- Email: [email protected]
Measurement of group self-concept of intermediate students through systematic observation and parallel self-reports
Journal of School Psychology 1979 * Vol. 17, No. 2
0022--4405/79/1400---4)181500.95 (~) 1979 The Journal of School Psychology, Inc.
MEASUREMENT OF GROUP SELF-CONCEPT OF INTERMEDIATE STUDENTS THROUGH SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION AND PARALLEL SELF-REPORTS PAMELA J. ECKARD The University of Texas at San Antonio
Summary: The assumption that persistent and stable behaviors of intermediate groups of students indicated a collective and dominant self-concept was investigated. Descriptive indicators of overt behaviors were organized to form a systematic observation schedule and a parallel self-report instrument. Pairs of trained observers independently and simultaneously rated groups of students in grades four, five, and six for a period of 20 minutes. All of the students within the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades responded to the self-report instrument, lnterrater agreement was established on the observation schedule. A reliability coefficient of .84, p < .05 on the self-report was gained through test-retest procedures. Factor analysis of self-report data revealed interpretable underlying factors. Content validity was established on both instruments. A Theoretical emphasis in education is toward personalization and individualization, but learning continues to be a social process which emphasizes interaction within groups of students; education remains group-oriented in relation to administrative, organizational, evaluative and some instructional practices. Further, in public education, teachers are responsible for students assigned in groups. Consequently, the individual student, in spite of criterion-referencing, is normed and standardized, both cognitively and affectively, against peers. Descriptors assigned to individual learners, by significant adults and peers--successful or failure, winner or loser, achiever or nonachiever--are determined through observing the individual in reference to the group as a whole. The literature of the past 40 years reveals abundant evidence that self-concept strongly influences the behaviors in learning environments as well as delimits or promotes academic success (Wylie, 1974). in an academic environment a positive self-concept is often the determining factor in obtaining successfully potential achievement (Purkey, 1970), social effectiveness (Mussen & Porter, 1959), reduced anxiety (Coopersmith, 1959), and acceptance of others (Berger, 1952). Individual students exhibit behaviors that reflect attitudes, values, and beliefs that contribute to the characteristics of the group (Kinch, 1963); conversely, the selfconcept and self-evaluation of individual students depend on the reinforcement of overt behaviors that are prescribed by the group (Gegas, 1974). Social researchers investigating the stability of the group, in comparison to the stability of the individual, report that groups maintain an equilibrium that has a continuous, strong influence over the individual exposed to it (Lindskold, 1974). Further, it apears that dominance or relative power of group members is a significant variable in determining whether the concept a group has of itself is positive or negative (Archer, 1974). The self.., is essentially a social structure and it arises in social experience . . . . It is
impossible to conceive of a self arising outside of social experience (Mead, 1934, p. 140). 181
182
Journal of School Psychology
The self-concept of a learner has been defined as "an abstraction that an individual develops about the attributes, capacities, objects, and activities which he possesses and pursues" (Coopersmith, 1967, p. 87); "a basic frame of reference" (Combs, 1962, p. 53); and "a composite of thoughts and feelings which constitute a person's awareness of his individual existence, his conception of who and what he is" (Jersild, 1952, p. 9). As individual self-concepts are developed from interactions between and among group members, it is important to make an accurate observation of the group's concept of itself and to gain information about individuals within the group. The concept a group has of itself can be determined through collecting data on the central tendency and variance of dominant behaviors occurring within the group. For the purpose of this study, group self-concept is defined as: Gestalted perceptions of a group's attitudes, beliefs, and values expressed about its collective characteristics, attributes, and potential; the interaction and direction of the composite group's standards reflected behavioraily by individuals. Research on self-concept has revealed that there exist both public and private components within the individual self-concept (Raimy, Note 1); the former are those which can be inferred through the observation of exhibited behaviors, and the latter consist of aspects which can be reported only by the individual. When used together, the parallel observation schedule and self-report on self-concept instrument can more adequately collect data on the complex organization of the self. In examining the concept a group has of itself, emphasis is on the observation of overt behaviors in concurrence with the evaluation of a composite report on the self-concept of individuals as they perceive their membership within the defined parameters. A systematic observation instrument for measuring self-concept of learners in an academic environment was judged as a need by George Mead (1934). However, Wylie (1974) reported the lack of systematic observations and stated that published instruments purporting to describe self-concept of learners through observation required contrived situations and collected data on individual children. The purpose of this study was to develop (1) an instrument on which systematic observations of the concept a group had of itself could be recorded, and (2) a selfreport instrument containing parallel items which would collect data on members as each would report his or her behavior within the group. The research design emphasized assessment of interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, content validity, and construct validity. METHOD Instrument Development I
Several criteria were used to construct the group observation schedule and the
self-report: 1. Items on the observation schedule were to contain descriptive behavioral rather than judgmental adjectives as much as possible. 2. The reading comprehension and conceptual levels of the students were considered when constructing the self-report items. 3. The ability of the students to distinguish among response terms. ~Sample copies of the instruments will be made available upon request by the author. The Observation Schedule of Group Self-Concept and the Self-Report on Self-Concept are available in Spanish and English.
