close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

?

THE RELATION BETWEEN THE SUCCESS IN TEACHING AND THE SPEECH COMPETENCY OF THE SECONDARY-SCHOOL TEACHER

код для вставкиСкачать
INFORMATION TO USERS
This dissertation was produced from a microfilm copy o f the original docum ent.
While th e m o st advanced technological means to photograph and reproduce this
d o c u m e n t have been used, t h e quality is heavily dependent upon the quality of
th e original subm itted.
T h e fo llo w in g explanation o f techniques is provided to help you
markings or patterns which m ay appear on this reproduction.
1.
understand
The sign or "target" for pages apparently lacking from the do cu m en t
photographed is "Missing Page(s)". If it was possible to obtain the
missing page(s) or section, they are spliced into the film along with
adjacent pages. This may have necessitated cutting thru an image and
duplicating adjacent pages to insure you c o m p le te continuity.
2.
When an image o n the film is obliterated with a large round black
mark, it is an indication that the photographer suspected that the
copy
may have moved during exposure and thus cause a blurred
image. Y ou will find a g o o d image o f the page in the adjacent frame.
3.
When a map, drawing or chart, etc., was part o f the material being
photographed
th e
photographer
fo llow e d
a
definite
m ethod
in
"sectioning" th e material. It is customary to begin photoing at the
upper left hand corner o f a large sheet and t o c on tin u e photoing from
left t o right in equal sections with a small overlap. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again — beginning b e lo w the first row and
continuing on until com plete.
4.
T h e majority of users indicate that the textual c o n te n t is of greatest
value, however, a s o m e w h a t higher quality reproduction could be
m ade from "photographs" if essential to th e understanding o f the
dissertation. Silver prints of "photographs" may be ordered at
additional charge by writing th e Order D epartm ent, giving the catalog
number, title, author and specific pages you wish reproduced.
University Microfilms
300 N ort h Z e e b R oad
A nn A rbor, M ichi ga n 48106
A Xerox E d u c a tio n C o m p a n y
T5-853fe>
LD3907
• Xj O
1941
.F4
Fessenden, Se th Arthur.
The re lation between the success in
teaching and the speech ccr.petcncy of
the s e c o n d a r y school teacher...
hew
York, 1941.
;;ii,212 typewritten leaves.
tables,
forms.
29cm.
Thesis (Ph.D.) - hew York university,
School of education, 1941.
Bibliography: p . 80-83.
AC 7894
Xerox University Microfilms,
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106
THIS DISSERTATION HAS BEEN MICROFILMED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED.
/ {
i T h esis a c o e p t # ^ f
P at e^ M A Y g .Q
THE RELATION BETWEEN THE SUCCESS IN TEACHING AND THE
SPEECH COMPETENCY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL TEACHER
SETH A. FESSENDEN
Subm itted i n p a r t i a l f u lf illm e n t of th e
req u irem en ts f o r th e degree o f Doctor of
P hilosophy i n th e School of Education of
New York U n iv e rsity
1941
PLEASE
NOTE:
Some pa ge s may have
ind ist inet print.
Filmed as
U n ive rsi ty M i c r of i l ms ,
received.
A X e ro x E du cation
Company
ii
Acknowledgments
I am p le a se d t o have th i s o p p o rtu n ity to acknowledge th e a id and
encouragement t h a t have been given me i n th e course of t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
I am a p p re c ia tiv e o f th e a s s is ta n c e of th e many s tu d e n ts , secondary
school te a c h e r s , and p r in c ip a ls who provided data f o r th e s tu d y .
To
these persons I cannot give in d iv id u a l re co g n itio n because o f t h e i r
number.
I w ish to e x p re ss t o th e members of my sponsoring com m ittee,
P rofessor W alter B arnes, Chairman, P ro fesso r Roy M itc h e ll, and P ro fe s so r
E. R. Wood, my s in c e re a p p re c ia tio n f o r t h e i r support and p a tie n c e d u rin g
th e development o f t h i s stu d y .
I have leaned h eav ily on P ro fe s s o r Wood
fo r te c h n ic a l a d v ic e j I have acknowledged my deep in d eb ted n ess to
P rofessor M itc h e ll i n th e t e x t o f t h i s studyj I w ish to acknowledge th e
in v alu ab le a s s is ta n c e o f P ro fe sso r Barnes, who has guided my f o o ts te p s
w ith a f a ir n e s s t h a t s h a ll never be fo rg o tte n ,
I w ish to acknowledge th e kindness of Dr. R. G. B uzzard, P re s id e n t
of E astern I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers C ollege, who granted me a le a v e of
absence to p u rsu e t h i s stu d y , and who has been a source o f encouragement
in th e course o f i t s developm ent.
I w ish t o acknowledge my indebtedness to Dr. and M rs. Leland Schubert
of Madison C o lleg e , V irg in ia , whose f a i t h i n me made th e stu d y p o s s ib le .
I w ish t o acknowledge th e cooperation of th e members o f th e f a c u lty
of th e School o f E d u catio n , New York U n iv ersity , whose s u g g e stio n s aided
in th e e a rly developm ent of th e stu d y :
P rofessor Ambrose L. S u h rie ,
P rofessor R. E. L a n g f itt, P ro fe sso r Dorothy I . Mulgrave, P ro fe s s o r W. J .
Farma, Dr. Ruth M anser, D r. L e t i t i a Ranbicheck, Mr. Frank W. Thomas, and
Mr. Roscoe G rover.
A6 7 8 9 4
iii
I wish to acknowledge th e a id given me by members of th e fa c u lty
o f E astern I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers C ollege who have read and aided in
th e p re p aratio n o f t h i s m an uscript:
P ro fe s so r Donald A. R othschild,
P ro fe sso r Glenn Ross, P ro fe sso r H. DeForest W idger, P ro fesso r Eugene
M. W affle, and P ro fesso r James M. Thompson.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Chapter
I
Page
In tro d u c tio n
General Statem ent o f Purpose
1
General Procedure Followed
2
D e fin itio n o f Terms
2
The Meaning of Speech
2
The Meaning of Speech Competency
3
Measurement of Speech Competency
The Meaning of Success in Teaching
R atin g o f th e Success in Teaching
Persons C ooperating i n t h i s In v e s tig a tio n
II
1
The Measurement o f Speech Competency
3
4
6
7
8
G eneral C o n sid eration
8
Speech A spects Chosen
9
Voice
9
E nunciation
9
F le x ib ility
9
Language
10
Manner
11
Check o f These A spects
11
Summary
13
V
Chapter
III
IV
V
VI
VII
Page
The Speech In v en to ry
14
Preliminary In v e s tig a tio n
14
Speech T rain in g D iv isio n
17
Voice and E nunciation D iv isio n
19
Voice
19
E n u n ciatio n
23
A ttitu d e s D iv isio n
26
Language D iv isio n
27
Summary
29
R e l i a b i l i t y and V a lid ity o f th e Speech Inventory
30
R e l i a b i l i t y of th e Speech In v en to ry
30
V a lid ity o f th e Speech Inventory
33
Summary
37
Development o f th e T eacher-R ating S cale
38
T eacher C h a r a c te r is tic s
38
Summary
42
A d m in istratio n of th e Instrum ents
43
I n te r p r e ta tio n o f Data
47
Item Response
47
Com parative Scores
59
C o e f f ic ie n ts of C o rre la tio n
63
D is tr ib u tio n of Scores
64
Summary
68
vi
Chapter
V III
Page
Summary and Conclusions
71
The Scope of th e In v e s tig a tio n
71
Purpose o f th e In v e s tig a tio n
71
Methods and In stru m ents Used
72
A d m in istra tio n
74
A p p ra isa l of th e Means of In v e stig a tio n
75
C onclusions
76
E d u c a tio n a l Im p lic a tio n s
77
D e s ira b le F u rth e r Research on th e Problem
78
B ib lio g rap h y
80
Appendix
84
v ii
V
LIST OF TABLES
T itle
T able
Page
I.
Source of A ttitu d e Q uestions
28
II.
C o e ffic ie n ts of R e l i a b i l i t y
32
C o e ffic ie n ts of V a lid ity
35
R atings o f C ooperating T eachers
44
C onstants t o Convert Item Answers
49
Responses t o th e Speech T ra in in g D iv isio n
50
Responses t o th e Voice and E n u n ciatio n D iv isio n
52
Responses t o th e A ttitu d e s D iv isio n
54
Responses t o th e Language D iv isio n
57
Scores f o r Each Speech A spect
60
Necessary D iffe re n c e between S cores
62
C o e ffic ie n ts of C o rre la tio n
65
X III.
P ercentage o f Teachers Rated Low 'Who Scored High
66
XIV.
P ercentage o f T eachers Rated High Who Scored Low
67
R atings Given F iv e T eachers by F iv e Judges
99
III.
IV .
V.
V I.
V II.
V III.
IX.
X.
X I.
X II.
XV.
XVI.
XVII.
X V III.
XIX.
XX.
Teaching F ie ld s o f C ooperating T eachers
100
R ating and S cores o f th e C r ite r io n Group
102
Courses i n Speech
106
Response o f F o r ty - f iv e New York U n iv e rs ity
S tudents t o th e I n i t i a l Speech T ra in in g
Q u estionnaire
146
Response o f F o r ty - f iv e New York U n iv e rs ity
Students t o th e I n i t i a l Voice D iv isio n
Q u estionnaire
148
v iii
T able
T itle
Page
Response o f f o r t y - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l D ivision o f
E n u n ciatio n q u e stio n n a ire
150
Response o f f o r t y - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l In to n a tio n
q u e s tio n n a ire
153
Response o f f o r ty - f iv e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l A d ap tab ility
q u e s tio n n a ire
155
Response o f f o r t y - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l P hysical A c tiv ity
q u e s tio n n a ire
157
Response o f f o r ty - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l Speech A ttitu d e
H ab its q u e s tio n n a ire
158
Response o f f o r t y - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l Speech A c tiv itie s
q u e s tio n n a ire
160
Response o f f o r ty - f iv e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l Speech S itu a tio n
q u e s tio n n a ire
161
Response o f f o r t y - f i v e New York U niversity
s tu d e n ts to th e i n i t i a l Language
q u e s tio n n a ire
163
S cores made i n Voice
165
XXX.
S cores made i n E nunciation
166
XXXI.
S cores made in F l e x i b i l i t y
167
S cores made in Language
168
S cores made in Manner
169
S cores made i n T o ta l Speech
170
In v en to ry responses to th e Speech T raining
d iv is io n o f the Speech Inventory f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic A ttitu d e s
171
In v en to ry resp o n ses t o th e Speech Training
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic Leadership
172
XXI.
XXII.
X X III.
XXIV.
XXV.
XXVI.
XXVII.
XXVIII.
XXIX.
XXXII.
XXXIII.
XXXIV.
XXXV.
XXXVI.
ix
Table
XXXVII.
XXXVIII.
XXXIX.
XL.
XLI.
XLII.
X L III.
XLIV.
XLV.
XLVI.
T itle
Page
Inventoiy responses to th e Speech T rain in g
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic T act
175
Inv en to ry responses to th e Speech T rain in g
d iv is io n of th e Speech In v e n to ry f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic Sense of
Humor
174
In v en to ry responses to th e Speech T rain in g
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v e n to ry f o r
th e tea ch e r c h a r a c te r is tic R e la tio n
t o P u p ils
175
Inv en to ry responses to th e Speech T rain in g
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v e n to ry fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic In flu e n c e
on P u p ils
176
In v en to ry responses to th e Voice and
Enunciation d iv isio n o f the Speech
Inv en to ry f o r the te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c
A ttitu d e
177
Inventory responses to th e Voice and
E nunciation d iv isio n of th e Speech
Inv en to ry fo r th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c
Leadership
179
Inventory responses to th e Voice and
E nunciation d iv isio n of th e Speech
In v en to ry f o r th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c
T act
181
In v en to ry responses to th e Voice and
E nunciation d iv isio n of th e Speech
In v en to ry f o r the te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c
Sense of Humor
185
Inv en to ry responses to th e Voice and
E nunciation d iv is io n o f t h e Speech
In v en to ry fo r th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic
R e la tio n to P upils
185
Inventory responses to th e Voice and
Enunciation d iv isio n o f th e Speech
Inv en to ry f o r th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t ic
In flu e n ce on P upils
187
X
Table
XLVII.
XLVIII.
XUX.
L.
LI.
III.
L I I I.
LIV.
LV.
LVI.
LVII.
LV III.
T itle
Page
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is ti c A ttitu d e
189
In v e n to ry resp o n ses to th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is ti c Leadership
191
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic Tact
193
In v en to ry resp o n ses t o th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is ti c Sense
o f Humor
195
In v e n to ry resp o n ses to th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is ti c R elatio n
t o P u p ils
197
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e A ttitu d e s
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is ti c Influence
on P u p ils
199
In v en to ry resp o n ses t o th e Language
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic A ttitu d e
201
In v e n to ry resp o n ses to th e Language
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is t ic Leadership
203
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e Language
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In ventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is tic Tact
205
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e Language
d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is tic Sense of
Humor
207
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e Language
d iv is io n o f t h e Speech In v en to ry fo r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic R elatio n
to P u p ils
209
In v en to ry resp o n ses to th e Language
d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v en to ry f o r
th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic In fluence
on P u p ils
211
ad
Appendix
T itle
Page
Schools con sid ered in in v e s tig a tio n
85
I n i t i a l l e t t e r s e n t t o p rin c ip a ls
91
Card enclosed in i n i t i a l l e t t e r
92
Second l e t t e r s e n t t o p rin c ip a ls
93
Follow-up card
94
L e tte rs from p r in c ip a ls
95
Speech R atin g S cale
107
P relim in ary Voice t e s t
108
P relim in ary E nunciation t e s t
111
Second E n u n ciatio n t e s t
115
P relim in ary Language t e s t
117
P re lim in a ry S p eech-P ersonality t e s t
119
P relim in ary Speech-Competency t e s t
121
P relim in ary Speech Inventory
123
P h y sic a l A c tiv ity t e s t
128
Speech T rain in g t e s t
130
A d a p ta b ility t e s t
131
Speech A ttitu d e -H a b its t e s t
133
Speech S itu a tio n s t e s t
135
Speech A c tiv itie s t e s t
136
In to n a tio n t e s t
137
P e rs o n a lity q u estio n s
140
Responses o f f o r ty - f iv e New York U n iv e rsity
stu d e n ts to th e p relim in ary t e s t s
146
xii
T itle
Page
Scores made on th e Speech In v e n to ry by
th e cooperating te a c h e rs
165
Responses made to th e in d iv id u a l item s o f
th e Speech In v en to ry by th e co o p eratin g
teach ers
171
CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION
G eneral Statem ent
I t has been g e n e ra lly assumed by te a c h e rs o f speech t h a t e f f e c tiv e
speech n o t o n ly enhances th e p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r su ccess o f t h e man i n
p u b lic l i f e , b u t a ls o promotes advancement i n l i n e s o f p r iv a te endeavor.
This assum ption t h a t th e speaking a b i l i t y a f f e c t s su c c e ss h as brought an
in c re a s in g emphasis on speech by te a c h e rs -c o lle g e s and sch o o ls o f educa­
tio n .
I n 1954 Sandford and Yeager w rote, " In th e te a c h in g p r o f e s s io n ,
a ls o , th e most su c c e ss fu l te a c h e rs u s u a lly a re th e m ost e f f e c tiv e
ta lk e rs .
S in ce so much o f teach in g c o n s is ts o f sp eak in g , i t i s essen ­
t i a l t h a t a l l te a c h e r s , w hether i n prim ary or secondary s c h o o ls , c o lle g e s
o r u n i v e r s i t i e s , be e f fe c tiv e sp eak ers."1
I n 1936 Mulgrave w ro te, "The e f fic ie n c y and h appiness o f ev ery
te a c h e r a re t o a co n sid erab le degree co n d itio n ed by h i s own speech
2
h a b its and speech co n scio u sn ess."
I n 1939 P a r ris h w ro te, "More im portant i s th e te a c h e r ’s o b lig a tio n
t o c u ltiv a te good speaking h a b its fo r th e sake o f g r e a te r e f f ic ie n c y i n
te a c h in g ."
*
1 . W. P . Sandford and W. H. Yeager, P r in c ip le s o f E f f e c tiv e Speaking.
p p . 5—6 .
2 . Dorothy M ulgrave, Speech f o r th e Classroom T e ach er. P . IX .
3 . W. M. P a r r is h , The Teacher’ s Speech, p . 13.
z
These a t t i t u d e s a r e r e p r e s e n ta tiv e o f th e c u rre n t assum ption among
te a c h e r s of speech t h a t th e speech o f any te a c h e r a f f e c ts h is success
a s a teach er*
Yet th e s e e x p ressed a t t i t u d e s a r e n o t based on e x p e ri­
m ental d ata th a t t h i s in v e s t i g a to r has been a b le t o f in d .
It is ,
t h e r e f o r e , th e p urpose o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n to in q u ire in to th e
r e la tio n s h ip which may e x i s t between su ccess i n teach in g and th e speech
competency o f th e tea ch e r*
G eneral Procedure Follow ed
This in v e s tig a tio n has sought t o determ ine th e r e la tio n s h ip through*
(1 ) th e development o f in stru m e n ts t o measure speech competency and
su c ce ss in te a c h in g , ( Z) th e e sta b lish m e n t o f th e v a lid ity and r e l i ­
a b i l i t y of th e s e in s tru m e n ts , (3 ) th e a d m in is tra tio n o f th ese i n s t r u ­
ments t o 404 te a c h e rs i n s e n io r h ig h sc h o o l, (4) th e a n a ly sis and
i n t e r p r e t a t i o n o f th e d a ta re c e iv e d , (5) th e p re s e n ta tio n of th e con­
c lu s io n s which th e a n a ly s is o f th e d a ta seems to j u s t i f y , and (6 ) a
d isc u s s io n o f th e r e l a t i o n o f th e s e co n clu sio n s to th e f ie ld o f
education*
Each o f th e s e p h ases i s developed i n th e body of t h i s t h e s i s .
D e fin itio n o f Terms
The Meaning o f Speech
I t w ill be t h e p r a c t i c e o f t h i s stu d y t o r e f e r t o a l l v o cal ex p res­
s io n a s speech.
T his p r a c t i c e i s n o t uncommon.
W oolbert s a id , "Speech
i s a term w ith many m eanings, from e le m e n ta l vocal sound to a p u b lic
a d d re ss or even th e language h a b its o f a p e o p l e ...
The e s s e n tia l f a c t o r
i s th e in te n tio n on th e p a r t o f one p erso n t o c a rry meanings t o a n o th e r
4
o r o th e rs ."
SI
C. H. W ooibert, Psychology from th e S tan d p o in t o f a Speech T eacher,
The Q u a rte rly J o u rn a l o f Speech. I (F ebruary, 1930), p . 9 .
3
The Meaning o f Speech Competency
Speech competency as used h e re in r e f e r s t o th e a b i l i t y t o convey
e f f e c t i v e l y meanings and a t t i t u d e s .
I t r e f e r s t o th e s k illf u ln e s s and
p r o f ic ie n c y 'w ith which o r a l communication i s accom plished.
I t should
n o t be co n sid ered s u f f i c i e n t t h a t an idea i s conveyed; t h a t id e a must
be conveyed w ith an ex p e rtn e ss and an a p p re c ia tio n f o r th e d e lic a c ie s
o r lan g u ag e.
The degree t o which t h i s i s accom plished i s th e measure
o f th e speech competency.
The Measurement o f Speech Competency
A m ajor problem w hich w as, th e r e fo r e , confronted i n th e process
o f t h i s experim ent was nHow s h a ll th e speech competency o f th e te a c h e rs
whose su c c e ss i s judged be determ ined?"
The p o s s i b i l i t y o f d ir e c t
o b s e rv a tio n was co n sid ered b u t discarded because i t was f e l t t h a t i f
a s u f f i c i e n t number o f c ases t o provide s t a t i s t i c a l d ata were s tu d ie d ,
th e tim e -c o s t would be e x c e ssiv e .
I t was f u r th e r f e l t t h a t t h i s
i n v e s t i g a t i o n should sample a considerable t e r r i t o r y , a procedure which
would n o t make d i r e c t o b se rv a tio n by one person f e a s i b l e .
