is taken from or to other similar

populations in terms of contexts, individuals, times, and settings” (p. 255). This study

utilized a purposive sample and as such, the results and findings cannot be generalizable

to the larger audience.

Expected Findings

The researcher expected to find similar results to Fries’ (2012) findings in which a

majority of participants would report utilizing the educational philosophical orientations

of progressive and/or humanistic. This researcher also expected to find a large proportion

of participants using teacher-centered teaching preferences in their classrooms. Based on

the findings, the researcher expected this study to show congruence with the earlier 2012

findings noting a dissonance between philosophical orientations and teaching styles.

Ethical Issues

Attention to potential ethical issues is important in any research study. A position

statement regarding the assessment of conflict of interest, as well as the researcher’s

position and ethical issues will be stated below.

Researcher's Position Statement

In this section, information will be shared regarding the approach to protect

participants from harm, providing informed consent, awareness of volunteerism, a right

115

to privacy, and additional ethical concerns. The researcher’s position will also be

addressed in regards to potential bias and conflict of interest, followed by the approach

taken to address any ethical issues.

Conflict of interest assessment. As shared in the Capella University

Supplemental Form I: Conflict of Interest Management Plan, the researcher reported that

there were no formal professional relationships. The intentions of this research were to

recruit faculty members from any authorized teacher preparation programs (or program

with courses that can be transferred into) in higher education institutions (IHE) in New

Hampshire, Maine, Massachusetts, or Vermont (as identified by their individual state

department of education websites). This included a potential pool of 92 Institutes of

Higher Education and a potential estimate of 506 faculty members to recruit from within

the four states.

As in any field, informal professional relationships are commonplace. At the time

of the publication of this research, the researcher was participating in the New Hampshire

College Roundtable for Institutes of Higher Education. That group met quarterly to

discuss the field of higher education and the field of early childhood education. It was

possible that individuals that attend the roundtable meetings may have responded to the

request to participate in the study. In order to reduce any possible conflict of interest,

manage personal bias potentially caused by these relationships, and protect the validity

against the perception, data collected in the online survey did not include names, email

addresses, or the name of the institution(s) or state(s) in which the participants were

employed. Moreover, the researcher collected data through an online survey and

116

permission was granted in Capella University’s Supplemental Form F: Waiver of

Documentation to ensure anonymity.

Participants choosing to complete the survey were anonymous and it was

impossible for the researcher to know who completed it. This data was anonymous and

therefore the researcher cannot show bias towards any individual participant. This

research accepted all completed survey data and deleted any incomplete results, which

could have possibly been due to the participant choosing to no longer participate, and

thus, chose to close the browser.

Position statement. The researcher is employed as a full time instructor in a state

approved 4-year institution of higher education that provides a teacher preparation

program in early childhood education. Working for over 30 years in the field of early

childhood education, the researcher has worked as an assistant teacher, lead teacher,

center manager, and director in early learning programs. She also was employed as the

executive director of the local affiliate of the National Association for the Education of

Young Children and for 14 years focused on postsecondary adult education in the roles of

adjunct professor and full time instructor at two and four-year institutions in Connecticut,

New Hampshire, and Vermont. The researcher intentionally utilized anonymous data to

ensure no conflicts of interest or potential bias existed in the data collection and analysis.

Furthermore, the researcher was seeking information on the relationships between the

theoretical constructs, whether there is congruence with a Midwestern state study, and

hoped to utilize the findings to spur discussion. It is this researcher’s position that

“learning is a construction of meaning from experience,” and as such, faculty members

(learners of the craft of teaching) construct knowledge or make meaning as they interpret

117

or make sense of their lived experiences (Merriam & Bierema, 2014, p. 36). As such,

some faculty members will be interested in learning about philosophical orientations and

teaching style preferences to have an awareness of, potentially reflect on, and make

decisions on how it relates to their teaching practices (purpose (s) of education, roles of

teacher and learner, teaching methods, and their preferred teaching style).

Ethical Issues in the Study

In 1979, the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of

Biomedical and Behavioral Research released The Belmont Report. This comprehensive

document outlined the ethical principles and guidelines for the protection of human

subjects of research in regards to respect for persons, beneficence, and justice. According

to the report, “applications of the general principles to the conduct of research leads to

consideration of the following requirements: informed consent, risk/benefit assessment,

and the selection of subjects of research” (United States Department of Health and

Human Services, 1979, p. 1). As part of Capella University’s policy, a comprehensive

and detailed research plan was submitted to the Institutional Review Board (IRB)

including an informed consent letter that outlined the benefits and risks, as well as, how

the selection of subjects were to be determined.

As part of the study, no compensation was offered. Criteria for participation in

the study were clearly outlined and no vulnerable populations were included.

Participation was voluntarily, with the participant agreeing to participate at the end of the

informed consent survey page. If the participant had questions, contact information for

the researcher, dissertation chair, and Capella University’s IRB was provided and those

118

participants, who no longer wanted to participate or chose to withdraw from the one-time

online study, could simply close the browser.

A waiver (Capella University Supplemental Form F: Waiver of Documentation of

Informed Consent) was granted before the beginning of the data collection from

Capella’s IRB in order to collect data online without a signed permission slip in order to

protect the participants from the potential harm that could have resulted from a breach in

confidentiality. No identifying information about the participant (name, email, school, or

state they teach in) was collected in the anonymous survey. The participants had the

opportunity to provide open responses at the end of the survey, as well as request for the

findings of their individual results to be sent to them. In order to ensure anonymity of the

participants during the research analysis, this information was removed from the data

spreadsheet and recordered in a word document. Upon completion of the research, the

open-ended questions were reviewed and the requested survey results were tabulated and

sent to the participants.

Chapter 3 Summary

In summation, faculty members in four New England states were provided the

opportunity to complete a one-time online survey with questions related to two

instruments: Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) and Philosophy of Adult

Learning Scale (PALS). Chapter 3 set the stage of understanding the purpose of the

study, included information about the research questions and hypotheses, as well as

explaining and justifying the use of the causal-comparative research design to explore the

relationship among the variables (educational philosophical orientations, teaching style

preferences, gender, age, current academic rank, number of years teaching in higher

119

education, and terminal degree). The target population was defined, along with the

decision to use a purposive sample based on the sample size, the setting of the study, and

recruitment of participants. The operationalization of the variables were provided, along

with details of the two instruments (PAEI and PALS) in regards to validity and

reliability, in addition to how they were utilized to collect data. Furthermore, the

procedures and justification for the use of the data analysis were detailed so that other

researchers in the future who may wish to replicate this study can do so. The chapter

concluded with the limitations of using causal-comparative research and shared threats to

the internal and external validity, along with the researcher’s expected findings, ethical

issues, and position statement.

120

CHAPTER 4. DATA ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

The purpose of this causal-comparative research study was to identify the

relationships between the individual educational philosophies and teaching style

preferences of higher education faculty members teaching in early childhood teacher

preparation programs in the states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Vermont.

The adult education philosophies were measured using the Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory (PAEI, 2007) and teaching style and factors were measured using

the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS, 1982). Using the IBM Statistical Package

for the Social Sciences (SPSS) software program (version 23.0) to run descriptive and

inferential statistics, the purpose of this chapter is to present a summary of the results

based on an analysis of the data collected from faculty members (N=45). This chapter is

organized to provide a description of the sample, as well as a summary of the results,

detailed analysis of the two research questions and hypotheses, followed by the chapter

summary.

Included in the sample description will be information about the sample size,

characteristics, and demographics (gender, age, academic rank, terminal degree, and

teaching experience), as well as the rate of response (based on institutes of higher

education that were invited compared to those that had the potential of participation).

Further, the description offers information on how many faculty members responded to

the survey, including how many completed it and those who withdrew or were withdrawn

121

from the study by the researcher. Moreover, chapter four contains a summary of the

results based on the following two research questions and hypotheses:

1. What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s Philosophy of

Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences (according to Conti’s

Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in Northern New

England?

2. What are the relationships between the educational philosophies (PAEI) and

teaching styles (PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in Northern New England?

H01: It is hypothesized that there will be no significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Ha1: It is hypothesized that there will be a significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Lastly, in this chapter, a detailed analysis and chapter summary are provided.

Information on how the analysis was conducted, the descriptive and inferential statistics

utilized, and the resulting data and related information is shared for the two questions

122

posed along with the hypotheses. Finally, the chapter summary will highlight the brief

main points from chapter four and provides an answer to the research questions and

hypotheses asked.

Description of the Sample

The sample consisted of 45 early childhood higher education faculty members

teaching in institutes of higher education in four New England states in late 2014 to early

2015 (December 2014 to March 2015). An initial email was sent to the deans,

department chairs, and/or provosts of eighty-six institutes of higher education and a

second email three weeks later was sent out to eighty-two institutions. The sample

included participants who were 21 years of age or older and met the following

characteristics of the study:

A faculty member teaching in an institution of higher education;

Currently teaching in one or more of the following states: Maine, Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, or Vermont; and

Teaching early childhood education courses that can be transferred in or in an

approved teacher preparation program with a focus on early childhood education

certification, as authorized and documented on the state’s Department of

Education website.

When the data collection survey was closed in March of 2015, 56 people had

partaken in the online survey with an 80% completion rate. Of the 56, 55 checked yes to

the informed consent and one checked no. Of the 55 remaining, ten did not complete the

survey in full and any collected data was eliminated from the study. Of the 45 faculty

members who completed the survey it in its entirety, 44 were female (97.8%) and one

123

was male (2.2%). Additionally, eight (17.8%) of the faculty members reported their age

between 31 and 40 years, 13 (28.9%) reported being 41 to 50 years old, 13 (28.9%)

identified being between the ages of 51 and 60, five (11.1%) faculty members reported

being between the ages of 61 and 64, and six (13.3%) reported the age of 65 years or

older. The academic teaching rank also varied among the faculty members.

The largest majority to respond to the survey was adjunct faculty members

(33.3%). Additional faculty classifications included five part-time instructors (11.1%),

four full-time instructors (8.9%), two assistant professors (4.4%), eight associate

professors (17.8%), and 11 full professors (24.4%). Also, the demographics indicated

that 27 faculty members (60%) had obtained a Master’s degree, three (6.7%) reported

having a Certificate of Advanced Graduate Studies (C.A.G.S.), and 15 (33.3%) identified

as having either a Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or Doctor of Education (EdD) as their

terminal degree. Furthermore, as shown in Figure 1 and Appendix C, the number of

years teaching varied amongst the faculty members ranging from a faculty’s first year of

teaching to 38 years of experience in higher education. These findings had a mean of

15.04 (SD 8.783) with 35.6% of the faculty reporting they had taught one to ten years,

40% reported teaching 12 to 20 years, and 24.4% identified that they had been teaching

anywhere from 23 to 38 years.

124

Figure 1. Number of Years Teaching.

Summary of the Results

This section includes a concise summarization of the results organized by each of

the questions, as well as the hypotheses.

Research Question One

Twenty five (55.6%) faculty members (N=45) reported their primary educational

philosophy of adult education as progressive, followed by eight faculty (17.8%)

identifying behavioral, five members (11.1%) sharing a humanistic philosophy, two

(4.4%) preferring radical, one faculty member (2.2%) stating a liberal philosophy, and

four faculty members in a mixed group with two equally scoring progressive and radical,

as well as two scoring progressive and humanistic.

125

The results of the teaching style preferences indicated that 26 (57.8%) faculty

members identified an eclectic (4.4%) teaching style, an increased (42.2%) learner-

centered, a very strong (6.7%) learner-centered, or an extreme (4.4%) learner-centered

style of teaching; whereas, 19 (42.2%) faculty members identified as an increased

(37.8%) teacher-centered or very strong (4.4%) teacher-centered approach.

Research Question Two

The correlation findings suggested there was statistical significance in the

relationships between the adult educational philosophies of progressive, humanistic,

radical/critical and teaching style; progressive orientation and the total teaching style

score, factor two (personalizing instruction), factor four (assessing student needs), factor

five (climate building), and factor six (participation in the learning process); the

behavioral orientation and factor seven (flexibility for personal development); the

humanistic philosophy and the total teaching style score and factor one (learner-centered

activities), factor two (personalizing instruction), factor four (assessing student needs),

and factor five (climate building); and the radical/critical philosophy with the total score,

in addition to factors two (personalizing instruction) and six (participation in the learning

process).

Further, the one-way ANOVA calculations identified statistical significance

between the PAEI adult education philosophical orientations and the PALS factor six

(participation in the learning process) teaching construct; the three PAEI adult education

philosophical orientations (liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical) and the terminal

degree demographic; the PALS factor one (learner-centered activities) and the age of

126

faculty members; and the factor four (assessing student needs) teaching style and the

terminal degree recognized by the faculty members.

Hypotheses

No statistical significance was found for the overall teaching style preferences of

the 45 early childhood faculty members between the first group (primary adult education

philosophical orientation of progressive and humanistic) and the second group (primary

adult education philosophical orientations of liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical).

Detailed Analysis

The detailed analysis section will answer the questions and hypotheses in

sequential order using descriptive statistics (measures of variability, measures of central

tendency, and frequency distributions), the Pearson product moment correlation

coefficient, and the analysis of variance (ANOVA). The first question, with the use of

tables and histograms, will provide the results of the frequency distribution, measures of

variability, and the measures of central tendency for determining the educational

philosophies and teaching style preferences of faculty in the study. The second question

explored the relationship between educational philosophies and the teaching style

preferences. In this section a summary of the results is provided from the Pearson

product moment correlation coefficient and the one-way ANOVA (Levene’s

homogeneity of variances, descriptive statistics, and Tukey’s HSD Post-Hoc

comparisons). Finally, the last section of the detailed analysis will address the stated

hypotheses. A rationale for retaining the null hypothesis and not supporting the

alternative hypothesis will be discussed based on the correlation tests completed on the

philosophical orientations and styles of teaching.

127

Research Question One

What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences (according to Conti’s

Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in Northern New

England?

Using SPSS 23, the frequency distribution for determining the educational

philosophy was completed first by creating standardized scores. Next, the frequency

distribution, measures of variability, and measures of central tendency were run on the

raw scores of the educational philosophy data to answer the first half of the question.

Lastly, the data results for the teaching style preferences are presented including the total

score and the seven constructs to answer the second half of the question. The use of

tables and histograms for both the educational philosophy and the teaching style

preferences are shared as graphic supports to guide in the interpretation of the analysis.

Educational philosophy. The frequency distributions of the five philosophical

orientations in this study were calculated based on the percentage of the total scores.

Pointed out in several research studies (Foster, 2006; Fries, 2012; Fritz, 2008; Hughes,

1997; Martin, 1999; O’Brien, 2001), the scores of the Philosophy of Adult Education

Inventory (PAEI) are not standardized. As such, scores reflecting a faculty member’s

preferred philosophy may vary greatly between individuals with the same philosophical

preferences. Fritz (2008) offered “For example, two respondents may have two highest

preferences in the same school but have very different raw scores based upon how high

their responses were on the 7-point scale” (p. 71).

In order to standardize the scores for each philosophical orientation, and thus

compare amongst the individual faculty members, scores were converted to percentages

128

of their total overall score. According to Fritz (2008), “To accomplish this, a raw number

was computed for each participant’s score by adding individual scores for each of the

philosophical areas. In order to show the participant’s percentage of support for each

school of thought, the score for each area was divided by the total score. This resulted in

standardized scores representing percentage of support for each philosophy which should

range from 0 to 100, this standardization of scores allowed for equitable comparisons

between individuals” (p. 72). Table 1 lists the frequency distribution results for the five

philosophical orientations based on standardized scores.

Table 1

Frequency Distribution: Philosophical Orientations

Orientation

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Liberal 1 2.2 2.2

Progressive 25 55.6 55.6

Behavioral 8 17.8 17.8

Humanistic 5 11.1 11.1

Radical 2 4.4 4.4

Mixed1 2 4.4 4.4

Mixed2 2 4.4 4.4

Total 45 100.0 100.0

Note: Mixed1=Progressive and Radical; Mixed2= Progressive

and Humanistic.

The data results from Table 1 indicated that the early childhood faculty members

were not equally distributed among the five philosophical orientations. In addition, 41

(91.2%) faculty members reported their highest score in one of the five philosophies,

whereas four indicated equal scoring on two philosophies (progressive /radical and

129

progressive/humanistic). All philosophies were represented in the data results with over

half (55.6%) of the faculty showing support for the progressive philosophy, eight faculty

members (17.8%) reporting alignment with the behavioral philosophy and (11.1%) for

scoring for a humanistic educational philosophy. Radical/Critical, along with the two

mixed groups, had equal representation of two members in each of the three groups.

The descriptive statistics were run using SPSS 23. The measures of variability

results shared the standard deviation, minimum, maximum, and range; the measures of

central tendency provided results on the mean; and the frequency distribution shared the

distribution of the scores based on the raw data collected from the PAEI survey. Scores

for each of the five philosophical orientations (liberal, progressive, behavioral,

humanistic, and radical/critical) (N=45) are summed briefly in Table 2. Finally,

additional data results, along with graphical histograms, are provided for each of the five

philosophies.

Table 2

Descriptive Statistics: Philosophical Orientations

Orientation N Range Minimum Maximum Mean SD

Liberal 45 45 50 95 75.84 7.157

Progressive 45 32 72 104 87.49 7.621

Behavioral 45 60 41 101 78.69 11.051

Humanistic 45 33 68 101 81.49 8.357

Radical 45 46 52 98 79.76 10.373

Note: SD=Standard Deviation

According to Zinn (2007), the PAEI scores range from 95-105 to indicate a strong

agreement, 66-94 to report an agreement with the philosophy, 56-65 to be within a

130

neutral point, 55-26 to show a disagreement, and 15-25 to indicate a strong disagreement.

The minimum score for each philosophy was 15 and the maximum score possible for

each orientation is 105. The results from Table 2 indicate that the range of values varied

greatly based on the raw scores. Based on the mean scores of the 45 faculty members,

the philosophical orientation progressive (87.49) was ranked highest. This was also

recognized as the most frequently observed primary educational philosophy of 25

(55.6%) faculty members and was recognized by four faculty members in their mixed

philosophical groups (progressive/radical and progressive/humanistic). The humanistic

orientation had the second highest mean score (81.49) and was recognized by five faculty

members as their primary orientation, as well as two faculty members in the

progressive/humanistic group.

The radical orientation scored the third highest mean (79.86) across the 45 faculty

members surveyed and based on the frequency distribution results, four faculty members

recognized this as their primary (including the two in the progressive/radical group).

Ranked fourth in mean (78.69) scores, eight (17.8%) faculty members preferred the

behavioral orientation which had the largest range (60) of distribution among the

philosophical orientations. The liberal philosophical orientation, chosen by one faculty

member, scored the lowest frequency (2.2%) within the adult education philosophical

orientation distribution, as well as in the mean (75.84) score respectively. Further

detailed information is shared next on each of the five specific adult education

philosophical orientations.

Liberal Adult Education Philosophical Orientation The distribution of raw

scores for the liberal orientation was represented with a histogram in Figure 2. The mean

131

(75.84) is smaller than the median (76.00) score so the distribution was negatively

skewed. The minimum score was 50 with one faculty member (2.2%) who reported

disagreement with the philosophy, one faculty member’s score (2.2%) suggesting

neutrality, and one member (2.2%) who resonated with a strong agreement for the liberal

orientation. Further, the results identified that the majority of faculty (93.4%) identified

agreement with the liberal philosophy.

Figure 2. Frequency Distribution: Liberal Adult Education Philosophy. Zlib=Liberal

Orientation.

Progressive Adult Education Philosophical Orientation. Figure 3 graphically

represents the distribution of scores for the progressive philosophical orientation. With a

smaller range (32) of distributed scores, the results indicated a positive skew distribution

with the mean (87.49) larger than the median (88.00). The lowest score recorded from

the survey was a 72 and scores ranged up to 104. This indicated that the majority of

132

faculty members (80%) designated an agreement with the progressive philosophy and

eight faculty members (20%) were in strong agreement with the orientation.

Figure 3. Frequency Distribution: Progressive Adult Education Philosophy. Zpro=

Progressive Orientation.

Behavioral Adult Education Philosophical Orientation. A histogram, as shown

in Figure 4, displayed the distribution for the scores of the behavioral philosophical

orientation. The mean (78.69) and median (79.00) scores determined the distribution had

a negative skew. One faculty member (2.2%) indicated disagreement with a score of 41;

however, the majority (84.4%) of the faculty members were in agreement with the

behavioral orientation. Three faculty members (6.6%) reported a strong agreement and

no faculty members reported a strong agreement or strong disagreement with this

philosophy.

133

Figure 4. Frequency Distribution: Behavioral Adult Education Philosophy. Zbeh=

Behavioral Orientation.

Humanistic Adult Education Philosophical Orientation. As shown in Figure 5,

the humanistic adult education philosophical orientation distribution of scores had a

positive skew with a mean of 81.49, which was higher than the median score of 78.00.

The first reported score in the study was a 68, with 42 (93.3%) faculty members

identifying in agreement and three (6.7%) in strong agreement with this philosophical

orientation. No faculty members indicated disagreement or a strong disagreement with

this philosophy.

134

Figure 5. Frequency Distribution: Humanistic Adult Education Philosophy. Zhum=

Humanistic Orientation.

Radical/Critical Adult Education Philosophical Orientation. The last of the five

philosophical orientations of adult education displays the distribution scores of the

radical/critical orientation in Figure 6. The mean (79.76) score and the median (80) score

indicated a negative skew in the distribution of scores, which was confirmed with the

visual inspection of the histogram. Forty faculty members (89.9%) identified with

agreement for the philosophy, two faculty members (4.4%) indicated a neutral stance,

and three faculty members (6.6%) strongly agreed with the radical/critical orientation.

No faculty members strongly agreed or strongly disagreed with this orientation.

135

Figure 6. Frequency Distribution: Radical Adult Education Philosophy. Zrad= Radical

Orientation.

Teaching style. To answer the second part of the first question, survey data

results related to Conti’s Principle of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) were utilized. With

the use of tables and histograms, an overall score, as well as the scores of the seven

factors are shared. Similar to the determining the educational philosophies in the first

half of question one, the teaching style results in this second half were calculated by

using SPSS 23 and the measures of variability, measures of central tendency, and

frequency distributions.

First, a frequency distribution was calculated for the overall total scores reported

by the 45 faculty members. The results, summed on Table 3, indicated that early

childhood faculty members were not exclusively teacher-centered or learner-centered in

their teaching style preferences. Further, the majority (84.4%) of the scores was

136

distributed within one standard deviation from the mean and, 95.6% of the faculty were

reported to fall within the mean and two standard deviations. Lastly, two faculty

members (4.4%) indicated an extreme learner-centered style of teaching and no faculty

members reported an extreme teacher-centered teaching style in this study.

Table 3

Frequency Distribution: Teaching Styles

Teaching Style

Frequency Percent Valid

Percent

Extreme Learner-Centered (+3SD) 2 4.4 4.4

Very Strong Learner-Centered (+2SD) 3 6.7 6.7

Increased Learner-Centered (+1SD) 19 42.2 42.2

Eclectic 2 4.4 4.4

Increased Teacher-Centered (-1SD) 17 37.8 37.8

Very Strong Teacher-Centered (-2SD) 2 4.4 4.4

Extreme Teacher-Centered (-3SD) 0 0 0

Total 45 100.0 100.0

The measures of variability and measures of central tendency were run from the

data collected from the PALS survey. Scores for the overall total, as well as each of the

seven factors (learner-centered activities, personalizing instruction, relating to

experience, assessing student needs, climate building, participation in the learning

process, and flexibility for personal development) identified by the early childhood

faculty members (N=45) are summarized in Table 4. Following this table, histograms for

each of the seven constructs of teaching styles are presented.