Eckard
183
Table 1 Examples of Items in the Observation Schedule of Group Self-Concept and Parallel Self-Report on Self-Concept
Items
Observation Schedule Humor
!.8
responds to by smiling or laughing
() () () () () does not
2.5 touches or handles objects, materials
Tactility () () () () () does not touch things
3.3 resourceful,
Individual Work () () () () () repetitive, imitative
creative
Self-Report
respond
I laugh or smile when funny things happen at school. Always Sometimes Never I pick up or touch things when I am at school. Always Sometimes Never 1 make things that are different from things other students make. Always Sometimes Never
4. The competence of students to accurately report experiences and to make judgments was considered. The construction of an observation schedule initially involved identifying behaviors exhibited by students in an open-spaced learning environment. Extensive systematic observation of students as they were involved in daily learning activities suggested that learner behaviors centered around: peer interactions, teacher-learner interactions, learner-environment interactions, and characteristics of learner self-presentation. Consequently, for purposes of organized observation, indicators consisting of behaviors were grouped within the aforementioned categories creating content factors. Each item was developed by placing an indicator of self-concept on a five-point continuum with a positive description at one end and a negative description at the other end. The self-report was constructed through developing first person statements, each of which incorporated a concept in a parallel item on the observation schedule. A 5-point continuum of always, sometimes, and never was used for the response format. Training of Observers Observers received in-field training using the observation schedule on several groups of students. Pairs of observers were asked to work individually but concurrently for 20 minutes to systematically record behaviors exhibited in a group of students. At the end of each training session, pairs of observers compared and discussed their recorded observations. A training session followed each observational period to further insure that identical behaviors were given the same marking. Sample A sample of 225 intermediate elementary students was included in this study. The students were in grades four, five, and six. Each of the three groups of students in each of the fourth and fifth grades worked in a defined area the majority of the school day. Some interaction within the grade level took place. All sixth-grade students occupied one learning area approximately 75% of the school day, although organizationally each of the three groups was assigned to a teacher. The school experiences for the learners were influenced by Westinghouse PLAN*, a program which emphasized personaliza-
Journal of School Psychology
184
tion as well as individualization of instruction. The school facility was open spaced and located in the Midwest. Eighty-five percent of the students were white, with a predominant Appalachian heritage; the majority were the first generation of children born outside of Appalachia. Fifteen percent of the students were black and came from families who had resided in the Midwest for several decades. RESULTS
Reliability
Estimates
Observations. Five pairs of observers rated each of three learner groups in grade four, each of the three learner groups in grade five, and one group of learners consisting o f the sixth-grade population. Thirty-five observations were made. Total sums and standard deviations o f projected face factors and maximum and minimum scores are reported for each factor as indicated in Table 1. Interrater reliability was ascertained by determining absolute agreement which occurred within pairs or raters. The raw scores for each of the observers in each observational circumstance were correlated, using the Pearson product-moment formula. Table 2 presents the coefficient of correlation determined for each pair of observers. Self-Report. The mean, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean were computed on the self-report on self-concept for each group of learners within each grade level. Table 3 presents a summary of the mean score and standard deviation, as well as the related standard error of the mean on the self-reports. Table 2 Total Sums and Standard Deviations of Projected Face Factors and Maximum and Minimum Scores Reported for Each Factor on the Observation Schedule Physical Self-Preservation (9-45)
Environmental Interaction (7-35)
Group
Sum
M
SD
Sum
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6
335 297 358 275 308 324 304
33.50 29.70 35.80 27.50 30.80 32.40 30.40
34.89 30.98 37.29 28.74 32.13 33.73 31.80
272 274 277 202 265 272 273
27.20 27.40 27.70 20.20 26.50 27.20 27.30
28.29 28.61 28.71 21.39 27.64 28.37 28.58
Peer Interaction (8-40)
Pupil-Teacher-Interaction (7-35)
Group
Sum
M
SD
Sum
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5- I 5- 2 5-3 6
310 239 308 230 297 321 290
31.00 23.90 30.80 23.00 29.70 32.10 29.00
32.19 24.73 32.04 24.11 30.84 33.39 30.44
256 234 254 230 283 260 268
25.60 23.40 25.40 23.00 28.30 26.00 26.80
26.68 24.66 26.39 24.09 29.37 26.93 28.24
Eckard
185
Table 3 Correlation Coefficients for Pairs of Raters Gathering Data on Individual Study Groups Through Systematic Observation 4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1/3
.62 .89 .58 .90 .53 .88 .19
.46 .51 .75 .10 .80 .37 .62
.58 .66 .50 .88 .29 .78 .54
.26 .53 .53 .89 .58 .32 .71
.81 .48 .59 .83 .30 .85 .19
An analysis of factors within the self-report on self-concept took place through determining the mean score and standard deviation for projected factors and their related standard error of the mean. These are reported in Table 4. A test-retest reliability coefficient was calculated for a fifth-grade subset selected at random from the original fifth-grade population. Using a 3-week interim, the reliability coefficient obtained was .84, p < .05. Eighty percent of the students maintained the same core of teachers and area of the building over a 10-month period. An attempt to measure stability in the student self-report was carried out through an analysis of variance technique. Considering the influencing variable of a 20% difference in makeup of the environmental group, the researcher judged that a one-way analysis of variance for noncorrelated groups would be used. Table 5 reports the obtained F.