The p o s s i b i l i t y o f ask in g th e cooperation o f te a c h e rs o f speech
i n th e v a rio u s co o p eratin g schools was a ls o considered b u t d iscard ed
f o r two reaso n s?
f i r s t , i t was f e l t th a t many te a c h e rs m ight re s e n t
having t h e i r speech competency ra te d by a fello w te a c h e r; second, i t i s
p ro b ab le t h a t in d iv id u a l judgments of speech, even by e x p e r ts , a re n o t
com parable.
I t ap p eare d , th e r e f o r e , t h a t i t would be n ecessary t o devise
some means by which th e speech of a l l te a c h e rs co o p eratin g could be
measured by some sta n d a rd which i t s e l f could be an aly zed .
The
4
Speech In v en to ry , a p rin te d copy o f which has been placed i n Chapter
H I , was th e r e s u lt o f th e e f f o r t to d ev ise such an in stru m en t.
This
In v en to ry I s se lf-a d m in is te rin g and i s sco red on an o b je c tiv e s c a le .
I t was found to be s u f f ic ie n tly r e l ia b le and v a lid f o r t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
The c o e f fic ie n ts of r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y have been p resen ted in
Tables I and I I .
The scores o b tain ed were assumed t o in d ic a te th e
degree of speech competency.
The Meaning o f Success i n Teaching
S u ccessfu l teach in g may be considered from s e v e ra l p o in ts of
view.
The philosophy o f th e person serv in g as ju d g e, however, w ill
guide th e judgment.
The te a c h e r who i s promoted ra p id ly t o higher
and more im portant p o sitio n s may be considered more su c c e ssfu l than
th e te a c h e r who serves w ell i n a s in g le c a p a c ity , y e t has a more
pow erful in flu en c e f o r good over a l l who work w ith him.
The teach er
whose stu d e n ts excel merely i n s u b je c t-m a tte r knowledge may be con­
s id e re d more su c ce ssfu l than th e te a c h e r whose s tu d e n ts g ain le s s
s u b je c t-m a tte r but more in w orthy l i f e i d e a l s .
These in ta n g ib le q u a l i t i e s a re d i f f i c u l t to measure; y e t they
probably should be considered i n th e d e term in a tio n o f su ccessfu l
te a c h in g .
I t may w ell be t h a t th e s u c c e ss fu l te a c h e r cannot be
discovered u n t i l h is stu d e n ts have m atured i n t h e i r judgments, and look
back from a c r i t i c a l p o in t o f view t o say which te a c h e rs th ey then
co n sid er to have been th e b e t t e r .
John Derwey expresses th e r e la tio n ­
sh ip between su b je c t-m a tte r and l i f e as follow s*
"There i s th e stan d ­
in g danger t h a t th e m a te ria l o f form al i n s tr u c tio n w i l l be merely th e
5
su b ject m a tte r o f th e s c h o o ls, is o la te d from th e su b ject m a tte r of
l i f e experience."®
From t h i s p o in t o f -view i t might be suggested th a t th e s u c c e ssfu l
te a c h e r i s th e te a c h e r who b e s t f u l f i l l s th e o b jectiv es of e d u c a tio n .
Weeks says t h a t , "The purpose of education i s to give stu d en ts an under­
standing o f l i f e and th e c h a ra c te r, inform ation and s k il l needed to
meet i t s
p r o b le m s ." 6
S u h rie has s a id , "The te a c h e r i s one who h as th e
power to c r e a te a s o c ia l atmosphere th a t i s sur-charged w ith th e s p i r i t
of mutual h e lp fu ln e s s .
She i s n e ith e r a ta s k s e t t e r nor a tim e k e e p e r -
l e a s t o f a l l i s she an a u to c r a t or an o v erlo rd ; she i s a comrade in whose
presence in d iv id u a l e f f o r t and group cooperation a r e easy and n a tu r a l ." ''
Cubberly w r i te s , "Every Strong Teacher i s an A r t i s t . . .
Often beginning
w ithout s p e c ia l s k i l l i n a p p lic a tio n , th e tr u e teach er b u ild s up h is
teach in g tech n iq u e as he le a r n s h is a r t .. ." ®
Success in te a c h in g , th e r e fo r e , may be in te rp re te d i n a v a r ie ty
o f ways.
7 e t a c r i t e r i o n of success i n teach in g a g a in st which th e speech
competency could be compared had to be e sta b lish e d fo r t h i s s tu d y .
It
seemed p ro b ab le t h a t i f an in d iv id u a l were req u ested to r a t e a te a c h e r
on th e g en e ral degree o f su ccess, he would be confused by th e v a r ie ty
of p o s sib le c r i t e r i a by means of which he could form th a t judgm ent.
It
was th e r e fo r e f e l t t h a t more comparable r e s u l ts would beo b tain ed i f a l l
teach ers w ere r a te d in a few observable te a c h e r q u a l i t i e s .
Ad isc u s s io n
o f th ese q u a l i t i e s has been placed i n Chapter V.
Su John Dewey. Democracy and Education, p . 10*
6 . Ruth May Weeks, A C o rre la te d Curriculum , p . 1 .
7. Ambrose H. S u h rie , The American Teachers C ollege, Teachers E ducation
J o u rn a l. I (December, 1939), 3, p . 256.
8. Elwood P . C ubberly, The Teaching P ro cess, Teacher Education Jo u rn a l.
I I (September, 1940), 2 , p . 76.
6
R atin g th e Success i n Teaching
I n a d d itio n t o th e determ ination o f a method f o r m easuring th e
d eg ree o f success o f th e tea ch ers who were to s e rv e a s s u b je c ts i n
t h i s experim ent was th e problem of choosing the b e s t in d iv id u a l to
r a t e them .
A survey o f l i t e r a t u r e on teach er r a t in g p ro v id ed m a te ria l
f o r s p e c u la tio n b u t l i t t l e assurance th a t any method i s t r u l y s a t i s ­
f a c to r y o r b e s t.
For example, Meaders compared t h e s c o re s o f 100
te a c h e r s when ra te d on p r in c ip a l's score cards, s e l f - r a t i n g s c a le s ,
and p ro fe s s io n a l te ac h in g a p titu d e t e s t s .
His f in d in g s provided
c o e f f ic ie n ts o f c o r r e la tio n which he considered to o low t o be s ig n i f i c a n t .
I f any o f th e th re e procedures had been taken a s t h e c r i t e r i o n , n e ith e r
o f th e o th e r methods would have provided s a tis f a c to r y ran k in g o f th e
te a c h e rs.®
No d i r e c t e f f o r t was made to v a lid a te the T each er-R atin g S cale
u sed i n t h i s in v e s tig a tio n , but i n the course o f th e p re s e n t in v e s tig a tio n
f iv e te a c h e rs i n A lex an d ria, V irg in ia, were sim u ltan eo u sly r a te d by fo u r
p e rso n s:
th e p r in c ip a l, two a s s is ta n t p r in c ip a ls , and a departm ent head.
I n b u t two in sta n c e s was th e re disagreem ent w ith th e p r i n c i p a l 's d e c i­
s io n .
I n th e se two in s ta n c e s th e p rin c ip a l r a te d th e te a c h e r a s average
w h ile th e o th e r judges ra te d him as both high and low .
A ta b u la tio n
o f th e s e r a tin g s has been placed i n th e appendix.'*'0
I t i s n ot assumed t h a t these data were s u f f i c i e n t t o p ro v id e con­
c lu s iv e evidence.
9.
10.
I t i s f e l t , however, th a t th e y do c o n trib u te to
J . R. Meaders, 4 Comparison of Three Methods o f Teacher R ating.
See Appendix, p7 99
7
th e conclusion t h a t th e p r in c ip a l i n th e average s iz e d high school i s
r e l a t i v e l y fa m ilia r w ith th e work and a b i l i t y o f h is te a c h e rs.
F u rth e r,
a s i t may be assumed th a t i n th e m a jo rity o f cases th e advancement o f a
te a c h e r i s dependent upon th e p r i n c i p a l 's judgment of him, i t seems
reaso n ab le to conclude t h a t a ty p e o f te a c h e r success can la r g e ly be
in d ic a te d by th e p r in c ip a l.
Persons Cooperating in This I n v e s tig a tio n
The te ach ers used i n t h i s in v e s tig a tio n were chosen by th e p r in c ip a ls
o f each school cooperating.
I n o rd e r t h a t a comparable group o f te a c h e rs
would be s tu d ie d , sen io r high sch o o ls were chosen i n c i t i e s of 10,000 or
more w herein th e re was not more th a n one h ig h sch o o l.
six ty -tw o persons cooperated i n t h i s stu d y .
S ix hundred and
Four hundred and fo u r te a c h e rs
su p p lied th e requested speech d a ta concerning them selves and were judged
on t h e i r success i n teach in g by eighty-tw o p r in c ip a ls .
Four hundred and
tw enty te a c h e rs su p p lied d ata and e ig h ty -fo u r p r in c ip a ls scored t h e i r
te a c h e r s , but th e re were complete d a ta f o r o n ly 404 te a c h e rs .
Eighty-seven New York U n iv e rs ity s tu d e n ts aid ed i n th e development
o f th e Speech In ventory, f i f t y of whom were ranked by f iv e judges from
New York U n iv e rsity .
N ineteen members of New York U n iv ersity fa c u lty
p e rm itte d them selves to have t h e i r speech r a te d by e ig h t teach ers of
speech.
To a id in th e estab lish m ent o f th e r e l i a b i l i t y and v a lid ity of th e
In v en to ry f i f t y stu d en ts a t E a ste rn I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers C ollege,
C h arlesto n , I l l i n o i s , answered th e Speech In v e n to ry questions tw ice and
had t h e i r speech scored by s ix ty - f o u r s tu d e n ts i n t h i s sch o o l.
f i f t y s tu d e n ts, tw en ty -fiv e had had te a c h in g ex p erien ce.
Of th e se
CHAPTER I I
THE MEASUREMENT OF SPEECH COMPETENCY
Speech competency has been d efin ed in th e in tro d u c to ry c h a p te r of
t h i s stu d y as th e o v e r - a ll e ffe c tiv e n e s s of o r a l ex p ressio n i n communi­
c a tio n .
As i t seemed p ro b ab le t h a t an attem pt to determ ine th e general
degree o f speech competency would r e s u l t in s u b je c tiv e judgments which
would n o t be s a ti s f a c t o r y f o r s t a t i s t i c a l tre a tm e n t, the use o f c e r ta in
o f th e a s p e c ts o f speech which could be c lo s e ly analyzed was considered
t o be more d e s ir a b le f o r t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
G eneral C o n sid eratio n
The f i r s t s te p in th e s e le c tio n of these a s p e c ts was to co n sid e r
th e p o in ts o f view o f s e v e ra l le a d e rs in th e f i e l d o f speech.
S ap ir
su g g ested t h a t speech c o n s is ts o f "th e voice as su ch , speech dynamics,
and p ro n u n c ia tio n , th e v ocabulary, and th e s ty l e o f u tte ra n c e . "■*■
Coulton s a id th e elem ents of good speech were "an a g re e a b le voice
q u a lity , a p itc h le v e l s u ita b le f o r th e p a r tic u la r v o ic e , f l e x i b i l i t y ,
2
a u d i b i l i t y , com m unicativeness.
Cable s a id , "Good speech c o n s is ts of th e e f f e c tiv e u se o f th e e n tir e
body, th e v o ic e , and lan g u ag e."
*
Murray quoted a committee of th e Western A sso ciatio n of Teachers o f
1 .’ Edward S a p ir, Speech as a P e rs o n a lity T r a it, American Jo u rn al o f
S ociology. (May, 1927), p . 897.
2 . Thomas E. Coulton, Speech as S o cial Behavior, E ducational Method.
(March, 1937), p . 303.
3 . W. A rthur C able, A Program of Speech Education i n a Democracy, p . 88.
9
Speech, November, 1935, th a t d efin e d speech as "a to o l o f s o c ia l
ad ju stm en t, which r e f le c ts th e e f f i c i e n t p e r s o n a lity , and as a
p sy ch o lo g ica l and so cio lo g ic a l tech n iq u e o f m odifying human behavior
*
by means of body, v o ice, thought, and la n g u a g e ." 0
Speech A spects Chosen
As a r e s u l t o f statem ents such as th e s e , t h i s in v e s tig a to r 's
ex p erien ce, and th e opinions of o th e r members of New York U n iv ersity
speech f a c ility f iv e asp ects o f speech competency were chosen f o r
in v e s tig a tio n :
voice, en u n ciatio n , f l e x i b i l i t y , language, and manner.
Voice
I t seemed apparent th a t voice must be considered as a p a r t of any
a n a ly s is o f o ra l communication, f o r vocal ex p ressio n presupposes th e
use o f voice*
Nor d id any o f the a u t h o r i t i e s stu d ie d omit mention o f i t .
B iu n ciatio n
E q u ally so , enunciation must b e co n sid ered a p a r t o f speech compe­
te n c y .
The in v e s tig a to r found no a u th o r ity which r e je c te d enunciation
i n th e c o n sid e ra tio n o f speech.
I t was th e r e f o r e f e l t t h a t th e in clu sio n
o f en u n ciatio n a s a major asp ect was n e c e s sa ry .
F l e x i b i l i ty
F l e x i b i l i t y i s a term which i s fre q u e n tly used by w r ite rs to include
th o se q u a l i t i e s of speech which le n d ex p ressiv en ess to th e communication.
Under th e heading of f l e x i b i l i t y Murray l i s t s p itc h , in te n s ity , s y lla b ic
d u ra tio n , pause d u ra tio n , q u a lity .^
fo llo w s:
P a r r is h expresses th e concept as
"We a re concerned n o t w ith th e q u a lity of th e v o ice, b u t w ith th e
p a tte r n o f th e voice in i t s ex p ressio n o f thought and f e e lin g j n o t w ith
4.
5.
ELwood Murray, Jhe Speech P e r s o n a lity , p . 10.
I b i d . . p . 381.
10
th e a r tic u la tio n of w o rd s, b u t w ith th e co lo r and fla v o r and r e l a t i v e
im portance of words a s th e y a r e heard in connected sp eech .1,8 Mulgrave
considers th e p ro d u ct o f th e f l e x i b i l i t y of speech as th e a r t i s t r y o f
speech.
n
I t seemed d e s ir a b le t o c o n sid er th e se various vocal a c t i v i t i e s
which i n te n s if y th e e f f e c t o f a r t i s t r y , i n t e r s t , and meaning, and which
in the main, express p e r s o n a lity , under th e sin g le heading o f f l e x i ­
b ility .
Craig say s, " F l e x i b i l i t y o f voice includes range of to n e s ,
p itc h o f v o ice , and i n f l e c t i o n s . " 8 For th e purpose of t h i s in v e s ti­
gation i t seemed p ro b a b le t h a t f l e x i b i l i t y would be a s a tis f a c to r y
term and a n ecessary a s p e c t.
Language
The New E nglish D ic tio n a ry , e d ite d by James A. H. Murray, gives a s
th e f i r s t d e f in itio n o f language, "The whole body o f words and methods
of combination o f words used by a n a tio n , people, or r a c e ."
I t seemed
obvious th a t i n th e c o n s id e ra tio n o f o r a l communication, th e means by
which th e communication i s accomplished must be in clu d ed .
T h erefo re,
th e problem became n o t th e a d v is a b ility of attem pting to measure language
usage, b u t r a th e r to d eterm in e what phase of language usage should be
considered.
Because o f th e d i f f i c u l t i e s th a t would undoubtedly a r i s e i n
attem pting to g e t a f a i r measure o f vocabulary range or " c o rre c tn e s s " of
expression w ith an in stru m e n t which would be s e lf ad m in istered , a l l
fa c to rs which might b e checked by th e s u b je c t fo r t h e i r accuracy were
elim in ated .
6.
7.
8.
The em phasis was p laced on language as an in d ic a tio n o f
W. M. P a r ris h , The Teachers Speech, p . 141.
Dorothy M ulgrave, Speech f o r th e Classroom Teacher, p . 7.
A lice C raig , The Speech A rts, p . 26.
11
p ro b a b le inodes of e x p ressio n .
Barnes d e fin e s language as a '‘mode of
s o c ia l b eh av io r whose prim ary fu n c tio n i s communication. “
9
Language
usage as a p o s s ib le index t o p e r s o n a lity was considered to be th e most
a c c e p ta b le phase o f o ra l communication t o in c lu d e .
Manner
C o n sid eratio n should be given to th e manner i n which a person
sp ea k s.
I t appeared p o s sib le t h a t a v e ry f in e v o ic e , e x c e lle n t enun­
c i a t i o n , w e ll chosen language, and a s a tis f a c to r y q u a lity o f f l e x i b i l i t y
could a l l be combined, y e t n o t produce d e s ir a b le speech because of the
manner o f th e speaker.
Speech competency seems to presuppose a d e s ir e on th e p a r t of the
speaker to have h im self heard and u n derstood.
I t was f e l t th a t competency
in v o lv ed s in c e r ity o f ex p ressio n , e v id e n t i n t e r e s t in s u b je c t m a tte r,
co n fid en ce, and such o th er a t t i tu d e s as would a t t r a c t to him th e favor­
a b le a tte n tio n of h is h e a re rs .
The a t t i t u d e or manner o f th e speaker should be considered as a
m ajor a s p e c t i n speech competency.
Check o f th e s e Aspects
In o rd er to determ ine i f th e se f iv e a s p e c ts , v o ic e , en u n ciatio n ,
f l e x i b i l i t y , language, and manner, probably in clu d ed th e p r in c ip a l
phases o f speech competency, two beginning speech c la s se s a t New York
U n iv e rsity w ere asked to s e le c t a ra d io speaker whose speech th ey
co n sid ered b e s t and to s ta t e th e reaso n s in word o r p hrase form .
The fo llo w in g f i f t e e n persons were m entioned, Jean A rth u r, Boake
C a r te r , Samuel C hotzinoff, G. H. Cone, M ilton C ro ss, Ire n e Dunne,
9.
W alter B arnes, Language a s S o c ia l B ehavior, E ducational Method.
XVI, (March, 1937), p . 283.
12
Arthur H ale, Edwin C. H i l l , L e slie Howard, Paul Muni, David Ross,
B ill S te rn , Lowell Thomas, F ran k lin D. R oosevelt, and James W allington.
The follow ing l i s t o f c h a r a c te r is tic s were given.
These c h a r a c te r ­
i s t i c s , fo r convenience, have been grouped i n t o s ix d iv isio n s re p re s e n tin g
each o f th e fiv e a s p e c ts and one in d e te rm in a te .
D irect r e p e titio n h as
been elim in ated .
V oice-M ellow , a u d ib le , deep, rounded to n e , q u a lity r ic h , i n t e r e s t i n g
voice, smooth, c l e a r flow ing v o ic e .
Enunciation—P ro n u n c ia tio n c le a r c u t, en u n ciates w e ll, c a r e f u l
enunciation.
P ro n u n c ia tio n , e n u n c ia tio n , d is t in c t enunciation, slow
and d i s t i n c t , e n u n c ia tio n e x c e lle n t.
F le x i b i l i ty —Tempo, p itc h v a r ie d , v a rie d tempo, musical b u t n o t
sing-song, fre q u e n t p a u se s, c lip p e d , c le a r , ra p id , concise, c o n tro l
over v o ice , v arying i n f l e c ti o n s , medium p itc h , never quivers or f a l t e r s ,
w ell modulated, e x p re s s iv e , not monotonous.
Language—Good choice o f w ords, vocabulary, choice of words h o ld s
i n t e r e s t , d e s c r ip tiv e .
Manner—F rie n d ly a t t i t u d e , d e c is iv e , expresses her emotions,
frie n d ly to n e , d ra m a tic , speaks w ith o u t stu d ied accuracy, s in c e re ,
convincing.
In determ inate—Good pure speech.
I t i s not to be assumed t h a t a s y n th e s is of th e se fiv e a s p e c ts
of speech would f a i r l y produce any in d iv id u a l's speech p a tte r n .
It
i s not probable t h a t speech can be broken in to various component p a r ts
and each analyzed s e p a r a te ly .