137

Table 4

Descriptive Statistics: Teaching Styles

Variables N Range Min Max Mean SD

Total Score 45 76 113 189 149.38 15.180

Factor One 45 22 27 49 40.11 4.701

Factor Two 45 20 19 39 28.40 4.535

Factor Three 45 15 15 30 23.11 3.868

Factor Four 45 10 10 20 14.13 2.777

Factor Five 45 8 12 20 16.89 2.289

Factor Six 45 9 10 19 13.64 1.990

Factor Seven 45 12 7 19 13.09 2.922

Note: Min=Minimum; Max=Maximum; SD= Standard Deviation

According to Conti (1985), the PALS instrument scores range from 0 to 220 have

a standard deviation of 20, and a mean of 146. As seen in Table 3, PALS scores range

from 186 to 205 to indicate an extreme learner-centered teaching style (+3 SD); 167 to

186 indicating a very strong learner-centered style of teaching (+2 SD); and 147 to 166

for an increased learner-centered preference (+1 SD). Further, scores ranging from 145

to 126 show a preference for an increased teacher-centered style of teaching (-1 SD); 125

to 106 indicates a very strong teacher-centered preference (-2 SD); and 0 to 105 supports

an extreme teacher-centered style of teaching (-3 SD). The minimum score for the

overall total was 0 and the maximum possible score is 220. Moreover, 0 is the minimum

score for each of the seven factors and the maximum scores vary for each of the

constructs based on the number of question items in each. The maximum scores are 60,

45, 30, 20, 20, 20, and 25 respectively.

The results from Table 4 reveal the range for the overall total score was 76 with a

mean of 149.38. This indicates that the overall sample of 45 faculty members had a

138

tendency to be learner-centered with 53.3% identifying with a learner-centered style of

teaching and 42.2% identifying with the teacher-centered approach. Further details are

shared next on each of the seven factors. This includes information from Table 4, as well

as details from the seven histograms (Figure 7 to Figure 13).

Factor one: learner-centered activities. Factor one is comprised of 12 negative

question items (Conti, 1998) focusing on learner-centered activities. With an established

mean of 38, standard deviation of 8.3, and a possible range from 0 to 60 on the PALS

instrument, the mean for the sample was 40.11, with a standard deviation of 4.701 and a

range of 22 values. As seen in Figure 7, 33 faculty members tended to provide a

collaborative mode of teaching that supported learner-centered activities, whereas 12

faculty members (26.7%) tended not to. Equally important, considering the instrument’s

mean and standard deviation, three (6.7%) faculty members scored the same mean, 29

(37.7%) faculty members fell one standard above the mean and ten (22.2%) faculty

members fell one standard below the mean. Three faculty members (6.7%) scored within

two standard deviations (one +2 SD and two -2 SD). No faculty members fell within

three standard deviations above or below the mean. Lastly, the median score (41.00) was

higher than the mean, therefore, as seen in the histogram in Figure 7, a negative skew in

the distribution of scores is visible.

139

Figure 7. Frequency Distribution: Factor One. CoF1=Factor One.

Factor two: personalizing instruction. Personalizing instruction was the second

factor calculated. This factor is comprised of six positive and three negative question

items (Conti, 1998). The PALS normative mean was 31, with a standard deviation of 6.8

and a possible range from 0 to 45. As seen in Figure 8, the mean for the group was 28.4,

standard deviation was 4.535, and a range of 20 values is present. The results indicated

that the mean score was smaller than the median score (29.00), and as such, the

distribution of scores have a negative skew. Further, the majority (32, 71.1%) of faculty

members in this study scored one to two standard deviations below the mean indicating a

preference for teacher-centered practices, whereas, learner-centered practices included 11

(26.7%) faculty members who scored one standard deviation above. In addition, one

140

(2.2%) faculty member scored two standard deviations above the mean. No faculty

members fell within three standard deviations above or below the mean.

Figure 8. Frequency Distribution: Factor Two. CoF2=Factor Two.

Factor three: relating to experience. Relating to experience was the third

construct determined and represented in Figure 9. This factor included six positive

questions and the established mean was 21, the standard deviation was 4.9, and the score

for the participants ranged from 0 to 30. The results from this sample included a mean of

23.11 and a standard deviation of 3.868. Further, the range of values was 15, with a low

score of 15 and a maximum score of 30, and the distribution of scores had a positive

skew (median 23.00). Findings indicated that the overall mean for the group was learner-

centered, with all faculty members falling within two standard deviations above and

141

below the mean. Moreover, the majority of faculty (68.9%) identified with a learner-

centered approach with 14 (31.1%) faculty members recording teacher-directed scores.

Figure 9. Frequency Distribution: Factor Three. CoF3= Factor Three.

Factor four: assessing student needs. Factor four focused on assessing student

needs and had an established mean of 14, a standard deviation of 3.6, and scores ranging

from 0 to 20. There were four positive question items (Conti, 1998). The results from

the sample included a mean of 14.13, the standard deviation of 2.777, and a range of 10

values. These findings, as shown in Figure 10, report that 24 (53.3%) faculty members

identified with a learner-centered approach with seven (15.6%) members scoring two

deviations above the mean and 17 (37.7%) scoring one deviation above. Equally

important, 21 (46.7%) faculty members in the study had scores that fell one standard

142

deviation below the mean which indicated that these educators preferred a teacher-

centered approach to assessing student needs. No scores fell below two standard

deviations. Nor did any scores fall three standard deviations above the mean. Finally,

because the median score of 14.00 is smaller than the mean, the distribution has a

positive skew as graphically illustrated in the Figure 10 histogram.

Figure 10. Frequency Distribution: Factor Four. CoF4= Factor Four

Factor five: climate building. Factor five centered on climate building and was

comprised of four positive question items (Conti, 1998). The established mean for the

PALS instrument was 16, with a standard deviation of 3.0 and a range from 0 to 20. The

results calculated on the sample had a mean of 16.89, a standard deviation of 2.289, and a

range of 8. The results also indicated that all of the scores fell within two standard

deviations with a large concentration of scores falling within one standard deviation

143

above (60%) and one standard deviation (22.3%) below the mean. The median score was

17.00, slightly larger than the mean. As graphically represented in Figure 11, the

histogram is shown with a negative skew in the distribution of the scores. Additionally,

the findings noted that 12 (26.7%) of the faculty members identified with teacher-

centered practices where they regularly did not focus on climate building and 33 (73.3%)

identified with a more learner-centered approach with this as a focus in practice.

Figure 11. Frequency Distribution: Factor Five. CoF5= Factor Five.

Factor six: participation in the learning process. Another factor run through

SPSS 23 was related to participation in the learning process. This factor included four

positive question items (Conti, 1998) and had a range of 0 to 20 established in the PALS.

Additionally, it had a mean of 13 with a standard deviation of 3.5. The results from the

144

44 participants in this study had a range of 9, with a mean of 13.64 and a standard

deviation of 1.990. The median (14.00) was larger than the mean and a negative skew of

the distribution of scores can be seen in Figure 12. Findings from the results indicated 14

faculty members (31.1%) scored one deviation from the mean and no faculty members

scored two or more below. Further, these findings indicate these educators preferred a

teacher-centered approach, as opposed to the majority (64.5%) of faculty who fell one

standard deviation above leaning towards learner-centered approaches and two faculty

members (4.4%) with reported scores two standard deviations above.

Figure 12. Frequency Distribution: Factor Six. CoF6= Factor Six.

Factor seven: flexibility for personal development. Factor seven addressed the

flexibility for personal development and the scores were determined by responses to five

negative question items. PALS had a normative mean of 13, a standard deviation score

145

of 3.9, and a range of scores from 0 to 25. The results from the sample (N=45) included a

mean of 13.09, the standard deviation of 2.922, and the range included 12 scores. The

median (14.00) was larger than the mean and the scores distribution can be seen in Figure

13 showing a negative skew. The scores on the study indicated that scores ranged from

two standard deviations above the mean to two standard deviations below the mean.

Nineteen (42.2%) fell below the mean with the majority (15 faculty, 33.3%) within the

range of one standard deviation. Additionally, 21 (46.7%) were reported to be within one

standard deviation above the mean with a total of 26 (57.8%) faculty members reported

using learner-centered approaches in their teaching practices.

Figure 13. Frequency Distribution: Factor Seven. CoF7=Factor Seven.

After reviewing the frequency distribution results for question one, the findings

identified 45 faculty members completed the survey for this study. Of this sample, 25

146

faculty members reported a dominant educational philosophy of progressive (55.6%);

eight faculty members identified with the behavioral (17.8%), five members reported

humanistic (11.1%), two identified with radical (4.4%), one faculty member recognized

the liberal philosophy (2.2%), and four faculty members were in one of two mixed groups

with two equally scoring progressive and radical (2.2%), as well as two scoring

progressive and humanistic (2.2%). Equally important, the results noted that 26 (57.8%)

faculty members identified with a learner-centered or an eclectic teaching style and 19

faculty members identified with an increased or very strong teacher-centered approach.

After calculating and reporting the results for question one, the next section will

address the second research question in this study. Two statistical tests will be performed

on the data including the Pearson product moment correlations coefficient and the one-

way analysis of variance.

Research Question Two

What are the relationships between the educational philosophies (PAEI) and

teaching styles (PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in Northern New England?

The second question explored the relationships between the five educational

philosophies and the teaching style preferences of the early childhood faculty members in

four New England states. Using SPSS 23, the Pearson product moment correlation

coefficient was first completed between the educational philosophies and the overall total

of the teaching style preference scores. Next, correlations were run between the five

educational philosophies and each of the seven teaching style factors. After completion

of the correlation tests, the one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) findings are reported

for the ANOVA (F ratio) statistic and descriptive statistics. Finally, graphics were added

147

in this section to help with the guidance of the interpretation of the data to answer this

question. This included scatterplots and tables for several of the correlation results, as

well as tables are provided for the one-way ANOVA.

Pearson Correlation Coefficients. Bivariate correlations and scatterplots were

run to help determine the relationships of direction, form, degree, and strength of the

correlation between the educational philosophies and teaching styles scores. The first set

of correlations was computed using SPSS 23 with the findings related to the five adult

education philosophical orientations (liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic, and

radical/critical) and the overall total for the teaching style. The second set of findings

reported includes the five philosophical orientations and each of the seven factors of

teaching style.

When determining the magnitude of the relationship, the following scale was

used: low (.00 to .33), moderate (.34 to .66), or high (.67 to 1.00). In addition, the

direction (positive or negative) is shared along with the probability level of statistical

significance (statistically significant or not statistically significant). Located in Table 5

are the results of the Pearson product moment correlations (r) for the philosophical

orientations and teaching styles, as well as the findings from each of the seven teaching

style factors in relation to the orientations. Scatter plots are provided from Figure 14

through Figure 18 to graphically illustrate the relationship of the five Pearson product

moment correlation coefficients run in the first set of correlation. Additional results are

presented in Table 5 to supplement the histograms.

Liberal Adult Education Philosophical Orientation and Teaching Style Total.

As seen in Table 5, the relationship (r=-.28, p=.06) between the scores of the total

148

teaching style (PALS) and the liberal adult education philosophical orientation (PAEI)

had a negative direction, was low in regards to magnitude, and was not statistically

significant (Table 5). Additionally, Figure 14 graphically illustrates the relationship that

exists between the liberal orientation and the teaching style total. The data, as seen in the

scatter plot, formed in a low negative linear pattern.

Figure 14. Scatter Plot: Liberal Philosophy and Total Teaching Style.

Progressive Adult Education Philosophical Orientation and Teaching Style.

The scatter plot, in Figure 15, showed a linear moderate positive relationship between the

progressive philosophy and the total teaching style score. Based on Table 5, the direction

was positive, moderate in magnitude, and the results suggested it was statistically

significant (r=.55, p=<.001).

149

Figure 15. Scatter Plot: Progressive Philosophy and Total Teaching Style.

Behavioral Adult Education Philosophical Orientation and Teaching Style.

The scatter plot, in Figure 16, showed the low negative linear relationship between the

behavioral philosophy and the total teaching style score. The direction was negative,

magnitude was low, and the data found the relationship, as seen in Table 5, was not

statistically significant (r=-.28, p=.06).

150

Figure 16. Scatter Plot: Behavioral Philosophy and Total Teaching Style.

Humanistic Adult Education Philosophical Orientation and Teaching Style.

The humanistic orientation results were positive, moderate, and statistically significant

(r=.43, p=.00) according to Table 5. The scatter plot as shown in Figure 17, showed the

moderate positive linear relationship between the humanistic philosophy and the total

overall teaching style score.

151

Figure 17. Scatter Plot: Humanistic Philosophy and Total Teaching Style.

Radical Adult Education Philosophical Orientation and Teaching Style. The

radical/critical results, as seen in Table 5 were positive, moderate, and statistically

significant (r=.34, p=.02). Data in the scatter plot in Figure 18 visibly showed the

moderate positive linear relationship between the radical/critical philosophy and the total

teaching style score.

152

Figure 18. Scatter Plot: Radical Philosophy and Total Teaching Style.

In summary, the results from the first set of calculations between the adult

education philosophical orientations and the overall style of teaching identified that the

correlations of the liberal and the behavioral philosophy were negative in direction and

low in magnitude with both not being statistically significant. Further, the three

educational philosophies (progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical) relationship to the

styles of teaching were positive, moderate, and statistically significant.

153

Table 5

Pearson Correlation Coefficients: Philosophical Orientations and Teaching Style

Scale Statistic Liberal Prog Behav Hum Radical

Total Score r -0.280 0.554 -0.286 0.430 0.336

p 0.062 <.001 0.057 0.003 0.024

Factor One r -0.236 0.257 -0.225 0.305 0.224

p 0.119 0.088 0.138 0.042 0.139

Factor Two r -0.270 0.414 -0.233 0.419 0.407

p 0.073 0.005 0.124 0.004 0.006

Factor Three r -0.141 0.246 -0.108 0.131 0.011

p 0.354 0.103 0.482 0.391 0.940

Factor Four r -0.110 0.582 -0.056 0.317 0.230

p 0.472 <.001 0.717 0.034 0.129

Factor Five r -0.130 0.508 -0.099 0.324 0.273

p 0.394 <.001 0.516 0.030 0.070

Factor Six r -0.141 0.445 -0.131 0.255 0.320

p 0.355 0.002 0.390 0.091 0.032

Factor Seven r -0.168 0.241 -0.401 0.193 0.091

p 0.271 0.111 0.006 0.205 0.550

Note: Prog= Progressive; Behav=Behavioral; Hum=Humanistic

Equally important to the relationship between the philosophical orientations and

teaching style preferences are the results of the relationship between the adult education

philosophies and the seven teaching style factors identified on the PALS. The results of

the relationship of the philosophies to each of the teaching style constructs are reported

next.

Factor one: learner-centered activities. As shown in Table 5, the correlation and

probability findings of the learner-centered activities in factor one and the liberal adult

education philosophical orientation was negative in direction, low in magnitude, and not

statistically significant (r=-.24, p=.12). The progressive philosophy on the other hand,

154

was positive in direction, low in magnitude, and was not statistically significant (r=.26,

p=.09). Meanwhile, the behavioral orientation results (r=-.23, p=.14) were found to be

negative, low, and not statistically significant, whereas, the humanistic and radical/critical

were positive in direction and low in magnitude. However, the humanistic (r=.31, p=.04)

was statistically significant and the radical/critical was not statistically significant (r=.22,

p=.14). Consequently, the findings suggested all five philosophies were low in

magnitude and four out of five were not statistically significant. Further, the results

indicated that the liberal and behavioral orientations were negative in direction and the

other three were positive.

Factor two: personalizing instruction. The relationship between personalizing

instruction (factor two) and the liberal adult education philosophical orientation was

negative in direction, low in magnitude, and not statistically significant (r=-.27, p=.07),

as shown in Table 5. The progressive philosophy on the other hand, was positive in

direction, moderate, and was statistically significant (r=.41, p=.01). In contrast, the

behavioral orientation was negative, low, and the finding was not statistically significant

(r=-.23, p=.12). The humanistic and radical/critical, however, were positive in direction

and moderate in magnitude. In addition, the humanistic (r=.42, p=.00) as well as the

radical/critical (r=.41, p=.01) were statistically significant. Hence, the findings found

two philosophies (liberal and behavioral) were negative, low in magnitude, and not

statistically significant. In contrast, the other three philosophies were positive, moderate,

and statistically significant.

Factor three: relating to experience. The correlation (Table 5) for the liberal

adult education philosophical orientation in relation to factor three (relating to

155

experience) indicated that the relationship was negative, low, and not statistically

significant (r=-.14, p=.35). The progressive philosophy, however, was positive but had

similar results with a low magnitude and was not statistically significant (r=.25, p=.10).

The behavioral orientation findings were reported as negative, low, and not statistically

significant (r=-.11, p=.48). The humanistic (r=.13, p=.39) and radical/critical (r=.01,

p=.94) were both positive in direction, low in magnitude, and not statistically significant.

Therefore, the relationship between all five philosophies and factor three were low in

magnitude and not statistically significant. Further, the results indicated that the liberal

and behavioral orientations were negative in direction and the progressive, humanistic,

and radical/critical were positive.

Factor four: assessing student needs. Factor four focused on assessing student

needs and a correlation was run with the liberal adult education philosophical orientation,

as seen in Table 5. The results indicated the relationship was negative in direction, low in

magnitude, and not statistically significant (r=-.11, p=.47). Conversely, the progressive

philosophy was positive in direction, moderate in magnitude, and was statistically

significant (r=.58, p=<.001). The behavioral orientation results were also negative, low,

and not statistically significant (r=-.06, p=.71). The humanistic and radical/critical were

both positive in direction and low in magnitude, however, the humanistic orientation was

statistically significant (r=.31, p=.03) and the radical/critical was not statistically

significant (r=.23, p=.13). Based on these findings, four of the philosophies were low in

magnitude, whereas, the progressive was moderate. Further, three were found to be not

statistically significant but the progressive and humanistic were. Finally, the results

156

indicated that the liberal and behavioral orientations were negative in direction and the

other three were positive.

Factor five: climate building. The correlation and probability findings of climate

building in factor five and the relationship with the liberal adult education philosophical

orientation were negative in direction, low in magnitude, and not statistically significant

(r=-.13, p=.39). On the contrary, as indicated in Table 5, the progressive philosophy was

positive in direction, moderate, and statistically significant (r=.51, p=<.001).

Additionally, the behavioral orientation results were similar to the liberal orientation and

were found to be negative, low, and not statistically significant (r=-.10, p=.52).

Similarly, the humanistic and radical/critical philosophies were positive and low in

magnitude but the humanistic was statistically significant (r=.32, p=.03) and the

radical/critical was not statistically significant (r=.27, p=.07). In other words, the

findings found that the liberal and behavioral orientations were negative in direction and

the other three were positive; four philosophies were low in magnitude, with progressive

indicating a moderate magnitude; and the relationships between factor five and three

philosophical orientations (liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical) were not statistically

significant.

Factor six: participation in the learning process. Participation in the learning

process, when correlated with the liberal adult education philosophical orientation was

negative in direction, low in magnitude, and not statistically significant (r=-.14, p=.36) as

reported in Table 5. The progressive philosophy results indicated the direction was

positive, moderate in magnitude, and statistically significant (r=.45, p=.00). The

behavioral orientation results were negative, low, and not statistically significant (r=-.13,

157

p=.39). Similarly, the humanistic orientation was also low and not statistically

significant, but did have a positive directionality (r=.25, p=.09). Finally, the

radical/critical was also positive in direction and low in magnitude but was statistically

significant (r=.32, p=.03). On the whole, the findings between factor six and the five

philosophies indicated that three (progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical) were

positive in direction; four philosophies were low in magnitude with progressive being

moderate; and three were not statistically significant (liberal, behavioral, and humanistic

orientations).

Factor seven: flexibility for personal development. The last teaching style factor

(flexibility for personal development) correlated with the five philosophical orientations

as represented in Table 5. The liberal philosophy had a negative direction, was low in

magnitude, and was not statistically significant (r=-.17, p=.27). Further, the progressive

orientation was positive, low, and was not statistical significant (r=.24, p=.11). Results

from the correlation with the behavioral orientation resulted in a negative, moderate, and

statistically significant finding (r=-.40, p=.00) and both the humanistic (r=.19, p=.21) and

radical/critical (r=.09, p=.56) results were positive in direction, low in magnitude, and

were found to not be statistically significant. In summation, the findings concluded that

two philosophies were negative (liberal and behavioral); four were low in magnitude and

one was moderate (behavioral); and four out of five were not statistically significant (all

but behavioral).

To summarize, the Pearson product moment correlation was run first with the five

philosophical orientations against the teaching style total, then was run with the

orientations against the seven teaching style factors. The findings from the 40

158

correlations and five scatter plots were presented in the previous section. In an effort to

further understand the relationships between the adult education philosophical

orientations and the teaching style preferences, the analysis of variance (ANOVA) was

run using SPSS 23. Calculations were run between the adult education philosophical

orientations using the PAEI and the teaching styles using the PALS, as well as the PAEI

scores and the five demographics as reported by the faculty members in the study. The

next section will share information regarding the findings from the one-way ANOVA (F

ratio) statistic that was computed along with the Levene’s test for homogeneity of

variances, the descriptive statistics of the variable groups, and when appropriate, post-

hoc comparisons using the Tukey HSD.

Analysis of variance (ANOVA). Question two was seeking information on the

relationships between the adult education philosophies and the teaching style preferences

of the 45 early childhood faculty members. As such, the one-way analysis of variance

(ANOVA) was calculated first to compare the teaching style, which was the dependent

variable with the philosophical orientations, which was the independent variable to

determine “whether scores from one or more groups are statistically different” (Gay,

Mills, & Airasian, 2012, p. 341). In addition, the one-way ANOVA was also run on the

demographics (independent variable) and the PAEI orientations (dependent variable).

Lastly, the demographics were run along with the PALS orientations (dependent

variable). A one-way ANOVA was appropriate for this research study because it

examined the variability between the two variables within the instruments of PAEI and

PALS.

159

Several assumptions were met to use the ANOVA test for this study including the

fact that the variables were independent of each other (two different instrument scores);

the dependent variable was an Interval or Ratio scale (PALS total score); the variance

samples followed the homogeneity of variances principles with equality (tested with each

ANOVA); there are no significant outliers; there was a presumption that the independent

variable had multiple categories (liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic,

radical/critical, and two mixed philosophy groups); and within the multiple categories,

each faculty member appeared in only one group (Laerd, 2015; Ravid, 2011). For the

three ANOVA comparisons (PALS and PAEI; PAEI and Demographics; and PALS and

Demographics), findings are reported in several tables (Table 6, Table 7, and Appendices

K-N). The one-way ANOVA statistical information includes the sum of squares (SS),

degrees of freedom (df), mean squares (MS), F ratio (F), and the .05 level of significance

(p). The descriptive statistics tables includes the sample (N), mean (M), standard

deviation (SD), standard error (SE), and the 95% Confidence Interval for mean (CI) for

lower and upper bound, as well as maximum and minimum.

PALS Teaching Style and PAEI Philosophical Orientations. In this calculation,

the total teaching style of the faculty members (N=45) was the dependent variable and the

adult education philosophical orientations was the independent variable in the study. As

seen in Table 6, the teaching style groups included the total teaching style and the seven

teaching style factors. The independent categories included seven philosophical groups

represented in the study including liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic,

radical/critical, a group that equally scored progressive and radical/critical as their

dominant philosophy, and a group of faculty members reporting the two equally primary

160

philosophies of progressive and humanistic. Calculations run on SPSS 23 used the one-

way ANOVA to suggest whether the statistical significance of the adult education

philosophical orientations were predicting a relationship, or association, with the teaching

style preferences.

The analysis of variance test was calculated for the total teaching style and seven

factors (dependent variables) with its individual relationship with the philosophical

orientations identified in the study (independent variable). Forty five faculty members

participated in the study. Six of the philosophical groups had more than one member

except for the liberal group, which had only one. The Levene’s test for homogeneity of

variances was calculated for six out of the seven groups (sans liberal group). Three of the

tests, factor four (p=.034), factor six (p=.046), and factor seven (p=.039), had a statistical

significance less than five percent (p=<.05). As seen in Table 6, factor six (F 6,38 = 2.441,

p = 0.043) is the only dependent variable that indicated there was a statistically

significant difference (p =<.05) with the philosophical orientations. The Tukey HSD

post-hoc tests were not conducted because one of the two groups had fewer than two

members (liberal, N=1).