Estimates of Validity Content Validity. Content validation was carried out according to Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests (APA, 1974). It was agreed that both instruments contained a pool of items which related to individual indicators of public self-concept. Construct Validity. The analysis of the data attempting to establish construct validity was a theoretical process, as well as an analytical one. A sufficient amount of data was collected on the self-report instrument in order to carry out a meaningful
Table 4 Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Self-Reports Administered to All Groups of Pupils and the Related Standard Error of the Mean Group
N
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
27 23 22 21 29 24 24 23 22
108.63 110.20 120.36 109.67 115.62 117.47 120.00 112.82 114.91
12.63 9.26 16.79 11.43 13.24 10.78 11.41 10.32 12.05
Total
215
114.10
SEm=4.14
186
Journal o f School Psychology
Table 5 Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Face Factors and Related Standard Error of the Mean with the Maximum and Minimum Scores Reported for Each Factor on the Self-Report Physical Self-Presentation (9-45) Group
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
32.19 33.24 34.27 32.34 33.07 34.12 34.17 32.13 34.22
3.85 2.76 3.41 3.38 3.53 3.24 3.68 3.18 4.54
Environmental Interaction (7-35) SE,~=2.78
Peer Interaction (8-40) 4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
27.41 27.60 3 I. 18 25.18 27.86 29.82 30.42 28.87 28.61
M
SD
25.67 25,16 27.73 26.71 27.97 28.82 28.75 26.22 28.57
3.84 3. l 1 5.54 3.86 3.0 l 3.28 2.72 3.50 3.57
SEs=2.60
Student-Teacher Interaction (7-35)
3.99 2.45 5.40 3.40 4.66 4.19 3.88 2.61 3.69
23.37 24.20 27.18 24.91 26.72 24.71 26.67 25.61 23.52
4.57 3.87 6.52 4.88 5.20 5.17 4.71 3.84 4.83
factor analysis using both simple oblique and orthogonal rotations. Table 6 presents the factor matrix for the simple oblique rotation, which produced five underlying structure factors on the self-report of self-concept. Five factors were identified from the oblique rotation, a noticeable decrease between the eigenvalue o f . 7 2 for factor V and the eigenvalue o f . 5 8 for factor VI. The cumulative proportion of the total variance for all five factors was considered to be small. However, the upper limit on the correlation coefficient was established at .95, with the constant held to 1.00. The stringent parameters of the computer program
Table 6 Summary of Analysis of Variance Related to Measuring Change in Student Self-Reports over a Ten-Month Period Source
SS
DF
MS
F
bg wg
310.7 39,938.3
I 92
310.7 434. I
.72 p .05
Total
40,249.0
93
Eckard
187
Table 7 Factor Matrix for Simple Oblique Rotation on Five Underlying Structure Factors of the Self-Report Item
I
I1
111
1V
.29
1
.53
2 3
.42 .31
4
5 6 7
.12 .34 .27 .30
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Eigenvalues: Cumulative Proportion of Total Variance:
V
.36 .22 .41 .44 .43 .36 .40 .40 .37 .51 .41
.30 .32 .39 .14
.30 .52 .35 .56 .54
.32 .26 .33 .52 .45
1 3.89
II 1.14
III .88
IV .75
V .73
.13
.16
.19
.21
.24
(Factor Analysis-3/27/73-Health Sciences Computing Facility-UCLA) held the variables at a minimum performance. The data were further subjected to orthogonal rotation in order to establish factors which were statistically independent. The upper limit on the correlation coefficient was established at .95, and the constant was held at 0.0. Table 8 presents the factor Ioadings for simple orthogonal rotation with item deletions. I n s t r u m e n t Correlation As a final analysis, the relationship between the total observation schedule data and the total self-report data was determined by obtaining the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation.