I t seems probable t h a t speech i s an
expression o f p e r s o n a lity which c r e a te s i t s e f f e c t y et r e ta in s i t s
•wholeness.
Speech i s a com plicated process 'which seems t o defy a n a ly s is
i n t o o b je c tiv e c l a s s i f i c a t i o n .
I t seems, however, t h a t th e f iv e a sp e c ts
o f speech discussed, h e re in would provide an index t o th e probable speech
competency o f an in d iv id u a l.
The use of them as th e guides in m easuring
speech seems j u s t i f i a b l e , sin ce th ey c o n s titu te th e phases of speech most
commonly mentioned by w r ite rs in th is f i e l d , and seem t o in clu d e th e
q u a l i t i e s d e sc rib e d by in e x p e rt observers.
Summary
T h is ch ap ter has p resen ted th e problem o f measurement o f speech
com petency.
F ive a sp e c ts o f speech were chosen from th e w ritin g s o f
p e rso n s in th e f i e l d o f speech, th e suggestions o f members o f th e Speech
D epartm ent o f th e School o f Education, New York U n iv e rs ity , and th e
i n v e s t i g a t o r ’s ex p e rien c e.
These fiv e asp e c ts a r e :
v o ic e , e n u n c ia tio n ,
f l e x i b i l i t y , language, and manner of speaking.
I n o rd er to determ ine i f th e se aspects p ro b ab ly in clu d ed most of
th e o b serv ab le phases o f an in d iv id u a l's speech, each member o f a New
York U n iv e rs ity speech c la s s chose and d escrib ed th e r a d io speaker of
h i s c h o ic e .
An a n a ly s is o f th e d e sc rip tio n s seemed to in d ic a te th a t
th e s e f i v e a sp e c ts in clu d ed most of th e observable q u a l i t i e s of speech.
CHAPTER I I I
THE SPEECH INVENTORY
The f i r s t major p r o je c t in t h i s in v e s tig a tio n was th e c o n stru c tio n
o f an instrum ent w ith which to measure th e speech competency o f th e
se v e ra l te a c h e rs who were to s e rv e as s u b je c ts in t h i s experim ent.
There
has been d isu cssed on pages th re e and fo u r o f t h i s stu d y th e d e s ir a b i l i t y
o f using a se lf-a d m in is te re d in stru m e n t.
The Speech Inven to ry , which
has been in clu d ed as th e n ex t two pages o f t h i s stu d y , was co n stru cted
as th e instrum ent w ith which t o measure th e speech competency of
th e se se v e ra l te a c h e rs .
I t i s th e purpose of t h i s ch ap ter t o discuss
th e development o f th e Speech In v en to ry .
P relim in ary In v e stig a tio n
The members o f th re e c la s s e s i n th e re q u ire d speech course in th e
School o f Education, New York U n iv e rs ity , served as su b je c ts fo r th e
c o n stru c tio n o f t h i s In ventory.
As th e in v e s tig a to r had th e se c la s se s
under h is d ir e c t su p e rv isio n he was a b le not only to ad m in ister th e
v ario u s item s used i n th e p re lim in a ry ex p erim en tatio n , b u t a ls o was ab le
to check th e answers given w ith th e a c tu a l speech h a b its of th e s e v e ra l
members o f th e c la s s e s .
This made i t p o s s ib le f o r him to determ ine w ith
a f a i r degree o f c e r ta in ty th e v alu e o f th e v ario u s item s used in th e
p re lim in ary re s e a rc h .
There has been placed in th e appendix-*- o f t h i s stu d y a copy o f each
o f th e p r in c ip a l item s used in t h i s p re lim in a ry experim entation.
Li
See Appendix, p . 107 -146
Four
THE SPEECH INVE NT O RY
S e th A. F essen d e n
School of Education
New York University
♦ ------N a m e ............................. ...... School......................
City...... ...............................State.......................
Teaching Major............... Minor..................Years of Experience
INTRODUCTION
This inventory has been designed to enable you by self-observation to separate certain of your
speech assets from possible speech liabilities. It is concerned with general vocal effectiveness and
does not, therefore, endeavor to establish or support any single standard of speech.
This inventory has been compiled by selecting from professional writings, published tests, and
practice those items which seem to provide the most valid and reliable data when self administered.
If all of the items are conscientiously answered, they should provide an index to your personality as it
is expressed in your speech. Your answers will be treated in the strictest confidence, so you may feel
free to give candid replies.
A, SPEECH TRAINING. Below are listed ten general fields of speech activities under which headings
you are asked to indicate the formal school training you have had in speech, the fields in which you
would like to have further training, and the T H R E E of these ten fields you feel are most important
for the teacher. Use a check mark for your answers; do not attempt to provide the number of hours.
Field of Speech.
Fields in which
you have had
formal training.
Fields in which
you should like
formal training.
Acting
Choral Speaking
Debate
Group Discussion
Oral Interpretation
Parliamentary Procedure
Phonetics
Public Speaking
Speech Correction
Voice Training
C o p y rig h t, 1940, Seth A , Fessenden
THREE fields
most important
to the teacher.
B. VOICE AND ENUNCIATION. This division is devoted to the consideration of voice and enuncia­
tion. No attempt is made to classify a voice as good or bad or to determine the individual enunciation
problems; the desire is to differentiate among various types of voices and enunciation patterns. In an­
swering all of these items please bear in mind that it is your normal speaking voice which is to be rep­
resented.
1.
What do you consider to be the usual pitch of your speaking voice?
Lower than average........ About average.........Higher than.average.......
2.
Starting with the normal pitch of your speaking voice as “do” sing down the sol-fa scale, one
note at a time, to the lowest note you can sustain. Circle this symbol.
do
ti
la
sol
fa
mi
re
do
3.
Following are five “tongue twisters.” Attempt to read them as fast as you can say “Jack Robin­
son.” Circle the 1 following the twister which is most difficult for you, the 2 for the one next in
difficulty, and the 3 for the one which ranks third. Circle only three numbers.
Give Grimes Jim’s great gilt gag whip.
She visited Mrs. Smith’s fish sauce shop.
Lilting lithly and lazily the royal ruler leaped.
The bleak breeze blighted the bright broom blossoms.
The pretty frisky fellow moved the muse by mute maneuvers.
4.
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
3
3
3
3
3
Read the following in a manner so that it seems that your voice is placed in the depths of your
throat.
“Roll on, thou deep and dark blue Ocean— roll!”
This was: Easy........Difficult...... .Impossible.......
5.
Readthe following ina manner so that it seems that your voice is placed in the upper front
part of your face.
“When shall we three meet again
In thunder, lightning, or in rain?”
This was: Easy......., Difficult....... Impossible........
6.
Which of theseabove twovoice placements seems more closely to resemble your normal speaking
voice ?
That in Item number 4......... Item number.5........
7.
Which of these above two voice placements do you think would be the closer to the voiceyou
would use if you were to speak in a large auditorium
where greater than normal volume wasnec­
essary?
That in Item number 4.........
8.
Item number.5........
Read the following lines aloud. Read the first line in your normal manner, then continuewith
the second line while pinching the nostrils shut. Listen carefully and check the answer whichbest
represents the difference in the sound of the two lines.
(Close Nostrils)
“O young Lochinvar has come out of the West,
In all the wide border his steed is the best.”
H o w much change did you notice? None....... . Some.......
9.
Much........
Do you avoid such assimilations of sound as “donchew” or “meechew” for that which is spelled
“don’t you” or “meet you”?
Always...... .Usually...... , Occasionally....... Seldom....... Never.......
10.
H o w frequently does your throat feel very tired toward the end of the day?
Always...... . Usually...... ,Occasionally........ Seldom....... Never
C. ATTITUDES. In answering the following questions circle either Y E S or N O in all possible cases.
If you are unable to answer either Y E S or NO, then circle the question mark.
1. yes no
2.
3.
4.
5.
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
?
Do you express yourself more easily in speech than in writing?
7 Does the mispronunciation of words by others annoy you?
? Do you usually consciously try to speak distinctly?
7 Do you consider people who make puns cleverer than others?
7 Do you tell stories in dialect effectively?
?
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
yes no
yes no
yes no
yes no
yes no
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
?
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
?
?
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
? Do you ever feel like apologizing when you make a speech?
7 In a group or faculty meeting do you often start discussions?
? Is a person who speaks with a great deal of force insincere?
? Are you frequently asked to repeat questions?
7 Do you often use literary references when you speak to groups?
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
?
7
7
7
7
Do people who weigh their words carefully annoy you?
Are you careful to make each point clear when you speak?
If a member of your audience heckled you would you continue speaking?
Are persons who expect one to engage in small talk social bores?
Can you express your ideas through pantomime?
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
7
7
7
7
7
Are you clever at imitating the speech of others?
Can you speak with greater ease if you have something in your hand?
Can you readily start conversation with a person you have just met?
Is a person who shows his feelings in his voice too emotional?
Do you feel that people often misinterpret what you say?
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
7 Do you often hesitate to speak out in a group meeting?
7 Can you always make an appropriate remark in group conversation?
7 Can you hold your own in informal table conversation?
? Could you talk over a boarding house telephone without hesitation?
7 Do you find difficulty in finding words to express your meanings?
7 Do you like the rapid speaker better than the deliberate speaker?
7 Do you ever enjoy soliciting funds?
7 Have you often spoken at public gatherings?
7 Do you like to participate in festival gatherings and lively parties?
7 At a reception or a tea do you seek to meet the guest of honor?
Do you consider yourself a good judge of voice quality?
7 Do persons who use figures of speech in their talks like to show off?
? Can you express yourself clearly when angry?
? Do you enjoy arguing merely for the sake of arguing?
? Are persons who like to say things to shock others tactless?
7 In social conversation are you more of a listener than a talker?
7 At a party do you enjoy introducing a stranger to the other guests?
7 Do you think that “snappy comebacks” indicate agility of mind?
? Have you found that sarcasm helps emphasize a point?
7 Do you consciously use gestures as you speak?
Are persons who continually talk about serious subjects trying to show off?
7 Are persons who ask a great many questions irritating meddlers?
? Do you endeavor to express yourself in unusual and novel ways?
? Do you enjoy talking with little children?
7 Are you annoyed by people who speak in broken English?
Are persons who express very positive opinions about others intolerant?
In speaking to a group of people do you use jokes effectively?
7 If you disliked a person could you talk pleasantly with him?
7 Do you often hurt other people’s feelings without meaning to do so?
? Are persons who talk about their own work pretty narrow?
D.
LANGUAGE.
This division is not intended to search the extent of your vocabulary or the cor­
rectness of your language usage. The purpose is to consider the choice of words which you might
use under certain circumstances. You may feel that none of the words offered satisfies your
desire. In such a case check the word which seems to be the best substitution for the word or
phrase you would prefer.
1.
blacksheep
brat . . . .
devil . . . .
delinquent
problem .
rascal ...
rowdy ...
ruffian ..
scamp ...
scoundrel
You have just finished teaching a friend’s class. The class was
unruly and discourteous primarily because of one boy. The friend
whose class you took comes to you later in the day and asks you
about the boy. Indicate what you would call him by placing a
T in the space provided. If the principal were to ask you the
same question, indicate the word you would probably use to him
with a P.
2.
awful
bad taste .
disgusting
displeasing
You have recently attended a picture show which you feel would
have very undesirable influence on young people. A member of
your class, in class, asks you about the show. Indicate with an
lo u s y
S a word which you might use in your reply. Indicate with a T
a word you might use if asked about the show in private by an­
other teacher.
3.
...........
moronic ..
offensive ..
repulsive .
shocking ..
unpleasant
delightful .
enchanting
exquisite
fascinating
gripping .
interesting
keen ........
lovely
swell ........
thrilling ..
You have just read in a popular magazine a poem which seemed
to you to be unusually fine. You wish to encourage a friend to
read it. Indicate with the letter F a word which you might use
in your description of a poem which you might like. You wish
to tell your class about it. Indicate with the letter S a word you
might use as you talk to them about it.
DO NOT WRITE BELOW THIS LINE
Score
Score |
Score |
%
Training
Vocalization
Attitude
Language
Total Speech
c
B
A
•
%
Score
E
D
%
Score |
%
Score |
F
%
Score
%
17
c r i t e r i a were used f o r th e f i n a l s e le c tio n of each item :
1.
Can
th e ite m be
answered
s a t i s f a c t o r i l y by a person u n fa m ilia r
answered
w ith a minimum of e ffo rt?
w ith speech p r in c ip le s ?
2.
Can
th e item be
3.
Does th e answer t o th e item seem to in d ic a te a speech c o n d itio n ?
4.
Are
th e answ ers
given to
th e item s u f f ic ie n tly v aried t o show a
range of speech c o n d itio n s?
However, a s th e c o u rse s ta u g h t re q u ire d a c e r ta in amount o f t e x t
m a te ria l to be co v ered , i t was in co n v en ien t to adm inister a l l p re lim in a ry
m a te ria l to a l l c l a s s e s .
Absences a ls o dim inished th e t o ta l number of
stu d en ts a v a ila b le f o r a l l t e s t s .
T h erefo re, th e minimum number a v a ila b le
fo r a l l te s ts was chosen t o be recorded in t h i s r e p o r t.
f o r ty - f iv e .
This number was
Whenever more to o k th e t e s t s , f o r ty - f iv e t e s t papers were
se le c te d a t random f o r c o n s id e ra tio n .
Items fo r c o n s id e ra tio n were drawn from th e background knowledge and
experience of th e i n v e s t i g a t o r , p u b lish ed t e s t s of p e rso n a lity , pro ­
fe s s io n a l w r itin g s , and th e d i r e c t suggestions of experts in th e f i e l d
of speech.
The c o n tr ib u tio n s of th e se various sources are p rese n te d in
th e follow ing pages o f t h i s c h a p te r.
The f in a l form of the Speech
Inventory was a r b i t r a r i l y d iv id e d in to fo u r d iv is io n s :
speech t r a in in g ,
voice and e n u n c ia tio n , a t t i t u d e s , and language, w ith one page of th e f o u r page form devoted t o each d i v i s io n .
Each d iv is io n was considered i n th e
sco rin g fo r each o f th e f i v e speech a sp e c ts considered.
I t seems,
th e re fo re , t h a t a d is c u s s io n of th e development of t h i s inventory m ight
w ell be so d iv id e d .
Speech Training D iv isio n
In order t o determ ine th e p ro b ab le f ie ld s of speech tra in in g
18
co n sid ered try ed u cato rs as im p o rtan t, a geographical sam pling o f about
o n e -te n th o f a v a ila b le c o lle g e catalogues was ta k e n .
These c atalo g u es o f th e school y ear 1939-1940 re p re s e n tin g te a c h e rs
c o lle g e s and sch o o ls o f education throughout th e U nited S ta te s were
examined f o r co u rses in th e f i e l d of speech.
A ll of th e co u rses in
speech given by each were summarized under major h ead in g s.
T his
sum m arization i s p re se n te d in th e appendix^ of t h i s stu d y .
E ig h t g en eral
f i e l d s were d isc o v e re d .
ty p es o f c o u rs e s .
d ra m a tic s.
In th e se general f ie ld s were tw enty-one d if f e r e n t
To t h i s l i s t were added fo u r g en eral co u rses in
T h is l i s t o f tw en ty -fiv e f ie l d s of speech was mimeographed and
p re se n te d t o th e beginning speech c la s s e s p rev io u sly in d ic a te d .
o f t h i s form has been p laced i n th e appendix.®
A copy
F o r ty - f iv e members of
t h i s group were chosen a t random and t h e i r responses ta b u la te d .
Con­
v e r s a tio n , d e b a te , in te rv ie w in g , p h o n etics, s to r y t e l l i n g , voice c u ltu r e ,
and p la tfo rm speaking were considered by th e stu d e n ts as b ein g th e most
in p o rt an t f i e l d s o f speech f o r th e te a c h e r.
Choral speaking, declam ation,
d i a l e c t i c s , g e s tu r e , r a d io , sta g e d esig n , salesm anship, and th e a tr e
h is to r y were considered o f l e a s t im portance to th e te a c h e r .
The t o t a l
ta b u la tio n s have been in clu d ed in th e appendix.4
F o r a second check th o se item s re c e iv in g th e low est re sp o n se s, w ith
th e e x cep tio n o f ch o ral speaking and ra d io , were e lim in a te d .
Choral
speaking was re ta in e d because o f i t s growing prominence in th e f i e l d
o f speech and because over h a lf of th e c o lle g e s in v e s tig a te d had a t l e a s t
one course i n th e s u b je c t.
Radio was re ta in e d because s ix o f th e
c o lle g e s in v e s tig a te d o ffe re d courses in th a t f i e l d .
2.
3.
4.
See Appendix, p . 106
I b i d . . p . 130
I b i d . . p . 146
19
Argumentation and d eb ate were combined under one heading.
Acting
was re ta in e d as re p re s e n tin g an a c tiv e speech phase of d ram atic s.
Dec­
lam atio n was combined w ith th e general f i e l d of o r a l in te r p r e ta tio n .
G esture and in terv iew in g were considered phases o f audience c o n tact and
were th e re fo re grouped w ith p latform speaking under th e more common
term o f p u b lic speaking.
A ll v o ice item s were grouped to g e th e r under
v oice c u ltu re .
This re s u lte d i n tw elve f i e l d s which were placed on th e f in a l
p re lim in a ry form of th e Speech Inventory.®
A fte r th e a d m in istra tio n of
t h i s form , ra d io speaking was e lim in a te d , and p arliam en tary procedure
sep a rated from p u b lic sp eaking.
The inform al speaking p ro je c ts were
p laced under th e g en eral heading o f group d is c u s s io n , and th e general
t i t l e of voice c u ltu re s h if te d to th e more common speech term o f voice
t r a in i n g .
Voice and E nunciation D iv isio n
Voice
C onsiderable ex p erim en tatio n was necessary t o d isc o v e r a means of
determ ining voice q u a lity from s e lf-a d m in is te re d ite m s.
F i r s t , a s e r ie s of experim ental item s was mimeographed and admin­
i s t e r e d under th e g en eral heading, “Voice D iv isio n .* 6
were chosen from s i x so u rces:
These item s
item s one, f o u r , and f iv e were suggested
by th e in v e s tig a to r ’s experience i n th e f i e l d of speech; item two was
drawn from a s e rie s o f experim ents p resen ted by Holmes;7 item s th r e e ,
s ix , seven, and e ig h t were ta k en from th e in v e s ti g a to r ’s notes from a
5 . I b i d . . p . 125
6 * I b id . . p . 108
7 . F . L. D. Holmes, A Handbook of Voice and D iction
20
c la s s ta u g h t by P ro fe sso r Roy M itc h e ll of New York U n iv ersity ; item nine
i s based on d isc u s s io n s o f v o ice by Mulgrave,
O
Manser,
Q
and M urray.
10
A fte r a d m in is tra tio n , f o r t y - f i v e cases were s e le c te d a t random
and th e resp o n ses ta b u la te d to determ ine th e most commonly answered
ite m s.
T his ta b u la tio n has been p laced in th e appendix."^
On in s p e c tio n
of th e se f ig u r e s i t was noted t h a t th e re seemed to be a f a i r spread in
th e answers t o each item , which might be considered to be in d ic a tiv e of
s a tis f a c to r y item ch o ic e .
However, on p erso n al check up w ith members of
th e c la s s i t was found t h a t th e answers to item s two and th re e were
guesses; t h a t item fo u r was answered, to a la r g e e x te n t, on th e b a s is of
speech knowledge; t h a t item s s ix and seven were not w ell understood; and
t h a t th e v ario u s su b d iv isio n s o f item nine could n o t be reco g n ized .
This
l e f t item s one, f iv e and e ig h t as p r a c tic a b le f o r u s e .
Second, an o th er t e s t f o r th e in v e s tig a tio n of voice was devised and
mimeographed under th e heading of ’’Speech Competency."
This t e s t a ls o
c a rrie d item s on e n u n c ia tio n , a d iscu ssio n of which i s p resen ted on page 24.
A copy o f t h i s t e s t has been in clu d ed in th e a p p e n d ix .^
These v o ice item s were chosen from two so u rces:
item s one, th re e
and f o u r, and f iv e were drawn from th e "Voice D ivision" t e s t , b u t reworded
f o r b e t t e r u n d erstan d in g ; item two was drawn from th e i n v e s t ig a to r 's n o tes
taken i n th e c la s s ta u g h t by P ro fe sso r M itc h e ll.