161

Table 6

One-Way ANOVA: Philosophical Orientations and Teaching Style

PAEI Total SS df MS F Sig

PALS Total Between Groups 2245.338 6 374.223 1.802 .125

Within Groups 7893.240 38 207.717

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 98.709 6 16.452 .716 .639

Within Groups 873.735 38 22.993

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 234.085 6 39.014 2.210 .063

Within Groups 670.715 38 17.650

Total 904.800 44

Factor Three Between Groups 121.784 6 20.297 1.437 .226

Within Groups 536.660 38 14.123

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 62.160 6 10.360 1.421 .232

Within Groups 277.040 38 7.291

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups 33.704 6 5.617 1.085 .389

Within Groups 196.740 38 5.177

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups 48.496 6 8.083 2.441 .043

Within Groups 125.815 38 3.311

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 77.109 6 12.852 1.636 .164

Within Groups 298.535 38 7.856

Total 375.644 44

Note: SS= Sum of squares; df=degrees of freedom; F= F ratio; MS=Mean square;

Sig=Statistical Significance

The descriptive statistics findings, as seen in Table 7 indicated that from the

sample (N=45), the progressive philosophy group (n=25) had the highest mean of 155.32

(SD 14.436) compared to the eight faculty members in the behavioral group with the

lowest mean of 138.25 (SD 17.186) in the overall teaching style total. Further, factor

162

one’s highest group was humanistic (n=5) with a mean of 42.40 (SD 4.450) and lowest

group was behavioral (n=8) with a mean of 37.63 (SD 4.470). Additionally, factor two

results indicated that the progressive (29.88, SD 4.226) group was highest and the liberal

group (n=1) had a mean of 24 with no standard deviation reported. Factor three scored

the liberal group the highest (M=26) and the humanistic group lowest (M=19.60, SD

3.975), as well as, factor four found behavioral the highest (M=14.50, SD 2.976) and the

liberal group the lowest (M=11.00). Factor five results indicated the two mixed groups

(each with n=2) scored highest (progressive and radical with a mean of 18.00 and a

standard deviation of 1.414) and lowest (progressive and humanistic had a mean of 15.00

and a standard deviation of 2.828). Moreover, factor six’s progressive group (M=14.48,

SD 1.806) indicated it was highest opposed to the liberal group whose mean was 11.00.

Finally, factor seven recognized the progressive group as highest (M=14.04, SD 2.475)

with the behavioral group scoring lowest (M=10.63, SD 2.973).

Table 7

Descriptive Statistics: Philosophical Orientations and Teaching Style

PAEI Total N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

PALS Total1 8 138.25 17.186 6.076 123.88 152.62 113 164

2 1 143.00 . . . . 143 143

3 25 155.32 14.436 2.887 149.36 161.28 133 189

4 5 143.80 11.256 5.034 129.82 157.78 132 161

5 2 148.50 9.192 6.500 65.91 231.09 142 155

6 2 146.50 3.536 2.500 114.73 178.27 144 149

7 2 140.50 14.849 10.500 7.08 273.92 130 151

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

163

PAEI Total N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Factor One 1 8 37.63 4.470 1.580 33.89 41.36 27 41

2 1 42.00 . . . . 42 42

3 25 40.44 4.883 .977 38.42 42.46 30 49

4 5 42.40 4.450 1.990 36.87 47.93 35 47

5 2 42.00 7.071 5.000 -21.53 105.53 37 47

6 2 39.50 .707 .500 33.15 45.85 39 40

7 2 38.00 5.657 4.000 -12.82 88.82 34 42

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

Factor Two 1 8 24.38 4.689 1.658 20.46 28.29 19 32

2 1 24.00 . . . . 24 24

3 25 29.88 4.226 .845 28.14 31.62 22 39

4 5 28.40 3.782 1.691 23.70 33.10 26 35

5 2 31.00 1.414 1.000 18.29 43.71 30 32

6 2 25.50 4.950 3.500 -18.97 69.97 22 29

7 2 28.50 2.121 1.500 9.44 47.56 27 30

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

Factor Three1 8 22.50 4.071 1.439 19.10 25.90 18 28

2 1 26.00 . . . . 26 26

3 25 24.04 3.482 .696 22.60 25.48 17 30

4 5 19.60 3.975 1.778 14.66 24.54 15 25

5 2 22.50 6.364 4.500 -34.68 79.68 18 27

6 2 25.00 2.828 2.000 -.41 50.41 23 27

7 2 20.00 4.243 3.000 -18.12 58.12 17 23

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

Factor Four 1 8 14.50 2.976 1.052 12.01 16.99 10 18

2 1 11.00 . . . . 11 11

3 25 14.92 2.900 .580 13.72 16.12 11 20

4 5 12.40 1.140 .510 10.98 13.82 11 14

5 2 13.00 <.001 <.001 13.00 13.00 13 13

6 2 12.00 2.828 2.000 -13.41 37.41 10 14

7 2 12.00 <.001 <.001 12.00 12.00 12 12

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

Factor Five 1 8 16.00 3.162 1.118 13.36 18.64 12 20

2 1 17.00 . . . . 17 17

3 25 17.52 1.982 .396 16.70 18.34 12 20

4 5 16.00 1.581 .707 14.04 17.96 14 18

164

PAEI Total N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

5 2 15.50 3.536 2.500 -16.27 47.27 13 18

6 2 18.00 1.414 1.000 5.29 30.71 17 19

7 2 15.00 2.828 2.000 -10.41 40.41 13 17

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

Factor Six 1 8 12.63 2.504 .885 10.53 14.72 10 17

2 1 11.00 . . . . 11 11

3 25 14.48 1.806 .361 13.73 15.23 12 19

4 5 12.60 .894 .400 11.49 13.71 12 14

5 2 11.50 .707 .500 5.15 17.85 11 12

6 2 14.00 <.001 <.001 14.00 14.00 14 14

7 2 13.00 <.001 <.001 13.00 13.00 13 13

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

Factor Seven1 8 10.63 2.973 1.051 8.14 13.11 7 15

2 1 12.00 . . . . 12 12

3 25 14.04 2.475 .495 13.02 15.06 9 19

4 5 12.40 2.966 1.327 8.72 16.08 8 15

5 2 13.00 7.071 5.000 -50.53 76.53 8 18

6 2 12.50 2.121 1.500 -6.56 31.56 11 14

7 2 14.00 <.001 <.001 14.00 14.00 14 14

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Note: SD=Standard Deviation; SE=Standard error; CI=Confidence interval;

Min=Minimum; Max=Maximum; 1=Behavioral; 2=Liberal; 3=Progressive; 4=

Humanistic; 5=Radical/Critical; 6=Progressive and Radical; 7= Progressive and

Humanistic.

In summarization, the relationship between the adult education philosophical

orientations and teaching styles showed a statistical significance with the teaching style

factor six (p=0.043) in the ANOVA test; a statistical significance was identified when

reviewing factors four (p=.034), six (p=.046), and seven (p=.039) for the Levene’s

homogeneity of variances. Similarly, when reviewing the results from the descriptive

tests for philosophical orientations and teaching styles, progressive scored highest on four

165

means, with humanistic, liberal, behavioral, and the mixed group of progressive and

radical scoring at least once highest with the various factors. Additionally, behavioral

and liberal both scored lowest in means three times; along with humanistic and the mixed

group of progressive and humanistic scoring once in the lowest groups in mean scores

when related to the overall total and teaching style factors. The next set of relationships

calculated focused on the adult education philosophical orientations, as measured by the

PAEI and the demographics of gender, age, employment status, experience, and terminal

degree obtained by the faculty members who completed the survey.

PAEI Philosophical Orientations and Demographics. Similar to the previous

ANOVA tests between the adult education philosophical orientations and the teaching

style preferences, the next set of calculations examined the findings from the independent

variable (demographics of gender, age, academic rank, years of teaching experience, and

terminal degree) and the relationships with the PAEI five philosophical orientations of

liberal, progressive, behavioral, humanistic, and radical/critical (dependent variable).

The one-way ANOVA (F ratio) statistics (Appendix B) was run along with the Levene’s

test for homogeneity of variances, the descriptive statistics (Appendix C) of the variable

groups, and when appropriate, the Tukey HSD Post-Hoc comparisons. Information is

shared based on the statistical findings of each test in relation to the specific

demographics and philosophical orientations.

The ANOVA test was calculated for the 45 faculty members who participated in

the study. As seen in Appendix B, the one-way ANOVA test for the faculty members’

terminal degree (independent variable) was recognized as statistically significant

(p=<.05) suggesting a relationship with three groups: liberal (F 2,42 = 4.822, p=0.013),

166

behavioral (F 2,42 = 3.838, p=0.029), and radical/critical (F 2,42 = 5.467, p=0.008). When

computing the test for the Levene’s homogeneity of variances test, the gender

demographic group had one male identified in the sample and the test was not run

because there was only computed variance in one group. The Levene’s test for age

identified an unequal variance with the radical/critical group (F= 3.130, p=.20). Further,

the academic rank indicated no statistical significance, as well as the number of teaching

years and the terminal degree.

The lack of three groups in the Gender demographic impacted not only the

Levene’s test but it also resulted in an inability to run the Tukey HSD test for this group.

The Tukey’s HSD results indicated that the tests for age, academic rank, and number of

years teaching showed no statistical significance in the findings for this study. Further,

the results of the relationship between the terminal degrees of Master’s and Certificate of

Advanced Graduate Studies (C.A.G.S.) identified a statistical significance with the liberal

(p=.009) and behavioral (p=.046) groups. Equally important, the radical/critical

philosophy group on the Tukey HSD showed a statistical significance with the faculty

member who reported having a Masters and Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or Doctor of

Education (EdD) degree.

The demographic results, as seen in Appendix C indicated that out of the 45

faculty members, one sample member was male and had the highest means for the liberal

(M=78, SD 7.232) and behavioral (M=83, SD 11.159) orientations. Whereas, the female

faculty members (n=44) scored highest on the means of progressive (M=87.55, SD

7.699), humanistic (M=81.64, SD 8.395), and radical (M=79.82, SD 10.484). When

reviewing the age ranges and the relationship with the philosophical orientations, the

167

results indicated the age ranges of 31 to 40 scored the highest mean for the behavioral

orientation (M=81.75, SD 8.876) and lowest for the humanistic (M=78.75, SD 7.797);

members 51 to 60 scored lowest on the liberal (M=74.62, SD 4.194) and behavioral

means (M=75.62, SD 13.414); members 61 to 64 scored the highest mean for the liberal

group (M=76.80, SD 5.891), but lowest for progressive (M=83.60, SD 7.701) and radical

(M=72, SD 17.687); and faculty members who reported being 65 years of age and older,

scored the highest means for progressive (M=94.33, SD 5.574), humanistic (M=89.50, SD

8.118), and radical (M=84.67, SD 9.647) orientations. Further, when reviewing academic

rankings, adjunct faculty members reported highest means for liberal (M=77.73, SD

6.912), progressive (M=90.20, SD 6.439), and humanistic (M=83.93, SD 7.507); full-time

instructor calculations indicated a lowest mean for liberal (M=69.50, SD 14.177) and a

highest mean for radical (M=84.25, SD 8.261); assistant professors scored the lowest

means in four orientations- progressive (M=80, SD 9.899), behavioral (M=65, SD 2.828),

humanistic (M=74, SD 1.414), and radical (M=68, SD 0.000); and the professor group

findings scored high for the behavioral orientation (M=82.36, SD 7.215).

Moreover, the number of years teaching from 0 to 10 indicated progressive

(M=85, SD 6.703) and humanistic (M=79.06, SD 6.226) scored lower means, whereas,

the behavioral orientation (M=80.88, SD 9.514) scored a higher mean; faculty teaching

from 11 to 20 years scored the lowest mean on the liberal orientation (M=74.56, SD

9.076); 21 to 30 years of teaching identified the highest mean for the liberal group

(M=78.13, SD 6.728) and the lowest means for behavioral (M=75, SD 15.721) and radical

(M=76.75, SD 13.101); and findings from the relationship with faculty members teaching

31 to 40 years indicated the highest means with three orientations- progressive (M=93.67,

168

SD 9.292), humanistic (M=88.67, SD 8.622), and radical (M=86, SD 3.606). Finally,

when reviewing the descriptive statistics for the demographic of terminal degree, as seen

in Appendix C, the Master’s degree scored the highest means for all five philosophical

orientations, the Certificate of Advanced Graduate Studies (C.A.G.S.) scored the lowest

mean for four orientations, and the Doctor of Philosophy or Doctor of Education (PhD/

EdD) reported the lowest mean (M=73.87, SD 11.686) for the Radical orientation.

As mentioned in the last section, the Levene’s test for homogenity of variances to

examine the relationship between the demographics and philosophical orientations of the

45 faculty members in this study could not be completed on the gender demographic; it

provided unequal variances for the age demographic; and provided no statistical

significance for academic rank, number of years of teaching, or terminal degree. In

addition, Tukey’s HSD Post-Hoc comparisons could not be completed for gender; was

not statistically significant for age, academic rank, or number of years; but results did

suggest it had a statistical significance with the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical

adult education philosophical orientations. Moreover, the one-way ANOVA findings

indicated a statistical significance also with the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical

adult education philosophical orientations.

What’s more, the descriptive statistics indicated in the gender demographic that

the male faculty member scored the highest means for two orientations (liberal and

behavioral); the age demographic provided results in four levels (31-40, 51-60, 61-64,

and 65+); the academic rank of adjunct faculty scored the highest means in three

orientations (liberal, progressive, and humanistic), whereas the full-time instructor scored

the highest mean for radical and the professor group reported behavioral orientation as

169

the highest mean. Additionally, the descriptive statistics identified faculty members

teaching 0 to 10 years to have one high mean, 21 to 30 years to have one high mean, and

31 to 40 years to have three highest means respectively (behavioral, liberal, progressive,

humanistic, and radical). Finally, the descriptive statistics identified the faculty members

with a Master’s degree to score the highest means in all five orientations, the Certificate

of Advanced Studies (C.A.G.S.) faculty members to have four lowest means (liberal,

progressive, behavioral, and humanistic), and the Doctor of Philosophy and Doctor of

Education (PhD and/or EdD) group to score the lowest mean on the radical philosophy.

The next set of calculations focused on the independent variable (five demographics) and

the dependent variable of the overall teaching style and the seven factors.

PALS Teaching Styles and Demographics. In the same way the previous one-

way ANOVA tests were calculated in the past two sections to look for answers to the

relationships posed in question two, the next set of findings resulted from the statistical

tests using the demographics of gender, age, academic rank, years of teaching experience,

and terminal degree as the independent variable and comparing it with the PALS overall

teaching style total and the seven factors (dependent variable). The one-way ANOVA

(F ratio) results, as seen in Appendix D, were run using SPSS 23 along with the Levene’s

test for homogeneity of variances, the descriptive statistics (Appendix E), and the Tukey

HSD Post-Hoc comparisons. With the use of graphic illustrations to support the

reporting of the results, statistical findings of the tests are shared in relation to the five

demographics and teaching style groups.

The one-way ANOVA test was completed using data from the sample group

(N=45). Findings from the one-way ANOVA test, as seen in Appendix D, identified two

170

demographics with statistical significance (age and degree). Specifically, the findings

from the faculty members’ age suggested a relationship with factor one: learner-centered

activities (F 4,40 = 2.801, p=0.038) and the terminal degree with factor four: assessing

student’s needs (F 2,42 = 0.070, p=0.933). When reviewing the results for the Levene’s

homogeneity of variances test, the gender demographic group had 44 females and one

male identified in the sample, therefore, a test was not run because there was only

computed variance in the female group. The Levene’s test for age resulted in no

statistical significance, however, the findings identified unequal variance with the

academic rank and factor three: relating to experience (F= 4.392, p=.003). Further

findings in this test also included unequal variances in the number of teaching years and

factor four: assessing student’s needs (F= 2.993, p=.042) and in factor seven: flexibility

for personal development (F= 3.035, p=.040). Finally, results calculated on the

relationship between the terminal degree (independent variable) and factor one: learner-

centered activities (dependent variable) indicated (F= 3.966, p=.026).

The lack of three gender groups resulted in the inability to run the Tukey HSD

test for that demographic category. The Tukey’s HSD results, however for academic

rank, number of years teaching, and terminal degree showed no statistical significance in

the findings but the results of the relationship between the ages of the faculty member

did. Specifically the age ranges of 31 to 40 and 61 to 64 identified a statistical

significance with factor one: learner-centered activities (p=.045).

Equally important is the relationship of the descriptive statistics between the five

demographic groups and the PALS teaching style and seven factors. Gender

demographics indicated that females (n=44) scored the highest means for total overall

171

teaching style score and factors one, two, four, five, and seven. Whereas, the male group

(n=1) scored the highest means for factor three: relating to experience (M=27) and factor

six: participation in the learning process (M=14). When reviewing the demographic

findings of age, as shown in Appendix E, faculty members between the ages of 31 to 40

scored the lowest means in four categories including Total (M=140, SD 9.885), factor

one: learner-centered activities (M=37, SD 4.106), factor two: personalizing instruction

(M=26, SD 3.586), factor five: climate building (M=15.88, SD 2.457), and factor seven:

flexibility for personal development (M=11, SD 2.619). Also, faculty members aged 41

to 50 reported the lowest mean with factor three (M=21.92, SD 4.132) and the highest

means for factor four: assessing student needs (M=15.46, SD 2.933); faculty ages 51 to

60 identified the two highest means in factor two (M=29.38, SD 4.976) and factor seven

(M=14.08, SD 2.813); and faculty 61 to 64 indicated factor one (M=44.20, SD 3.564) had

the highest means and factor four (M=12.20, SD 1.095) and factor six (M=13, SD 1.581)

had the lowest means. Finally, faculty members, age 65 and older, scored the highest

means in four areas of teaching style including Total (M=158.67, SD 15.996), factor three

(M=24.33, SD 4.502), factor five (M=17.50, SD 2.881), and factor six (M=14.67, SD

3.011).

Academic rank indicated adjunct faculty members scored the lowest means on

both factor three (M=22.20, SD 5.185) and factor five (M=16.07, SD 2.374); whereas, the

group of professors scored the highest means on factor one (M=40.91, SD 4.110) and the

part-time instructors scored the lowest means on Total (M=142.20, SD 12.716), factor six

(M=12.80, SD 1.095), and factor seven (M=11, SD 2.828). In addition, part-time

instructors also scored an equally low score with associate professors for factor one

172

(M=39, SD 3.742) and an equally lowest mean score with assistant professors for factor

four (M=13, SD 1.732). Full-time instructors scored the highest means for Total (M=162,

SD 8.869), factor two (M=32.75, SD 1.258), factor four (M=16.50, SD 0.577), factor five

(M=18.50, SD 1.291), and factor six (M=16, SD 1.414). Equally important to scoring the

lowest mean on factor four with the part-time instructors, the assistant professor group

also scored the lowest mean for factor two (M=24.50, SD 3.536) and the highest mean in

factor three (M=26, SD 1.414). Additionally, the associate professor scored an equal low

scoring mean on factor one (with part-time instructor) and the highest mean when

compared to the academic rank in factor seven (M=14.75, SD 2.712).

The number of years teaching by faculty in the study indicated that those teaching

0 to 10 years scored the lowest means in relationship to the total teaching style score

(M=143.69, SD 13.763) and factors one (M=38.19, SD 5.036), five (M=16.56, SD 2.220),

and seven (M=11.88, SD 2.729), whereas, faculty teaching 31 to 40 years scored the

highest means on Total (M=166, SD 20.224) and factors two (M=32.67, SD 4.619), three

(M=26.33, SD 3.055), four (M=16.67, SD 4.163), five (M=18.67, SD 1.528), six

(M=15.67, SD 3.055), and seven (M=14.67, SD 3.055). More so, faculty members

teaching 11 to 20 years scored the highest mean for factor one (M=41.17, SD 4.541) and

the lowest mean for factor three (M=22.33, SD 4.715); and those teaching 21 to 30 years

reported the lowest means for factor two (M=27, SD 3.162), factor four (M=13.13, SD

1.885), and factor six (M=13.13, SD 2.295). Lastly, Appendix E displayed the range of

means for the terminal degree of the faculty members. As shown, the Certificate of

Advanced Graduate Studies (C.A.G.S.) faculty members scored highest in the overall

total means and all seven factors; the Doctor of Philosophy (PhD) or Doctor of Education

173

(EdD) faculty members scored the lowest mean in relation to factor four; and the

Master’s degree faculty members indicated the lowest means on the rest of the factors in

addition to the Total.

On the whole, question two was answered with a combination of two statistical

tests: Pearson product moment correlations and the one-way ANOVA. Findings from the

correlation coefficient were first calculated on the educational philosophies and the

overall total of the teaching style preference scores. Then the correlation coefficient was

computed on the five educational philosophies and each of the seven teaching style

factors. After completion of the correlations tests, the one-way analysis of variance was

completed first on the philosophical orientations and the total teaching style, next on the

demographics and philosophical orientations, and finally the one-way ANOVA was

calculated for the demographics and teaching style scores.

Findings from the Pearson product moment correlation suggested statistical

significance in the total overall teaching score and the orientations of progressive,

humanistic, and radical/critical; in factor one and humanistic; factor two with the

orientations of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical; factor four with the

progressive and humanistic philosophies; factor five with the orientations of progressive

and humanistic; factor six with progressive and radical/critical; and finally, factor seven

suggesting a statistical significance with behavioral.

Findings from the one-way ANOVA indicated a statistical significance was

established between the PAEI adult education philosophical orientations and the factor

six teaching style. Equally important, when examining the relationships between the

demographics and the philosophies, a statistical significance was found in the terminal

174

degree and the following three orientations: liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical.

Lastly, statistical significance was identified after computing the one-way ANOVA to the

age of the faculty members and the teaching style construct of factor one, as well as,

terminal degree and factor four.

The next, and final section of the detailed analysis, will focus on the results of the

Pearson product moment correlation coefficient in an effort to determine if the directional

alternative hypothesis should be retained or rejected based on the statistical significance

level of p=<.05.

Hypotheses:

It is hypothesized that there will be a significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

The alternative hypothesis in this study stated there would be a significant

difference in the PALS teaching style preferences between the first group of faculty

members with the dominant progressive and humanistic orientations in comparison with

the second group of faculty members with the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical

philosophical orientations. The null hypothesis suggested there would be no statistical

significance between group one (progressive and humanistic orientations) and group two

(liberal, behavioral, and radical orientations) in relationship to the preferences for

teaching style. Findings from the Pearson product moment correlations and the one-way

ANOVA were calculated for the two groups and the results are seen in Table 8 and Table

175

9. Group one included the progressive and humanistic philosophical orientations in

relationship to the PALS overall teaching style and group two included the liberal,

behavioral, and radical/critical orientations and the overall teaching style.

The results of the first group’s correlations (n=34), as seen in Table 8, indicated

that the progressive and humanistic (r=-.31, p=.07) orientations was not statistically

significant with the overall PALS teaching style. At the same time, when reviewing the

second group’s (n=12) correlations for the liberal, behavioral, and radical orientations

(r=.41, p=.18), the findings suggest there is also no statistical significance.

Table 8

Pearson Correlation Coefficients: Hypothesis

Teaching Style Statistic Group One Group Two

PALS total r -0.313 0.411

p .071 .184

Further, when reviewing the findings from the one-way ANOVA, as seen in Table

9, there is no statistical significance either in group one (F 3,30=1.628, p=0.204) or in

group two (F 3,8=.628, p=0.617) in relationship to the teaching style.

176

Table 9

One-Way ANOVA: Hypothesis

PALS Total Sum of Squares df Mean Square F Sig.