Journal of School Psychology
188
Table 8 Factor Matrix for Simple Orthogonal Rotation on Two Underlying Factors of the Self-Report with Item Deletions Item
1
I1 .28
2 3
.53 .29
4
.38 .30 .32 .26 .52
6 8
9 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 29 30 31
.43 .25 .47 .27 .48 .38 .41 .27 .31 .44 .17 .48 .28 .47 .49 .53 .48
Eigenvalues:
I 3.74
I1 1.04
.15
.19
Cumulative Proportion of Total Variance:
DISCUSSION The reliability measures involved interrater reliability, wherein raters were in agreement at the 50% or higher level three-fourths of the time. They further included a test-retest procedure with an interim of 3 weeks and an analysis of variance technique with an interim of 10 months. The reliability coefficient of the test-retest was .84, p < .05, and the stability coefficient was .72, p < .05. Validity measures which were pertinent to the construction of the observation schedule and the self-report included content validity, which a panel of judges coneluded items maintained were representative of the indicators of public self-concept. Construct validity on the observation schedule could not be determined statistically, due to a need for 29% more individual rater observation scores. The factor analysis technique was possible for the self-reports, whereinAhe analysis of the oblique simple rotation revealed five underlying factors which were interpretable for purposes of instrument reorganization and future heuristic endeavors. The factors include:
Eckard
189
1. Communication II. Feelings toward the operational environment III. Energy level IV. Task orientation V. Evaluation of self as seen by others The analysis of the orthogonal simple rotation indicated two underlying factors which were interpretable as variables in a future multiple regression analysis. These were: 1. Teacher expectation II. Relaxation within the learning environment The correlation coefficient of + .55 between the self-report on self-concept and the observation schedule supported the assumptions of the need for parallel instruments to gather data on the complex structure. The value of the r expressed the strength of the relationships between the two instruments; consequently, there would be approximately 30% variance in common between the instruments. For the purpose of this study it was assumed that inference was a valuable research tool and that an observation schedule, as well as a self-report, could be constructed in such a way that reliability and validity could be established. The results of the statistical analyses demonstrated a satisfactory degree of success. The comparison of self-report data with observer data revealed directional agreement, as well as 30% of the total variance of both instruments held in common. At no point did observer and self-report data conflict. The analyses provided the opportunity to study the relationship between the observer data and the self-report data. The dispersion of scores obtained on the self-report data appeared to maintain a broader range within all factors. The construct of group self-concept was supported by the data gathered through the parallel use of the self-report and observation instruments. The initial success in obtaining satisfactory coefficients of reliability and validity, as well as the determination of interpretable factors within the construct of group self-concept, will serve as a basis for more in-depth research. REFERENCE NOTE 1. Raimy, F. The self-concept as a factor in counseling and personality organization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Office of Educational Services, 1971.
REFERENCES Archer, D. Power in groups: Self-concept changes of powerful and powerless group members. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1974, 2, 208-220. Berger, E. M. The relation between expressed acceptance of self and expressed acceptance of others. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1952, 47, 778-782. Combs, A. W. The self in chaos: A reivew of Wylie, R. C. The self-concept. Contemporary Psychology, 1962, 7, 53-54. Coopersmith, S. A. A method for determining types of self-esteem. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 87-94. Coopersmith, S. A. The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman and Co., 1967. Jersild, A. T. In search of self. New York: Bureau of Publication, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1952. Kinch, J. A formalized theory of self-concepL American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 68, 481486. Lindskol, S. The perception of individual and group stability. Journal of Social Psychology, 1974, 93 (2), 211-218.
190
Journal of School Psychology
Mead, G. M. Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Musser, P. H., & Porter, L. W. Personal motivations and self-conceptions associated with effectiveness and ineffectiveness in emergent groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 23-27. Purkey, W. Self-concept and school achievement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Wylie, R. C. The self-concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1974. Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1974. Pamela J. Eckard Assistant Professor of Education Division of Education College of Multidisciplinary Studies University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio, Texas 78285 Received: April 15, 1977 Revision Received: August 5, 1977
0022--4405/79/1400---4)181500.95 (~) 1979 The Journal of School Psychology, Inc.