T his t e s t was ad m in istered to a c la s s in dram atic a r t , th e speech
o f th e members o f which had been c a r e fu lly analyzed as p a r t of r e g u la r
8.
9.
10*
11.
12«
Dorothy I . M ulgrave, Speech f o r th e Classroom Teacher.
Ruth Manser, Speech C o rrectio n on th e C ontract P la n .
ELwood Murray, The Speech P e rs o n a lity .
See Appendix, p . 148
I b id . . p . 121
21
c la s s r o u tin e by th e i n s t r u c t o r , P ro fe sso r M itchell#
An e f f o r t was
made to r e l a t e to t h i s speech a n a ly s is th e answers given on t h i s second
te s t.
I t was found t h a t item one was f a i r l y dependable; t h a t item two
was in d ic a tiv e in only a few ca ses; th a t item th re e was f a i r l y c o n s is te n tly
answered by th o se w ith b e t t e r v oice; t h a t th e r e was no way found to check
item f o u r; t h a t th e answers to item fiv e were q u ite v a rie d and d id not
r e l a t e t o v o ice q u a lity .
I t was, th e r e f o r e , assumed t h a t item s one and
th r e e were probably th e most v alu ab le voice item s on th e t e s t .
T h ird ;
th e r e was devised a t e s t vhich n o t only req u ested th e stu d en t
t o perform some a c t b u t a lso ex plained th e p r in c ip le behind t h a t a c t .
t e s t was c a lle d th e "S p eech -P ersonality In v e n to ry ." -^
This
This t e s t was
ad m in istered t o two of th e c la s se s i n speech.
There were th re e sources f o r th e item s on t h i s t e s t ;
item one
appeared as item e ig h t on th e "Voice D iv isio n " t e s t , and as item th re e on
th e "Speech Competency" t e s t ; item two appeared as item f iv e on th e
"Voice D iv isio n " and a s item fo u r on th e "Speech Competency" t e s t ; item
th r e e appeared as item s ix on th e "Voice D ivision" t e s t and as item f iv e
on th e "Speech Competency" t e s t ; item fo u r was based on th e p r in c ip le
t h a t a good voice must be supported by a s u f f i c i e n t supply of b re a th .
The responses to t h i s t e s t were n o t ta b u la te d .
R ather th e s ta te d
resp o n se o f each stu d e n t was compared by th e in v e s tig a to r and th e o th er
members o f th e c la s s w ith h is a c tu a l perform ance.
Item s one and two
were found to be done w ith accuracy; item th re e was n o t w ell done by
more th a n te n p e rc en t of th e s tu d e n ts ; th e answers to item fo u r v aried
each tim e th e a c t was re p e a te d .
15.
I b i d . . p . 119
zz
Fourths
as a f i n a l check a p re lim in a ry ''Speech Inventory" was
mimeographed, a copy o f which has been p laced in th e a p p e n d ix .^
These item s were drawn from th re e so u rces:
item one and fo u r had
appeared on both th e "Voice D iv isio n " and th e "Speech Competency" t e s t s j
item two was a rew ording o f item two on th e "Voice D ivision" t e s t j item
s ix was drawn from th e w r i t e r 's experience in th e f i e l d of speech.
R ather th a n a s t a t i s t i c a l approach to item s e le c tio n , in d iv id u a l
o b serv atio n was used as th e c r i t e r i o n .
I t was found t h a t th e p o s itio n of
th e v o ice in re fe re n c e t o th e vocal range was of importance in a few
c a s e s.
q u a lity .
Item number fo u r seemed f a i r l y r e l i a b l e and in d ic a tiv e of voice
Item s ix was o f no re co g n izab le v alu e.
The voice item s on th e f i n a l "Speech Inventory" were se le c te d from
t h i s s e rie s o f p re lim in a ry in v e s tig a tio n s .
Item one occurred in each
p re lim in a ry form* item two occurred on th e "Voice D ivision" and "Speech
Inventory" te s ts * item s f o u r, f i v e , s ix and seven were rewordings of
item e ig h t on th e "Voice D iv isio n " t e s t and item th r e e on the "Speech
Competency" te s t* item e ig h t appeared as item f iv e on th e "Voice D ivision"
t e s t , item fo u r on th e "Speech Competency" t e s t , and item fo u r on th e
"Speech Inventory" t e s t .
Item te n i s a general q u estio n designed to
in q u ire in to th r o a t r e la x a tio n .
The s p e c ific v oice item s which have been in clu d ed in the f i n a l
form o f th e Speech In v en to ry a re th o se s e le c te d f i r s t by an aly sis of
group resp o n se, and second by th e comparison of th e answer given w ith
in d iv id u a lly observed c o n d itio n s.
14.
I b id . . p . 125
23
E nunciation
The s e le c tio n o f en u n ciatio n item s follow ed th e same g e n e ra l
procedure as was used f o r th e s e le c tio n of th e voice item s.
an i n i t i a l "D iv isio n of E nunciation11^
F irs t,
was devised and subm itted f o r
c r itic is m t o s e v e ra l te a c h e rs of speech.
In a d d itio n to t h i s i t was
adm inistered t o one speech c la s s under th e d ir e c t supervision of th e
in v e s tig a to r .
A ll item s in clu d ed on th e t e s t were developed from phases
of th e i n v e s t i g a t o r ’s classroom pro ced u res.
Second, as a r e s u l t of th e c r itic is m s of th e speech te a c h e rs and
a group a n a ly s is o f th e answers given by th e c la s s to the s e v e ra l ques­
tio n s , t h i s t e s t was re v ise d and read m in iste re d , again under th e g e n e ra l
heading o f " D iv isio n o f E n u n c ia tio n ."
T6
T his tim e i t was given t o two o th e r c la s se s in beginning speech.
F o rty -fiv e ca ses were s e le c te d a t random and th e responses ta b u la te d
as given in th e appendix. 1 7
There were two g en eral sources f o r th ese enunciation ite m s :
s ix , sev en , and
item s
e ig h t were i n te r p r e ta tio n s of notes taken by th e
in v e s tig a to r i n a speech c la s s under P ro fesso r M itchell} item n in e was
drawn from a su g g estio n o f Mr. Frank W. Thomas of New York U n iv e r s ity .
The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f answers approached a normal curve.
I t was
d isco v ered , however, t h a t th e answers t o item s te n , eleven, tw elv e,
th ir te e n , and fo u rte e n w ere, in th e g re a t m ajo rity of cases, g u e sse s.
I t was found t h a t th e s e stu d e n ts could n o t id e n tif y a c c u ra te ly the
p o s itio n o f t h e i r a r t i c u l a t i n g o rg an s.
15.
16.
17.
Ib id .. p . I l l
I b i d . . p . 115
I b i d . . p . 150
For example, many who answered
24
t h a t f o r " t " t h e i r tongue t i p s were a g a in st th e upper gum rid g e would,
i n a c tu a l p r a c t i c e , p la c e th e t i p of th e tongue a g a in s t th e back of
th e upper t e e t h .
F u rth e r in d iv id u a l observation and check showed th a t
answers to o th e r item s were eq u ally u n r e lia b le .
T h ird , a s upon a n a ly s is o f th e se r e s u l ts i t seemed a d v isa b le
t o s h i f t th e en u n ciatio n emphasis to general e ffe c tiv e n e s s and c l a r i t y
i n sp eak in g , a p o rtio n o f th e "Speech Competency"-*-® sh eet was devoted
t o an in v e s tig a tio n o f th e p o s s i b il ity of d isco v e rin g g e n e ra l e n u n ciatio n
e f f ic ie n c y .
F o u rth , en u n ciatio n item s were included on th e "S p eech -P erso n ality "
te s t.
There were th re e sources f o r th ese item s:
19
item f iv e was a reword­
in g o f item seven on th e "D ivision o f E nu n ciatio n ," and s ix on th e "Speech
Competency" t e s t ; item s ix was devised as an experim ent t o re p la c e the
p ro n u n c ia tio n problem o f item n ine on th e "Speech Competency" t e s t .
On checking th e speech a n a ly sis a g a in st resp o n ses i t was found t h a t
item s i x , sev en , and e ig h t could not be used in th e form i n which th ey
were s ta t e d i n th e t e s t , b u t th a t item nine was v a lu a b le .
A problem
h e re , however, la y in th e g en eral d i f f i c u l t y o f th e words.
On a n a ly s is o f th e answers to th e se item s i n r e l a t io n to observed
f a c t s , i t was found t h a t no value could be p laced on item f iv e , b u t item
s ix appeared to be somewhat in d ic a tiv e of gen eral e n u n ciatio n p ro fic ie n c y .
This ite m w as, th e r e fo r e , re ta in e d and rev ised f o r th e f i n a l mimeographed
"Speech In v e n to ry ,"
On th e f in a l p rin te d form o f th e In v en to ry f iv e
"tongue tw is te r s " were u se d .
IS .
19.
I b i d . . p . 121
I b i d . . p . 119
One was chosen to in v e s tig a te th e a c t i v i t y
25
o f th e back o f th e tongue, one f o r th e m iddle tongue, one fo r th e p o in t
o f th e tongue, one f o r th e l i p s , and one fo r gen eral mouth a c t i v i t y .
In a d d itio n to th e se s p e c if ic voice and en u n ciatio n experim ents,
th re e o th er p relim in a ry t e s t s were devised to in v e s tig a te general phases
o f speech.
One o f th e s e was concerned w ith th e gen eral in to n a tio n p a tte r n
of an in d iv id u a l’s speech.
A copy of t h i s form has been placed in the
ap p en d ix .^ 5 The ta b u la tio n o f th e responses given on f o r ty - f iv e random
cases has a lso been p laced in th e appendix.2-*- The item s in th is d iv is io n
were not used in th e f i n a l In v en to ry because f i r s t , they gave too much
freedom to s u b je c tiv e judgment, and second, th e time consumed in read in g
and answering them was to o g re a t in r e l a t io n to th e v a lu e .
A second t e s t was th e ’’A d a p ta b ility D iv is io n .”22
The ta b u la tio n of
th e responses o f f o r t y - f i v e random cases has been p laced in th e appendix.^®
Those item s which seemed most in d ic a tiv e and were placed in th e a ttitu d e s
d iv is io n of th e f i n a l In v en to ry form w i l l be d iscu ssed on page 26.
A t h ir d t e s t was th a t o f ’’P h y sical A c tiv ity .”2^
A ta b u la tio n o f th e
answers given in f o r t y - f i v e random cases has been placed in th e appendix.^5
I t was f e l t t h a t th e answers to th e item s under "A” on th e ’’P h y sical
A c tiv ity ” form would be to o s u b je c tiv e ly determ ined, f o r i t was found t h a t
th e s u b je c ts who took th e t e s t could n o t dem onstrate a t a l l e f f e c tiv e ly
a convincing g estu re even though th ey had s a id i t was e f fe c tiv e and easy
to do.
C ertain item s under ”B” which seemed in d ic a tiv e of speech e f f e c tiv e ­
ness were c a rrie d over f o r in v e s tig a tio n under a ttitu d e s and are d iscu ssed
on page 26.
20.
21.
22.
25.
24.
I b id . .
I b id . .
I b id . .
Ib id ..
Ib id ..
p.
p.
p.
p.
p.
157
155
151
125
128
26
Q uestion n in e under th e "Voice and B iu n ciatio n " of th e Speech Inventory
was drawn from th e g en eral f i e l d o f voice and en u n ciatio n p r a c t ic e .
A ttitu d e s D iv isio n
The q u e stio n o f th e r e l a t io n of a ttitu d e s to speech has been r e c e n tly
in v e s tig a te d by Khower, who p re se n ts as one conclusion of h is in v e s tig a tio n
t h a t "Some speech a t t i t u d e s a re of value in d if f e r e n t ia t in g good and poor
sp e a k e rs ."26
On th e b a s is o f t h i s work done by Khower, i t was assumed
t h a t th e value o f a t t i t u d e s toward speech and speech s itu a tio n s would
probably have an a p p re c ia b le in flu e n c e on th e speech competency of a
te a c h e r .
In o rd e r to determ ine which type of q u estio n s would probably
be o f most v alu e in th e f i n a l form of th e Speech In v en to ry , th re e t e s t
forms were d e v ise d , "Speech A ttitu d e H a b its," "Speech A c ti v i t i e s ," and
"Speech S itu a tio n s ."
Copies o f th e se have been p laced in th e appendix.
27
These were ad m in istered to th e speech c la s se s and f o r ty - f i v e random cases
ta b u la te d .
These ta b u la tio n s have been placed i n th e appendix.^®
Twenty-nine o f th e item s from th ese t e s t s which, through comparison
of answers and observed c o n d itio n s, seemed to have th e most probable
value as in d ic a tiv e of speech competency were r e s ta te d in an e f f o r t
to e lim in a te p o s s ib le m is in te rp re ta tio n s and placed i n th e f i n a l form
of th e In v e n to ry .
To t h i s l i s t were added th ir te e n q u estio n s from pub­
lis h e d p e r s o n a lity t e s t s by B e ll,^ 9 B e m e u te r,30 and G u ilfo rd 31 which
d e a lt w ith some phase o f speech.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
F ran k lin H. Khower, A Study of Speech A ttitu d e s and Adjustments^
Speech Monographs. V (1938).
See Appendix, p p . 133-137
I b i d . . p p . 158-165
Hugo M. B e ll, The Adjustment In v en to ry .
R. G. B e m e u te r, The P e rs o n a lity In v en to ry .
J . P . G u ilfo rd , The Nebraska P e rso n a lity In v en to ry .
27
In a d d itio n to th e s e , e ig h t of th e q u estio n s found most in d ic a tiv e
o f good speakers by Knower were in clu d ed , b rin g in g th e a tti t u d e s e c tio n
o f th e f i n a l form to a t o t a l o f f i f t y q u e s tio n s , a l l d ealin g w ith some
a sp e c t o f speech or speaking.
Table I shows th e source o f each question
in clu d ed in th e f in a l Speech A c tiv itie s d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory.
Language D iv isio n
I t seemed j u s t i f i a b l e to devote an e n tir e p o rtio n o f th e Inventory
to th e problem o f language visage because o f th e im portance o f language
i n communication.
I t was f e l t th a t a vocabulary t e s t or any s im ila r t e s t which assumed
a “c o rre c t answer” would not be s a tis f a c to r y , f o r anyone using th e
In v en to ry , o th e r th an under d ir e c t su p e rv is io n , would have access to means
fo r determ ining th a t "c o rre c t" answer.
T h erefo re, th e re was d ev ised th e t e s t c a lle d "Language D iv isio n ,"
which has been placed in th e a p p e n d i x . T h i s t e s t was adm inistered
to th e c la s s e s under th e su p e rv isio n o f th e in v e s tig a to r .
cases were ta b u la te d and p laced in th e appendix.^®
F o rty -fiv e
In one evening
c la s s o f a d u lts each stu d en t was ra te d by th e o th e rs on h is e f fe c tiv e ­
ness o f th e use of language.
These r a tin g s were averaged and c o rre la te d
w ith th e score made on th e Language D iv isio n test^ giving a c o e f fic ie n t
o f .5 9 .
No t e s t which su p p lied a more s a ti s f a c t o r y r e s u l t could be
foundj so th e f i r s t th re e problems were s e le c te d .
The te n words most
fre q u e n tly vised by th e members o f t h i s c la s s f o r each o f th e se problems
were s e le c te d f o r a d m in istra tio n in th e mimeographed form o f th e
32.
33.
See Appendix, p . 117
I b id . . p . 163
28
Table I
The Source of Each Question i n the
A ttitu d e s D iv isio n of th e Speech Inventory
Source
Question Number
The A djustm ent In v en to ry by Hugo
M. B e ll, 1938.
12, 38, 42, 48, and 49
The P e rs o n a lity In v en to ry by
R. G. B e rn re u te r, 1935.
1, 11, and 24
The Nebraska P e rs o n a lity In v en to ry
by J . P. G u ilfo rd , 1934.
9, 24, 33, 40, and 50
A Study o f Speech A ttitu d e s and
Adjustm ents by F ra n k lin Knower,
1938.
4, 7, 10, 13, 16, 17, 21,
25, 28, 34, and 39
The Speech A ttitu d e s T e st developed
f o r t h i s stu d y by the in v e s tig a to r
2, 3, 14, 18, 22, 26, 27,
29, 30, 36, 41, and 45
The Speech S itu a tio n T est developed
f o r t h i s stu d y by th e in v e s tig a to r
8, 19, 23, 38, 43, and 44
The Speech In v en to ry developed f o r
t h i s stu d y by th e in v e s tig a to r
6, 20, 31, and 46
The Speech A c tiv itie s developed
f o r t h i s study by th e in v e s tig a to r
5 and 47
The A d a p ta b ility T e st developed
f o r t h i s stu d y by th e in v e s tig a to r
15 and 32
The P h y sic al A c tiv ity T est d e v e loped f o r t h i s stu d y by th e
in v e s tig a to r
35 and 37
29
“Speech In v e n to ry ."
With very l i t t l e change t h i s s e c tio n was in co r­
p o ra te d i n th e f in a l p rin te d form o f th e Speech In v e n to ry .
Summary
T his chapter has p resen ted th e manner in which th e Speech Inventory
was developed.
Items f o r each d iv is io n o f th e In v en to ry were drawn from
p ro fe s s io n a l w ritin g s , p u b lish ed p e r s o n a lity t e s t s , th e suggestions of
te a c h e rs of speech, and th e i n v e s t i g a t o r 's experience •
Each of th ese
item s was adm inistered a t l e a s t once to members of th e in v e s t ig a to r 's
c la s s e s a t New York U n iv e rsity .
The f i n a l s e le c tio n of item s fo r th e
In v e n to ry was determ ined by th e comparison of th e answers given by the
members o f c la s se s w ith th e a c tu a l speech h a b its o f th e se in d iv id u a ls .
Only th o se item s were s e le c te d t h a t seemed to d i f f e r e n ti a te between
degrees o f speech competency.
CHAPTER IV
RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY OF THE SPEECH INVENTORY
A d m in istratio n o f th e Speech Inventory f o r the purpose of e s ta b lis h ­
ing i t s r e l i a b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y were made to stu d en ts in a beginning
speech and a beginning E nglish course in th e 1940 summer s e ss io n of th e
E satern I l l i n o i s S t a t e Teachers C ollege, C harleston, I l l i n o i s .
About
one h a lf o f th e se s tu d e n ts were te a c h e rs in I l l i n o i s sch o o ls; th e r e s t
were r e g u la r s tu d e n ts i n th e c o lle g e doing summer work f o r e x tra c r e d i t .
I t was f e l t t h a t a group comprised i n p a r t, a t l e a s t , of te a c h e rs i n
serv ice would a ffo rd a b e t t e r means f o r v a lid a tin g a t e s t to be used w ith
teachers th a n a group comprised e n t i r e ly of stu d e n ts.
I t was f e l t t h a t
the amount o f speech covered in t h i s beginning speech course would n o t
a f fe c t th e type o f answers g iv en .
R e lia b ility o f th e Speech In v en to ry
A t e s t i s co n sid e red r e l i a b l e when the scares of two a d m in is tra tio n s
to th e same group d i f f e r very l i t t l e , or not a t a l l .
G a rre tt sa y s,
“When a s u f f i c i e n t i n te r v a l has elap sed between the f i r s t and second
a d m in istra tio n s of a t e s t t o o f f s e t (in a la r g e p a r t, a t l e a s t ) memory,
p ra c tic e and o th er e f f e c t s , th e r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f fic ie n t w i l l be a c lo s e
estim ate o f th e a c tu a l c o n sisten cy of th e t e s t sc o re s."^
Knowledge
of th e d e g re e of t h i s c o n siste n cy was considered of im portance f o r two
p rin c ip a l re a so n s :
1.
f i r s t , i t seemed necessary to know w hether th e
H. E. G a r r e tt, S t a t i s t i c s in Psychology and Education, p . 312.
31
co o p eratin g te a c h e rs would have answered th e item s d if f e r e n tly had they
tak en th e Speech Inventory a t some o th e r tim e; and second, i t i s neces­
sa ry t h a t a t e s t be r e l ia b le in o rd er to be v a lid , f o r i t i s g en erally
assumed t h a t an e s s e n tia l c h a r a c te r is ti c to t e s t v a li d it y i s i t s r e l i a ­
b ility .