Group One Between Groups 934.878 3 311.626 1.628 .204

Within Groups 5741.240 30 191.375

Total 6676.118 33

Group Two Between Groups 393.571 3 131.190 .628 .617

Within Groups 1672.429 8 209.054

Total 2066.000 11

Note: df=degrees of freedom; F= F ratio; Sig.=Statistical Significance

The alternative hypothesis suggested there would be a statistical significance in

group one and no statistical significance (p=<.05) in the second group, when in fact, both

the Pearson product moment correlations and the one-way ANOVA tests indicated no

relationship existed between either groups and the PALS teaching style. For that reason,

the researcher’s stated alternative hypothesis could not be supported and the null

hypothesis is retained.

Chapter 4 Summary

The purpose of chapter four was to share the results and detailed analysis of the

survey data collected on 45 early childhood faculty members in four New England states.

This causal-comparative study compared the self-reported scores of the adult education

philosophical orientations (as identified on PAEI) and the scores for teaching style

preferences (as identified on PALS) in order to identify the primary philosophical

orientations and teaching style preferences, as well as determine what statistically

significant relationships that may exist between the two variables.

Chapter 4 shared detailed information on the characteristics and demographics of

the faculty members including gender, age, academic rank, number of years teaching, and

177

terminal degree. Specifically, 97.8% of the respondents were female with one male

member identified in the study; age ranges spanned from 31 years old to over 65 with the

majority of faculty reporting their ages between 41 and 60 (57.8%); that a majority of the

faculty to complete the survey were adjuncts (33.3%) followed by professors (28.9%) and

associate professors (17.8%); and that 60% of the faculty members were teaching with a

Master’s degree, followed by 33.3% with a PhD and/or EdD. Further, based on results

from the frequency distributions completed on the sample, 40% of the faculty reported

teaching 12 to 20 years with 35.6% reported teaching less than ten years.

In chapter 4, the summary of results and detailed analysis were also discussed.

Specifically, research question one identified what the specific orientations and teaching

style preferences were of the sample using descriptive statistics such as frequency

distributions, measures of variability, and measures of central tendency. The findings

concluded that the primary progressive orientation was recorded by 25 faculty members

(55.6%), followed by eight members recognizing behavioral, five identifying with

humanistic, two acknowledging radical/critical, and one preferring the liberal

philosophical orientation. Further, two faculty members identified with the mixed group

of progressive/radical and two faculty members also equally scored the two dominant

philosophies of progressive and humanistic. Additionally, the descriptive statistics for

the teaching style preferences indicated a range from the learner-centered (53.4%)

approach to the eclectic (4.4%) preference to 42.2% suggesting a teacher-centered

approach.

Chapter 4 also analyzed the results from the Pearson product moment correlation

and analysis of variance statistics run on SPSS 23 to determine if any statistical

178

significant relationships existed between the educational philosophies and the teaching

styles. The correlation findings suggested that faculty members with the three dominant

adult education philosophical orientations of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical

had a statistical significance with the overall teaching style. It also suggested that faculty

members who identified with the progressive philosophy had a statistically significant

relationship not only with the overall total teaching style score, but also with factor two:

personalizing instruction, factor four: assessing student’s needs, factor five: climate

building, and factor six: participation in the learning process. In addition, faculty

members recognizing the behavioral orientation as their primary orientation also had a

statistical significance suggested with factor seven: flexibility for personal development.

Furthermore, the results from the correlations test identified and suggested a relationship

with the humanistic philosophy faculty members to the total teaching style score and

factors one: learner-centered activities, two: personalizing instruction, four: assessing

student’s needs, and five: climate building, as well as, the faculty members in the

radical/critical philosophy whose scores indicated a relationship with the total and factor

two: personalizing instruction.

Equally important were the findings regarding the statistical significance which

was determined from the use of the one-way ANOVA calculations completed on the five

PAEI adult education philosophical orientations and the PALS overall teaching style

score along with the seven factors. Specifically, the results identified a statistically

significant relationship between the orientations and factor six: participation in the

learning process. The findings also suggested there were three adult education

philosophical orientations (liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical) that had a relationship

179

with the terminal degree demographic. Lastly, when reviewing the information from the

PALS teaching style preferences and the demographics, factor one: learner-centered

activities suggested a statistical significance with the faculty member’s ages and factor

four: assessing student’s needs findings suggested a significant relationship with the

terminal degrees.

The last set of calculations reported in chapter 4 addressed the researcher’s

alternative hypothesis. The use of Pearson product moment correlation and the one-way

ANOVA were computed on the two groups in relationship to the teaching style. Findings

from both tests concluded there were no statistical significant results from either group,

thus the alternative directional hypothesis cannot be supported and the null hypothesis is

retained.

180

CHAPTER 5. CONCLUSIONS AND DISCUSSION

The purpose of this causal-comparative quantitative research study was to identify

and examine the relationships between the individual educational philosophies and

teaching styles of 45 early childhood faculty members teaching in institutions of higher

education in four New England states (Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and

Vermont). Further, this study was designed to collect data through an online survey in an

effort to identify whether a relationship existed between the adult education philosophical

orientations, as measured by the Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI) and the

style of teaching measured by the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS).

The purpose of chapter five is to present an overall summary of the four previous

chapters and provide the results of the study. This chapter is organized to first provide a

summary of the results. It will then provide a discussion of the results as it relates to the

two research questions and hypotheses in addition to the relationship of the results to the

current literature on adult education in terms of philosophy, teaching style, and the

Principle of Congruity. Equally important, this chapter will discuss the limitations of the

study and implications of the results for practice in higher education settings. Finally,

chapter five will share several recommendations for continued research and will provide

a conclusion to the reader.

The following two research questions and hypotheses guided this study:

181

1. What are the educational philosophies (according to Zinn’s Philosophy of

Adult Education Inventory, PAEI) and teaching style preferences (according to Conti’s

Principles of Adult Learning Scale, PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in

teacher preparation programs in college and university settings located in Northern New

England?

2. What are the relationships between the educational philosophies (PAEI) and

teaching styles (PALS) of higher education faculty teaching in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in Northern New England?

H01. It is hypothesized that there will be no significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Ha1. It is hypothesized that there will be a significant difference between the

progressive and humanistic higher education faculty and the liberal, behavioral, and

radical/critical faculty members in preferences of teaching style (in teacher preparation

programs in college and university settings located in the four Northern New England

states of Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Vermont).

Summary of the Results

This study collected data using a Survey Monkey online survey with questions

from the PAEI and PALS. Faculty members completed the one-time survey and the

results were analyzed using descriptive statistics (frequency distributions) to identify the

demographics (gender, age, academic rank, years of experience, and terminal degree) of

182

the participants in the sample. Specifically in this study, a majority of the faculty

members were female with one male participant. The ages of the faculty ranged from 31

to 65 or older. In terms of academic rank, a majority (15) of respondents were adjunct

faculty; five were part-time instructors; four full-time instructors; two were assistant

professors; eight associate professors; and 11 full professors. Additionally, the majority

of faculty had less than 20 years of teaching experience with 16 faculty reporting

teaching from several months to 10 years and 18 reported teaching 11 to 20 years; eight

indicated teaching 21 to 30 years; and three faculty members stated they were teaching

between 31 and 40 years. Finally, the majority (27) of faculty members also had

obtained a Master’s degree, three members reported having a Certificate of Advanced

Graduate Studies (C.A.G.S.), and 15 faculty members identified as having either a Doctor

of Philosophy (PhD) or Doctor of Education (EdD).

In addition to the demographics, descriptive statistics (measures of variability,

measures of central tendency, and frequency distributions) were also calculated on the

individual adult education philosophical orientations and styles of teaching of the faculty

members. The data results were then analyzed using inferential statistics including the

Pearson product moment correlation coefficient in order to determine direction, form,

degree and strength as well as the analysis of variance, Levene’s homogeneity of

variances, and the Tukey HSD Post-Hoc comparisons in order to determine if there were

statistically significant relationships between the educational philosophies and teaching

styles. Data from this self-reported study resulted in the null hypothesis being retained

because the researcher’s stated alternative hypothesis could not be supported by the

183

sample (N=45). A summary of each of the two research questions, along with the results

from the alternative hypothesis will be sequentially shared.

Research Question One

Research question one identified the educational philosophies and teaching style

preferences of the 45 faculty members who participated in the study. Collectively on the

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI), the largest majority of the faculty

members (25) identified with the progressive philosophy. The next most identified

philosophy was the behavioral orientation with eight faculty members, followed by the

humanistic orientation with five recognizing this as their dominant philosophy. One

faculty member’s results aligned with the liberal philosophy and six faculty members

(two in each group respectively) indicated their highest scoring, primary adult education

philosophy as radical, progressive and radical, or progressive and humanistic. The results

also indicated that the progressive philosophy had the highest mean (87.49), followed by

the humanistic (81.49), and respectively, the radical/critical (79.76), behavioral (78.69),

and the liberal (75.84).

Similarly, the majority of the participants (26) who answered questions regarding

the preferred teaching styles identified with an eclectic or learner-centered teaching style.

Additionally, 19 faculty members identified with a teacher-centered style of teaching.

Specifically, questions on the online survey pertaining to the Principles of Adult Learning

Scale (PALS) indicated that the mean for the total score was 149.38 and the majority of

learner-centered faculty members, 19 in the sample reported an increased learner-

centered style of teaching, three identified with a very strong learner-centered style, and

two identified with an extreme learner-centered approach. Of those participants in the

184

sample (n=19) recognizing a teacher-centered approach, 17 noted an increased teacher-

centered approach and two identified with a very strong teacher-centered style of

teaching.

Further, the data revealed in regards to the seven aspects, or factors of the

teaching style that one factor (factor two) was identified by faculty members as teacher-

centered, whereas, the sample identified learner-centered approaches with factors one,

three, four, five, six, and seven with mean scores recorded above the normative mean of

the PALS. Specifically, factor one had a mean of 40.11 with 33 identifying with a

learner-centered approach and 12 teacher-centered; factor two had a mean of 28.40 with

13 acknowledging a learner-centered style and 32 with a teacher-centered style; factor

three had a mean of 23.11 and 31 had indicated a learner-centered style and 14 indicated

a teacher-centered style of teaching. Additionally in this sample, factor four had a mean

of 14.13 with 24 faculty members responding to a learner-centered approach and 21 with

a teacher-centered style; factor five had a mean of 16.89 and 33 indicated they utilized a

learner-centered style of teaching and 12 a teacher-centered approach; factor six had a

mean of 13.64 and 31 supported a learner-centered score and 14 identified with a teacher-

centered style; and factor seven had a mean of 13.09 with 26 faculty members

acknowledging a learner-centered approach and 19 preferring a teacher-centered teaching

style.

Research Question Two

Research question two examined the relationships of the educational philosophies

and teaching style preferences of the 45 faculty members teaching in early childhood

teacher preparation programs. Multiple relationships were suggested based on the data

185

findings from the Pearson product moment correlation tests. First, the data suggested that

there were relationships of statistical significance between the PALS teaching style and

the PAEI adult educational philosophies of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical.

Specifically, the teaching style and progressive philosophy correlation (r=.55, p=<.001)

and humanistic (r=.43, p=.003) was significant at the 0.01 level (p=.01) and the

radical/critical (r=.34, p=.024) correlation was significant at the 0.05 level (p=.05).

The results also suggested there were additional statistical significant

relationships with the progressive orientation and the faculty member’s style of teaching.

In addition to the total overall teaching style score, the correlation was significant (p=.01)

with factor two (r=.41, p=.005), factor four (r=.58, p=<.001), factor five (r=.51,

p=<.001), and factor six (r=.45, p=.002). Another suggested correlation relationship

(p=.01) was identified between the behavioral orientation and the teaching aspect of

factor seven (r=-.40, p=.006). Equally important, in addition to identifying with the total

teaching style, the humanistic philosophy results suggested a relationship with the

following factors: one, two, four, and five. A significant correlation at the 0.01 level was

identified with factor two (r=.42, p=.004) and at the 0.05 level for factors one (r=.31,

p=.042), four (r=.31, p=.034), and five (r=.32, p=.030). Finally, the results of the

correlations tests suggested that the radical/critical philosophy had a relationship not only

with the total score but also with factor two (r=.41, p=.006) at the 0.01 level and factor

six (r=.32, p=.032) with the 0.05 level of significance.

Further, using the calculations from the one-way ANOVA, an examination of the

results of the PAEI adult educational philosophical orientations, the PALS teaching style

total score, and seven factors revealed one statistically significant difference (p=.05)

186

found with the philosophical orientations and the factor six teaching construct (F 6,38 =

2.441, p=0.043). Moreover, when analyzing the results between the three constructs and

their respective relationship with the various demographics, statistically significant

differences at the 0.05 level were found with the terminal degree of the faculty members

in the sample and the following variables: liberal philosophy (F 2,42 =4.822, p=0.013),

behavioral philosophy (F 2,42 =3.838, p=0.029), radical/critical philosophy (F 2,42 =5.467,

p=0.008), and the factor four teaching aspect (F 2,42 =0.070, p=0.933). Lastly, a statistical

significant difference (p=.05) was found with the ages of the faculty members and factor

one (F 4,40 =2.801, p=0.038).

Hypotheses

The research hypothesis (or alternative hypothesis) suggested there would be a

statistically significant difference between the progressive and humanistic faculty

members and the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical faculty members in preferences

of teaching style. No statistically significant correlations or differences were found,

therefore, the researcher’s hypothesis was not supported and the null hypothesis was

retained.

Discussion of the Results

The purpose of this study was to identify and examine the relationship between

the individual educational philosophies and teaching style preferences of higher

education early childhood faculty teaching in teacher preparation programs in college and

university settings located in the Northern New England states of Maine, Massachusetts,

New Hampshire, and Vermont. In this section the results of the two research questions,

as well as the hypotheses will be shared in terms of what the data means. In answering

187

question one, the results of the faculty member’s dominant philosophy, as identified in

Zinn’s (2007) Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory, will be shared along with the

number of faculty members who’s identified dominant philosophy was in congruence

with the respective teaching style (Conti, 1982; Zinn, 2007), in addition to the level of

agreement or disagreement with the philosophy. Next, question one will discuss the

findings of the overall style of teaching for the 45 faculty members, in addition to the

seven factors regarding the members beliefs and behaviors, as identified in Conti’s

(1982) Principles of Adult Learning Scale.

Following a discussion of the results from question one, a discussion of question

two’s relationship results will follow. Information will be shared regarding the suggested

statistical significant correlations between the relationships of the five adult educational

philosophies and the overall style of teaching, as well as between the relationships of the

educational philosophies and the seven factors. After sharing these results, this section

will discuss the statistical significant results suggested from the one-way analysis of

variance tests completed between the relationship of the five demographics and the adult

educational philosophies as well as, between the teaching styles, and between the seven

factors. Next, this section will discuss the findings of the alternative hypothesis followed

by a discussion of the results of this study’s findings in relationship to the results from

Hughes (1997) research study and Fries (2012) study.

Research Question One

The results from research question one identified the educational philosophies

(dominant philosophy and raw scores) of the early childhood education higher education

faculty using Zinn’s Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory (PAEI, revised 2007). The

188

findings also identified the overall teaching style preferences, whether the educational

philosophies identified were congruent with the respective teaching style, and the

identified preferences of the seven factors as measured through Conti’s Principles of

Adult Learning Scale (PALS, 1982). As asserted by Zinn (2004) and Conti (1990), the

liberal and behavioral philosophies are congruent with the teacher-centered style of

teaching, and the philosophies of progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical are

congruent with a learner-centered approach. The data in this research study indicated that

28 (62%) out of the 45 faculty members in this sample had an adult educational

philosophy that was congruent with their respective style of teaching.

Specifically, one faculty member identified that their dominant orientation was

liberal philosophy and this was in direct alignment with their reporting of a teacher-

centered teaching style (100%). Further, the behavioral philosophy was recognized by

eight faculty members as their primary orientation and five (63%) supported the

complimenting teacher-centered style of teaching. Additionally, the 25 faculty members

whose primary philosophy identified was progressive, 17 (68%) had identified with the

congruent learner-centered teaching style; of the five faculty members recognizing the

humanistic orientation as dominant, two faculty members (40%) recognized learner-

centered approaches; and the two radical/critical faculty members, the two progressive

and radical faculty members, and the two progressive and humanistic faculty members all

had one faculty member (50%) whose results aligned with the respective learner-centered

teaching style. Equally important, the results indicated that two faculty members (one

faculty member in the behavioral orientation and in the progressive) identified with an

189

eclectic philosophy indicating preferences for elements of both the teacher-centered and

learner-centered teaching style.

What’s more, the results in question one shared the means of the raw scores of the

five adult education orientations. Based on the responses, the faculty members identified

the level of overall faculty member agreement or disagreement with each of the five adult

educational philosophies. Of the results, all faculty members (N=45) indicated agreement

with each of the five adult education philosophies. Specifically, the progressive

orientation scored the highest (M=87.49) ranked results; followed by the humanistic

philosophy (M=81.49); the radical/critical (M=79.86); the behavioral (M=78.69); and

lastly, the liberal orientation (M=75.84).

Further, the sample (N=45) scores for the liberal philosophy identified the largest

majority of faculty members (42) agreed with this philosophy with one member reporting

disagreement, one recognizing a neutral stance, and one identifying with a strong

agreement to the liberal orientation. The behavioral philosophy identified 41 faculty

members in agreement with the orientation, three faculty members reporting a strong

agreement, and one faculty member indicating a disagreement with the behavioral

orientation. Forty faculty members agreed with the radical/critical philosophy, whereas

two faculty members indicated a neutral stance and three faculty members strongly

agreed. The progressive orientation identified that 37 faculty members agreed with the

orientation and eight faculty members were in strong agreement. Finally, the humanistic

philosophy results identified 42 faculty members agreeing with the orientation and three

in strong agreement with it.

190

The total scores on the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (1982) indicated that

24 faculty members identified with the learner-centered style, two members identified

with an eclectic approach, and 19 indicated a teacher-centered style of teaching. In fact,

the majority of the faculty (38) fell at or within one standard deviation above or below the

normed mean. Moreover, three faculty members scored two standard deviations above,

two members scored two standard deviations below, and two faculty members scored

three standard deviations above the normed mean. In addition to considering the general

label (teacher-centered or learner-centered) for the faculty members’ teaching style,

questions on the PALS also identified specific beliefs and behaviors in the classroom by

looking at seven factors or elements.

Of the seven factors, the majority of the faculty members identified with learner-

centered approaches in six out of seven factors with scores reported above the normed

mean; however, factor two fell below the normed mean, therefore the majority of faculty

identified with the teacher-centered style when personalizing their instruction. Further,

the majority (N=45) of the scores fell immediately above or below the normed mean

score for all seven factors. Specifically, the number of faculty member’s scores that fell

at or within one standard deviation above or below the normed mean for factor one

included 42; 37 in factor two; 32 in factor three; 41 in factor four; 37 in factor five; 43 in

factor six; and 38 in factor seven. As noted by Fries’ (2012), “Since most of the faculty

fell immediately above and below the normed mean for these factors, this indicates that

the majority of the group did not have a strong determination either for or against the

characteristics in these” (p. 87).

191

In addition to reviewing the meaning of the results from the descriptive statistical

findings of question one, this discussion of the results section will next share the

meanings of any statistically significant correlations and variances found between the

relationships of the adult educational philosophies and teaching styles, the educational

philosophies and the seven factors, and the educational philosophies and the five

demographic variables. It will also share statistically significant correlations and

variances between the teaching style, seven factors, and the five demographics.

Research Question Two

The results from question two identified the relationships between Zinn’s (2007)

Philosophy of Adult Education Inventory and Conti’s (1982) Principles of Adult

Learning Scale. Specifically, a statistically significant correlation was suggested between

the three relationships of each of the educational philosophies (progressive, humanistic,

and radical/critical) and its relationship to the overall teaching style. As such, an increase

in the progressive philosophy results in this sample was associated with a moderate

increase in the total overall teaching style. Similar findings were associated between the

humanistic philosophy and a moderate increase in the total style of teaching, as well as,

the radical/critical orientation and the teaching style.

Additionally, statistical significance was also suggested in the correlations

between the relationship of six factors and the various educational philosophies. Factor

one: learner-centered activities encourages learners to “take responsibility of their own

learning” (Conti, 1985, p. 9) and was associated with a low increase in the humanistic

philosophy. Results from factor two: personalizing instruction suggested a statistical

significance with the orientations of the progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical

192

philosophies indicating an association with a moderate increase for each. Assessing

student needs (factor four) and considering the learner’s wants and needs was associated

with a moderate increase with the progressive philosophy and with a low increase with

the humanistic philosophy. The results from factor five’s climate building in which

learners are encouraged to take risks was associated with a moderate increase with the

progressive philosophy and a low increase with the humanistic. Another statistical

significant finding was suggested with factor six in which learners work with the

instructor to determine topics to address and then identify problems they wish to solve.

Specifically, factor six was associated with a moderate increase with the progressive

philosophy and low increase with the radical/critical philosophy. Finally, factor seven,

which focuses on the flexibility of the faculty member to support personal development,

suggested a statistical significance with the behavioral philosophy in which a moderate

decrease was associated.

The results from the analysis of variance also suggested several relationships had

a statistical significance. Based on the 45 faculty members, factor six had a statistically

significant relationship with the philosophical orientations. Additionally, the

demographic variables of the faculty members’ terminal degree and age were the only

demographic variables which had statistically significant relationships with either the

adult education philosophies or with the teaching style total or factors. Specifically, the

faculty members’ terminal degree had a statistically significant effect on the liberal,

behavioral, and radical/critical philosophies. Moreover, the results also suggested that

the terminal degree had a statistically significant relationship with factor four’s construct,

assessing student needs. The other demographic was age and it was identified in the

193

results to have a statistically significant relationship with learner-centered activities

(factor one).

No statistically significant correlations were found between the overall total style

of teaching and the liberal or behavioral philosophies. Additionally, no statistically

significant relationships were found between the relationship with the liberal philosophy

and all seven factors; the progressive philosophy and factors one, three, and seven; the

behavioral orientation and factors one through six; the humanistic philosophy and factors

three, six, and seven; or the radical/critical orientation and factors one, three, four, five,

and seven.

Lastly, no statistically significant variances were found between the relationships

of the philosophical orientations and overall teaching style, as well as no statistically

significant effects with the philosophies and factors one, two, three, four, five, or seven.

Further, no statistically significant relationships were found between the liberal

philosophy and the demographics of gender, age, and the number of years of teaching

experience; the progressive orientation and gender, age, academic rank, years of teaching

experience, and terminal degree; the behavioral philosophy and gender, age, and years of

teaching experience; the humanistic orientation and the demographics of gender, age,

academic rank, years of teaching experience, and terminal degree; and radical/critical

philosophy and the demographics of gender, age, academic rank, and years of teaching

experience. Additionally, no statistically significant effects were found between the

demographics of gender, academic rank, and years of teaching experience in relationship

to the variables of total teaching style and each of the seven factors. Equally important,

no statistically significant effects were found between the demographic of age and total

194

teaching style, or age and factors two through seven. Finally, when looking for

statistically significant relationships between the terminal degree and the PALS findings,

no relationships were found in the overall total, or between factors one, two, three, five,

six, or seven.

Hypotheses

The results of this research study indicated that there were no statistically

significant relationships identified between group one (faculty members whose dominant

philosophy were progressive or humanistic) and the overall teaching style and group two

(liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical). This was in contrast to the alternative

hypothesis that suggested there would be a difference. Although there were suggested

statistically significant correlations between each of the three educational philosophies

(progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical) and the overall teaching style, there were

no statistically significant correlations or variances identified in the study when the

philosophies were grouped together and thus, the null hypothesis was accepted. One

plausible explanation for these findings may be found in the relationship that already

exists in the current literature between the philosophies and teaching style preferences.