MEASUREMENT OF GROUP SELF-CONCEPT OF INTERMEDIATE STUDENTS THROUGH SYSTEMATIC OBSERVATION AND PARALLEL SELF-REPORTS PAMELA J. ECKARD The University of Texas at San Antonio
Summary: The assumption that persistent and stable behaviors of intermediate groups of students indicated a collective and dominant self-concept was investigated. Descriptive indicators of overt behaviors were organized to form a systematic observation schedule and a parallel self-report instrument. Pairs of trained observers independently and simultaneously rated groups of students in grades four, five, and six for a period of 20 minutes. All of the students within the fourth, fifth, and sixth grades responded to the self-report instrument, lnterrater agreement was established on the observation schedule. A reliability coefficient of .84, p < .05 on the self-report was gained through test-retest procedures. Factor analysis of self-report data revealed interpretable underlying factors. Content validity was established on both instruments. A Theoretical emphasis in education is toward personalization and individualization, but learning continues to be a social process which emphasizes interaction within groups of students; education remains group-oriented in relation to administrative, organizational, evaluative and some instructional practices. Further, in public education, teachers are responsible for students assigned in groups. Consequently, the individual student, in spite of criterion-referencing, is normed and standardized, both cognitively and affectively, against peers. Descriptors assigned to individual learners, by significant adults and peers--successful or failure, winner or loser, achiever or nonachiever--are determined through observing the individual in reference to the group as a whole. The literature of the past 40 years reveals abundant evidence that self-concept strongly influences the behaviors in learning environments as well as delimits or promotes academic success (Wylie, 1974). in an academic environment a positive self-concept is often the determining factor in obtaining successfully potential achievement (Purkey, 1970), social effectiveness (Mussen & Porter, 1959), reduced anxiety (Coopersmith, 1959), and acceptance of others (Berger, 1952). Individual students exhibit behaviors that reflect attitudes, values, and beliefs that contribute to the characteristics of the group (Kinch, 1963); conversely, the selfconcept and self-evaluation of individual students depend on the reinforcement of overt behaviors that are prescribed by the group (Gegas, 1974). Social researchers investigating the stability of the group, in comparison to the stability of the individual, report that groups maintain an equilibrium that has a continuous, strong influence over the individual exposed to it (Lindskold, 1974). Further, it apears that dominance or relative power of group members is a significant variable in determining whether the concept a group has of itself is positive or negative (Archer, 1974). The self.., is essentially a social structure and it arises in social experience . . . . It is
impossible to conceive of a self arising outside of social experience (Mead, 1934, p. 140). 181
182
Journal of School Psychology
The self-concept of a learner has been defined as "an abstraction that an individual develops about the attributes, capacities, objects, and activities which he possesses and pursues" (Coopersmith, 1967, p. 87); "a basic frame of reference" (Combs, 1962, p. 53); and "a composite of thoughts and feelings which constitute a person's awareness of his individual existence, his conception of who and what he is" (Jersild, 1952, p. 9). As individual self-concepts are developed from interactions between and among group members, it is important to make an accurate observation of the group's concept of itself and to gain information about individuals within the group. The concept a group has of itself can be determined through collecting data on the central tendency and variance of dominant behaviors occurring within the group. For the purpose of this study, group self-concept is defined as: Gestalted perceptions of a group's attitudes, beliefs, and values expressed about its collective characteristics, attributes, and potential; the interaction and direction of the composite group's standards reflected behavioraily by individuals. Research on self-concept has revealed that there exist both public and private components within the individual self-concept (Raimy, Note 1); the former are those which can be inferred through the observation of exhibited behaviors, and the latter consist of aspects which can be reported only by the individual. When used together, the parallel observation schedule and self-report on self-concept instrument can more adequately collect data on the complex organization of the self. In examining the concept a group has of itself, emphasis is on the observation of overt behaviors in concurrence with the evaluation of a composite report on the self-concept of individuals as they perceive their membership within the defined parameters. A systematic observation instrument for measuring self-concept of learners in an academic environment was judged as a need by George Mead (1934). However, Wylie (1974) reported the lack of systematic observations and stated that published instruments purporting to describe self-concept of learners through observation required contrived situations and collected data on individual children. The purpose of this study was to develop (1) an instrument on which systematic observations of the concept a group had of itself could be recorded, and (2) a selfreport instrument containing parallel items which would collect data on members as each would report his or her behavior within the group. The research design emphasized assessment of interrater reliability, test-retest reliability, content validity, and construct validity. METHOD Instrument Development I
Several criteria were used to construct the group observation schedule and the
self-report: 1. Items on the observation schedule were to contain descriptive behavioral rather than judgmental adjectives as much as possible. 2. The reading comprehension and conceptual levels of the students were considered when constructing the self-report items. 3. The ability of the students to distinguish among response terms. ~Sample copies of the instruments will be made available upon request by the author. The Observation Schedule of Group Self-Concept and the Self-Report on Self-Concept are available in Spanish and English.