L in d q u ist sa y s, "C onsistency in measure i s th e re fo re an e s s e n tia l
p
b u t n o t a s u f f i c i e n t co n d itio n f o r t e s t v a l i d i t y ."
In o rd e r t o compute th e c o e f f ic ie n ts o f r e l i a b i l i t y f o r each of
th e speech a sp e c ts being co n sid ered , two a d m in istra tio n s of th e Inventory
were made, one on June 19, 1940, and th e second on Ju ly 22, 1940.
During
th e f iv e weeks in te rv e n in g between a d m in is tra tio n s , th e su b je c ts had not
seen th e In v en to ry , nor had i t been d iscu ssed w ith them.
Each In v en to ry of both a d m in istra tio n s was scored f o r th e f iv e
speech a s p e c ts , th e scores were ta b u la te d , and th e f iv e c o e f fic ie n ts
o f r e l i a b i l i t y computed.
i n Table I I .
These c o e f f ic ie n ts of r e l i a b i l i t y a re p resented
This Table a lso s e ts f o r th th e indexes of r e l i a b i l i t y which
in d ic a te th e maximum c o rre la tio n which th e t e s t i s capable o f y ie ld in g
and show how w ell th e t e s t sco res agree w ith th e v a rio u s " tru e scores"
f o r each a s p e c t.
H ull i n d isc u ssin g r e l i a b i l i t y of a p titu d e s sa y s, "The minimal
r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f fic ie n ts of m easures u s u a lly con sid ered necessary f o r
use v a rie s co n sid erab ly w ith circum stances.
U sually a t e s t i s n o t consid­
ered o f much value i f i t s r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f ic ie n t f a l l s below .50, and
th e same may a lso be s a id of a p titu d e measures as w e ll. . . .
I t is
p ro b a b le , however, th a t a p titu d e c r i t e r i a as a c la s s have much lower
r e l i a b i l i t y c o e f f ic ie n ts than do te s ts ." ®
2.
3.
He l a t e r suggests th a t though
E. F . L in d q u ist, £ F i r s t Course in S t a t i s t i c s , p . 200.
C. L. H u ll, A ptitude T e stin g , p p . 231-232.
32
Table I I
C o e ffic ie n t o f R e lia b i l i t y of th e Speech In v en to ry
Based on Scores o f F i f t y E a stern I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers
C ollege Summer School Students
C o e ffic ie n t
o f R e lia b ility
Index o f
R e lia b ility
Voice
.85 £ .03
.92
E nunciation
.77 £ .04
•
GO
CD
Speech
Aspect
F le x ib ility
.82 £ .03
.90
Language
.62 £ .05
.79
Manner
.81 £ .03
.90
33
.68 i s a m ediocre r e l i a b i l i t y fo r a t e s t i t i s r a t h e r good f o r a p titu d e
s c o re s .4
The c o e f f ic ie n ts d eriv ed fo r th e In v en to ry seemed s u f f ic i e n tly high
t o assume t h a t th e t e s t was r e l ia b le and t h a t were th e t e s t t o have been
taken by th e te a c h e rs a t some o th er d a te th e sco res probably would have
been f a i r l y s im ila r .
This assumption i s f u r th e r su sta in e d by re feren ce
to th e indexes o f r e l i a b i l i t y p resen ted in T able I I , page 32.
O dell says in
re fe re n c e t o th e index of r e l i a b i l i t y , “Since i t measures th e r e la tio n ­
sh ip between obtained scores and tru e s c o r e s . . . . i t i s a more s ig n if ic a n t
measure o f th e s itu a tio n than th e c o e f f ic ie n t o f r e l i a b i l i t y and should
be used in p referen ce to it." ®
V a lid ity o f th e Speech Inventory
The v a li d i t y o f a t e s t i s defined by L in d q u ist as "th e accuracy
w ith which i t measures th a t which i t i s in ten d ed to m easure."
6
The
v a l i d i t y of th e Speech In ventory, in t h i s c a s e , i s th e accuracy w ith
which i t m easures th e q u a lity of each of th e f iv e a sp e c ts b ein g considered
i n t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
G a rre tt p re se n ts th re e methods fo r d eterm ining v a l id it y which might
be a p p lie d to th e Speech Inventory:
1.
D eterm ination o f v a lid ity through c o r r e la tio n w ith a c r ite r io n .^
2.
D eterm ination o f v a lid ity through r e lia n c e on competent judges
as to th e s u i t a b i l i t y o f th e m a te ria l in c lu d e d .8
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
D eterm ination o f v a lid ity through use o f th e index of r e l i a b i l i t y . 9
I b i d . . p p . 232-233.
C. ¥ . O d ell, Educational S t a t i s t i c s , p .
188.
E. F . L in d q u ist, A.F i r s t Course in S t a t i s t i c s , p . 197.
G a r re tt, oj>. c i t . . p . 324.
I b i d . . p . 328*
I b i d . . p . 329.
34
Each o f th e se methods was u t i l i z e d in t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
The
c r ite r io n fo r use in th e f i r s t method was provided by having a group of
E astern I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers C ollege stu d en ts ra te d in each of th e
f iv e speech a s p e c ts .
To e s ta b lis h th e se r a tin g s , an average of seven
to twenty o f th e o th e r members of th e c la s se s served as ju d g es.
These
judgments as rendered a re p re se n te d in th e a p p e n d i x . T h e s e d a ta
showed t h a t th e r e was a wide v a r ia tio n in judgment o f each person in
each o f th e speech a s p e c ts .
I t would seem t h a t such r a tin g used f o r
comparison should be accep ted as only probable or f a l l i b l e c r i t e r i a .
Symonds d isc u s s e s th e n e c e s s ity o f having th e r a tin g s of s e v e ra l judges
averaged.
He s ta t e s t h a t r a tin g s by a s in g le judge a re to o u n re lia b le
to be u s e f u l , ^ and t h a t Rugg’s recommendation fo r th re e judges "e rre d on
th e sid e o f len ien c y " f o r th e re should be e ig h t independent r a tin g s i f th e
r a tin g s a re t o be in d iv id u a lly d ia g n o stic
Even w ith t h i s number o f judgments, however, th e c r i t e r i a are
probably in a c c u ra te , f o r th e in d iv id u a l r a tin g s a re a t v a ria n c e .
There­
f o re , th e degree of v a l i d i t y e s ta b lis h e d fo r th e Inventory in d ic a te s
only th e amount of agreement between one f a l l i b l e measure and ano th er
which i s probably only somewhat l e s s f a l l i b l e .
Table I I I p re se n ts th e c o e f f i c i o i t s of v a lid ity as found through
c o rre la tio n o f th e r a tin g s w ith each of th e in v en to ry a d m in is tra tio n s .
G a rre tt says t h a t th e re i s f a i r l y good agreement among workers
w ith p sy ch o lo g ical and ed u c a tio n a l t e s t s t h a t a c o e f f ic ie n t from +.40
10.
11.
12.
See Appendix, p . 102
P . M. Symonds, D iagnosing P e rs o n a lity and Conduct, p . 95.
I b id . . p . 96.
35
Table I I I
C o e ffic ie n ts of V a lid ity o f th e Speech In v e n to ry Based on
Scores and R atings of F i f t y E a ste rn I l l i n o i s S ta te
Teachers C ollege Summer School S tudents
Speech
Aspect
F irs t
Admini s tr a t i o n
Second
A d m in istratio n
Voice
.75 / .04
.80 / .03
.775
E nunciation
.57 / .06
.58 / .06
.575
F le x ib ility
.56 / .06
.60 / .06
.580
Language
.64 / .05
.54 / .07
.589
Manner
.67 / .05
.73 / .03
.700
36
to +.70 denotes s u b s ta n tia l o r marked r e la tio n s h ip ; and from £ .7 0 to
+.100 denotes high to v e ry h ig h r e la tio n s h ip .
13
H ull s ta te s i n re g a rd t o th e size of c o e f fic ie n ts of c o r re la tio n
between genuine a p titu d e and t e s t s th a t a c o e f f ic ie n t from + .60 to + .7 0
i s a co n sid erab le v a lu e ; from + .70 to + .80 i s of decided value b u t r a r e l y
found, and th a t above + .8 0 i s n o t obtained by p resen t methods.
14
I t would appear i n l i g h t of th e c r i t e r i a a g a in st which th e Speech
Inventory was measured t h a t th e c o e f f ic ie n ts obtained in d ic a te d t h a t
th e Inventory was s u f f i c i e n t l y v a lid to w arrant i t s use in t h i s in v es­
ti g a t i o n .
The second method o f d eterm ining th e v a l i d i t y according t o G a r re tt
i s through r e lia n c e on competent judges as to th e s u it a b i l i t y of the
m a te ria l in clu d ed .
T his procedure was follow ed in th e course of th e
development of th e In v e n to ry as d iscu ssed i n Chapter I I I .
The in v e s tig a to r
took th e o p p o rtunity a ffo rd e d a t New York U n iv e rsity to d is c u s s , s te p
by s te p , th e developm ent of th e In v en to ry w ith members of th e Speech and
Dramatic A rts departm ents o f th e School of Education.
The t h ir d method s u i t a b l e to th is in v e s tig a tio n which was p rese n te d
by G a rre tt i s through th e u se of th e index of r e l i a b i l i t y .
These d a ta
were included in th e d is c u s s io n o f r e l i a b i l i t y and th e indexes d eriv e d
placed in Table I , page 28.
G a rre tt says "The index of r e l i a b i l i t y g iv es th e
c o rre la tio n between o b tain e d sc o res and th e o r e tic a lly tru e sco res i n th e
same fu n c tio n .
The in d e x , th e r e f o r e , i s in r e a l i t y a v a lid ity c o e f f i c i e n t ,
sin ce i t t e l l s us how w e ll o u r t e s t i s measuring tru e a b i l i t y in th e func­
tio n -which i t p rq p o rts t o
13.
14.
15*
m e a s u r e .'* ^
H. E. G a r re tt, S t a t i s t i c s in Psychology and Education, p . 342.
C. H. H u ll, A p titu d e T e stin g , p. 276.
G a rre tt, op. c i t . . p . 329.
37
T ieg s s a y s, "We may take c e rta in in fe re n c e s re g a rd in g th e v a li d ity of a
t e s t by u t i l i z i n g th e index of r e l i a b i l i t y . . . . i t re v e a ls something about
th e e x te n t to which -the t e s t i s approaching th e tr u e measure of th e t r a i t
o r a b i l i t y in question."^®
Summary
T his c h a p te r has p resen ted th e procedures by which th e r e l i a b i l i t y
and v a l i d i t y o f th e Speech Inventory were e s ta b lis h e d .
Both r e l i a b i l i t y
and v a l i d i t y c o e f f ic ie n ts were obtained by c o r r e la tin g sco res made on
th e In v en to ry by summer school stu d en ts a t th e E a ste rn I l l i n o i s S ta te
T eachers C ollege during th e summer se ssio n of 1940.
Two a d m in istra tio n s
o f th e In v en to ry were made w ith a f iv e week i n t e r v a l in te rv e n in g .
The
c o r r e la tio n o f th e sco res made by f i f t y stu d e n ts gave th e r e l i a b i l i t y
c o e f f ic ie n ts p resen ted i n Table I , page 28.
The speech of each o f th ese stu d e n ts was judged by seven to tw enty
fe llo w s tu d e n ts .
The c o rre la tio n of th e average o f th e se judgments w ith
th e In v en to ry scores o f each o f th e a d m in istra tio n s mentioned above was
made t o g e t th e c o e f fic ie n ts of v a l i d i t y .
These c o e f f ic ie n ts were p re­
se n te d in Table I I , page 32.
16.
E . W. T ieg s, T ests and Measurements in th e Improvement of Learning.
p . 386.
CHAPTER V
DEVELOPMENT OF THE TEACHER-RATING SCALE
I t has been p o in te d out i n th e in tro d u c to iy ch ap ter o f t h i s study
t h a t th e judgment o f a te a c h e r ’s success fu rn ish e d by h is p r in c ip a l
would probably be as dependable as judgments rendered by any o th e r
in d iv id u a l.
I t was f u r th e r in d ic a te d th a t th e p r in c ip a l probably would
make a judgment n o t f a r from t h a t rendered by a group o f judges.
For
t h i s study i t was decided th a t p r in c ip a l s ’ opinions would serv e as
c r i t e r i a f o r e s ta b lis h in g th e success of te a c h e rs .
This ch ap ter i s
concerned w ith th e development o f a r a tin g sc a le to be used by th e
p r in c ip a l to serv e as a measurement o f the success of a teacher*
Teacher C h a ra c te ris tic s
The s e le c tio n of c h a r a c te r is tic s was made from a l i s t b u i l t from th e
a n a ly s is of c o n sid e ra b le p ro fe s s io n a l l i t e r a t u r e on te a c h e r r a t in g under
th e guidance of P ro fe sso rs R. E. L a n g fitt and Ambrose L. S uhrie o f New
York U n iv e rsity .
Five s tu d ie s o f methods of r a t in g teach ers were in v e s tig a te d in order
to d isco v er what te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s were considered most im portant
f o r th e teach er*
Two major s tu d ie s made a t approxlam tely th e same tim e, about ten
y e a rs ago, found two d i s t i n c t l i s t s o f t r a i t s o f su p e rio r te a c h e r s .
B arr
and Enans analyzed 209 r a t in g s c a le s and found t h a t th e te n p o in ts most
fre q u e n tly mentioned w ere:
(1) in s tr u c tio n a l a b i l i t y , (2) classroom
39
management, (3) p ro fe s sio n a l a t tit u d e , (4) choice of su b je c t m a tte r,
(5) d i s c i p l i n e , (6) appearance o f room, (7) p e rso n a l h a b its , (8) per­
so n al appearance, (9) co o p eration, and (10) h e a lth .^ The second major study was th a t done under th e d ire c tio n of C harters
and W aples.
H erein e ig h ty -th re e t r a i t s of te a c h e rs a re an aly zed .
in v e s tig a tio n p la c e s th e follow ing as th e most im p o rtan t:
The
(1) a d a p ta b ility ,
(2) b rea d th o f i n t e r e s t , (3) enthusiasm , (4) f o rc e f u ln e s s , (5) good
g
judgment, (6) le a d e rs h ip , and (7) s e lf c o n tr o l.
Other s tu d ie s have been eq u ally in d iv id u a l i n t h e i r fin d in g s .
Leventhal
c o lle c te d th e l i s t o f d e s ira b le te a c h e r t r a i t s from s ix ty te a c h e rs and
s ix ty n o n -te a c h e rs.
b o th were:
He found th a t th o se most fre q u e n tly mentioned by
(1) knowledge of su b je c t-m a tte r, (2) c l a r i t y i n ex p lan atio n ,
(3) sense o f humor, (4) even temper, (5) enthusiasm , (6) f r ie n d lin e s s ,
(7) c h e e rfu ln e s s, (8) good v o ice, (9) good p h y s ic a l appearance, and
(10) sym pathetic a t t i t u d e .
s
H a rt, c o n sid e rin g th e statem ents o f 4,000 high school s tu d e n ts , l i s t s
th e fo llo w in g as th e most fre q u e n tly mentioned c h a r a c te r is tic s of b e s t
lik e d te a c h e rs :
(1) in s tr u c tio n a l a b i l i t y , (2) good n a tu re , (3) f r i e n d l i ­
n e s s , (4) i n t e r e s t in p u p ils , (5) a b i l i t y to make work in te r e s tin g ,
(6) good d i s c i p l i n a r i a n , (7) im p a r tia lity , (8) n o t cro ss or s a r c a s tic .^
E n g elh art and Tucker provide th e fo llo w in g l i s t o f t r a i t s as those
1.
2.
3.
4.
A. S. B arr and L. N. Kuans, Ullhat Q u a litie s a re P r e re q u is ite to Success
in Teaching, Nation*s Schools. (September, 1930), p . 60.
W. W. C h arters and Douglas Waples, The Commonwealth T eacher-T raining
S tudy.
E lia s L ev en th al, Q u a litie s R elated t o Success in High School Teaching
as Judged by Teachers and Adult Non-Teachers.
F . W. H a rt, Teachers and Teaching.
40
most fre q u e n tly possessed by good te a c h e rs :
(1) good judgment, (2)
im p a r tia lity , (3) firm n ess, (4) c l a r i t y i n e x p la n a tio n , (5) re sp e c tin g
opinions of o th e rs, (6) a p p re c ia tio n o f o th e r s , (7) i n t e r e s t in p u p ils ,
(8) broadmindedness, (9) knowledge o f subject.®
These f iv e s tu d ie s p re s e n t t h i r t y s e p a ra te te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s
considered t o be of major im p o rtan ce.
By th e e lim in a tio n of a l l c h a ra c te r­
i s t i c s wherein speech was u n im p o rtan t, th e l i s t was reduced to fo u rte e n :
(1) d is c ip lin e , (2) c o o p e ra tio n , (3) a d a p ta b ility , (4) enthusiasm , (5)
fo rc e fu ln e s s , (6) le a d e rs h ip , (7) s e lf c o n tr o l, (8) c l a r i t y in ex p lan atio n ,
(9) sense o f humor, (10) f r i e n d l i n e s s , (11) good v o ic e , (12) sym pathetic
a t t i t u d e , (13) c h e e rfu ln e ss, and (14) a b i l i t y to make work in t e r e s t in g .
D is c ip lin e was removed from th e f i n a l l i s t because of th e various
in te r p r e ta tio n s which th e p r in c ip a ls might make.
One p r in c ip a l might
consider good d is c ip lin e t h a t which i s r ig i d and form alj another might
consider i t t o be f r e e and a c t i v e .
F o rcefu ln ess and voice were om itted
because th ey were to be measured by th e Speech Inventory.
C la r ity in
ex p lan atio n and a b i l i t y to make work i n t e r e s t in g were om itted because of
th e degree of s u b je c tiv ity which would probably e n te r in to th e p r in c ip a l's
judgments of them.
To t h i s rem aining l i s t was added on th e recommendation of P ro fesso r
L a n g fitt an ita n r e f e r r in g t o th e in flu e n c e which th e te a c h e r had on th e
l i v e s of th e p u p ils .
F in a lly th e se c h a r a c te r is t ic s were grouped, d escrib ed
in o th er words and phrases and in clu d ed on th e Teacher R ating Scale which
i s p resen ted as th e n e x t page in t h i s stu d y .
5.
M. D. Engelhart and Tucker, T r a its R elated to Good and Poor Teachers,
School Review. (Jan u ary , 1936), p . 32.
41
Seth A. Fessenden
School of Education
New York University
T E A C H E R
for use with
THE SPEECH INVENTORY
R A T I N G
S C A L E
DIRECTIONS;
The teachers to be considered are identified for you by numbers
vfhich have also been placed on the speech inventory. Please be sure
that the identification number of eaoh teacher rated corresponds with
the number on the speech inventory blank used by that teacher. Rate
them aooording to your judgment of the degree to which they possess
eaoh of the six qualities listed below.
KEY;
Use 1 to indicate "rates low," 2 to indicate "average," and 3 to indi­
cate "rates high."
QUALITIES
TEACHERS RATED
ATTITUDES:
Open-minded, optimistic, cooperative.
Is not over-critioal; does not form deter­
mined opinions on impulse} works in friendly
spirit with students, other members of the
faculty, and the administration.
LEADERSHIP:
Resourceful, initiative, original.
Has individuality, personality; is a per­
son whom you will remember; does not "let
George do it"; is able to organize and
carry through a project.
TACT:
Has good social judgment and "common sense".
Says and does the proper thing at the proper
time; can always be depended upon to create
a favorable impression.
SENSE OF HUMOR:
Cheerful, enthusiastic.
Not over serious; is tolerant of others;
does not take joy out of life and work;
sees the bright side; has "pep."
RELATION TO PUPILS:
Courteous, considerate, sympathetic.
Gains pupil’s confidence and holds it;
seems to have real interest in their
welfare.