Specifically research supports that the progressive, humanistic and radical/critical

philosophies are associated with a learner-centered style of teaching, whereas the liberal

and behavioral are in alignment with a learner-centered approach. Further, in this study,

the highest means were found respectively in the orientations of progressive, humanistic,

and radical/critical and of the 36 faculty to identify with one of these philosophies, 22

also identified with a learner-centered teaching preference.

195

Relationship to Existing Studies

There are similarities and differences that were identified between the results of

this study and that of Hughes (1997) research focusing on Ricks College and that of Fries

(2012) research focusing on the division of Education. The Philosophy of Adult

Education Inventory identified that 25 education faculty members at Ricks College

identified with a philosophical preference for the behavioral orientation (M=85); whereas

more than half (53%) of the 45 faculty members in Fries (2012) study identified with the

progressive philosophy (M=86.02) followed by the humanistic orientation (17%;

M=79.62). Moreover, over half (55.6%; M=87.49) of the faculty in this research study

(N=45) showed support for the progressive philosophy, followed by the behavioral

philosophy (17.8%; M=78.69).

Results from the Principles of Adult Learning Scale (PALS) in all three studies

fell within one standard deviation above or below the established norm. Hughes (1997)

study (n=15) identified a mean of 128.4 and Fries (2012) reported a mean of 137.14, both

of which were one standard deviation below the norm indicating a preference for an

increased teacher-centered style of teaching. Unlike these literature findings, the results

of this study identified a mean of 149.38, one standard deviation above the norm,

suggesting a preference for an increased learner-centered teaching style. Further, results

from Hughes (1997) identified mean scores for the Education division in regards to three

of the seven dimensions including factor one learner-centered activities (M=36.2), as

well as factor two personalizing instruction (M=22.9) and factor six participation in the

learning process (M=10.4). Based on these results, education faculty at Ricks College

scored one to two standard deviations below the normed score indicating that faculty had

196

an increased teacher-centered style of teaching for factors one and six, and a very strong

teacher-centered preference for personalizing instruction.

Findings from Fries (2012) study reported the means for all seven elements.

Learner-centered activities (factor one) had a mean of 38.4 in Fries’ (2012) study and a

mean of 40.11 in this research study. This indicated that educators in Fries (2012) study

scored one standard deviation below and preferred an increased teacher-centered style of

teaching, whereas, this study showed an increased learner-centered approach scoring one

standard deviation above. Factors three (relating to experience), four (assessing student

needs), six (participation in learning), and seven (flexibility for personal development) of

this study indicated an increased learner-centered approach (Table 4) and had similar

results with Fries (2012) respective means of 20.7, 12.8, 11.2, and 12.2. Further, factor

two’s personalizing instruction had a mean of 25.3 in Fries (2012) study and had a mean

of 28.4 in this study, indicating both groups of educators preferred an increased teacher-

centered approach. Lastly, factor five’s climate building identified both Fries’ (2012)

faculty members (M=16.4) and this study’s (M=16.89) faculty members preferring an

increased learner-centered approach.

Discussion of the Results in Relation to the Literature

This research study collected data from 45 faculty members regarding their adult

education philosophies and teaching style preferences. A discussion of the results will

focus on the literature related to the theoretical framework constructs of educational

philosophy, teaching style, and the Principle of Congruity. The conclusions of this study

will be shared in relationship to the adult educational philosophies (Zinn, 2007) and

teaching styles (Conti, 1982), followed by a discussion of the results in relation to the

197

Principle of Congruity (Katz, 1977). Following these conclusions, results will be shared

between the relationship of the results and the literature review.

Relationship between the Results and the Theoretical Framework

Research in the field of post-secondary and adult education suggests that a

positive relationship must exist between an educators’ educational philosophy in relation

to their ideals, beliefs, values, and attitudes and the choices, decisions, and the actions

they perform in their daily teaching practices (Brookfield, 2010; Galbraith, 1990;

Merriam & Bierema, 2014; Zinn, 1990). The foundation of this study was based on the

theoretical framework of the adult education philosophical orientations (Elias &

Merriam, 2005; Zinn, 2007), teaching styles (Conti, 1982), and the Principle of Congruity

(Katz, 1977).

As a component of the teaching-learning process, research in the field of post-

secondary and adult education suggest that a positive relationship must exist between the

educational philosophy of the adult educator and his or her teaching style (Conti, 1990;

Zinn, 2004). Conti (1990) asserted that educators may use multiple schools of

philosophy when engaging in adult education and by exploring the relationship between

these philosophies and what is implemented in the classroom, educators may add clarity

to their teaching process by creating a consciousness for purposeful engagement between

their espoused theories and their theories-in-use (Elias & Merriam, 2005; Merriam &

Bierema, 2014; Zinn, 1990).

The conclusions from this research indicated that a majority of the faculty

members who completed the survey were female (98%), were between the ages of 41 and

60 (58%), had been teaching in higher education anywhere from their first year to 20

198

years (76%). The results also indicated that 60% of the sample had a minimum of a

Master’s degree (60%) and that the results identified that more than half (56%) of the

faculty members reported working full time with an additional one-third (34%)

acknowledging adjunct status. Additionally, findings in this study also indicated that the

majority of the faculty members (56%) in this sample (N=45) identified with the

progressive philosophy as their dominant orientation and identified this orientation with

the highest scoring means (87.49) of all of the five philosophies; with behavioral,

humanistic, liberal, and radical/critical respectively following. Further, conclusions from

this study suggested that the terminal degree of the faculty members had a statistically

significant effect on the liberal, behavioral, and radical/critical philosophies. In addition,

the findings suggested the terminal degree had a statistically significant relationship with

assessing student needs in which the means for all three groups were roughly 14. Lastly,

age also had a statistically significant relationship reported with learner-centered

activities. The means ranged from 37 to 44 with an increase in relationship with an

increase in age.

Conti (1990) shared that teaching styles affect the total atmosphere of the

teaching-learning process and as pointed out by and Zinn (1990), the style is “the

operational behavior of the teachers’ educational philosophy” (p. 55). The conclusions in

this study noted that 62% of the faculty members had an adult educational philosophy

that was congruent with their respective teaching style. As confirmed in the literature,

and supported in the conclusions of this study, the liberal philosophy (which was 100%

congruent) and the behavioral (63% congruency) orientation were consistent with

teacher-centered approaches. Further, the findings confirmed that 68% of the dominant

199

progressive philosophy faculty members supported the learner-centered teaching style

along with half of all faculty members who identified with the radical/critical orientation

or one of the two mixed groups (progressive/ radical and progressive/humanistic). In

contrast, the findings from this study did not support the literature findings for the

humanistic philosophy, as only 40% recognized its congruency with the learner-centered

teaching style.

Discussions of philosophy engage educators in questions regarding what they do

and why they do it and Brookfield (1990) offered a working philosophy can provide the

educator with the answers of “why you’re doing what you’re doing” (p. 16). As such, an

examination of teaching styles is important to the educator as they consider the

demonstrated teaching behaviors in the classroom, as well as how they collect, organize,

transform, and use information in their practices (Conti & Welborn, 1986; Cross, 1976;

Kolb, 1984). The conclusions of this study indicated that 54% of the faculty identified

with a preference for a learner-centered style of teaching. Equally important, the

majority of the faculty members (84%) overall teaching style fell at or within one

standard deviation above or below the normed mean meaning that educators had a

moderate commitment but did not have a strong liking, or predilection for either teacher-

centered or learner-centered.

Similar to the research in post-secondary education, research in the field of early

childhood education has also examined the relationship between philosophical

orientations and teaching-learning practices, as well as the relationship between theory

and practice in adult education (Alexander, 2014; Baumgartner, Buchanan, & Casbergue,

2011; Dobson & Dobson, 1983; Fulton & Myers, 2014; Jones, 1985, 1986, 1993; Katz,

200

1977, 1999; Maakestad-Wolf, 1999; Marshall, 1996; Roach & Riley, 2006; VanderVen,

2000; Vardanyan, 2013). Merriam and Bierema (2014) noted “we are constantly creating

and acting on theories… Theories are created every day and embedded in our culture” (p.

247). With the ability to consider espoused theories and theories-in-action, educators

engage in practices that are based on theories that are co-created with colleagues and/or

are derived from past experiences (Brookfield, 2010). The Principle of Congruity (1977)

serves as a theoretical assumption that early childhood higher education faculty should be

mindful that they are role models to adult learners; that educators should teach by

example and “that adults should be treated according to the developmental principles they

must follow when working with young children” (Jones, 1986, p. xi).

The conclusions of this study confirmed that educators (62%) are in fact

practicing what they are preaching based on the congruency observed between the

philosophical orientations and teaching styles. Further, the results of the study indicated

that the overall majority of faculty members were in positive agreement with each of the

five philosophies (with progressive scoring highest followed by the humanistic and

radical/critical orientations). Moreover, faculty members identified with the learner-

centered style of teaching along with six out of the seven dimensions. This would

indicate that faculty members in this study were focused on the needs of the learners and

were more likely to consider the student when establishing activities. Further, faculty

members in this sample stated they are more likely to incorporate prior experiences,

assess student needs, participate in climate building in the learning environment, engage

learners as partners in the participation of the learning process, and to provide flexibility

for personal development. In contrast, the results also indicated that faculty were less

201

likely to consider the needs of learners when instructing and may not do a variety of

things that personalize learning for the individual or unique needs of each learner in the

classroom.

Relationship Between the Results and the Literature Reviewed

In the literature review multiple studies were shared on learners (uneven

qualifications, academic barriers, lack of professional standards, and compensation), as

well as national studies on teacher preparation programs in the United States, early

childhood curriculum approaches (developmental and academic), andragogy and

pedagogy, and research related to the positive relationship between educational

philosophy, teaching style preferences, and the Principle of Congruity. Merriam and

Bierema (2014) shared the importance of determining the demographics of learners in

relation to age, gender, experience, culture, socio and economic level, oppression, and

political needs. This, according to Brookfield (2013), supports the intention that “to

teach is to help someone learn” (p. 14) and in order to do this, the educator must know

the wants and needs of the learner in order to help support them not just for academics of

the profession, but also for the preparation for life (Entwistle, 2010).

Faculty members overall had an agreement with all of the philosophies but the

majority (n=25) preferred the progressive philosophy and to a lesser extent the behavioral

(n=8). The progressive philosophy focuses on lifelong learning, as well as experience

based practices, problem-solving activities, active learning, and practical knowledge in

order to engage the learner in the constructivist learning process. These conclusions

supported Jacobs (2001) contention that the goal of educating pre-service teachers is to

help them meet the needs of future generations and help them fulfill their individual

202

lifelong potential for learning. In contrast, the behavioral philosophy focuses on behavior

modification, acquiring job skills, mastery in competency-based learning, and the looping

of performance, feedback, and reinforcement. Reasons the behavioral philosophy scored

as the second highest may be due to the type of training that many faculty members

receive (andragogy or pedagogy) or due to the fact that some of the early childhood

teacher preparation programs may be following and teaching with an academic (as

opposed to developmental) curriculum.

Ongoing research is gaining traction in an effort to identify the national landscape

of early childhood teacher preparation programs in the United States in relationship to

quality and their influence on teacher practice. Whitebook et al. (2012), however,

emphasized that appropriate research methodologies need to continue to be addressed in

order to consider and recognize the “important variations in program content and

delivery, and provide solid evidence to inform policy and practice” (p. 1). Conclusions

from this study, along with continued research, have the potential to support educators as

they respond to the increasing and diversified demands of the field of early childhood

education (increased learners enrolling in post-secondary institutions, uneven

qualifications and barriers of learners, lack of professional standards in the field,

variations in curriculum approaches, etc.). Although these results are not generalizable to

the larger audience, they do shed light on this sample of faculty members.

Conclusions in this study noted statistical significance in the overall teaching

scores and a moderate association with the progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical

philosophies. In particular, the progressive philosophy had statistically significant

associations with personalizing instruction, assessing student needs, climate building, and

203

having the learner participate in the learning process; all of which align with the purpose,

methods, and the roles of the teachers and learners within this orientation. The

humanistic orientation also had similar alignment with its association with learner-

centered activities as learners are encouraged to take action and responsibility; the

educator, on the other hand, personalizes instruction to support a variety of methods of

instruction, as well as assesses the student needs to find out what the student wants and

needs to know, and creates a friendly and informal climate.

Additional statistically significant associations were found between the

radical/critical philosophy and the need to personalize instruction for the learners to allow

the students to make decisions and identify problems they wish to solve in the classroom.

As well as, a statistically significant association was observed between the behavioral

philosophy and the dimension of fostering flexibility for personal development. As the

second-most dominant philosophy, this association further supports the notion that

faculty members may be teaching adult learners with an academic curriculum approach,

determining the objectives for the course and sticking to them throughout the instruction,

avoiding controversial subjects and discussion, and believes that “a stimulus for learning”

is a “well-disciplined classroom” (Conti, 1985, p. 10).

Limitations

Many studies have limitations that could possibly change the results and

conclusions. This research is no exception. As pointed out by Gay, Mills, and Airasian

(2009), “two common limitations are less-than-ideal sample size and length of study” (p.

109). With 45 faculty members completing the full survey, the small sample size may

have limited the results. Another limitation is the use of a purposive sample and the

204

subjective criteria determined by the researcher for participant inclusion (Oliver, 2006).

Different findings may have resulted if the population had been expanded beyond the

four New England states and included all faculty members teaching in the education

divisions, not just early childhood education faculty. As such, different demographics,

philosophies, and teaching style preferences may have emerged in the results.

In addition, the length of the survey and timing of study have the potential to

impact the limitations of this study. Data was collected during the first three months of

the year and this may have limited recruitment of faculty members that may teach in

different semesters. Moreover, the survey indicated it would take 20-25 minutes to

complete. If the time had been shorter, it may have impacted the number of faculty

choosing to start and/or complete the study. Based on the SurveyMonkey.com data

retrieved, 56 faculty members activated and began the survey. However, it is unknown

why the eleven faculty members did not answer all of the questions or whether these

faculty members returned and completed the survey at a different time.

Equally important, a limitation may have resulted in participant perceptions.

Although there were no right or wrong answers, participants were aware of the subject of

the study. Participants self-reported their responses which may have been their espoused

theories instead of their theories-in-use, thus limiting the results and conclusions.

Further, information may be inaccurate if the participants misunderstood the instruments.

The survey did not allow for participants to share additional information about the

instrument questions, nor did it allow educators to share information about their teaching

behaviors beyond the confines of the prescribed questions. Finally, other potential

limitations could be related to the teaching environment as each learning and teaching

205

environment is unique based on the experiences of the teacher, learner, physical setting,

mission, and philosophy.

Implication of the Results for Practice

This research study utilized a purposive sample which consisted of a small sample

size of 45 faculty members responding; further, the researcher acknowledged an

uncertainty regarding the number of higher education faculty members actually teaching

in the four New England states. As such, the results cannot be generalizable to a larger

audience (Gay, Mills, & Airasian, 2012; Lodico, Spaulding, & Voegtle, 2010; McMillan

& Schumacher, 2010; Ravid, 2011). However, with that being said Knowles (1970) and

Conti (1990) both acknowledged the critical role that an educator plays in the classroom.

Equally important, Brookfield (2013) believed the role of the educator is to help others

learn and Galbraith (2004) believed the purpose of education is to guide learners through

a process of personal growth and development.

Whitebook et al. (2012) pointed out the intricacies involved in teaching

performance in early childhood higher education settings and noted research was needed

to understand and identify which dimensions and variations were related to student

learning and the adult learner’s ability to implement effective teaching practices with

young children. Research studies have been published, and more are currently underway,

regarding the multiple variations and characteristics of early childhood faculty members

teaching in higher education settings in the United States (Center for the Study of Child

Care Employment, 2013a, 2013b, 2013c; Early & Winton, 2001; Lobman, Ryan, &

McLaughlin, 2005; Maxwell, Lim, & Early, 2006;Whitebook et al., 2012). Research has

also been completed on faculty members teaching in the division of education in regards

206

to adult education philosophical orientations and teaching style preferences but the

studies did not identify whether early childhood faculty members were included (Fries,

2012; Hughes, 1997). As of yet, no studies have been published on early childhood

education faculty that identify the adult education philosophical orientations (using the

PAEI) or the teaching style preferences (using the PALS).

The results of the study indicated that the majority of faculty members identified

with one of the five philosophies, with four faculty members identifying with a

combination of two philosophies (progressive with either radical or humanistic). Further,

the majority of faculty members reported their primary adult educational philosophy was

progressive and identified with a learner-centered style of teaching. In addition, findings

indicated that a majority of those participating in this study had an adult educational

philosophy that was congruent with their respective style of teaching; and more so, 22

(49%) faculty members identified their educational philosophy (progressive, humanistic,

and radical/critical) and teaching style preference (learner-centered) were congruent with

the Principle of Congruity.

As such, this study provides valuable information as it suggests that educators are

(consciously or unconsciously) aligning their beliefs and actions about educational

philosophies, teaching style preferences, and the Principle of Congruity when engaging in

the teaching-learning process and when making decisions on curriculum, teaching

methods, interactions with learners, and their actions and beliefs in the classroom setting

(Conti, 1990; Elias & Merriam, 1995; Galbraith, 1999; Zinn, 1990).

Instruments such as the PAEI and PALS instruments can help educators gain

insights into their philosophies of adult education and teaching style preferences.

207

Findings from this study identified the majority of faculty member’s utilized learner-

centered preferences in regards to six out of seven aspects of teaching style (sans

personalized instruction). In fact, it is worth noting that most faculty member’s scores

fell within =/- one standard deviation of the normed mean. By completing these

instruments, faculty members could benefit from reviewing their responses to the specific

questions and considering its relationship to their practice.

Recommendations for Further Research

The purpose of research is to improve on and expand the body of knowledge. As

Moon (2013) indicated, a profession is characterized by its public display of espoused

theories, and as Brookfield (2010) pointed out, the creation and development of theories

of a profession are from the ideas and practices of those doing the work. Specifically in

early childhood teacher preparation programs, Whitebook et al. (2012) reported there is a

lack of research involving adult educators and the dimensions and variations that relate to

student learning. This research study collected and analyzed data in an effort to expand

on the knowledge base. The following recommendations for further research are offered

to continue this work:

1. This study could be replicated to include early childhood teacher preparation

programs at other institutions of higher education, as well as in other states, in

order to determine if there is dissonance or concurrence with these findings.

2. The study could be repeated with the same population but occur in a different

semester to determine if different scores resulted, as well as if different

participants responded.

208

3. This study could be repeated with different focused populations including a

study focusing on undergraduates and graduate learners, traditional and

nontraditional learners, as well as learners taking courses in campus

classrooms, in online environments, or a hybrid of both. Faculty members

could examine the dominant educational philosophies and teaching style

preferences used with these various populations and environments to

determine if their working philosophy (adult education philosophies and

teaching style preferences) is in alignment with the demographics of adult

learners.

4. This study could be replicated on a national scale. This would increase the

sample size and validity in order to identify on a larger scale, the statistical

significance and thus, the results could then potentially be generalizable to a

larger audience.

5. Further research could examine the link between theories-in-use and espoused

theories. Observations of faculty members teaching in their settings could be

completed and compared to the self-reported results.

6. Further, a study could be conducted with the learners enrolled in early

childhood teacher preparation programs to determine if the faculty are

employing and modeling teacher-centered or learner-centered teaching styles

as self-reported.

7. Professional development opportunities for teachers include exploring the

relationship of topics such as philosophies of adult education; teaching style

preferences and factors that impact various classroom characteristics; the role

209

of andragogy and pedagogy in early childhood teacher preparation programs;

and the Principle of Congruity.

Conclusion

Elias and Merriam (2005) reasoned “theory without practice leads to an empty

idealism, and actions without philosophical reflection lead to mindless activism” (p. 4).

Conclusions from the 45 faculty members in this study found that the overall majority of

faculty members were female, between the ages of 41 and 60, had been teaching up to 20

years, and had a minimum of a Master’s degree. Unlike Hughes’ (1997) findings (which

preferred the behavioral philosophy), but similar to Fries (2012), the majority of the

faculty in this study preferred the progressive philosophy and unlike Hughes’ (1997) and

Fries’ (2012) results, the findings in this study identified a learner-centered style of

teaching. Results of this study also led to retaining the null hypothesis and not supporting

the alternative hypothesis proposed. These results suggest that there are statistically

significant positive associations between the overall teaching style (learner-centered) and

each of the three educational philosophies- progressive, humanistic, and radical/critical.

However, the results found no statistically significant correlations or variances between

the overall teaching style and the two groups (progressive/humanistic and

liberal/behavioral/radical). Further research about educational philosophies and teaching

style preferences of teacher educators is needed in order to determine if results are similar

to other departments/divisions of Education with faculty teaching early childhood

education content.

Having an organized vision for individual practice with alignment between theory

and practice has the potential to engage faculty members with others who believe and

210

practice the teaching-learning process based on a shared rationale. Katz (1977) offered a

principle of congruity that “is intended to suggest a kind of consistency, harmony, or

concordance between the way we teach teachers and the way we want them to teach” (p.

4) and yet, according to Marshall (1996) this often does not happen in practice when

educators know that these outdated teaching methods which were implemented in their

educational training did not work for them. Moon (2013) further shed light on this

dichotomy when commenting that the education profession does not have a “body of

secure knowledge that can be used instrumentally to guide practice” (p. 41). The

development of a working philosophy, as suggested by Galbraith (1999) will provide

teacher educators with the ability to examine their current philosophical beliefs, values,

and attitudes related to the teaching and learning process; explore the principles of adult

education; provide a foundation “for all decisions, processes, and actions made about the

instructional and learning process” (p. 11); and thus, reduce confusion between an

educators’ stated espoused beliefs and the actual theories-in-use that are implemented in

their practices.

211

REFERENCES

Aaronsohn, E. (2003). The exceptional teacher. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Abbate-Vaughn, J., & Paugh, P. C. (2009). The paraprofessional-to-teacher pipeline:

Barriers and accomplishments. Journal of Developmental Education, 33(1), 14-

27.

Ahmed, M. M. (2006). Patient education: Speech-language pathologists' perceptions

regarding the use, effectiveness, and barriers to adult education principles.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3255090).

Alexander, D. J. (2014). Developmentally appropriate practice and preschool teachers'

perceptions: Theory versus practice. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations &

Theses Global. (Order No. 3621971).

Apps, J. W. (1985). Improving practice in continuing education. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1974). Theory in practice: Increasing professional

effectiveness. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Association of American Colleges and Universities. (2007). College learning for the new

global century: A report from the National Leadership Council for Liberal

Education & America’s Promise. Washington, DC: AACU.

Austin, L. J. (2014). Early care and education leadership: Toward a theory of essential

experiences, skills and knowledge for effective early care and education change

agents. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No.

3630410).

Baptiste, N. (1996). We need to practice what we know. Early Childhood Education

Journal, 23(4), 243-245.

Barden, M. A. M. (2000). University of North Carolina faculty perceptions of the degree

to which they apply the principles of adult education within the distance

education environment and the barriers to becoming more learner-centered in

practice. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No.

9974562).

Barnett, W. S. (2003). Better teachers, better preschools: Student achievement linked to

teacher qualifications. Preschool Policy Matters, 2. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 480 818)

212

Barrett, K. R. (2004). A comparison of online teaching styles in Florida community

colleges. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No.

3160545).

Baumgartner, J. J., Buchanan, T. K., & Casbergue, R. M. (2011). Developmentally

appropriate teacher education “practicing what we preach”. Childhood Education,

87(5), 332-336.

Bearor, D. E. (2012). Student perceptions of effective clinical teaching characteristics in

dental hygiene programs in Northeastern States. Retrieved fromProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3528202).

Belanger, P. (1996). Trends in adult education policy. Adult Education and

Development, 47, 19-29.

Belenky, M. F., Clinchy, B. M., Goldberger, N. R., & Tarule, J. M. (1986). Woman’s

ways of knowing: The development of self, voice, and mind. New York, NY:

Basic Books.

Berk, L. E. (2000). Child development (5th

ed.). Needham Heights, MS: Allyn & Bacon.