Eckard
183
Table 1 Examples of Items in the Observation Schedule of Group Self-Concept and Parallel Self-Report on Self-Concept
Items
Observation Schedule Humor
!.8
responds to by smiling or laughing
() () () () () does not
2.5 touches or handles objects, materials
Tactility () () () () () does not touch things
3.3 resourceful,
Individual Work () () () () () repetitive, imitative
creative
Self-Report
respond
I laugh or smile when funny things happen at school. Always Sometimes Never I pick up or touch things when I am at school. Always Sometimes Never 1 make things that are different from things other students make. Always Sometimes Never
4. The competence of students to accurately report experiences and to make judgments was considered. The construction of an observation schedule initially involved identifying behaviors exhibited by students in an open-spaced learning environment. Extensive systematic observation of students as they were involved in daily learning activities suggested that learner behaviors centered around: peer interactions, teacher-learner interactions, learner-environment interactions, and characteristics of learner self-presentation. Consequently, for purposes of organized observation, indicators consisting of behaviors were grouped within the aforementioned categories creating content factors. Each item was developed by placing an indicator of self-concept on a five-point continuum with a positive description at one end and a negative description at the other end. The self-report was constructed through developing first person statements, each of which incorporated a concept in a parallel item on the observation schedule. A 5-point continuum of always, sometimes, and never was used for the response format. Training of Observers Observers received in-field training using the observation schedule on several groups of students. Pairs of observers were asked to work individually but concurrently for 20 minutes to systematically record behaviors exhibited in a group of students. At the end of each training session, pairs of observers compared and discussed their recorded observations. A training session followed each observational period to further insure that identical behaviors were given the same marking. Sample A sample of 225 intermediate elementary students was included in this study. The students were in grades four, five, and six. Each of the three groups of students in each of the fourth and fifth grades worked in a defined area the majority of the school day. Some interaction within the grade level took place. All sixth-grade students occupied one learning area approximately 75% of the school day, although organizationally each of the three groups was assigned to a teacher. The school experiences for the learners were influenced by Westinghouse PLAN*, a program which emphasized personaliza-
Journal of School Psychology
184
tion as well as individualization of instruction. The school facility was open spaced and located in the Midwest. Eighty-five percent of the students were white, with a predominant Appalachian heritage; the majority were the first generation of children born outside of Appalachia. Fifteen percent of the students were black and came from families who had resided in the Midwest for several decades. RESULTS
Reliability
Estimates
Observations. Five pairs of observers rated each of three learner groups in grade four, each of the three learner groups in grade five, and one group of learners consisting o f the sixth-grade population. Thirty-five observations were made. Total sums and standard deviations o f projected face factors and maximum and minimum scores are reported for each factor as indicated in Table 1. Interrater reliability was ascertained by determining absolute agreement which occurred within pairs or raters. The raw scores for each of the observers in each observational circumstance were correlated, using the Pearson product-moment formula. Table 2 presents the coefficient of correlation determined for each pair of observers. Self-Report. The mean, standard deviation, and standard error of the mean were computed on the self-report on self-concept for each group of learners within each grade level. Table 3 presents a summary of the mean score and standard deviation, as well as the related standard error of the mean on the self-reports. Table 2 Total Sums and Standard Deviations of Projected Face Factors and Maximum and Minimum Scores Reported for Each Factor on the Observation Schedule Physical Self-Preservation (9-45)
Environmental Interaction (7-35)
Group
Sum
M
SD
Sum
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6
335 297 358 275 308 324 304
33.50 29.70 35.80 27.50 30.80 32.40 30.40
34.89 30.98 37.29 28.74 32.13 33.73 31.80
272 274 277 202 265 272 273
27.20 27.40 27.70 20.20 26.50 27.20 27.30
28.29 28.61 28.71 21.39 27.64 28.37 28.58
Peer Interaction (8-40)
Pupil-Teacher-Interaction (7-35)
Group
Sum
M
SD
Sum
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5- I 5- 2 5-3 6
310 239 308 230 297 321 290
31.00 23.90 30.80 23.00 29.70 32.10 29.00
32.19 24.73 32.04 24.11 30.84 33.39 30.44
256 234 254 230 283 260 268
25.60 23.40 25.40 23.00 28.30 26.00 26.80
26.68 24.66 26.39 24.09 29.37 26.93 28.24
Eckard
185
Table 3 Correlation Coefficients for Pairs of Raters Gathering Data on Individual Study Groups Through Systematic Observation 4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1/3
.62 .89 .58 .90 .53 .88 .19
.46 .51 .75 .10 .80 .37 .62
.58 .66 .50 .88 .29 .78 .54
.26 .53 .53 .89 .58 .32 .71
.81 .48 .59 .83 .30 .85 .19
An analysis of factors within the self-report on self-concept took place through determining the mean score and standard deviation for projected factors and their related standard error of the mean. These are reported in Table 4. A test-retest reliability coefficient was calculated for a fifth-grade subset selected at random from the original fifth-grade population. Using a 3-week interim, the reliability coefficient obtained was .84, p < .05. Eighty percent of the students maintained the same core of teachers and area of the building over a 10-month period. An attempt to measure stability in the student self-report was carried out through an analysis of variance technique. Considering the influencing variable of a 20% difference in makeup of the environmental group, the researcher judged that a one-way analysis of variance for noncorrelated groups would be used. Table 5 reports the obtained F.