INFLUENCE ON PUPILS:
Promotes pupil's growth and achievement
in socially desirable ways of living.
Rated b y ______ i
_________________
Principal
Address
42
Some o f th e se c h a r a c te r is tic s have been in v e s tig a te d by Manahan and
Jarman.®
They found t h a t s u p e rio r te a c h e rs -were judged th ir ty - e ig h t
p e r cen t h ig h er in le a d e rs h ip and re so u rc e fu ln e ss than in f e r io r te a c h e rs.
They found th a t su p e rio r teach er? were judged t h i r t y - f o u r p e r cent
h ig h e r on t a c t and common-sense than i n f e r i o r te a c h e r s .
in v e s tig a te th e sense o f humor.
They d id not
They found s u p e rio r te a c h e rs were judged
t h i r t y - e i g h t p er cen t h ig h e r i n t h e i r b e n e f ic ia l r e l a t io n w ith p u p ils than
i n f e r i o r te a c h e rs .
They made no d i r e c t in v e s tig a tio n of th e in flu en c e
o f th e te a c h e r on th e l i v e s o f th e p u p ils .
There was no summation s e c tio n p laced on th e r a tin g s c a le .
The
r a tin g s in a l l q u a litie s were to ta le d f o r gen eral te a c h e r success, fo r
th e in te r p r e ta tio n of th e d a ta .
The p r in c ip a l was asked to c la s s if y the
te a c h e rs as only low, av erag e, o r h ig h .
The words, s u p e rio r and in f e r io r
were n o t used fo r f e a r a p r in c ip a l might h e s it a t e to c la s s if y one of h is
te a c h e rs as in f e r io r w h ile he m ight adm it th e te a c h e r did r a te low i n the
q u a litie s .
Summary
This ch ap ter has p rese n te d th e method by which th e r a tin g sca le to be
used by th e p rin c ip a ls i n th e stu d y was developed.
P ro fe ssio n a l stu d ie s d e a l­
in g w ith th e c h a r a c te r is tic s o f s u p e rio r te a c h e rs were in v e s tig a te d .
c h a r a c te r is tic s of su p e rio r te a c h e rs were d isco v e red .
T h irty
Those c h a r a c te r is tic s
which were not concerned w ith th e speech of th e te a c h e r, and th o se c h a ra c te r­
i s t i c s which the Inventory in v e s tig a te d were elim in ated from th e l i s t .
To
th e r e s u ltin g l i s t was added one g en eral ch aracteristic^ m ak in g th e item s
on th e r a tin g sh eet a t t i t u d e s , le a d e rs h ip , sense o f humor, t a c t , r e la tio n t o
p u p ils , and in flu en ce on p u p ils .
6.
There was no summation item in clu d ed .
John L. Manahan and A. M. Jarman, A Comparison of S uperior and Tnferi mT eachers. p . 23.
*"
CHAPTER VI
ADMINISTRATION OF THE INSTRUMENTS
In o rd er t h a t t h i s in v e s tig a tio n might r e f l e c t a r a th e r r e p re s e n ta tiv e
group of American te a c h e r s , a t o t a l o f 200 schools were chosen from tw elve
s ta te s .
The choice o f th e s ta t e s was such th a t each s e c tio n of th e c o u n try
would be sampled.
The choice of th e schools was determ ined by a lp h a b e tic a l
l i s t i n g s o f towns o f over 1 0 ,0 0 0 p o p u latio n in which th e re was n o t more
than one s e n io r h ig h sch o o l.
The tw elve s ta te s chosen to sample w ere:
in
th e E ast, M assach u setts, New York, New Jersey and Pennsylvaniaj i n th e
South, V irg in ia and Texas; in th e Middle West, Ohio, In d ian a, I l l i n o i s and
Michigan; i n th e West, Colorado and Washington.
c i t i e s from any s t a t e were s e le c te d .
Not more than tw enty
There has been placed in th e appendix'1'
a l i s t i n g o f a l l sch o o ls chosen, th e schools which promised c o o p eratio n ,
and th e sch o o ls which f i n a l l y provided a s u f f ic ie n t amount of th e d e s ire d
data fo r in c lu s io n i n th e stu d y .
p r in c ip a l's d i s c r e t i o n .
The choice of teach ers was l e f t to th e
The m ajor teach in g f ie ld s of th e se te a c h e rs and
t h e i r years o f s e rv ic e seem to in d ic a te th a t th i s in v e s tig a tio n p re s e n ts
r e s u l t s based on a re aso n ab ly wide d is tr ib u tio n .
There has been p laced in
th e appendix a ta b u la tio n o f th e number of teach ers in each f i e l d and th e
y e ars of s e rv ic e .
O
The p r in c ip a ls * s e le c tio n of th e teach ers gave an unbalanced t o t a l ,
many more samples o f good than poor te a c h e rs .
1.
2.
See Appendix, p . 85
I b id . . p . 160
Table IV, which summarizes
44
Table IV
Ratings Given th e Teachers Who
Cooperated in This Study by T heir P r in c ip a ls
Number
Rated
High
Number
Rated
Average
Number
Rated
Low
T o ta l
Rated
A ttitu d e s
253
133
18
404
L eadership
221
155
28
404
T act
212
164
28
404
Sense o f Humor
216
164
24
404
R e la tio n to P u p ils
260
131
13
401
In flu e n c e on P u p ils
217
170
17
404
1379
917
128
2424
Teacher
Q u ality
T o ta ls
45
th e r a tin g s given th e s e v e ra l te a c h e rs on th e T eacher-R ating S cale, shows
th a t p r in c ip a ls tended to consider a l l o f t h e i r te a c h e rs above average;
i n only 128 in sta n c e s were te a c h e rs judged below average . The in v e s ti­
g a to r f e e ls th a t i t would have been b e t t e r had th e number of teachers
judged above average and below average been approxim ately equal; how­
e v e r, i n view of th e tre n d ap p arent in th e f in a l com pilation of d ata
p resen ted in Chapter VII i t would appear t h a t in s p ite o f th e v a ria tio n s
in numbers, th e samples a re f a i r l y re p re s e n ta tiv e of th e whole.
Inasmuch as th e d a ta were m ainly from te a c h e rs r a te d h ig h , th e re was
th e o p p o rtu n ity to check th e u n ifo rm ity o f answers given th e Speech
Inv en to ry by th ese te a c h e rs r a te d as s u p e rio r.
I f most o f th e se teach ers
had been found to have a high d egree of speech competency, then th e re
would have been j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r concluding t h a t th e b e t te r teach ers had
good speech h a b its .
This r e s u l t could have been compared w ith th e condition
found among th e poor te a c h e rs to determ ine th e r e la tio n s h ip .
An a n a ly sis
o f th e co n d itio n s found has been p laced i n Chapter VII o f t h i s study.
A l e t t e r was se n t to each of th e p r in c ip a ls of th e se schools explain­
in g in b r ie f the plan o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n , and a re q u e s t th a t he mail an
enclosed card i f he were w illin g to a id i n the stu d y .
There have been placed
i n th e appendix® copies o f th e l e t t e r and card u sed .
One hundred and seventeen o f th e two hundred p r in c ip a ls retu rn ed th e
card ex p ressin g t h e i r w illin g n e s s to co o p erate.
To each o f th ese p r in c ip a ls was s e n t a second l e t t e r containing
d ir e c tio n s , a tea ch er r a tin g s c a le , f iv e copies o f th e Speech Inventory,
and a stamped se lf-a d d re sse d envelope in which to r e tu r n th e requested
3!
I b id . . "p'.r q i-6 2
46
d a ta .
A copy o f t h i s l e t t e r has been p laced in th e appendix.^
follow -up card was u sed .
One
A copy o f t h i s card has been placed in th e
appendix.®
Four hundred and tw enty-one In v e n to rie s were re tu rn e d .
Of t h i s
number 404 were accompanied by th e te a c h e r r a tin g s c a le aid were
s u f f ic ie n tly complete to be in c o rp o ra te d in t h i s stu d y .
There have been
included in th e appendix® fo u r types of l e t t e r s from schools asked to
co o p erate.
These a re in c lu d e d , n o t as d a ta , b u t as evidence of types
of re c e p tio n given t h i s s tu d y .
4.
5.
6.
I b id . . p . 93
I b i d . , p . 94
I b id . . p . 95-99
CHAPTER VII
INTERPRETATION OF DATA
The s o lu tio n to th e problem which t h i s study in v e s tig a te s , th e
r e l a t i o n between th e success in teach in g and th e speech competency of
th e secondary school te a c h e r, was sought through th e c o n s id e ra tio n of
fo u r groups o f d a ta :
f i r s t , th e responses made to each o f th e item s of
th e Speech In v en to ry ; second, th e t o t a l sco res f o r each o f th e speech
a s p e c ts ; t h i r d , th e c o e f f ic ie n ts o f c o r re la tio n between In v en to ry sco res
and p r i n c i p a l s ' r a t in g s ; and fo u rth , th e d i s tr ib u tio n o f th e in d iv id u a l
scores*
Item Response
The resp o n ses given each item in th e Speech In v en to ry by a l l te a c h e rs
in v e s tig a te d were ta b u la te d under twenty-one h ead in g s.
The responses
made by a l l te a c h e rs whom th e p r in c ip a ls ra te d high in a tt itu d e s were
re co rd ed , th e resp o n ses made by a l l te a c h e rs whom th e p r in c ip a ls ra te d
average in a t t i t u d e s were reco rd ed, and the responses made by a l l te a c h e rs
whom th e p r in c ip a ls r a te d as low in a ttitu d e s were reco rd ed .
This same
procedure was follow ed to reco rd a l l th e answers made by a l l te a c h e rs
f o r each r a tin g i n each o f th e te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s .
F u rth e r, a l l
answers given by a l l te a c h e rs ra te d high in each te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic
were ta b u la te d , a l l answers given by a l l te a c h e rs r a te d average i n each
c h a r a c te r is tic were ta b u la te d , and a l l answers given by a l l te a c h e rs
r a te d low were ta b u la te d *
I t was found t h a t th e s e d ata could n o t be in te r p r e te d r e a d ily because
48
o f th e d iffe re n c e s in th e numbers o f te a c h e rs r a te d h ig h , average, and
low in th e s e v e ra l c h a r a c te r is tic s by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls .*
In order to
pro v id e ta b le s which could be in te r p r e te d more r e a d ily , each of th e above
mentioned ta b u la tio n s was converted to a common b ase o f one-hundred.
This
was done by m u ltip ly in g th e resp o n ses made by th e 250 te a c h e rs who had
been ra te d high in a t t i t u d e s by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls by .4 0 , th e responses
made by th e 131 teach ers who had b e a i r a te d average in a ttitu d e s by t h e ir
p r in c ip a ls by .76, and th e resp onses made by th e 18 te a c h e rs ra te d low in
a t t i t u d e by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls by 5 .6 0 .
A s im ila r procedure was followed
to co n v ert a l l fig u re s from th e tw enty-one ta b u la tio n s to th e common
b a s is f o r comparison.
The m u ltip lie r s used in each case a re shown in
Table V.
The com parative fig u r e s f o r a l l o f th e in d iv id u a l te a c h e r c h a ra c te ri s t i c s have been placed i n th e appendix o f t h i s s tu d y .
p
There have been
p laced i n th e body of t h i s stu d y only th o se f ig u r e s which re p re se n t the
resp o n ses made to each item o f th e In v en to ry by th e te a c h e rs ra te d high,
av erag e, and low in th e v ario u s te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c s .
T herefore,
Tables V I, V II, V III, and IX r e p re s e n t a l l of th e responses from a l l of
th e te a c h e rs in v e s tig a te d .
Table VI, page 50, p re s e n ts th e answers made by a l l of th e teach ers to
th e Speech T rain in g d iv is io n o f th e Speech In v e n to ry .
The columns of th i s ta b le in d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs ra te d accord­
in g to subheadings who have had tr a in in g in each of th e f ie ld s of speech
l i s t e d , who d e s ir e tr a in in g in each of th e f ie l d s l i s t e d , and who consider
1.
2.
See page 44 o f t h i s stu d y .
See Appendix, p . 171-212
49
Table V
C o n stan ts Used to Convert th e S everal Summed
Item Answers to A Comparative B asis of 100 Causes
Teacher
Q uality
To Convert
Those
Rated High
To Convert
Those
Rated Average
To C onvert
Those
Rated Low
Leadership
.47
.65
3.55
Tact
.47
.61
3.55
Sense of Humor
.46
.61
4 .2 0
00
to
7.7 0
In flu en c e on P u p ils
.46
.59
5.90
T o ta l Teaching Q u a litie s
.07
.1 1
CD
R ela tio n to P u p ils
.
-a
5.60
•
.76
CD
.40
•
A ttitu d e s
50
Table VI
Responses to the Speech Training D iv isio n of th e Speech
Inventory by an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in A ll of th e Teacher C h a ra cteristics.
Speech
F ie ld s
Would
D esire T rain in g
Have
Had T raining
Consider Most
Im portant F ield s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
A cting
40
35
26
22
18
15
9
6
4
7
6
5
21
20
11
1
1
0
42
42
33
10
11
9
5
4
1
Group D iscussion 37
47
35
29
36
37
54
44
57
Oral I n te r p r e ta ­
46
tio n
43
32
18
19
20
42
38
55
P arliam en tary
Procedure
41
38
31
19
20
15
8
9
11
P honetics
30
34
25
23
20
13
14
20
25
P u b lic Speaking
65
66
50
30
30
55
55
62
52
Speech Correc­
tio n
23
24
20
39
41
28
42
42
48
Voice T rain in g
35
38
32
47
42
48
59
44
50
366
373
289
258
257
251
298
270
303
Choral Speaking
Debate
T o tal
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would u se th e words presented
under the circum stances d e sc rib e d in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
51
c e r ta in o f th e f i e l d s most im p o rta n t.
The fig u re s i n each o f th e th r e e
columns a re d i r e c t l y com parable.
These f ig u r e s in d ic a te t h a t th e te a c h e rs ra te d high i n a l l of th e teach er
c h a r a c te r is tic s t y th e p r in c ip a ls have had more speech t r a in i n g in th e
f i e l d of p u b lic speaking where th e te a c h e rs ra te d high have had f if t e e n
p er cen t more tr a in in g than have th e te a c h e rs ra te d low.
T his d iffe re n c e
i s rev e rse d i n th e responses made to th e sectio n asking th e f i e l d s in
which
tr a in in g
i s d e s ir e d .
T w enty-five per cent more of th e te a c h e rs r a te d
low wanted f u r t h e r tr a in in g in p u b lic speaking than did th e te a c h e rs
ra te d h ig h .
This would seem to in d ic a te th a t teach ers r a te d love f e e l th e
need f o r such t r a in i n g .
There was l i t t l e d iff e r e n c e between th e teach ers r a te d high and th e
te a c h e rs r a te d low in t h e i r choice of th e speech f i e l d s which th e y con­
sid ered most im p o rta n t.
F i f t y p e r cent or more of th e te a c h e rs considered
group d is c u s s io n , p u b lic sp eaking, and voice tra in in g th e most im p o rtan t
f ie ld s fo r th e te a c h e r .
Table 711 p re s e n ts th e answers made by a l l of th e te a c h e rs to th e
Voice and E nunciation d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory.
Over seventy p er cent o f a l l te a c h e rs in v e stig a te d considered t h e i r
voices to be av erag e.
This p ercen tag e would in d ic a te t h a t th e p itc h o f
the voice i s n o t an im portant ite m .
The same s itu a tio n was found through­
out th e e n tir e d iv is io n ; th e answers to no item in d ic a te d a d iff e r e n c e
between th e te a c h e rs r a te d h igh and th e teach ers r a te d low .
Table V III, page 54, p re s e n ts th e answers made by a l l of th e te a c h e rs
to th e A ttitu d e s d iv is io n o f th e Speech Inventory.
52
Table VII
Responses Made to the Voice and E n u n ciatio n D iv isio n
o f th e Speech Inventory by an Equal Number of
Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in A ll of the
Teacher C h a r a c te r is tic s .
Item on Inventory________Hi^i
1.
3.
4.
Teacher Rated
Average
Low P itc h
Average P itch
High P itch
5
72
24
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
1
1
2
10
18
23
14
25
0 .(1 )
43
48
G .(2)
0 .(3 )
s.d)
S.(2)
S . (3)
L .( l)
L .(2 )
L .(3 )
B .( l)
B .(2)
B#(3)
M .(l)
M.(2)
M.(3)
22
20
10
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
7
76
16
1
1
Lew
5
86
10
0
6
4
14
19
17
13
22
2
6
15
26
10
22
10
8
15
18
52
16
13
24
15
17
8
31
23
9
29
31
5
7
16
86
14
83
15
93
7
0
0
0
15
24
17
18
15
21
19
11
26
23
3
23
20
15
16
21
21
8
27
29
4
Continued on th e next pa ge
Item on In v en to ry
5.
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
A
o.
No. 4
No. 5
7*•
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
76
23
77
23
78
23
1
2
1
76
24
68
68
32
32
No. 4
No. 5
68
68
32
32
70
26
8.
None
Some
Much
15
47
37
14
50
35
18
48
39
28
55
9
4
3
27
58
23
65
9.
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
12
6
1
2
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
1
0
4
36
42
16
5
39
39
18
4
2
0
6
39
30
27
The columns in d ic a te th e number of teach ers ra te d
according to th e subheadings who s t a t e they would use the
words p re se n te d under th e circum stances described i n the
Inv en to ry and in d ic a te d by th e column headings.
54
Table VIII
Responses Made to the A ttitudes D ivision o f the Speech Inventory
by an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and
Low in A ll Teacher C h a ra cteristics.
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
52.
________ Yes______
Teachers Rated
Hisft Average Low
48
82
78
13
21
66
9
54
20
64
48
50
44
20
26
4
17
33
81
46
84
85
14
19
63
7
53
19
56
53
44
44
19
24
46
81
82
8
17
52
11
63
18
50
55
40
40
19
31
2
2
18
31
79
28
19
78
12
11
10
40
28
84
36
27
83
15
19
27
29
40
15
83
13
17
23
33
1
8
2
12
17
26
33
2
5
40
31
78
No_________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
36
11
17
80
64
23
72
34
78
20
39
41
43
67
70
87
64
54
12
40
14
14
82
70
25
64
36
78
26
37
43
42
66
71
90
66
61
15
83
40
49
22
13
33
29
80
33
45
9
54
62
65
62
90
91
50
62
92
80
48
54
79
86
8
10
41
12
68
58
65
66
44
16
18
90
72
30
67
28
76
31
33
53
44
70
67
76
60
77
15
81
35
66
13
73
60
65
56
86
87
51
61
5
?______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
15
5
3
7
13
12
8
11
12
20
12
1
19
11
2
1
4
9
3
0
2
10
19
22
11
6
3
.16
18
18
11
10
10
12
12
6
14
13
14
12
6
8
12
5
11
2
8
19
18
9
7
4
17
7
5
12
6
22
24
24
7
18
17
9
5
9
3
9
7
14
21
9
25
18
3
15
5
18
23
11
6
6
2
11
9
13
Continued on the next page
4
6
22
7
6
14
0
15
9
9
55
Item
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
60
28
52
17
38
74
62
27
52
14
43
21
10
19
49
34
92
80
23
45
9
50
71
49
54
34
89
75
26
44
68
12
10
46
67
50
No________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
56
34
46
13
56
33
12
66
31
67
57
. 18
64
82
47
43
3
21
6
57
27
90
83
25
42
7
36
56
48
10
68
43
82
45
23
35
12
8
49
27
62
48
56
30
75
59
26
64
89
36
51
20
59
69
37
42
7
13
59
40
73
46
22
35
8
11
68
48
87
58
31
39
?________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
27
17
15
25
4
25
19
16
14
5
8
10
12
15
8
7
5
4
24
3
21
10
8
12
11
8
11
4
3
4
4
6
21
8
12
36
10
25
5
10
7
15
5
4
23
4
1
6
7
8
1
3
7
13
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs r a te d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would use th e words presented
under th e circum stances d esc rib e d i n th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
56
In only fo u rte e n o f th e f i f t y item s of t h i s d iv is io n was th e re as
much as te n p er cen t d iff e r e n c e between th e number of responses made by
th e te a c h e rs r a te d high and th e te a c h e rs ra te d low .