Boone, H. N., Gartin, S. A., Wright, C. B., Lawrence, L. D., & Odell, K. S. (2002). Adult

education philosophies practiced by agricultural education teachers in

Pennsylvania, Virginia, and West Virginia. Journal of Agricultural Education,

43(3), 37-48.

Bornfreund, L. A. (2011). Getting in sync: Revamping licensing and preparation for

teachers in pre-k, kindergarten, and the early grades. Washington, DC: New

American Foundation.

Bowman, B., & Stott, F. (1996). Child development knowledge: A slippery base for

practice. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(2), 169-183.

Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early

childhood programs. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of

Young Children.

Brewer, E., & Kuhn, J. (2010). Causal-comparative design. In N. J. Salkind (Ed.),

Encyclopedia of Research Design (pp. 125-132). doi: 10.4135/9781412961288

Brookfield, S. D. (1990). The skillful teacher: On technique, trust, and responsiveness in

the classroom. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

213

Brookfield, S. D. (2010). Theoretical frameworks for understanding the field. In C. E.

Kasworm, A. D. Rose, & J. M. Ross-Gordon (Eds.), Handbook of adult and

continuing education: 2010 edition (pp. 71-81). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Brookfield, S. D. (2013). Powerful techniques for teaching adults. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Brosseau, M. J. A. (2000). University students' preferences for a teacher and teaching

style: A case study of Moroccan students. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. MQ47750).

Brown, K. L. (2003). From teacher-centered to learner-centered curriculum: Improving

learning in diverse classrooms. Education, 124(1), 49–54.

Bruno, H. E. (2015). The comfort of little things: An educator’s guide to second chances.

St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.

Bryant, C. M. (2012). Faculty teaching behaviors at three state-funded universities.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3514667).

Buckhannon Welborn, R. A. (1985). The relationship of learning and teaching styles to

achievement among nontraditional health professional students. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 8605234).

Budak, D. B. (1998). Program planning and adult education: Extension professionals'

attitudes and practice at Ohio State University extension. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9822289).

Bufkin, L., & Bryde, S. (1996). Implementing a constructivist approach in higher

education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 17(2), 58–65.

Burns, R. (2002). The adult learner at work: The challenges of lifelong education in the

new millennium. New South Wales, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

Byler, M. M. (2000). Implementing a professional development program at a community

college for early childhood education adjunct faculty members. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9976913).

Byrd, J. L. (2010). Educational philosophies, teaching styles, learning strategy

preferences, and attitude toward continuing education of nationally certified sign

language interpreters. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

(Order No. 3482151).

Carson, G. W. (1985). The identification and analysis of philosophical orientations of

continuing education. Dissertation Abstracts International, 46, 2519a.

214

Carter, M., & Curtis, D. (1994). Training teachers: A harvest of theory and practice. St.

Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.

Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. (2015). State of early childhood higher

education: Early childhood higher education inventory report- California.

Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/2015/the-state-of-early-

childhood-higher-education-in-california/

Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. (2013a). State of early childhood higher

education: Early childhood higher education inventory report- New Hampshire.

Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/2013/early-childhood-higher-

education-inventory/

Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. (2013b). State of early childhood higher

education: Early childhood higher education inventory report- New Jersey.

Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/2013/early-childhood-higher-

education-inventory/

Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. (2013c). State of early childhood higher

education: Early childhood higher education inventory report- Rhode Island.

Retrieved from http://www.irle.berkeley.edu/cscce/2013/early-childhood-higher-

education-inventory/

Chu, M., Martinez-Griego, B., & Cronin, S. (2010). A Head Start/college partnership:

Using a culturally and linguistically responsive approach to help working teachers

earn degrees. Young Children, 65(4), 24-27.

Clow, T. L. (1986). Difference between teacher professed collaborative teaching mode

and adult student perception of collaborative teaching mode. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 8701371).

Conti, G. J. (1978). Principles of adult learning scale: An instrument for measuring

teacher behavior related to the collaborative teaching-learning mode. Columbus,

OH: Adult, Career, and Vocational Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction

Service No. ED 179 713)

Conti, G. J. (1982). Principles of adult Learning scale. Adult Literacy and Basic

Education, 6(3), 135-150.

Conti, G. J. (1985). The relationship between teaching style and adult student learning.

Adult Education Quarterly, 35(4), 220-228.

Conti, G. J. (1989). Assessing teaching style in continuing education. In E. R. Hayes

(Ed.), Effective teaching styles: New directions for continuing education. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

215

Conti, G. J. (1990). Identifying your teaching style. In M. W. Galbraith (Ed.), Adult

learning methods (pp. 79-96). Malabra, FL: Krieger.

Conti, G. (2004). Identifying your teaching style. In M.W.Galbraith (Ed.), Adult learning

methods (3rd

ed.). Malabra, FL: Kreiger.

Conti, G. J. (2007). Identifying your educational philosophy: Development of the

philosophies held by instructors of lifelong-learners (PHIL). Journal of Adult

Education, 36(1), 19-35.

Conti, G. J. & Welborn, R. B. (1986). Teaching-learning styles and the adult learner.

Lifelong Learning, 9(8), 20-24.

Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (Eds.). (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in

early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. (3rd

ed.)

Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Cranton, P. (1998). No one way. Toronto, Ontario: Wall & Emerson.

Creswell, J. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research. (5th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Cross, K. P. (1976). Accent on learning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Culver, T. (2008). National freshman attitude report. Retrieved from https://www

.noellevitz.com/NR/rdonlyres/26444EB6-1573-4A31-8243-1F64EDECB6F4/0

/FreshmanAttitudes09.pdf

Cummings, R. G. (1995). An investigation of teacher-centered or learner-centered

teaching style of accounting professors. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 9536292).

Curry, A., & Qualters, B. Exploring the influences that impact our work with faculty

learners. Teaching Professors Conference. Boston, MA. 30, May 2014.

Daniels, D. H., & Shumow, L. (2003). Child development and classroom teaching: A

review of the literature and implications for educating teachers. Applied

Development Psychology, 23, 495–526.

Davenport, J., & Davenport, J. A. (1985). A chronology and analysis of the andragogy

debate. Adult Education Quarterly, 35, 152-159.

Day, M., & Amstutz, D. D. (2003). Beyond philosophical identification: Examining core

values in adult education. Adult Education Research Conference, San Francisco

216

State University, San Francisco, CA. Retrieved from http://michael-

day.org/adult-education/examing-core-values/

DeCoux, V., Rachal, J. R., Leonard, R., & Pierce, W. L. (1992). A quantitative

examination of philosophical predilections of adult education graduate students.

(ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 355 433)

DeVito, T. R. (2008). A study of the teaching strategies of paramedic educators as they

relate to models of adult education. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 3305569).

Diem, J. J. (1994). The measurement of zoo and aquarium education directors'

philosophies of adult education. Retrieved from

http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=osu1250529666

Dobson, R. L., & Dobson, J. E. (1983). Teacher beliefs-practice congruency. Viewpoints

in Teaching and Learning, 59(1), 20-27.

Douglass, J. F. (1982). An analysis of the relationship between professional training in

adult education and orientation to the collaborative teaching-learning mode in

Washington state hospitals and the Washington state cooperative extension

service. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No.

8303946).

Dupin-Bryant, P. A. (2004). Variables related to interactive television teaching style: In

search of learner-centered teaching styles. International Journal of Instructional

Technology & Distance Learning, 1(4), 3-14.

Dylan, B. (1975). Simple twist of fate. On Blood on the water [CD]. San Francisco, CA:

Columbia Records.

Early, D. M., & Winton, P. J. (2001). Preparing the workforce: Early childhood teacher

preparation at 2-and 4-year institutions of higher education. Early Childhood

Research Quarterly, 16(3), 285-306.

East, W. T., Jr. (2013). Educational philosophies and teaching styles of Alabama

Cooperative Extension system agents. Retrieved from

http://etd.auburn.edu/handle/10415/3738

Eberle, J. H. (1993). Perceptions of the use of the collaborative teaching-learning mode

by county agents of the Kansas State University cooperative extension service.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9413079).

Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (1980). Philosophical foundations of adult education (1st

ed.). Malabar, FL: Krieger.

217

Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (1995). Philosophical foundations of adult education (2nd

ed.). Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Elias, J. L., & Merriam, S. B. (2005). Philosophical foundations of adult education (3rd

ed.). Malabar, FL: Krieger.

Elkind, D. (2001). Early childhood education developmental or academic. Education

Next, 2.

Elliott, D. L. (1996). The teaching styles of adult educators at the buckeye leadership

workshop as measured by the principles of adult learning scale. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 9710558).

Entwistle, N. (2010). Taking stock: An overview of key research findings. In J. C.

Hughes and J. Mighty (Eds.), Taking stock: Research on teaching and learning in

higher education (pp. 15-57). Montreal and Kingston: Queen’s Policy Studies,

McGill-Queens University Press.

Epstein, A. S. (2007). The intentional teacher: Choosing the best strategies for young

children’s learning. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of

Young Children.

Feeney, S. (2012). Professionalism in early childhood education. Doing our best for

young children. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Fischer, B. B., & Fischer, L. (1979). Styles in teaching and learning. Educational

Leadership, 36(4), 245.

Fitzgibbon, S. F. (2002). Assessment of a professional development workshop:

Facilitating adult learning. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

Global. (Order No. 3078840).

Floyd, T. D. (2010). An exploratory study of the philosophy and teaching styles of

Georgia workforce educators and entrepreneurship instructors. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3416046).

Follari, L. (2015). Foundations and best practices in early childhood education: History,

theories, and approaches to learning. (3rd

ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Pearson.

Fosnot, C. T. (1996). Constructivism: Theory, perspectives, and practice. (1st ed.) New

York, NY: Teacher College Press.

Foster, V. L. (2006). Teaching-learning style preferences of special education candidates

at Northeastern State University in Oklahoma. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3220240).

218

Fries, C. H. (2012). Teaching style preferences and educational philosophy of teacher

education faculty at a state university. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 3524500).

Fritz, A (2008). Educational philosophies and teaching styles of elementary public

school teachers of English language learners. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3342230).

Fulton, J. L., & Myers, B. K. (2014). Your children, my children. why not our children?:

Dilemmas in early childhood teacher education. Childhood Education, 90(1), 3-

10.

Gago, K. A. (1985). Identifying a philosophy of adult education in four sample

populations. Dissertations Abstract International, 46, 1553a.

Galbraith, M. W. (1990). Attributes and skills of an adult educator. In M. W. Galbraith

(Ed.), Adult learning methods. Malabra, FL: Krieger.

Galbraith, M. W. (1999). Philosophy and the instructional process. Adult Learning, 11(2),

11.

Gardner, D. P., Larsen, Y. W., & Baker, W. (1983). A nation at risk: The imperative for

educational reform. Washington, DC: US Government Printing Office.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2009). Educational research: Competencies for

analysis and applications. (9th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Gay, L. R., Mills, G. E., & Airasian, P. (2012). Educational research: Competencies for

analysis and applications. (10th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

George, D. & Mallery, P. (2012). IBM SPSS statistics 19 step by step; A simple guide

and reference (20th

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Gioti, L. (2010). Adult education philosophies guiding educational theory and practice:

The case of Greek primary education teacher counselors. The International

Journal of Learning, 17(2), 393-405.

Goffin, S. G. & Washington, V. (2007). Ready or not: Leadership choices in early care

an education. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Graham, J. W., & Havlick, W. (2005). Mission statements: A guide to the corporate and

nonprofit sectors. Retrieved from

https://sites.google.com/site/ebooklibrarydownload/Mission-Statements-A-Guide-

219

to-the-Corporate-and-Nonprofit-Sectors-Garland-Reference-Library-of-Social-

Science

Grateful Dead. (1969). Truckin. On American Beauty [CD]. Burbank, CA: Warner Bros.

Records.

Grisham-Brown, J. (2009). Early childhood development: Influences on early childhood

development. Retrieved from http://www.education.com/reference/article/early-

childhood-development/

Gularte, M. A. (2007). A description of students' sense of community and instructors'

philosophy of education in a distance-delivered degree program. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3263067).

Heimlich, J., & Norland, E. (1994). Developing teaching style in adult education. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Hudspeth, J. H. (1991). Student outcomes: The relationship of teaching style to readiness

for self-directed learning. Retrieved from scholarworks.montana.edu

Hughes, C. L. (1997). Adult education philosophies and teaching styles of faculty at

Ricks College. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order

No. 9816315).

Hyson, M. (2003). Putting early academics in their place. Educational Leadership, 60(7),

20-23.

Hyson, M., Tomlinson, H. B., & Morris, C. A. (2009). Quality improvement in early

childhood teacher education: Faculty perspectives and recommendations for the

future. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 11(1).

Jacobs, G. M. (2001). Providing the scaffold: A model for early childhood/primary

teacher preparation. Early Childhood Education Journal, 29(2), 125-130.

Johnson, C. S. (1999). A comparison of the teaching styles of full-time and part-time

community college faculty. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

Global. (Order No. 9950468).

Jones, B. (1985). Perspectives on teacher education: Some relations between theory and

practice. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 247 029)

Jones, B. (1986). Teaching adults: An active learning approach. Washington, DC:

National Association for the Education of Young Children.

220

Jones, B. (1993). Growing teachers: Partnerships in staff development. Washington DC:

National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Jones, W. P. & Kottler, J. (2006). Understanding research: Becoming a competent and

critical consumer. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Kagan, S. L., Kauerz, K., & Tarrant, K. (2008). The early care and education teaching

workforce at the fulcrum. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Kalaian, S. (2013). Research design. In P. J. Lavrakas (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Survey

Research Methods (pp. 725-732). doi: 10.4135/9781412963947

Kalaian, S., & Kasim, R. (2008). External validity. In P. J. Lavrakas (Ed.), Encyclopedia

of Survey Research Methods (pp. 255-258). doi: 10.4135/9781412963947

Karges, J. R. (2003). Patient education: Physical therapists' perceptions regarding the

use, effectiveness, and barriers of adult education principles. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3100600).

Katz, L. G. (1977). Challenges to early childhood educators. Young Children, 32(4), 4-

10.

Katz, L. G. (1984). The professional early childhood educator. Young Children, 39(5),

3-10.

Katz, L. G. (1988). Where is early childhood education as a profession? In B. Spodek, O.

N. Saracho, & D. L. Peters (Eds.), Professionalism and the early childhood

practitioner (pp. 75-83). New York, NY: Teacher College Press.

Katz, L. G. (1996). Child development knowledge and teacher preparation: Confronting

assumptions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 11(2), 135-146.

Katz, L. G. (1999). Balancing constructivist and instructivist curriculum goals in early

childhood education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 435 474)

Katz, L. G., & Goffin, S. G. (1990). Issues in the preparation of teachers of young

children. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Yearbook in early childhood

education, Vol. 1: Early childhood teacher preparation (pp. 192-208). New York,

NY: Teachers College Press.

Kauchak, D., & Eggen, P. (2010). Introduction to teaching: Becoming a professional (4th

ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.

Kember, D., & Grow, L. (1994). Orientations to teaching and their effect on the quality

of student learning. Journal of Higher Education, 65(1), 58-74.

221

Knowles, M. S. (1970). The modern practice of adult education. New York, NY:

Association Press.

Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to

andragogy (2nd

ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge Books.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (1998). The adult learner (5th

ed.).

Houston, TX: Gulf.

Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2012). The adult learner: The

definitive classic in adult education and human resource development (7th

ed.).

New York, NY: Routledge.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning. Experience as the source of learning and

development. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Kumar, A. (2015). Participatory adult learning, documentation and information

networking [PALDIN] unit 3:Philosophical background of adult and lifelong

learning. New Delhi, India: Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU)

Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/education/aladin/paldin/pdf/course01/unit_03.pdf

Laerd Statistics (2015). One-way ANOVA in SPSS Statistics. Retrieved from

https://statistics.laerd.com/spss-tutorials/one-way-anova-using-spss-statistics.php

LaParo, K. M., Scott-Little, C., Ejimofor, A., Sumrall, T., Kintner-Duffy, V. L., Pianta,

… & Howes, C. (2014). Student teaching feedback and evaluation: Results from a

seven-state survey. Journal Of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 35(4), 318-

336. doi:10.1080/10901027.2014.968297

Learner-centered instruction. (2009). In L. Sullivan (Ed.), The SAGE Glossary of the

Social and Behavioral Sciences. (p. 288). doi: 10.4135/9781412972024

Lee, J. G. (2004). An investigation and analysis of the teaching styles of faculty members

in Midwestern christian colleges and universities. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3155524).

Lehman, M. A. (2003). Interrupting the reflective practitioner: Discovering the espoused

philosophies and theories and theories-in-use of 13 adult educators. Retrieved

from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3109090).

Lemani, C. N. (2004). Effectiveness of Trek-21 model of professional development on

changes in teacher practices with respect to instructional technology integration.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3156459).

222

Lennon, J., & McCartney, P. (1969). The End. On Abbey Road [CD]. London, United

Kingdom: Apple Records.

Liaros, B. P. (2000). Predominant teaching behaviors in an electronic distance education

(EDE) program utilizing a live interactive television (ITV) system. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9955395).

Lindeman, E. C. (1926). The meaning of adult education. New York, NY: New

Republic.

Lobman, C., Ryan, S., & McLaughlin, J. (2005). Reconstructing teacher education to

prepare qualified preschool teachers: Lessons from New Jersey. Early Childhood

Research and Practice, 7(2), 30-55. Retrieved from

http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v7n2/lobman.html

Lodico, M. G., Spaulding, D. T., & Voegtle, K. H. (2010). Methods in educational

research: From theory to practice (2nd

ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey Bass.

Maakestad-Wolf, J. (1999). Making connections: From the college classroom to the

early childhood setting. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 20(2),

167-172.

MacDermid, S. M., Jurich, J. A., Myers-Walls J. A., & Pelo, A. (1992). Feminist

teaching: Effective eduction. Family Relations, 41(1), 31–38.

Maine Department of Education. (2014). Approved teacher preparation programs.

Retrieved from

http://www.maine.gov/doe/highered/teacherprep/approvedprograms.html

Marshall, C. (1996). Constructivist teaching in an early childhood teacher preparation

program: A personal journey. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education,

17(1), 46-51.

Martin, J. W. (1999). Adult education philosophies and teaching styles of construction

management faculty of the associated schools of construction. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 9951860).

Martin, D. J., & Loomis, K. S. (2007). Building teachers: A constructivist approach to

introducing education. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thompson Learning.

Marton, F., & Säaljö, R. (1976). On qualitative differences in learning- II Outcome as a

function of the learner’s conception of the task. British Journal of Educational

Psychology, 46(2) 115-127. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8279.1976.tb02304.x

223

Marton, F., Hounsell, D., & Entwistle, N. (Eds.). (1997). The experience of learning:

Implications for teaching and studying in higher education. (2nd

ed.). Edinburgh,

Scotland: Scottish Academic Press.

Maslow, A. H. (1954). Motivation and Personality. New York, NY: Harper and Brothers.

Massachusetts Department of Education. (2014). Approved teacher preparation

programs. Retrieved from http://www.doe.mass.edu/edprep/

Massachusetts Labor and Workforce Development. (2014). Occupational employment

and wage statistics. Retrieved from http://www.mass.gov/lwd/economic-data/

Maxwell, K. L., Lim, C. I., & Early, D. M. (2006). Early childhood teacher preparation

programs in the United States: National report. Chapel Hill, NC: FPG Child

Development Institute, University of North Carolina.

McCarthy, J. (1990). The content of early childhood teacher education programs:

Pedagogy. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Yearbook in early childhood

education, Vol. 1: Early childhood teacher preparation (pp. 82-101). New York,

NY: Teachers College Press.

McCollin, E. D. (1998). Faculty and student perceptions of teaching styles: Do teaching

styles differ for traditional and nontraditional students? Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9901343).

McGlynn, M. (2001). Constructivist teacher education: Taking theory to practice for

faculty-educators. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global.

(Order No. 304781120).

McKenzie, L. (1985). Philosophical orientations of adult educators. Lifelong Learning:

An Omnibus of Practice and Research, 9(1), 18.

McKenzie, P. M. (1987). Associate degree nursing programs in Texas: A survey of the

instructors' teaching style and the schools' licensure examination. Dissertation

Abstracts International, 49, 1091B.

McMillan, J. H., & Schumacher, S. (2010). Research in education: Evidence-based

inquiry. (7th

ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2014). Adult learning: Linking theory to practice.

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Merriam, S. B., & Brockett, R. G. (2007). The profession and practice of adult

education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

224

Merriam, S. B., Caffarella, R. S., & Baumgartner, L. M. (2007). Learning in adulthood:

A comprehensive guide. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Moon, J. A. (2013). Reflection in learning and professional development: Theory and

practice. New York, NY: Routledge.

Moore, J. A. L. (1996). Competency of community college developmental reading

instructors in the principles of adult learning. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9709280).

Moore, L. S. (2010). Study of effective approaches for teaching adults. Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3419234).

Morales Osegueda, S. G. (1997). An assessment of teaching/training style preferences

among Oklahoma Cooperative Extension field staff. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 9811748).

Mulholland, D. (1995). Characteristics of adult learning and the environment in teaching:

A comparative study of faculty and students in residential and extension

theological study (Doctoral dissertation, Trinity Evangelical Divinity School).

Dissertation Abstracts International, 57, 1938a.

Natale, R. D., II. (2007). Faculty knowledge of adult learning styles as predictors of

success in community college preparatory mathematics. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3268315).

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (November 2013). Strong

start for America’s children act. Retrieved from

http://www.naeyc.org/policy/federal/summary-ssfac-act

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (May 2014). Children’s

champion update: U.S. Senate committee passes strong start legislation.

Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/policy/federal/5_16_14

National Association for the Education of Young Children. (May 2015). Children’s

champion update: Strong start for America’s children act reintroduced in the

House and Senate. Retrieved from http://www.naeyc.org/policy/federal/updates/

Neugebauer, R. (2006, November/December). Educating the early childhood workforce:

Trends in higher education. Exchange, 172, 22.

Neugebauer, R. (2013, May/June). Developing competent teachers: Status report on

teacher training in the United States. Exchange, 211, 28-30.

225

New Hampshire Department of Education. (2014). Approved teacher preparation

programs. Retrieved from http://www.education.nh.gov/certification/prof_ed.htm

Nolte, J. L. (1994). Effects of inservice training on part-time continuing education

faculty. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No.

9427273).

O’Brien, M. D. (2001). Teaching style and teaching philosophy of rehabilitation

educators. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No.

3023943).

Office of the Press Secretary. (2013). Fact sheet President Obama’s plan for early

education for all Americans. Retrieved from http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-

press-office/2013/02/13/fact-sheet-president-obama-s-plan-early-education-all-

americans

Oliver, P. (2006). Purposive sampling. In V. Jupp (Ed.), The SAGE Dictionary of Social

Research Methods. (pp. 245-246). doi: 10.4135/9780857020116

Osborne, L. Y. (2008). Adult students and learner-centered instruction at a small

community college: A mixed method study. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3319382).

Papes, K. A. (1998). The relationships among nursing program attributes, nurse

faculties' personal attributes and preferences for learner-centered instruction.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9913292).

Phillips, D. (2010). What is philosophy of education? In R. Bailey, R. Barrow, D. Carr, &

C. McCarthy (Eds.), The SAGE handbook of philosophy of education. (pp. 3-21).

doi: 10.4135/9781446200872

Powell, L. (2006). An exploratory study of the philosophy and teaching styles of Alabama

workforce education and entrepreneurship instructors. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3225281).

Pratt, D. D. (1998). Five perspectives on teaching in adult and higher education.

Melbourne, FL: Krieger.

Pratt, D. D., & Collins, J. B. (2010). The teaching perspectives inventory at 10 years and

100,000 respondents: Reliability and validity of a teacher self-report inventory.

Adult Education Quarterly, XX (X) doi: 10.1177/0741713610392763

Price, D. W. (1994). Philosophical orientations of extension educators. (Unpublished

doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.

226

Puksa, M. A. (1999). Nursing students' perceptions of teachers' collaborative teaching

style and self-efficacy for collaborative learning. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. MQ39868).