Estimates of Validity Content Validity. Content validation was carried out according to Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests (APA, 1974). It was agreed that both instruments contained a pool of items which related to individual indicators of public self-concept. Construct Validity. The analysis of the data attempting to establish construct validity was a theoretical process, as well as an analytical one. A sufficient amount of data was collected on the self-report instrument in order to carry out a meaningful
Table 4 Mean Score and Standard Deviation of the Self-Reports Administered to All Groups of Pupils and the Related Standard Error of the Mean Group
N
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
27 23 22 21 29 24 24 23 22
108.63 110.20 120.36 109.67 115.62 117.47 120.00 112.82 114.91
12.63 9.26 16.79 11.43 13.24 10.78 11.41 10.32 12.05
Total
215
114.10
SEm=4.14
186
Journal o f School Psychology
Table 5 Mean Scores and Standard Deviations for Face Factors and Related Standard Error of the Mean with the Maximum and Minimum Scores Reported for Each Factor on the Self-Report Physical Self-Presentation (9-45) Group
M
SD
4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
32.19 33.24 34.27 32.34 33.07 34.12 34.17 32.13 34.22
3.85 2.76 3.41 3.38 3.53 3.24 3.68 3.18 4.54
Environmental Interaction (7-35) SE,~=2.78
Peer Interaction (8-40) 4-1 4-2 4-3 5-1 5-2 5-3 6-1 6-2 6-3
27.41 27.60 3 I. 18 25.18 27.86 29.82 30.42 28.87 28.61
M
SD
25.67 25,16 27.73 26.71 27.97 28.82 28.75 26.22 28.57
3.84 3. l 1 5.54 3.86 3.0 l 3.28 2.72 3.50 3.57
SEs=2.60
Student-Teacher Interaction (7-35)
3.99 2.45 5.40 3.40 4.66 4.19 3.88 2.61 3.69
23.37 24.20 27.18 24.91 26.72 24.71 26.67 25.61 23.52
4.57 3.87 6.52 4.88 5.20 5.17 4.71 3.84 4.83
factor analysis using both simple oblique and orthogonal rotations. Table 6 presents the factor matrix for the simple oblique rotation, which produced five underlying structure factors on the self-report of self-concept. Five factors were identified from the oblique rotation, a noticeable decrease between the eigenvalue o f . 7 2 for factor V and the eigenvalue o f . 5 8 for factor VI. The cumulative proportion of the total variance for all five factors was considered to be small. However, the upper limit on the correlation coefficient was established at .95, with the constant held to 1.00. The stringent parameters of the computer program
Table 6 Summary of Analysis of Variance Related to Measuring Change in Student Self-Reports over a Ten-Month Period Source
SS
DF
MS
F
bg wg
310.7 39,938.3
I 92
310.7 434. I
.72 p .05
Total
40,249.0
93
Eckard
187
Table 7 Factor Matrix for Simple Oblique Rotation on Five Underlying Structure Factors of the Self-Report Item
I
I1
111
1V
.29
1
.53
2 3
.42 .31
4
5 6 7
.12 .34 .27 .30
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Eigenvalues: Cumulative Proportion of Total Variance:
V
.36 .22 .41 .44 .43 .36 .40 .40 .37 .51 .41
.30 .32 .39 .14
.30 .52 .35 .56 .54
.32 .26 .33 .52 .45
1 3.89
II 1.14
III .88
IV .75
V .73
.13
.16
.19
.21
.24
(Factor Analysis-3/27/73-Health Sciences Computing Facility-UCLA) held the variables at a minimum performance. The data were further subjected to orthogonal rotation in order to establish factors which were statistically independent. The upper limit on the correlation coefficient was established at .95, and the constant was held at 0.0. Table 8 presents the factor Ioadings for simple orthogonal rotation with item deletions. I n s t r u m e n t Correlation As a final analysis, the relationship between the total observation schedule data and the total self-report data was determined by obtaining the Pearson product-moment coefficient of correlation.