The te a c h e rs ra te d
high by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls answered ”yes" te n per cent more fre q u e n tly to
item s 6 , 10, 12, 18, 22, 48, and 49, and answered
te a c h e rs ra te d low .
to 36 th an d id th e
The te a c h e rs ra te d low answered "no” te n p e r cent
more fre q u e n tly to iten s 4 , 1 2 , 18, 22, 24, and 48, and answered ”?" to
6 , 16, and 35 th an did th e te a c h e rs r a te d high.
This would seem t o in d ic a te t h a t th e chances a re four to one th a t
th e te ac h ers r a te d high would answer "y es” and th e teach ers r a te d low
would answer
12.
18.
22.
48.
"no” t o th e fo llo w in g q u estio n s:
At a p a r ty do you enjoy in tro d u c in g a s tra n g e r to th e o th e r
guests?
Do you endeavor to e x p ress y o u rs e lf in unusual and novel ways?
In speaking t o a group o f people do you use jokes e ffe c tiv e ly ?
Have you o fte n spoken a t p u b lic g atherings?
The d iffe re n c e s found i n t h i s s e c tio n o f th e Speech Inventory were n o t
s u f f ic ie n t to w arran t th e co n clu sio n t h a t th e responses made would
d istin g u is h between s u p e rio r and i n f e r i o r teach ers as measured by th e
Teacher R ating S c a le .
Table IX p re se n ts th e answers made by a l l of th e teach ers t o th e
Language d iv is io n of th e Speech In v e n to ry .
These fig u re s in d ic a te on ly th re e in sta n c e s where th e re i s as
much as a ten p er cent d iff e r e n c e between th e numbers of te a c h e rs ra te d
high and the te a c h e rs r a te d low answ ering an ite m .
Over te n p er c e n t more
o f th e te a c h e rs ra te d low used th e word "rowdy” in both of th e p o s sib le
in stan c e s and th e word ’^gripping” to a d u lt frie n d s than did th e te a c h e rs
ra te d h ig h .
57
Table IX
Responses Made to the Language D ivision of th e Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in A ll of the Teacher C haracteristics*
Item 1
Blacksheep
B rat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isg u stin g
D isp lea sin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
R epulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
2
3
1
16
14
6
9
11
8
1
0
0
36
28
34
10
12
10
14
32
7
19
3
7
1
1
0
2
2
4
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
5
5
3
16
13
16
37
30
30
2
7
1
2
6
2
10
16
14
7
13
7
2
2
0
4
Would Say
To P rin c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
3
2
2
80
4
4
1
1
1
0
0
1
3
67
5
72
2
0
9
3
14
5
2
0
2
1
Would Say
To S+.udents
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
4
3
3
32
32
31
16
13
19
9
14
11
2
3
2
6
1
13
5
7
3
10
2
20
9
1
2
2
2
8
1
6
5
7
1
22
0
14
Continued on the next page
58
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F ascinating
Gripping
In te re s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h rillin g
Would Say To
A dult F riend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
31
6
18
15
7
12
2
6
1
0
33
5
19
19
3
15
6
18
9
1
6
0
5
5
1
1
2
2
22
22
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
28
3
3
17
8
22
1
8
1
6
30
3
3
18
7
21
1
28
3
1
21
15
30
0
7
4
1
6
2
2
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would use th e words presented
under th e circum stances d esc rib e d i n th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by the column h ead in g s.
59
From th e in s p e c tio n o f th e f ig u r e s compared in Tables VI, V II, V III
and IX i t would appear t h a t th e re was very l i t t l e d iffe re n c e between th e
answers given to th e s e v e ra l item s by th e te a c h e rs ra te d high and th e
te a c h e rs r a te d low .
In o nly tw e n ty -six in sta n c e s out of a p o s sib le hundred
and f i f t y item s on th e In v en to ry i s th e r e a d iffe re n c e of as much as
te n p e r cen t i n "the answers given by th e te a c h e r r a te d high and th e te a c h e r
r a te d low.
Each o f th e s e in s ta n c e s has been d isc u sse d .
Comparative Scores
A second procedure was to compare th e scores derived by s c a lin g th e
to ta le d responses given t o th e in d iv id u a l Inventory item s by the te a c h e rs
ra te d h igh, average and low in th e v ario u s te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s .
In
o rder t h a t th e se sc o re s would be based on an equal number of c a se s, th e
comparative f ig u r e s d isc u s s e d on page
of t h i s chapter were u sed .
These
scores a re p re se n te d in T able X.
In order to determ in e th e d iffe re n c e th a t must e x is t between any
two scores o f any o f th e speech a s p e c ts so th a t th e score be m eaningful
and so t h a t th e re i s most probably a d iffe re n c e between t h e ir v a lu e s,
th e stan d ard e r r o r o f e s tim a te form ula was usedi
This form ula as s ta te d gives th e standard e r ro r of a score p re d ic te d
from an e q u atio n .
T h is means t h a t were any group of judges to r a t e any
speech a s p e c t, th e chances would be s ix ty - e ig h t in one hundred t h a t th e
sco re made on th e Speech In v en to ry would be w ith in p lu s or minus th e value
of th e standard e r r o r o f estim a te of a score p re d ic te d by the re g re s s io n
form ula.
I f th e r e la tio n s h ip between th e speech c r ite r io n , which was
th e judgment o f a group o f o b se rv e rs, and th e scores made on the Speech
60
Table X
Scores* f o r Each Speech Aspect D erived by S coring
th e Responses Made to Each Item of th e In ventory by an
Equal Number (100) of Teachers Rated High, Low, and
Average in Each o f th e Teacher C h a r a c te r is tic s In d ic a te d .
Teacher
C haracter­
is tic
Teachers
Rated
Voice
Speech Aspect Scores
Enunci­ F le x ia tio n
b i l i ty Language
T o tal
Manner Speech
A ttitu d e s
1129
1077
1321
1341
1293
1037
1014
1221
1221
1012
1170
3100
3120
3057
854
844
833
1131
1075
1033
1352
1266
1240
1023
994
948
1241
1190
1039
3124
3064
2846
High
Average
Low
829
869
831
1107
1269
1317
1287
1011
1015
1015
1167
1248
1167
3014
3085
2962
High
Average
Low
848
809
881
1045
1299
1285
1300
1013
975
1019
1244
1167
1130
3074
2987
2980
High
Average
Low
867
880
930
1106
1108
1081
1304
1327
1307
971
1049
980
1217
1184
1081
3085
3075
2939
High
Average
Low
841
880
818
1109
1078
1113
1324
1288
1282
1031
998
950
1204
1248
1049
3091
3085
2935
High
Average
Low
868
1112
863
881
1082
1077
1332
1295
1288
1035
976
955
1220
1220
1120
3108
3048
2921
High
Average
Low
879
869
859
High
Average
Low
1111
L eadership
T act
Sense of
Humor
R e la tio n to
P u p ils
In flu en c e
on P u p ils
T o tal o f
Q u a litie s
1100
1089
1089
1110
* The f ig u r e s w ith in each column are d i r e c t ly comparable.
61
In v e n to ry were p e r f e c t, then any d iffe re n c e between th e In ventory scores
o f th e high and low te a c h e rs could be assumed to be d i r e c t ly tr a n s la ta b le
in to ju d g e s' probable r a tin g s .
However, because t h i s r e la tio n s h ip i s n o t
p e r f e c t, each sco re made on th e Inventory must be considered to re p re s e n t
a range of p ro b ab le judgments.
Conversely, any given judgment must be
assumed to re p re s e n t a range of probable s c o re s .
I f , th e r e f o r e , a score
a tta in e d by th e te a c h e rs ra te d high d i f f e r s from a sco re a tta in e d by th e
te a c h e rs r a te d low by le s s than tw ice th e stan d a rd e r r o r of estim ate of
judgments of an a s p e c t, then th e d iffe re n c e between th e two scores in t h i s
asp e ct should be considered n o t s ig n if ic a n t.
Table XI p re se n ts th e amounts f o r each o f th e speech asp e c ts by which
th e sco res o f th e te ac h ers ra te d high and low in any of th e te a c h e r c h a ra c te r­
i s t i c s must d i f f e r in o rder th a t th e d iffe re n c e between th e high and low
sc o re s be considered s ig n if ic a n t.
The d a ta in T able XI were computed
from th e stan d a rd e r ro r of estim ate form ula,
and a re converted to th e u n it base of 1 0 0 in o rd er t h a t th ey may be used
in d i r e c t re fe re n c e to the fig u re s in Table X.
I t w i l l be noted from an in sp e c tio n of Table X t h a t th e re i s no
s itu a tio n w herein th e d iffe re n c e s between th e te a c h e rs r a te d h ig h and
th e te a c h e rs r a te d low equals two standard e r r o r s of e s tim a te .
There seems to be no v a lid reaso n , however, f o r assuming t h a t th e se
sco res would, because of th e im perfect r e la t io n between ju d g e 's r a tin g s
of speech a sp e c ts and th e scores of th e In v e n to ry , be skewed in any
s p e c if ic d ir e c tio n .
I t seems as j u s t i f i a b l e to assume th a t th e " tru e "
sco re in v oice by te a c h e rs ra te d high might be 879 p lu s n o t more th an
th re e stan d a rd e r r o r s , and the score in v o ice by te a c h e rs ra te d low might
be 859 minus n o t more than th re e standard e r r o r s .
62
T able XI
The Amounts by Which th e Scores in the V arious
A spects Must D iffe r t o be C onsidered S ig n if ic a n t.
q—
Speech Aspect
Voice
*
N ecessary
D ifferen ce
,84
368
E nunciation
2.36
472
F l e x i b i l i ty
3.89
778
Language
1.96
392
Manner
1.83
366
63
Since th e r e i s no c e r ta in ty of which d ire c tio n from th e obtained
sco re the " tr u e ” score l i e s and sin c e none of th e scores have s u f f ic i e n t
spread between h ig h and low to s a t i s f y th e s ta te d n ecessary se p a ra tio n ,
i t seems probable t h a t th e se d a ta do n o t p re se n t a determ inable co n d itio n .
On t h i s b a s is i t would be f a i r l y concluded th a t th e re e x is ts no m easurable
d iffe re n c e in th e speech competency, as d efin ed , between th e su p e rio r
te a c h e rs and i n f e r i o r te a c h e rs in v e s tig a te d in t h i s study.
However, because of th e preponderance of su b je c tiv e d eterm in atio n s
in th e com piling o f th e s e d a ta , i t seems ad v isab le to consider th e tre n d
o f th e scores as a te n ta tiv e b a s is f o r in t e r p r e ta tio n .
There i s no c e r ta in ty t h a t te a c h e rs judged below average by one
p r in c ip a l would n o t have been judged above average by an o th er.
There i s
no c e r ta in ty , th e r e f o r e , t h a t t h i s stu d y has been able to group te a c h e rs
in to th e th re e c la s s e s f o r i n v e s tig a tio n .
F u rth e r, th e re i s no c e r ta in ty
t h a t th e c r i te r i o n a g a in s t which th e Speech Inventory was v a lid a te d was
tr u e , fo r judgments o f th e v a rio u s speech a sp ects v aried 5 th e r e fo r e , th e re
i s no c e r ta in ty i n any case t h a t th e m a jo rity , or average, of judgments
was c o r r e c t.
The C o e ffic ie n ts o f C o rre la tio n
The t h ir d procedure follow ed was to c a lc u la te th e c o e f f ic ie n ts of
c o r re la tio n between th e s e v e ra l In v en to ry scores and p r in c ip a ls ' r a t in g s .
Each Inventory was scored on s ix scales?
language, manner, and t o t a l sp eech .
voice, en u n ciatio n , f l e x i b i l i t y ,
The scores f o r each of th e se speech
a sp e c ts were c o r re la te d w ith th e p r in c ip a l s ' r a tin g s in each of th e te a c h e r
c h a r a c te r is tic s :
a t t i t u d e s , le a d e r s h ip , t a c t , sense of humor, r e l a t io n
to p u p ils , in flu e n c e on p u p ils , and the t o t a l of th ese s ix r a t in g s .
64
The form ula used fo r t h i s c o r re la tio n was:
- Z f y J j r - l£ J A . / / c - n
The fo rty -tw o c o e f f ic ie n ts of these c o r re la tio n s are p re se n te d in
Table X II.
These c o e f f ic ie n ts a re too low to in d ic a te any r e a l r e la tio n ­
s h ip between th e speech o f th e te a c h e rs in v e s tig a te d as measured try th e
Speech In v en to ry and th e r a tin g s made of these te a c h e rs by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls .
There a re b u t s ix o f th e fo rty -tw o c o e ffic ie n ts which a re g r e a te r than
fo u r p ro b ab le e r r o r s , which in d ic a te s th a t th e re a re b u t s ix in sta n c e s
w herein any r e la tio n s h ip can be assumed.
A ll c o e f f ic ie n ts are to o
low to a tte m p t any p re d ic tio n th a t speech competency i s o f im portance
to th e te a c h e r .
D is tr ib u tio n o f Scores
The f o u rth procedure was an in sp ec tio n of th e d i s tr ib u t io n o f
In v en to ry sc o re s and te a c h e r r a t in g s .
The c o e f f ic ie n ts of c o r re la tio n
in d ic a te t h a t th e p a ire d m easures of speech and te a c h in g fo llo w no p a tte r n ,
b u t th ey do n o t in d ic a te th e manner in which th e s e p a ire d m easures d i f f e r .
The c o e f f ic ie n ts in d ic a te t h a t th e re i s no reason to assume t h a t th e te a c h e r
who sco res high on th e Speech Inventory would be judged h ig h in th e
te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c s .
Table X III i s provided to co n sid e r th e p o ssi­
b i l i t y o f a te a c h e r who sco res high on th e Speech In v en to ry being ra te d
low i n th e te a c h e r c h a r a c t e r is t i c s .
This ta b u la tio n of th e percentage
of te a c h e rs r a te d low by t h e i r p rin c ip a ls in th e s e v e ra l te a c h e r charac­
t e r i s t i c s who scored high on th e Speech In v en to ry shows t h a t in 23 of th e
39 in s ta n c e s considered in th e ta b le the chances a re fo u r o u t o f f iv e th a t
Table XII
C o e ffic ie n ts of C o rre la tio n Between Each of th e Speech
A spects and Each of th e Teacher C h a r a c t e r is tic s ,
Voice
a tio n
A ttitu d e
-.0 6
-.0 2
-.0 2
.02
.02
.03
Leadership
-.0 4
.10
.13
.04
.06
.13
Tact
-.0 2
.12
.04
- .0 3
.06
.08
.01
.06
.14
.02
.09
.14
P u p ils
- .0 1
.03
.02
- .0 1
.00
. 02
In flu en c e on P u p ils
.08
.07
.01
.05
.08
.03
-.0 5
.05
.06
- .0 6
.05
.28
Humor
R e latio n to
T o ta l
Probable E rro r in a l l Cases "^.OS
b i l i t y Language Manner
T o tal
66
Table X III
Percentage of Teachers R ating Low i n th e Various Teacher
C h a ra c te ris tic s Who Scored High in th e Various Speech A spects.
Teacher C haracter­
i s t i c Rated Low in
P er Cent Scored High in Speech Aspect
Enun­
F le x i­
Manner
Voice
c ia tio n
b i l i t y Language
A ttitu d e s
17
11
17
6
33
Leadership
11
18
18
25
25
Tact
11
14
29
36
39
Sense of Humor
25
17
25
17
29
R elatio n t o P u p ils
15
31
23
8
31
6
24
18
12
18
In flu en ce on P upils
67
Table XIV
P ercentage o f Teachers R ating High in th e Various Teacher
C h a r a c te r is tic s Who Scored Low in th e Various Speech A spects.
Teacher C h a ra c te rP er Cent Scored Low in Speech Aspect
i s t i c s Rated High
EnunF le x iin ___________________ Voice
e la tio n
b i l i t y Language Manner
A ttitu d e s
47
26
22
30
25
Leadership
46
21
19
28
21
Tact
50
22
21
30
26
Sense o f Humor
46
25
21
28
23
R e latio n to P u p ils
49
25
21
30
23
In flu en ce on P u p ils
51
28
21
32
24
68
th e te a c h e r who sco res h ig h i n th e v arious speech a s p e c ts w i l l n o t be
judged as an i n f e r i o r te a c h e r by h is p r in c ip a l.
Table XIV, page 6 7 , i s in cluded to consider th e p ercen tag e of te a c h e rs
r a te d high in th e s e v e ra l te a c h e r q u a litie s who scored low i n th e Speech
In v en to ry .
Although in t h i s in sta n c e a g re a te r p ercen tag e o f th o se ra te d
high scored low , t h a t p ercen tag e i s n o t g re a t enough t o in d ic a te t h a t any
r e la tio n s h ip e x i s t s .
With th e exception of the speech a s p e c t, v o ic e , i t
appears t h a t th e chances average about th re e in fo u r t h a t th e te a c h e r who
scores low i n th e v a rio u s speech asp ects w ill n o t be judged as a su p e rio r
tea ch er by h is p r in c ip a l.
T h e re fo re , i t would appear th a t even though th e re i s n o t d i r e c t
r e la tio n s h ip between th e speech as measured and th e te a c h in g c h a ra c te r­
i s t i c s co n sid e red , th e speech o f th e te a c h e r may be a f a c to r i n th e
p r i n c i p a l 's r a t in g of h is te a c h e r s .
Summary
This ch ap ter has d e a lt w ith th e in te r p r e ta tio n o f th e d a ta receiv ed
in th e p ro g re ss o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
ways to a id in t h i s i n t e r p r e t a t io n .
These d a ta were analyzed in fo u r
F i r s t , the answers t o each in v e n to ry
item were ta b u la te d in groups according to th e p r i n c ip a l s ' r a t in g s .
These
to ta le d f ig u r e s were th en reduced to a common b a s is o f one hundred cases
each f o r com parison.
A comparison of th e responses to th e in d iv id u a l
item s in d ic a te d :
1,
The te a c h e rs who were judged su p erio r by t h e i r p r in c ip a ls had
had more speech tr a in in g th an th o se teach ers judged i n f e r i o r .
2.
The te a c h e rs who were judged in f e r io r wanted more a d d itio n a l
tr a in in g i n p u b lic speaking th a n d id those judged s u p e rio r .
69
3.
The Voice and E nunciation s e c tio n o f th e Speech Inventory showed
no d iffe re n c e between th e te a c h e r r a te d s u p e rio r and th e te a c h e r ra te d
in fe rio r.
4.
There were b u t four item s in th e a t t i t u d e s d iv is io n of the
Speech In v en to ry th a t seemed to in d ic a te a n o ta b le d iffe re n c e between
th e a t t i t u d e s o f su p e rio r and i n f e r i o r te a c h e rs .
5.
The i n f e r i o r tea ch ers were more l i k e l y t o use th e words "rowdy"
and "g rip p in g " th an were th e s u p e rio r te a c h e r s .
Second, th e se comparative fig u r e s each o f one-hundred cases were
scored f o r each o f th e speech a s p e c ts .
A c o n s id e ra tio n of th ese scores
in d ic a te d t h a t :
1.
In no in sta n c e was th e d iffe re n c e between the score of the
te a c h e rs ra te d su p e rio r and t h a t of th e te a c h e rs r a te d in f e r i o r s u f f ic ie n t
to conclude t h a t th e speech of th e groups d i f f e r e d .
2.
In t h i r t y out of th e fo rty -tw o in sta n c e s th e te a c h e r ra te d
s u p e rio r scored s li g h t l y h ig h er than d id th e te a c h e rs r a te d i n f e r i o r .
3.
The d iffe re n c e in th e sco res i n manner o f speaking between
th e s u p e rio r and i n f e r i o r te a c h e rs i s fa v o ra b le t o th e su p e rio r teachers
in every in s ta n c e .
T h ird , th e c o e f fic ie n ts of c o r r e la tio n between each of th e speech
asp e c ts and each o f th e teach er c h a r a c te r is ti c s were c a lc u la te d .
These
c o e f f ic ie n ts in d ic a te d th a t:
1.