Quillin, A. A. (2004). The teaching styles of UAA school of nursing faculty. Retrieved

from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 1421643).

Ravid, R. (2011). Practical statistics for educators. (4th

ed.). Lanham, MD: Rowman

and Littlefield.

Reese, T. H. (1993). Adult learning research and effective college teaching: Perceptions

and practice. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order

No. 9333357).

Reiseck, C. J. (1996). A case study of a small private college's mental models of the adult

student. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Northern Illinois University,

DeKalb, Illinois.

Rhodes, H., & Huston, A. (2012). Social policy report: Building the workforce our

youngest children deserve. Society for Research in Child Development, 26(1).

Riley, D. A. (2003, September/October). Steps to a “reflective practice” model of teacher

development. Exchange, 153, 17-23.

Ringler, M. C. (2004). Determining the use of principles of adult learning in professional

development. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order

No. 3161028).

Roach, M. A., & Riley, D. A. (2006). Helping teachers grow: Toward theory and

practice of an “emergent curriculum” model of staff development. Early

Childhood Education Journal, 33(5), 363-370.

Roberson, V. R. (2002). Use of adult learning principles by adult basic skills instructors

in an urban community college district. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3088031).

Robinson, E. T. (1998). Evaluating the impact of a pedagogical institute on faculty

members' instructional and philosophical orientations. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9823169).

Robinson, L. M. (2012). Expanding the description of facilitators of adult learning:

Workplace facilitator teaching styles, theories of action, and perspectives of

teaching. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No.

3530870).

227

Rodrigues, K. J. B. (2009). Do learning styles, learning strategies, and student’s

preference for teacher’s teaching philosophy predict student preference for online

or in-class courses. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global.

(Order No. 3358879).

Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn: A view of what education might become.

Columbus, OH: Charles Merrill.

Rogers, D. F. (2009). Development of learner-centered teaching styles by select

California community college faculty. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 3359834).

Rothamer, F. R. (2003). Business faculty knowledge of adult learning styles: Cooperative

education vs. non-cooperative education institutions. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3127686).

Saracho, O. N. (2013). Early childhood teacher preparation programmes in the USA.

Early Child Development and Care, 183(5), 571-588.

Saracho, O. N., & Spodek, B. (1983). Preparing teachers for bilingual/multicultural

classrooms. In O. N. Saracho & B. Spodek (Eds.), Understanding the

multicultural experience in early childhood education (pp. 125-146). Washington,

DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

Schön, D. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco, CA: Jossy-Bass.

Scotney, D. W. (1986). An analysis of the relationship between the level of knowledge

and understanding of the collaborative teaching-learning mode and teaching

practices in the classroom. Dissertation Abstracts International, 4L, 3637a.

Seevers, B. S. (1991). Factors related to teaching style preference of Ohio cooperative

extension faculty and program staff. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 9130552).

Seevers, B. S. (1995). Extensionists as adult educators: A look at teaching style

preference. Journal of Extension, 33(3), 1-4.

Shedd, P. E. (1989). The use of the principles of adult learning scale to assess

instructional development needs in a community college. (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri.

Siraj-Blatchford, I. (1999). Early childhood pedagogy: Practice, principles and research.

In P. Mortimore (Ed.), Understanding pedagogy and its impact on learning, (pp.

20-45). Retrieved from

https://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=W1_UmO2tNYYC&oi=fnd&pg

228

=PA20&ots=BBS2bqb1C1&sig=UnAqPx0yUzcB2bQ736UVxRBa0MM#v=onep

age&q&f=false

Sluss, D. J., & Thompson, E. H. (1998). In search of the zone of proximal development:

A sociocultural view of the stages of teaching as experienced by novice and

experienced early childhood teachers. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher

Education, 19(3), 193-201.

Smith, T. M. (2008). Integrating multiple intelligences and andragogical principles into

a preservice teacher education program. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3325347).

Spodek, B., & Saracho, O. N. (1990). Preparing early childhood teachers. In B. Spodek &

O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Yearbook in early childhood education, Vol. 1: Early

childhood teacher preparation (pp. 23-44). New York, NY: Teachers College

Press.

Spoon, J. C. (1996). Impact of student learning style and instructor teaching style on

achievement of adult basic skills students. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 9726935).

Spoon, J. C., & Schell, J. W. (1998). Aligning student learning styles with instructor learning

styles. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 35(2), 41-56.

Spurgeon, L. P., & Moore, G. E. (1997). The educational philosophies of training and

development professors, leaders, and practitioners. The Journal of Technology

Studies, 23(2), 11-19. Retrieved from

http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/JOTS/Summer-Fall-1997/PDF/

Stage, F. K., Muller, P. A., Kinzie, J., & Simmons, A. (1998). Creating learner centered

classrooms: What does learning theory have to say? ERIC Digest: George

Washington University, Washington, DC. Graduate School of Education and

Human Development. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education, Washington,

DC.

Stolt-Krichko, D. (1997). An investigation of teacher-centered or learner-centered

teaching styles of adjunct physical education and outdoor education instructors.

Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 1387012).

Strom, B. T. (1996). The role of philosophy in education-for-work. Journal of Industrial

Teacher Education, 33, 77-82.

Stover, S. E. (2006). Shifting toward learning-centered principles: A faculty development

experiment. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order

No. 3226213).

229

Svinicki, M., & McKeachie, W. J. (2011). McKeachie's teaching tips: Strategies,

research, and theory for college and university teachers. (13th

ed.) Belmont, CA:

Cengage.

Swetnam, S. (2011). Accommodation of haptic learning style in traditional learning

environments. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order

No. 1492440).

Swick, K. J., DaRos, D. D., Pavia, L. (1998). Inquiry as a key to early childhood teacher

education. Childhood Education, 75(2), 66-70.

Taylor-King, S. (2001). Differences between full- and part-time faculty in the practice of

and value for learner-centered teaching: A case study at a private urban liberal

arts college. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order

No. 3010733).

Teacher Preparation Program, 34 C.F.R § 686.175 Retrieved from

http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-

idx?SID=2016e5871e755255e18d7d60ef1ba1ac&mc=true&node=se34.4.686_12

&rgn=div

Toney, S. H. (2012). Educational philosophy interactions in a middle school

interdisciplinary team: A case study. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 3538304).

Totin Meyer, M. (2002). The use of the principles of adult learning scale to assess the

instructional practices of clinical instructors/preceptors for graduate nurse

practitioner students in North Carolina. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3031775).

Tisdall, E., & Taylor, E. (1999). Adult education philosophy informs practice. Adult

Learning, 11(2), 6.

Trigwell, K. (2010). Teaching and learning: A relational view. In J. C. Hughes & J.

Mighty (Eds.), Taking stock: Research on teaching and learning in higher

education. Montreal and Kingston: Queen’s policy studies, McGill-Queen’s

University Press.

United States Department of Education. (2011). Race to the top-Early learning challenge.

Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop-

earlylearningchallenge/index.html.

United States Department of Health and Human Services. (1979). The Belmont report.

Retrieved from http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp/humansubjects/guidance/belmont.html

230

United States Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2013). Estimating occupational replacement

needs. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_table_110.htm.

United States Department of Labor. (2014a). May 2013 state occupational employment

and wage estimates Maine. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_me.htm#25-0000

United States Department of Labor. (2014b). May 2013 state occupational employment

and wage estimates New Hampshire. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/oes/2013/may/oes_nh.htm

United States Department of Labor. (2014c). May 2013 state occupational employment

and wage estimates New Jersey. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nj.htm#25-0000

United States Department of Labor. (2014d). May 2013 state occupational employment

and wage estimates Rhode Island. Retrieved from

http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_ri.htm#25-0000

United States Department of Labor. (2014e). May 2013 state occupational employment

and wage estimates Vermont. Retrieved from

www.bls.gov/oes/2013/may/oes_vt.htm

University of Chicago Urban Education Institute & Ounce of Prevention Fund. (2010).

Case study: Working together to build a birth-to-college approach to public

education. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development.

VanderVen, K. (2000). New perspectives on theory-to-practice: Implications for

transforming teacher education and child outcomes. (ERIC Document

Reproduction Service No. ED 470 897)

Vardanyan, K. (2013). The significance of National Association for the Education of

Young Children accreditation in elevating quality of early childhood education:

Administrators', teachers' and parents' beliefs about accreditation and its process

(Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola Marymount University). Retrieved from

http://gradworks.umi.com/36/10/3610170.html

Vella, J. (1994). Learning to listen, learning to teach. The power of dialogue in educating

adults. Jossey-Bass Higher Adult Education Series. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-

Bass.

Vermont Department of Education. (2014). Approved teacher preparation programs.

Retrieved from http://education.vermont.gov/licensing/preparation-of-educators

231

Wajler, N. S. (2012). Community college adult accelerated program: Faculty educational

philosophy influence on student retention. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3545294).

Walker, C. (2008). Bridging to new possibilities: A case study of the influence of a

bridging education programme. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from

https://aut.researchgateway.ac.nz/handle/10292/440

Wang, C. (2002). Instructional preferences of adult educators and perceptions of their

adult students in distance learning settings. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3055349).

Waters, D. (1992). Community college faculty’s use of adult learning principles as

measured by the principles of adult learning scale. (Unpublished doctoral

dissertation). University of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg, Mississippi.

Watkins, J. B. (2006). The educational beliefs and attitudes of Title 1 teachers in Tulsa

public schools. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order

No. 3220244).

Weaver-Hightower, M. B. (2011). Male preservice teachers and discouragement from

teaching. Journal of Men's Studies, 19(2), 97-115. doi:10.3149/jms.1902.97

Wegge, N. (1991). The effect of an inservice training program on the educational

orientation of part-time adult continuing education instructors. (Unpublished

doctoral dissertation). University of Missouri, St. Louis, Missouri.

Weigandt, C. M. (2005). The influence of reviewers' characteristics on their evaluations

of instructional technology integration. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations

and Theses Global. (Order No. 3191257).

Weimer, M. (2013). Learner-centered teaching: Five key changes to practice (2nd

ed.).

San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Weitkamp, E. W. (2005). Teaching style and technology: The role of educational values

in the adoption of information technology innovations in the classroom. Retrieved

from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3183581).

West, N. D. (2008). Adult education practices in historically black colleges and

universities theological settings: An exploratory study of the relationship between

the teaching philosophies and teaching styles of seminary professors. Retrieved

from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 3334081).

232

Whitebook, M. (2003). Bachelor's degrees are best: Higher qualifications for pre-

kindergarten teachers lead to better learning environments for children.

Washington, DC: Trust for Early Education.

Whitebook, M. (2014). Building a skilled teacher workforce: Shared and divergent

challenges in early care and education and in grades K-12. Berkeley, CA:

University of California, Berkeley, Institute for Research on Labor and

Employment, Center for the Study of Child Care Employment.

Whitebook, M., Austin, L. J. E., Ryan, S., Kipnis, F., Almaraz, M., & Sakai, L. (2012).

By default or by design? Variations in higher education programs for early care

and teachers and their implications for research methodology, policy, and

practice. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment,

University of California, Berkeley.

Whitebook, M., Gomby, D., Bellm, D., Sakai, L., & Kipnis, F. (2009). Teacher

preparation and professional development in grades K-12 and in early care and

education: Differences and similarities, and implications for research. Part I of

preparing teachers of young children: The current state of knowledge, and a

blueprint for the future. Berkeley, CA: Center for the Study of Child Care

Employment, Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, University of

California, Berkeley.

Whitebook, M., & Ryan, S. (2011). Degrees in context: Asking the right questions about

preparing skilled and effective teachers of young children, p. 3. NIEER Policy

Brief No. 22. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institution for Early Education

Research.

Wigington, H., Tollefson, N. & Rodriguez, E. (1989). Students‘ ratings of instructors

revisited: Interactions among class and instructor variables. Research in Higher

Education, 30(3), 331-344.

Williams, B. C. (1999). Educational philosophies and teaching styles of University of

Florida cooperative extension agents. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and

Theses Global. (Order No. 9948384).

Willson, A. (2006). Predictors of teaching styles and the adult education philosophies of

instructors of radiologic technology programs. Retrieved from ProQuest

Dissertations & Theses Global. (Order No. 3241987).

Wilson, N. L. (1994). A study of the extent to which the instructional practices of

teachers of adults differ from the instructional preferences of adult learners

enrolled in postsecondary credit courses. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from

http://escholarshare.drake.edu/handle/2092/450

233

Woodcock, J. F. (1994). The relationship of student satisfaction with instructors' and

students' scores on the principles of adult learning scale (PALS). Retrieved from

ProQuest Dissertations and Theses Global. (Order No. 9520178).

Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and method. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Zandevanian, A., Safaei Moghaddam, M., Pakseresht, M. J., & Sepaci, H. (2009).

Recognition and analysis of the educational philosophy of Yazd province adult

education instructors. Journal of Education (Journal of Education & Psychology),

5(3), 3-26.

Zigler, E., Gilliam, W. S., & Barnett, W. S. (Eds.) (2011). The pre-k debates: Current

controversies & issues. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education

of Young Children.

Zinn, L. M. (1983). Development of a valid and reliable instrument to identify a personal

philosophy of adult education. Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses

Global. (Order No. 8323851).

Zinn, L. M. (1990). Identifying your philosophical orientation. In M. W. Galbraith

(Ed.), Adult learning methods (pp. 39-77). Malabra, FL: Krieger.

Zinn, L. M. (1994). Notes on historical development and

administration/scoring/interpretation. Paper presented at the Challenge and

Change: Proceedings of the 1994 Annual Conference, Nashville, TN.

Zinn, L.M. (2004). Exploring your philosophical orientation. In M.W. Galbraith (Ed.),

Adult learning methods (3rd ed.), 39-74. Malbar, FL: Kreiger.

Zinn, L. M. (2007). Philosophy of adult education inventory. Quincy, IL: Lifelong

Learning Options.

Zirkle, C. (2001) Access barriers in distance education. Contemporary Education, 72(2),

39-42.

Zoellick, E. M. (2009). Philosophical orientation to adult learning: A descriptive study of

Minnesota environmental education practitioners. (Doctoral dissertation).

Retrieved from https://d-commons.d.umn.edu:8443/handle/10792/131

234

APPENDIX A. STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL WORK

Academic Honesty Policy

Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy (3.01.01) holds learners accountable for

the integrity of work they submit, which includes but is not limited to discussion

postings, assignments, comprehensive exams, and the dissertation or capstone project.

Established in the Policy are the expectations for original work, rationale for the policy,

definition of terms that pertain to academic honesty and original work, and disciplinary

consequences of academic dishonesty. Also stated in the Policy is the expectation that

learners will follow APA rules for citing another person’s ideas or works.

The following standards for original work and definition of plagiarism are discussed in

the Policy:

Learners are expected to be the sole authors of their work and to acknowledge the

authorship of others’ work through proper citation and reference. Use of another

person’s ideas, including another learner’s, without proper reference or citation

constitutes plagiarism and academic dishonesty and is prohibited conduct. (p. 1)

Plagiarism is one example of academic dishonesty. Plagiarism is presenting

someone else’s ideas or work as your own. Plagiarism also includes copying

verbatim or rephrasing ideas without properly acknowledging the source by author,

date, and publication medium. (p. 2)

Capella University’s Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06) holds learners accountable for

research integrity. What constitutes research misconduct is discussed in the Policy:

Research misconduct includes but is not limited to falsification, fabrication,

plagiarism, misappropriation, or other practices that seriously deviate from those

that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing,

conducting, or reviewing research, or in reporting research results. (p. 1)

Learners failing to abide by these policies are subject to consequences, including but not

limited to dismissal or revocation of the degree.

235

Statement of Original Work and Signature

I have read, understood, and abided by Capella University’s Academic Honesty Policy

(3.01.01) and Research Misconduct Policy (3.03.06), including the Policy Statements,

Rationale, and Definitions.

I attest that this dissertation or capstone project is my own work. Where I have used the

ideas or words of others, I have paraphrased, summarized, or used direct quotes following

the guidelines set forth in the APA Publication Manual.

Learner name

and date Lisa Strout August 17, 2015

Mentor name

and school Dr. Caroline Bassett, Capella University

236

APPENDIX B. ONE-WAY ANOVA: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATIONS

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Gender

Liberal Between Groups 4.752 1 4.752 .091 .765

Within Groups 2249.159 43 52.306

Total 2253.911 44

Progressive Between Groups 6.335 1 6.335 .107 .745

Within Groups 2548.909 43 59.277

Total 2555.244 44

Behavioral Between Groups 19.008 1 19.008 .153 .698

Within Groups 5354.636 43 124.526

Total 5373.644 44

Humanistic Between Groups 43.063 1 43.063 .611 .439

Within Groups 3030.182 43 70.469

Total 3073.244 44

Radical/Critical Between Groups 7.766 1 7.766 .071 .792

Within Groups 4726.545 43 109.920

Total 4734.311 44

Age

Liberal Between Groups 29.390 4 7.347 .132 .970

Within Groups 2224.521 40 55.613

Total 2253.911 44

Progressive Between Groups 450.759 4 112.690 2.142 .093

Within Groups 2104.485 40 52.612

Total 2555.244 44

Behavioral Between Groups 235.098 4 58.775 .458 .766

Within Groups 5138.546 40 128.464

Total 5373.644 44

Humanistic Between Groups 471.444 4 117.861 1.812 .146

Within Groups 2601.800 40 65.045

Total 3073.244 44

Radical/Critical Between Groups 587.016 4 146.754 1.415 .246

Within Groups 4147.295 40 103.682

Total 4734.311 44

Academic Rank

Liberal Between Groups 326.221 5 65.244 1.320 .276

Within Groups 1927.690 39 49.428

237

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Total 2253.911 44

Progressive Between Groups 402.333 5 80.467 1.458 .226

Within Groups 2152.911 39 55.203

Total 2555.244 44

Behavioral Between Groups 935.874 5 187.175 1.645 .171

Within Groups 4437.770 39 113.789

Total 5373.644 44

Humanistic Between Groups 270.454 5 54.091 .753 .589

Within Groups 2802.790 39 71.866

Total 3073.244 44

Radical/Critical Between Groups 733.382 5 146.676 1.430 .235

Within Groups 4000.929 39 102.588

Total 4734.311 44

Years Teaching

Liberal Between Groups 72.987 3 24.329 .457 .714

Within Groups 2180.924 41 53.193

Total 2253.911 44

Progressive Between Groups 241.092 3 80.364 1.424 .250

Within Groups 2314.153 41 56.443

Total 2555.244 44

Behavioral Between Groups 207.394 3 69.131 .549 .652

Within Groups 5166.250 41 126.006

Total 5373.644 44

Humanistic Between Groups 261.154 3 87.051 1.269 .298

Within Groups 2812.090 41 68.588

Total 3073.244 44

Radical/Critical Between Groups 202.874 3 67.625 .612 .611

Within Groups 4531.438 41 110.523

Total 4734.311 44

Degree

Liberal Between Groups 420.904 2 210.452 4.822 .013

Within Groups 1833.007 42 43.643

Total 2253.911 44

Progressive Between Groups 165.348 2 82.674 1.453 .245

Within Groups 2389.896 42 56.902

Total 2555.244 44

Behavioral Between Groups 830.415 2 415.207 3.838 .029

Within Groups 4543.230 42 108.172

238

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Total 5373.644 44

Humanistic Between Groups 185.348 2 92.674 1.348 .271

Within Groups 2887.896 42 68.759

Total 3073.244 44

Radical/Critical Between Groups 977.911 2 488.956 5.467 .008

Within Groups 3756.400 42 89.438

Total 4734.311 44

Note: SS= Sum of squares; df=degrees of freedom; MS=Mean square; F= F ratio;

Sig.=Statistical Significance

239

APPENDIX C: DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

PHILOSOPHICAL ORIENTATIONS

PAEI Total N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Gender

Liberal Female 44 75.80 7.232 1.090 73.60 77.99 50 95

Male 1 78.00 . . . . 78 78

Total 45 75.84 7.157 1.067 73.69 77.99 50 95

Prog. Female 44 87.55 7.699 1.161 85.20 89.89 72 104

Male 1 85.00 . . . . 85 85

Total 45 87.49 7.621 1.136 85.20 89.78 72 104

Behav. Female 44 78.59 11.159 1.682 75.20 81.98 41 101

Male 1 83.00 . . . . 83 83

Total 45 78.69 11.051 1.647 75.37 82.01 41 101

Hum. Female 44 81.64 8.395 1.266 79.08 84.19 68 101

Male 1 75.00 . . . . 75 75

Total 45 81.49 8.357 1.246 78.98 84.00 68 101

Rad. Female 44 79.82 10.484 1.581 76.63 83.01 52 98

Male 1 77.00 . . . . 77 77

Total 45 79.76 10.373 1.546 76.64 82.87 52 98

Age

Liberal 31-40 8 76.38 5.397 1.908 71.86 80.89 70 84

41-50 13 76.31 10.804 2.997 69.78 82.84 50 95

51-60 13 74.62 4.194 1.163 72.08 77.15 69 82

61-64 5 76.80 5.891 2.634 69.49 84.11 70 86

65+ 6 76.00 7.348 3.000 68.29 83.71 65 88

Total 45 75.84 7.157 1.067 73.69 77.99 50 95

Prog. 31-40 8 84.88 7.019 2.482 79.01 90.74 75 96

41-50 13 88.69 6.638 1.841 84.68 92.70 81 104

51-60 13 86.23 8.358 2.318 81.18 91.28 72 98

61-64 5 83.60 7.701 3.444 74.04 93.16 78 97

65+ 6 94.33 5.574 2.275 88.48 100.18 88 100

Total 45 87.49 7.621 1.136 85.20 89.78 72 104

Behav. 31-40 8 81.75 8.876 3.138 74.33 89.17 70 101

41-50 13 80.31 11.405 3.163 73.42 87.20 63 99

51-60 13 75.62 13.414 3.720 67.51 83.72 41 91

240

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

61-64 5 78.40 8.355 3.736 68.03 88.77 67 87

65+ 6 78.00 10.844 4.427 66.62 89.38 63 95

Total 45 78.69 11.051 1.647 75.37 82.01 41 101

Hum. 31-40 8 78.75 7.797 2.756 72.23 85.27 68 93

41-50 13 80.77 8.526 2.365 75.62 85.92 70 101

51-60 13 80.85 7.830 2.172 76.11 85.58 72 94

61-64 5 79.80 7.727 3.455 70.21 89.39 71 92

65+ 6 89.50 8.118 3.314 80.98 98.02 78 98

Total 45 81.49 8.357 1.246 78.98 84.00 68 101

Radical 31-40 8 81.75 7.479 2.644 75.50 88.00 71 94

41-50 13 77.46 8.959 2.485 72.05 82.88 66 91

51-60 13 81.54 9.475 2.628 75.81 87.26 68 98

61-64 5 72.00 17.678 7.906 50.05 93.95 52 90

65+ 6 84.67 9.647 3.938 74.54 94.79 69 95

Total 45 79.76 10.373 1.546 76.64 82.87 52 98

Academic Rank

Liberal Adj. 15 77.73 6.912 1.785 73.91 81.56 68 95

Part-time Instr. 5 73.40 4.159 1.860 68.24 78.56 70 80

Full-time Instr. 4 69.50 14.177 7.089 46.94 92.06 50 84

Asst. Prof. 2 70.50 2.121 1.500 51.44 89.56 69 72

Assoc. Prof. 8 76.38 5.041 1.782 72.16 80.59 69 83

Professor 11 77.27 6.358 1.917 73.00 81.54 65 88

Total 45 75.84 7.157 1.067 73.69 77.99 50 95

Prog. Adj. 15 90.20 6.439 1.662 86.63 93.77 78 100

Part-time Instr. 5 82.00 6.205 2.775 74.30 89.70 75 89

Full-time Instr. 4 90.00 5.164 2.582 81.78 98.22 84 96

Asst. Prof. 2 80.00 9.899 7.000 -8.94 168.94 73 87

Assoc. Prof. 8 86.88 9.311 3.292 79.09 94.66 78 104

Professor 11 87.18 7.960 2.400 81.83 92.53 72 100

Total 45 87.49 7.621 1.136 85.20 89.78 72 104

Behav. Adj. 15 80.60 9.672 2.497 75.24 85.96 63 99

Part-time Instr. 5 80.00 4.528 2.025 74.38 85.62 73 84

Full-time Instr. 4 79.75 17.424 8.712 52.03 107.47 65 101

Asst. Prof. 2 65.00 2.828 2.000 39.59 90.41 63 67

Assoc. Prof. 8 72.13 15.151 5.357 59.46 84.79 41 92

Professor 11 82.36 7.215 2.175 77.52 87.21 71 95

241

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Total 45 78.69 11.051 1.647 75.37 82.01 41 101