Journal of School Psychology
188
Table 8 Factor Matrix for Simple Orthogonal Rotation on Two Underlying Factors of the Self-Report with Item Deletions Item
1
I1 .28
2 3
.53 .29
4
.38 .30 .32 .26 .52
6 8
9 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 29 30 31
.43 .25 .47 .27 .48 .38 .41 .27 .31 .44 .17 .48 .28 .47 .49 .53 .48
Eigenvalues:
I 3.74
I1 1.04
.15
.19
Cumulative Proportion of Total Variance:
DISCUSSION The reliability measures involved interrater reliability, wherein raters were in agreement at the 50% or higher level three-fourths of the time. They further included a test-retest procedure with an interim of 3 weeks and an analysis of variance technique with an interim of 10 months. The reliability coefficient of the test-retest was .84, p < .05, and the stability coefficient was .72, p < .05. Validity measures which were pertinent to the construction of the observation schedule and the self-report included content validity, which a panel of judges coneluded items maintained were representative of the indicators of public self-concept. Construct validity on the observation schedule could not be determined statistically, due to a need for 29% more individual rater observation scores. The factor analysis technique was possible for the self-reports, whereinAhe analysis of the oblique simple rotation revealed five underlying factors which were interpretable for purposes of instrument reorganization and future heuristic endeavors. The factors include:
Eckard
189
1. Communication II. Feelings toward the operational environment III. Energy level IV. Task orientation V. Evaluation of self as seen by others The analysis of the orthogonal simple rotation indicated two underlying factors which were interpretable as variables in a future multiple regression analysis. These were: 1. Teacher expectation II. Relaxation within the learning environment The correlation coefficient of + .55 between the self-report on self-concept and the observation schedule supported the assumptions of the need for parallel instruments to gather data on the complex structure. The value of the r expressed the strength of the relationships between the two instruments; consequently, there would be approximately 30% variance in common between the instruments. For the purpose of this study it was assumed that inference was a valuable research tool and that an observation schedule, as well as a self-report, could be constructed in such a way that reliability and validity could be established. The results of the statistical analyses demonstrated a satisfactory degree of success. The comparison of self-report data with observer data revealed directional agreement, as well as 30% of the total variance of both instruments held in common. At no point did observer and self-report data conflict. The analyses provided the opportunity to study the relationship between the observer data and the self-report data. The dispersion of scores obtained on the self-report data appeared to maintain a broader range within all factors. The construct of group self-concept was supported by the data gathered through the parallel use of the self-report and observation instruments. The initial success in obtaining satisfactory coefficients of reliability and validity, as well as the determination of interpretable factors within the construct of group self-concept, will serve as a basis for more in-depth research. REFERENCE NOTE 1. Raimy, F. The self-concept as a factor in counseling and personality organization. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, Office of Educational Services, 1971.
REFERENCES Archer, D. Power in groups: Self-concept changes of powerful and powerless group members. Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 1974, 2, 208-220. Berger, E. M. The relation between expressed acceptance of self and expressed acceptance of others. Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1952, 47, 778-782. Combs, A. W. The self in chaos: A reivew of Wylie, R. C. The self-concept. Contemporary Psychology, 1962, 7, 53-54. Coopersmith, S. A. A method for determining types of self-esteem. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 87-94. Coopersmith, S. A. The antecedents of self-esteem. San Francisco: Freeman and Co., 1967. Jersild, A. T. In search of self. New York: Bureau of Publication, Teachers College, Columbia University, 1952. Kinch, J. A formalized theory of self-concepL American Journal of Sociology, 1963, 68, 481486. Lindskol, S. The perception of individual and group stability. Journal of Social Psychology, 1974, 93 (2), 211-218.
190
Journal of School Psychology
Mead, G. M. Mind, self, and society. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Musser, P. H., & Porter, L. W. Personal motivations and self-conceptions associated with effectiveness and ineffectiveness in emergent groups. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1959, 59, 23-27. Purkey, W. Self-concept and school achievement. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Wylie, R. C. The self-concept. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1974. Standards for Educational and Psychological Tests. Washington, D.C.: American Psychological Association, 1974. Pamela J. Eckard Assistant Professor of Education Division of Education College of Multidisciplinary Studies University of Texas at San Antonio San Antonio, Texas 78285 Received: April 15, 1977 Revision Received: August 5, 1977