Hum. Adj. 15 83.93 7.507 1.938 79.78 88.09 75 98

Part-time Instr. 5 77.80 6.458 2.888 69.78 85.82 68 86

Full-time Instr. 4 81.50 9.815 4.907 65.88 97.12 70 93

Asst. Prof. 2 74.00 1.414 1.000 61.29 86.71 73 75

Assoc. Prof. 8 81.38 10.582 3.741 72.53 90.22 72 101

Professor 11 81.27 8.787 2.649 75.37 87.18 71 97

Total 45 81.49 8.357 1.246 78.98 84.00 68 101

Radical Adj. 15 82.73 8.075 2.085 78.26 87.21 66 92

Part-time Instr. 5 83.40 9.762 4.366 71.28 95.52 71 98

Full-time Instr. 4 84.25 8.261 4.131 71.10 97.40 74 94

Asst. Prof. 2 68.00 .000 .000 68.00 68.00 68 68

Assoc. Prof. 8 77.25 13.221 4.674 66.20 88.30 52 95

Professor 11 76.36 11.307 3.409 68.77 83.96 54 95

Total 45 79.76 10.373 1.546 76.64 82.87 52 98

Years Teaching

Liberal 0-10 16 76.06 5.507 1.377 73.13 79.00 69 88

11-20 18 74.56 9.076 2.139 70.04 79.07 50 95

21-30 8 78.13 6.728 2.379 72.50 83.75 69 88

31-40 3 76.33 2.082 1.202 71.16 81.50 74 78

Total 45 75.84 7.157 1.067 73.69 77.99 50 95

Prog. 0-10 16 85.00 6.703 1.676 81.43 88.57 73 96

11-20 18 88.72 6.832 1.610 85.32 92.12 78 104

21-30 8 87.38 9.812 3.469 79.17 95.58 72 100

31-40 3 93.67 9.292 5.364 70.59 116.75 83 100

Total 45 87.49 7.621 1.136 85.20 89.78 72 104

Behav. 0-10 16 80.88 9.514 2.379 75.81 85.94 63 101

11-20 18 78.83 10.246 2.415 73.74 83.93 65 99

21-30 8 75.00 15.721 5.558 61.86 88.14 41 95

31-40 3 76.00 12.124 7.000 45.88 106.12 63 87

Total 45 78.69 11.051 1.647 75.37 82.01 41 101

Hum. 0-10 16 79.06 6.266 1.566 75.72 82.40 68 93

11-20 18 82.28 8.903 2.099 77.85 86.71 70 101

21-30 8 81.88 10.190 3.603 73.36 90.39 71 97

31-40 3 88.67 8.622 4.978 67.25 110.08 81 98

Total 45 81.49 8.357 1.246 78.98 84.00 68 101

242

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Radical 0-10 16 80.56 9.845 2.461 75.32 85.81 66 98

11-20 18 79.33 10.432 2.459 74.15 84.52 52 95

21-30 8 76.75 13.101 4.632 65.80 87.70 54 95

31-40 3 86.00 3.606 2.082 77.04 94.96 83 90

Total 45 79.76 10.373 1.546 76.64 82.87 52 98

Degree

Lib. Master’s 27 77.15 5.875 1.131 74.82 79.47 70 95

C.A.G.S. 3 64.67 12.702 7.333 33.11 96.22 50 72

PhD/ EdD 15 75.73 6.617 1.708 72.07 79.40 65 88

Total 45 75.84 7.157 1.067 73.69 77.99 50 95

Prog. Master’s 27 88.96 7.208 1.387 86.11 91.81 75 104

C.A.G.S. 3 83.00 9.539 5.508 59.30 106.70 73 92

PhD/ EdD 15 85.73 7.824 2.020 81.40 90.07 72 100

Total 45 87.49 7.621 1.136 85.20 89.78 72 104

Behav Masters 27 81.63 8.509 1.637 78.26 85.00 68 101

C.A.G.S. 3 66.00 1.000 .577 63.52 68.48 65 67

PhD/ EdD 15 75.93 13.781 3.558 68.30 83.57 41 95

Total 45 78.69 11.051 1.647 75.37 82.01 41 101

Hum. Master’s 27 82.96 8.012 1.542 79.79 86.13 68 101

C.A.G.S. 3 76.00 7.937 4.583 56.28 95.72 70 85

PhD/ EdD 15 79.93 8.836 2.281 75.04 84.83 71 98

Total 45 81.49 8.357 1.246 78.98 84.00 68 101

Rad. Master’s 27 83.56 8.159 1.570 80.33 86.78 66 98

C.A.G.S. 3 75.00 7.550 4.359 56.25 93.75 68 83

PhD/ EdD 15 73.87 11.686 3.017 67.40 80.34 52 95

Total 45 79.76 10.373 1.546 76.64 82.87 52 98

Note: SD=Standard Deviation; SE=Standard error; CI=Confidence interval;

Min=Minimum; Max=Maximum; Prog= Progressive; Behav=Behavioral; Hum=

Humanistic; Rad=Radical; Adj=Adjunct; Instr=Instructor; Asst=Assistant; Prof-

Professor; Assoc=Associate; Lib=Liberal; C.A.G.S.=Certificate of Advanced Graduate

Studies; PhD= Doctor of Philosophy; EdD=Doctor of Education

243

APPENDIX D. ONE-WAY ANOVA: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

TEACHING STYLE

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Gender

PALS Total Between Groups 89.941 1 89.941 .385 .538

Within Groups 10048.636 43 233.689

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 1.263 1 1.263 .056 .814

Within Groups 971.182 43 22.586

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 41.891 1 41.891 2.087 .156

Within Groups 862.909 43 20.068

Total 904.800 44

Factor Three Between Groups 15.467 1 15.467 1.034 .315

Within Groups 642.977 43 14.953

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 10.041 1 10.041 1.312 .258

Within Groups 329.159 43 7.655

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups .808 1 .808 .151 .699

Within Groups 229.636 43 5.340

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups .129 1 .129 .032 .859

Within Groups 174.182 43 4.051

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 4.463 1 4.463 .517 .476

Within Groups 371.182 43 8.632

Total 375.644 44

Age

PALS Total Between Groups 1369.275 4 342.319 1.561 .203

Within Groups 8769.303 40 219.233

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 212.811 4 53.203 2.801 .038

Within Groups 759.633 40 18.991

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 105.659 4 26.415 1.322 .278

Within Groups 799.141 40 19.979

Total 904.800 44

244

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Factor Three Between Groups 39.119 4 9.780 .632 .643

Within Groups 619.326 40 15.483

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 64.653 4 16.163 2.355 .070

Within Groups 274.547 40 6.864

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups 12.808 4 3.202 .588 .673

Within Groups 217.637 40 5.441

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups 13.285 4 3.321 .825 .517

Within Groups 161.026 40 4.026

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 48.319 4 12.080 1.476 .228

Within Groups 327.326 40 8.183

Total 375.644 44

Academic Rank

PALS Total Between Groups 986.663 5 197.333 .841 .529

Within Groups 9151.915 39 234.664

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 27.435 5 5.487 .226 .949

Within Groups 945.009 39 24.231

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 127.414 5 25.483 1.278 .293

Within Groups 777.386 39 19.933

Total 904.800 44

Factor Three Between Groups 48.085 5 9.617 .615 .689

Within Groups 610.359 39 15.650

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 36.046 5 7.209 .927 .474

Within Groups 303.154 39 7.773

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups 26.254 5 5.251 1.003 .429

Within Groups 204.190 39 5.236

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups 28.854 5 5.771 1.547 .198

Within Groups 145.457 39 3.730

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 45.002 5 9.000 1.062 .396

245

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Within Groups 330.642 39 8.478

Total 375.644 44

Years Teaching

PALS Total Between Groups 1468.696 3 489.565 2.315 .090

Within Groups 8669.882 41 211.461

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 91.965 3 30.655 1.427 .249

Within Groups 880.479 41 21.475

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 115.939 3 38.646 2.009 .128

Within Groups 788.861 41 19.241

Total 904.800 44

Factor Three Between Groups 44.153 3 14.718 .982 .411

Within Groups 614.292 41 14.983

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 55.221 3 18.407 2.658 .061

Within Groups 283.979 41 6.926

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups 13.965 3 4.655 .882 .459

Within Groups 216.479 41 5.280

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups 14.575 3 4.858 1.247 .305

Within Groups 159.736 41 3.896

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 40.242 3 13.414 1.640 .195

Within Groups 335.403 41 8.181

Total 375.644 44

Degree

PALS Total Between Groups 605.215 2 302.607 1.333 .275

Within Groups 9533.363 42 226.985

Total 10138.578 44

Factor One Between Groups 18.711 2 9.356 .412 .665

Within Groups 953.733 42 22.708

Total 972.444 44

Factor Two Between Groups 9.348 2 4.674 .219 .804

Within Groups 895.452 42 21.320

Total 904.800 44

Factor Three Between Groups 38.104 2 19.052 1.290 .286

246

Variables SS df MS F Sig.

Within Groups 620.341 42 14.770

Total 658.444 44

Factor Four Between Groups 1.126 2 .563 .070 .933

Within Groups 338.074 42 8.049

Total 339.200 44

Factor Five Between Groups 8.844 2 4.422 .838 .440

Within Groups 221.600 42 5.276

Total 230.444 44

Factor Six Between Groups 9.378 2 4.689 1.194 .313

Within Groups 164.933 42 3.927

Total 174.311 44

Factor Seven Between Groups 21.378 2 10.689 1.267 .292

Within Groups 354.267 42 8.435

Total 375.644 44

Note: SS=Sum of squares; df=degrees of freedom; MS= Mean square; F= F ratio;

Sig.=Statistical Significance

247

APPENDIX E. DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS: DEMOGRAPHICS AND

TEACHING STYLE

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Gender

Total Female 44 149.59 15.287 2.305 144.94 154.24 113 189

Male 1 140.00 . . . . 140 140

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

F. 1. Female 44 40.14 4.752 .716 38.69 41.58 27 49

Male 1 39.00 . . . . 39 39

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

F. 2. Female 44 28.55 4.480 .675 27.18 29.91 19 39

Male 1 22.00 . . . . 22 22

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

F. 3. Female 44 23.02 3.867 .583 21.85 24.20 15 30

Male 1 27.00 . . . . 27 27

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

F. 4. Female 44 14.20 2.767 .417 13.36 15.05 10 20

Male 1 11.00 . . . . 11 11

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

F. 5. Female 44 16.91 2.311 .348 16.21 17.61 12 20

Male 1 16.00 . . . . 16 16

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

F. 6. Female 44 13.64 2.013 .303 13.02 14.25 10 19

Male 1 14.00 . . . . 14 14

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

F. 7. Female 44 13.14 2.938 .443 12.24 14.03 7 19

Male 1 11.00 . . . . 11 11

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Age

Total 31-40 8 140.00 9.885 3.495 131.74 148.26 129 159

41-50 13 147.62 17.562 4.871 137.00 158.23 113 171

51-60 13 152.15 15.044 4.172 143.06 161.24 129 188

61-64 5 150.60 9.864 4.411 138.35 162.85 141 166

65+ 6 158.67 15.996 6.530 141.88 175.45 142 189

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

248

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

F. 1. 31-40 8 37.00 4.106 1.452 33.57 40.43 30 41

41-50 13 39.38 5.124 1.421 36.29 42.48 27 47

51-60 13 39.92 3.947 1.095 37.54 42.31 33 45

61-64 5 44.20 3.564 1.594 39.78 48.62 41 49

65+ 6 42.83 4.215 1.721 38.41 47.26 37 47

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

F. 2. 31-40 8 26.00 3.586 1.268 23.00 29.00 21 31

41-50 13 27.54 4.926 1.366 24.56 30.52 19 36

51-60 13 29.38 4.976 1.380 26.38 32.39 22 39

61-64 5 29.00 3.162 1.414 25.07 32.93 24 32

65+ 6 30.83 4.021 1.641 26.61 35.05 26 38

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

F. 3. 31-40 8 23.75 3.882 1.373 20.50 27.00 17 27

41-50 13 21.92 4.132 1.146 19.43 24.42 15 30

51-60 13 23.69 3.706 1.028 21.45 25.93 17 29

61-64 5 22.20 3.271 1.463 18.14 26.26 17 26

65+ 6 24.33 4.502 1.838 19.61 29.06 18 29

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

F. 4. 31-40 8 12.88 2.031 .718 11.18 14.57 10 16

41-50 13 15.46 2.933 .813 13.69 17.23 11 20

51-60 13 13.77 2.743 .761 12.11 15.43 10 19

61-64 5 12.20 1.095 .490 10.84 13.56 11 14

65+ 6 15.33 3.077 1.256 12.10 18.56 12 20

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

F. 5. 31-40 8 15.88 2.475 .875 13.81 17.94 12 20

41-50 13 16.85 2.478 .687 15.35 18.34 12 19

51-60 13 17.31 1.843 .511 16.19 18.42 14 20

61-64 5 16.80 2.168 .970 14.11 19.49 14 20

65+ 6 17.50 2.881 1.176 14.48 20.52 13 20

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

F. 6. 31-40 8 13.50 1.195 .423 12.50 14.50 11 15

41-50 13 13.15 1.676 .465 12.14 14.17 10 16

51-60 13 14.00 2.273 .630 12.63 15.37 10 18

61-64 5 13.00 1.581 .707 11.04 14.96 11 15

65+ 6 14.67 3.011 1.229 11.51 17.83 11 19

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

249

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

F. 7. 31-40 8 11.00 2.619 .926 8.81 13.19 8 15

41-50 13 13.31 3.119 .865 11.42 15.19 7 17

51-60 13 14.08 2.813 .780 12.38 15.78 10 19

61-64 5 13.20 1.643 .735 11.16 15.24 11 15

65+ 6 13.17 3.371 1.376 9.63 16.70 8 18

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Academic Rank

Total Adjunct 15 147.73 18.645 4.814 137.41 158.06 113 189

Part-time Instr. 5 142.20 12.716 5.687 126.41 157.99 129 161

Full-time Instr. 4 162.00 8.869 4.435 147.89 176.11 151 171

Asst. Prof. 2 148.50 6.364 4.500 91.32 205.68 144 153

Assoc. Prof. 8 151.75 16.568 5.858 137.90 165.60 133 188

Professor 11 148.73 12.001 3.618 140.67 156.79 129 166

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

F. 1. Adjunct 15 40.60 5.792 1.495 37.39 43.81 27 47

Part-time Instr. 5 39.00 3.742 1.673 34.35 43.65 35 43

Full-time Instr. 4 40.00 4.830 2.415 32.31 47.69 33 44

Asst. Prof. 2 39.50 .707 .500 33.15 45.85 39 40

Assoc. Prof. 8 39.00 5.071 1.793 34.76 43.24 30 45

Professor 11 40.91 4.110 1.239 38.15 43.67 35 49

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

F. 2. Adjunct 15 28.47 4.749 1.226 25.84 31.10 22 38

Part-time Instr. 5 27.20 5.586 2.498 20.26 34.14 21 35

Full-time Instr. 4 32.75 1.258 .629 30.75 34.75 31 34

Asst. Prof. 2 24.50 3.536 2.500 -7.27 56.27 22 27

Assoc. Prof. 8 29.13 4.518 1.597 25.35 32.90 24 39

Professor 11 27.45 4.204 1.268 24.63 30.28 19 32

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

F. 3. Adjunct 15 22.20 5.185 1.339 19.33 25.07 15 30

Part-time Instr. 5 22.80 2.864 1.281 19.24 26.36 19 26

Full-time Instr. 4 25.25 2.062 1.031 21.97 28.53 23 27

Asst. Prof. 2 26.00 1.414 1.000 13.29 38.71 25 27

Assoc. Prof. 8 23.25 3.284 1.161 20.50 26.00 19 29

Professor 11 23.09 3.330 1.004 20.85 25.33 18 28

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

F. 4. Adjunct 15 14.13 3.044 .786 12.45 15.82 11 20

250

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Part-time Instr. 5 13.00 1.732 .775 10.85 15.15 10 14

Full-time Instr. 4 16.50 .577 .289 15.58 17.42 16 17

Asst. Prof. 2 13.00 4.243 3.000 -25.12 51.12 10 16

Assoc. Prof. 8 14.63 3.292 1.164 11.87 17.38 12 20

Professor 11 13.64 2.580 .778 11.90 15.37 11 18

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

F. 5. Adjunct 15 16.07 2.374 .613 14.75 17.38 13 20

Part-time Instr. 5 16.40 2.702 1.208 13.05 19.75 12 19

Full-time Instr. 4 18.50 1.291 .645 16.45 20.55 17 20

Asst. Prof. 2 18.00 1.414 1.000 5.29 30.71 17 19

Assoc. Prof. 8 17.13 1.642 .581 15.75 18.50 15 20

Professor 11 17.27 2.649 .799 15.49 19.05 12 20

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

F. 6. Adjunct 15 13.40 2.165 .559 12.20 14.60 10 19

Part-time Instr. 5 12.80 1.095 .490 11.44 14.16 11 14

Full-time Instr. 4 16.00 1.414 .707 13.75 18.25 15 18

Asst. Prof. 2 14.00 .000 .000 14.00 14.00 14 14

Assoc. Prof. 8 13.88 1.642 .581 12.50 15.25 12 17

Professor 11 13.27 2.240 .675 11.77 14.78 10 17

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

F. 7. Adjunct 15 12.87 3.482 .899 10.94 14.79 7 18

Part-time Instr. 5 11.00 2.828 1.265 7.49 14.51 8 14

Full-time Instr. 4 13.00 3.559 1.780 7.34 18.66 9 16

Asst. Prof. 2 13.50 .707 .500 7.15 19.85 13 14

Assoc. Prof. 8 14.75 2.712 .959 12.48 17.02 11 19

Professor 11 13.09 1.973 .595 11.77 14.42 10 16

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Years Teaching

Total 0-10 16 143.69 13.763 3.441 136.35 151.02 113 163

11-20 18 151.94 15.821 3.729 144.08 159.81 128 188

21-30 8 148.75 10.389 3.673 140.06 157.44 129 166

31-40 3 166.00 20.224 11.676 115.76 216.24 151 189

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

F. 1. 0-10 16 38.19 5.036 1.259 35.50 40.87 27 47

11-20 18 41.17 4.541 1.070 38.91 43.42 30 47

21-30 8 41.13 4.086 1.445 37.71 44.54 36 49

251

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

31-40 3 41.33 4.041 2.333 31.29 51.37 37 45

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

F. 2. 0-10 16 27.13 4.440 1.110 24.76 29.49 21 35

11-20 18 29.44 4.731 1.115 27.09 31.80 19 39

21-30 8 27.00 3.162 1.118 24.36 29.64 22 32

31-40 3 32.67 4.619 2.667 21.19 44.14 30 38

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

F. 3. 0-10 16 23.13 3.344 .836 21.34 24.91 17 27

11-20 18 22.33 4.715 1.111 19.99 24.68 15 30

21-30 8 23.63 2.669 .944 21.39 25.86 19 28

31-40 3 26.33 3.055 1.764 18.74 33.92 23 29

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

F. 4. 0-10 16 13.19 2.007 .502 12.12 14.26 10 16

11-20 18 15.00 3.106 .732 13.46 16.54 11 20

21-30 8 13.13 1.885 .666 11.55 14.70 11 16

31-40 3 16.67 4.163 2.404 6.32 27.01 12 20

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

F. 5. 0-10 16 16.56 2.220 .555 15.38 17.75 12 20

11-20 18 16.67 2.473 .583 15.44 17.90 12 20

21-30 8 17.38 2.200 .778 15.54 19.21 14 20

31-40 3 18.67 1.528 .882 14.87 22.46 17 20

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

F. 6. 0-10 16 13.63 1.746 .437 12.69 14.56 10 18

11-20 18 13.56 1.854 .437 12.63 14.48 11 17

21-30 8 13.13 2.295 .811 11.21 15.04 10 17

31-40 3 15.67 3.055 1.764 8.08 23.26 13 19

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

F. 7. 0-10 16 11.88 2.729 .682 10.42 13.33 7 16

11-20 18 13.78 3.335 .786 12.12 15.44 8 19

21-30 8 13.38 1.506 .532 12.12 14.63 11 15

31-40 3 14.67 3.055 1.764 7.08 22.26 12 18

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Degree

Total Master’s 27 146.96 14.988 2.885 141.03 152.89 113 188

C.A.G.S. 3 160.67 14.572 8.413 124.47 196.86 144 171

PhD/ EdD 15 151.47 15.278 3.945 143.01 159.93 129 189

252

PALS N Mean SD SE 95% CI for Mean Min Max

Lower

Bound

Upper

Bound

Total 45 149.38 15.180 2.263 144.82 153.94 113 189

F. 1. Master’s 27 39.67 5.519 1.062 37.48 41.85 27 49

C.A.G.S. 3 42.00 2.000 1.155 37.03 46.97 40 44

PhD/ EdD 15 40.53 3.314 .856 38.70 42.37 35 47

Total 45 40.11 4.701 .701 38.70 41.52 27 49

F. 2. Master’s 27 28.07 4.548 .875 26.27 29.87 19 39

C.A.G.S. 3 29.67 6.658 3.844 13.13 46.21 22 34

PhD/ EdD 15 28.73 4.383 1.132 26.31 31.16 22 38

Total 45 28.40 4.535 .676 27.04 29.76 19 39

F. 3. Master’s 27 22.52 3.936 .757 20.96 24.08 15 29

C.A.G.S. 3 26.00 1.732 1.000 21.70 30.30 24 27

PhD/ EdD 15 23.60 3.888 1.004 21.45 25.75 18 30

Total 45 23.11 3.868 .577 21.95 24.27 15 30

F. 4. Master’s 27 14.15 2.522 .485 13.15 15.15 10 20

C.A.G.S. 3 14.67 4.041 2.333 4.63 24.71 10 17

PhD/ EdD 15 14.00 3.162 .816 12.25 15.75 11 20

Total 45 14.13 2.777 .414 13.30 14.97 10 20

F. 5. Master’s 27 16.56 2.359 .454 15.62 17.49 12 20

C.A.G.S. 3 18.00 1.000 .577 15.52 20.48 17 19

PhD/ EdD 15 17.27 2.314 .597 15.99 18.55 12 20

Total 45 16.89 2.289 .341 16.20 17.58 12 20

F. 6. Master’s 27 13.33 1.797 .346 12.62 14.04 10 18

C.A.G.S. 3 15.00 1.000 .577 12.52 17.48 14 16

PhD/ EdD 15 13.93 2.374 .613 12.62 15.25 10 19

Total 45 13.64 1.990 .297 13.05 14.24 10 19

F. 7. Master’s 27 12.67 3.187 .613 11.41 13.93 7 19

C.A.G.S. 3 15.33 1.155 .667 12.46 18.20 14 16

PhD/ EdD 15 13.40 2.501 .646 12.01 14.79 9 18

Total 45 13.09 2.922 .436 12.21 13.97 7 19

Note: SD=Standard Deviation; SE= Standard error; CI= Confidence interval;

Min=Minimum; Max=Maximum; C.A.G.S.=Certificate of Advanced Graduate Studies;

PhD= Doctor of Philosophy; EdD=Doctor of Education