In b ut s ix of th e fo rty -tw o in s ta n c e s were th e c o e f fic ie n ts
g r e a te r th an fo u r probable e r r o r s .
In th e se in s ta n c e s the c o e ffic ie n ts
were to o low to conclude t h a t th e r e la tio n s h ip between th e two groups
o f d a ta was im p o rtan t.
70
2.
The r e la tio n s h ip between none of the speech a sp e c ts and te a c h e r
c h a r a c te r is tic s was s u f f i c i e n t to in d ic a te th a t any speech a sp e c t i s
most or l e a s t im p o rtan t to th e te a c h e r .
F o u rth , th e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the in d iv id u a l speech sco res was
considered in re fe re n c e to th e p r in c ip a ls 1 ra tin g s of th e te a c h e r s .
It
was found t h a t :
1.
An average o f l e s s th an tw e n ty -fiv e per cent o f th e te a c h e rs
who were r a te d h igh in th e v a rio u s te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s scored low on
th e Speech In v e n to ry .
2.
An average o f l e s s th a n twenty p er cent o f the te a c h e rs who were
r a te d low in th e v a rio u s te a c h e r c h a r a c te r is tic s scored h ig h on the Speech
Inventozy.
CHAPTER V III
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
The Scope o f th e In v e stig a tio n
This has been an in v e s tig a tio n t o in q u ire in to t h e re la tio n s h ip
between th e speech competency and th e su ccess o f a te a c h e r .
Five
asp ects o f speech were chosen as r e p re s e n tin g th e gen eral q u a lity of
speech.
These asp ects were voice q u a lit y , e n u n c ia tio n , f l e x i b i l i t y of
speech which in cluded in to n a tio n and i n f l e c t i o n , language usage, and th e
manner o f sp eaking.
The success of th e te a c h e r was assumed t o be indicated
by h is p r i n c i p a l ’s r a tin g i n s ix s e le c te d q u a l i t i e s .
were:
These te a c h e r q u a litie s
a t t i t u d e s toward h is work and c o lle a g u e s , le a d e rsh ip and i n i t i a t i v e ,
t a c t , sense o f humor, r e la tio n to p u p ils , and th e e x te n t to which h is
in flu e n c e on th e p u p ils promotes t h e i r growth and achievement in s o c ia lly
d e s ira b le ways o f liv in g .
The te a c h e rs stu d ied in t h i s in v e s tig a tio n rep resen ted e ig h ty schools
in tw elve s t a t e s , M assachusetts, P en n sy lv an ia, New York, New Jersey , Ohio,
In d ia n a, M ichigan, I l l i n o i s , V irg in ia , T exas, Colorado, and Washington.
Teaching f ie ld s rep resen ted were E n g lish and speech, s o c ia l scie n ce,
p h y sica l s c ie n c e , language, m athem atics, commerce, home economics,
i n d u s tr i a l a r t s , music, a r t , and p h y s ic a l e d u c a tio n .
A t o t a l of four
hundred and fo u r teach ers were s tu d ie d .
Purposes of th e In v e stig a tio n
The prim ary purpose of th is in v e s tig a tio n was to d isc o v e r i f speech
were d i r e c t l y r e la te d to te a c h e r su c c e ss.
I t was a ls o hoped th a t i t could
72
be determ ined which a sp e c ts o f a te a c h e r 's speech seem to have th e
g r e a te s t bearing on h is pro b ab le su c c e ss .
A secondary purpose was to
d isco v er i f th e re was s u f f i c i e n t d iffe re n c e between th e general speech
competency of a poor and a good te a c h e r to support th e c o n ten tio n t h a t
a te a c h e r 's chance f o r success i s g r e a tly in flu en ced by h is speech, and
t o d isco v e r i f speech competency can j u s t i f i a b l y be considered to be a
reasonably dependable index t o th e probable success of any te a c h e r.
The Methods and In stru m en ts o f th e I n v e s tig a tio n .
Three major in stru m en ts were used i n th e in v e s tig a tio n .
F i r s t , The Speech In v e n to ry .
In order t h a t th e speech competency
of a l l te ach ers m ight be judged on a comparable b a s is , i t was n ecessary
to d ev ise a means to judge on an equal sc a le th e speech of each te a c h e r
r a te d .
This was attem pted by c o n s tru c tio n of a s e lf-a d m in is te rin g speech
t e s t o r in v e n to ry .
T his In v e n to ry was divided in to fo u r d iv is io n s :
speech tr a in in g , voice and e n u n c ia tio n , a ttitu d e s toward speech s itu a t io n s ,
and choice of words which would p ro b ab ly be used under c e r ta in circu m stan ces.
Each item used i n th e f i n a l form of th e in v en to ry was used i n experim ental
forms in one to th re e c la s s e s i n beginning speech in th e School of E ducation,
New York U n iv e rsity .
The answ ers given in th e se experim ental adm inis­
t r a tio n s were co n sid ered i n th e l i g h t o f observed speech a b i l i t i e s .
Those item s which seemed t o be in d ic a tiv e of c e rta in speech co n d itio n s
and •which were e a s ily answered were r e ta in e d .
The f in a l p rin te d form of
th e Speech Inventory co n tain ed se v e n ty -th re e item s w ith two hundred and
eig h ty -n in e p o ssib le answ ers d i s tr ib u t e d as fo llo w s;
Speech tr a in in g ,
ten item s w ith t h i r t y p o s s ib le answ ers; voice and en u n ciatio n , te n item s
w ith fo rty -n in e p o s s ib le answ ers; a ttitu d e s, f i f t y item s w ith one hundred
73
and f i f t y p o s s ib le answ ersj language, th re e item s w ith s ix ty p o s sib le
answ ers.
The v a l i d i t y and r e l i a b i l i t y o f t h i s in v en to ry were e s ta b lis h e d
by sc o rin g f i f t y cases wherein th e v ario u s speech a sp ects had been r a te d
by a group o f ju d g es.
C o e ffic ie n ts of v a l i d i t y ranged from .58 to ,80j
c o e f f ic ie n ts o f r e l i a b i l i t y from .62 to .8 5 .
Second, The Speech R ating S c a le .
In order t o determ ine what phases
of a te a c h e r 's speech were most im p o rtan t and in o rd er to have a more
ta n g ib le u n it th a n g en eral speech competency, speech was d iv id ed in to f iv e
a s p e c ts :
voice q u a lity , en u n ciatio n p ro fic ie n c y , f l e x i b i l i t y or ex p ressiv e­
n ess i n speech, language usage, and th e manner of speaking.
The design was
th e r e s u l t o f c la s s experim entation a t New York U n iv e rsity .
The s c a le
p erm itte d a four-w ay ch o ice:
e x c e lle n t, p r e t ty good, a c c e p ta b le , and below
s ta n d a rd .
On th e b a s is of th e se d iv is io n s th e In v en to ry was ad m in istered to
a group o f f i f t y summer school stu d e n ts a t th e E astern I l l i n o i s S ta te Teachers
C o lleg e, tw e n ty -fiv e of whom had had te a c h in g ex p erien ce, on two o ccasio n s,
f iv e weeks a p a r t.
Each of th e se stu d en ts was r a te d i n each speech a sp e c t
by seven to tw enty ju d g es.
The In v e n to rie s were scored and th e sco res
c o rre la te d w ith th e given ratings-. The c o e f f ic ie n ts o f v a l i d i t y were*
Voice .7 8 , en u n ciatio n .58, f l e x i b i l i t y .5 8 , language .60, and manner .7 0 .
The c o e f f ic ie n ts of r e l i a b i l i t y were:
vo ice .8 5 , en u n ciatio n .77,
f l e x i b i l i t y .82, language .62, and manner .8 1 .
T h ird , Teachers R ating S c a le .
The t h i r d major in stru m en t used in
t h i s in v e s tig a tio n was th e Teachers R ating S c a le .
This sc a le was designed
by choosing th e te a c h e r - c h a r a c te r is tic s found i n s e v e ra l in v e s tig a tio n s
to be most common among th e b e t te r te a c h e r s .
Also th e item s chosen to be
74
used in t h i s sc a le d e a lt i n some way w ith speech.
On th e b a s is of t h i s
second c r i te r i o n , item s such as a p p ro p ria te n e ss of d re s s and care of room
were d isc a rd e d .
The item s chosen f o r th e f i n a l s c a le were th o se mentioned
in th e i n i t i a l paragraph o f t h i s summary on page 70.
d e sc rib e d f o r th e p r in c ip a ls as A ttitu d e s :
c o o p erativ e; Leadership:
These item s were
open-minded, o p tim is tic ,
r e s o u r c e f u l, i n i t i a t i v e , o r ig in a l; T act:
good sound judgment and “common s e n s e ;1* Sense of humor:
e n th u s ia s tic ; R elatio n t o p u p ils :
and In flu en ce on p u p ils :
has
c h e e rfu l,
co u rteo u s, c o n s id e ra te , sym pathetic;
prom oting t h e i r growth i n s o c ia lly accep tab le
ways.
Method o f A dm inistration
Two hundred p rin c ip a ls were re q u e ste d to cooperate in t h i s in v e s t i­
g a tio n by r a tin g fiv e of t h e i r te a c h e rs and ask in g each to f i l l in th e
Speech Inv en to ry b lan k .
In th e f i n a l ta b u la tio n fo u r hundred and four
te a c h e rs were a v a ila b le f o r s tu d y .
Each of th e se had f i l l e d in most of th e
In v en to ry and had been r a te d by h is p r in c ip a l i n each of th e s ix te a c h e r
q u a litie s .
A summarization showed t h a t of th e p o s s ib le 2424 q u a lity
r a tin g s 1379 had been r a te d h ig h , 917 average and 128 low .
The answers
given to each item f o r each o f th e s ix q u a liti e s were ta b u la te d under
th re e headings:
high, av erag e, and low .
In a d d itio n t o t h i s th e re were
summarized th e answers o f a l l te a c h e rs r a te d h ig h , average, and low.
In order to provide a comparable s e r ie s of f ig u r e s each of th e se
tw enty-one ta b u la tio n s was converted t o a b a s is o f 100 cases as described
on page 48 of t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
Each of th e se s e r ie s of 100 cases
was scored f o r each of th e f iv e speech asp e c ts and, i n a d d itio n , f o r a
t o t a l speech a b i l i t y based on th e use o f every item used by th e in d iv id u a l
75
asp ects sc o rin g k ey .
The r e s u l t s obtained were analyzed f o r the s o lu tio n
to th e g en eral problem o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n .
In a d d itio n t o t h i s , each of th e te a c h e r q u a lity r a tin g s was c o r r e la te d
■with each o f th e speech a sp e c ts s c o re s .
A ppraisal of th e Means o f I n v e s tig a tio n
This in v e s tig a tio n has concerned i t s e l f , t o a la rg e e x te n t, w ith
su b je c tiv e elem en ts.
T h erefo re, as th e r e has been danger o f pyrami d i ng
constant e r r o r s which m ight have r e s u lte d from th e various judgm ents, th e
s t a t i s t i c a l m an ip u latio n o f th e f ig u r e s obtained in th e course of t h i s
in v e s tig a tio n has been h e ld to b a s ic pro ced u res.
sought to develop each new stag e o f th e stu d y .
New s u b je c ts were
This procedure, as was
poin ted out on page seven, le d to th e use of s ix hundred and s ix ty - fo u r
persons w hile th e a c tu a l study d e a ls w ith only fo u r hundred and f o u r.
I t was f e l t t h a t t h i s use o f v ario u s groups would le ss e n th e danger of
cum ulative e r r o r .
The in stru m e n ts used a re n o t f r e e from c r itic is m s .
I t is f e lt,
however, w ith th e development of th e Speech Inventory a new f i e l d of
re se a rc h has been opened f o r th e stu d y of speech.
Judgments a r e e s p e c ia lly open t o a tta c k .
proved to be e x a c t.
No such judgment can be
Had i t been f e a s ib le to o b tain th e judgments o f sev e ra l
competent in d iv id u a ls f o r each te a c h e r stu d ie d , th en a g re a te r degree of
f a i t h could have been p la ce d in th e r a tin g s given.
Thus, th e fin d in g s
and conclusion a r e t o be reg arded as te n ta tiv e and su g g estiv e, n o t con­
c lu siv e .
Though th e s e in stru m e n ts used have t h e i r weakness, the d a ta secured
in th e course o f t h i s in v e s tig a tio n a r e probably adequate to th e p u rp o se.
N E W YORK U N IV E R S IT Y "
S C H O O L OF ED U C A TIO N
*
LIBRARY
«
76
Both judgments o f speech competency and success i n teach in g a re nono b jec tiv e *
T his handicap was overcome, to an e x te n t, by narrow ing th e
range o f th e r a t in g s c a le s and using a s e lf-a d m in is te rin g in stru m en t
to r a t e th e speech*
The d a ta were considered t o be a ccep tab ly o b je c tiv e
fo r th e re n d e rin g of te n ta tiv e c o n clu sio n s.
I t i s probably im possible
to o b ta in , a t l e a s t w ith any procedure known to th e in v e s tig a to r , t r u l y
o b je c tiv e judgments o f e ith e r of th e two f a c to r s t h a t t h i s in v e s tig a tio n
has aimed to stu d y .
Conclusions
1.
Speech competency has a bearin g on th e success of a te a c h e r , but
i t appears t h a t i t i s but one of se v e ra l probable in flu e n c e s .
2.
Teachers who are judged as "high" in th e v ario u s te a c h e r q u a lit ie s
in v e s tig a te d i n t h i s study tend to have s li g h t l y g re a te r speech competency
th an th o se who a re judged average or low.
3.
T his tendency i s n o t s u f f ic ie n t t o w arra n t th e p r e d ic tio n th a t
th e te a c h e r w ith g re a te r speech competency w ill be more s u c c e s s fu l th an
th e te a c h e r w ith a l e s s e r degree of speech competency.
4.
I t i s p ro b ab le t h a t th e teach er w ith a high degree of speech
competency w i l l io t be ra te d as an in f e r io r te a c h e r.
5*
There seems to be some evidence t h a t co u rses in speech ten d to
enhance th e te a c h e r ’s chance f o r su ccess.
Teachers r a te d as su p e rio r had
taken tw enty-seven p er cent more courses i n speech th an th o se r a te d as
in fe rio r.
6.
I t appears t h a t th e q u a lity of v o ice i s th e l e a s t im p o rtan t speech
a sp e c t in r e l a t i o n to th e probable success of a te a c h e r .
7.
The manner i n which a te a c h e r speaks i s th e most im portant a sp ect
o f h is speech.
77
8.
I t i s p o ssib le by means of a s e lf-a d m in is te re d t e s t such as the
Speech Inv en to ry to c la s s if y in d iv id u a ls as having good or poor speech.
I t i s n o t p o s s ib le to p r e d ic t in d iv id u a l r a tin g s -with accuracy, but th e
use o f such an instrum ent can se g re g a te th e groups of poor and good
sp e a k e rs.
E ducational Im p licatio n s o f This Study
The e d u c atio n a l im p lic a tio n s r e s u l t i n g from t h i s in v e s tig a tio n are
r e l a t e d , in th e main, to th e f i e l d o f te a c h e r p re p a ra tio n .
I t i s n o t to
be assumed t h a t th e re la tio n s h ip s which have been poin ted o u t to e x i s t
between v ario u s phases o f a t e a c h e r 's success and th e v ario u s a sp e c ts of
speech a re to be in te rp r e te d as c a u s a l.
There has been p re se n te d , however,
evidence which seems to in d ic a te t h a t th e speech i s a f a c to r in teach er
su c c e ss .
Follow ing are some o f the more im p o rtan t ed u c a tio n a l im p licatio n s
o f t h i s stu d y .
1.
Speech tra in in g th a t i s given to p ro sp e c tiv e te a c h e rs should
concern i t s e l f , t o a la rg e e x te n t, w ith th o s e phases th a t a id in develop­
in g p le a s in g manners of p re s e n ta tio n .
2.
The m a jo rity of te a c h e rs have s li g h t l y b e t t e r than average
competency i n speech.
3.
Voice and enunciation problems t h a t a re n o t acu te do not seen to
be o f m ajor concern.
A more e f f i c i e n t vo ice and more e f f e c tiv e enunciation
may be o f co n sid erab le im portance to th e te a c h e r i n making h is speaking
and te ach in g e a s i e r , but th ey do not seem t o weigh h e a v ily w ith the
p r in c ip a l as he makes h is judgment o f th e te a c h e r 's su ccess.
4.
The speech competency o f an in d iv id u a l seems to be in creased by
course work in speech.
I t seems probable t h a t th e major c o n trib u tio n s of
78
speech courses l i e beyond o b je c tiv e accom plishm ents m easurable in terms
of speech competency.
5.
The Speech Inventory or a s im ila r group-adm inistered t e s t could
be used very e f fe c tiv e ly to s e p a ra te t h e s tu d e n ts w ith b e t t e r speech
from th o se -with poorer speech.
There seem to be th re e m ajor c o n tr ib u tio n s of t h i s in v e s tig a tio n :
f i r s t , t h a t speech competency i s a f a c t o r i n th e success of a teach er;
second, t h a t th e teac h er whose speech competency i s above average w ill
probably n o t be considered an i n f e r i o r te a c h e r; and t h i r d , t h a t th e more
speech tr a in in g th e teach er h as had, th e h ig h e r th e p r o b a b ility t h a t he
w i l l be ra te d as a su p erio r te a c h e r.
D esirab le F u rth er Research on th e Problem
There i s need f o r f u r th e r re s e a rc h on th e problem in v e s tig a te d in
th is th e s is .
Probably no stu d y which endeavors t o keep w ith in th e confines
of a s ta te d purpose can delve f a r in to th e unforseen p o s s i b i l i t i e s which
a r i s e in th e course of i t s developm ent.
To in v e s tig a te thoroughly the
r o le played by speech in determ ining t h e success o f te a c h e rs would
n e c e s s ita te a procedure which would h o ld c o n sta n t a l l o th e r in f lu e n tia l
fa c to rs .
I t would n e c e s s ita te an in v e s tig a tio n in to th e e f f e c t of speech
tr a in in g o r the mere p o ssessio n of h ig h speech-competency upon th e person­
a l i t i e s o f th e te a c h e rs .
I t would n e c e s s i ta t e an in v e s tig a tio n in to the
ed u c atio n a l and p h ilo so p h ical backgrounds o f th o se p r in c ip a ls whose opinions
determ ine th e r a tin g s given te a c h e r s .
To in v e s tig a te f u l l y th e problem
s e t f o r th i n t h i s th e s is would re q u ire an approach from many p o in ts of
view .
79
This study has pioneered th e f i e l d .
I t has given to th e stu d en t
f o r th e f i r s t tim e an in stru m ent w ith which speech can be measured
o b je c tiv e ly .
I t has opened new avenues f o r r e s e a rc h .
I t has provided a
preced en t by means o f which th e in flu e n c e of speech can be adequately
examined.
I t has pointed o ut a way to g r e a te r accom plishm ents.
80
B ibliography
Barker, M. E liz a b e th , R e la tio n o f P e rs o n a lity Adjustment o f Teachers
to T h eir E ffic ie n c y i n Teaching. Unpublished T hesis,
Teachers C ollege, Columbia U n iv e rsity , 1933.
Barnes, W alter, Language as S o c ia l Behavior.
XVI (March, 1937), pp. 275-88.
Educational Method.
B arr, A. S ., and Elnans, L. N ., TShat Q u a litie s Are P re rq u is ite
to Success in Teaching? N ations S chools.
(September, 1930), pp. 60.
Barrows, Sarah T. and P ie rc e , Anne E ., The Voice?
Boston: E&pression Company, 1933.
B ell, A. M., P r in c ip le s o f E lo c u tio n .
1887.
New York:
How to Use I t .
Edgar S. Wenxer,
B ern stein , F e lix , R egression and C o rre la tio n Evaluated by a Method
o f P a r t i a l Sums. Annals o f M athematical S t a t i s t i c s .
Volume V III, Number 2 (Ju n e, 1937), pp. 77-89.
Cable, W. A rth u r, A Program o f Speech Education in a Democracy.
Boston: The E xpression Company, 1932.
C a n tr il, Hadley and A llp o rt, G. W., The Psychology of Radio.
New York: H arper B ro th e rs, 1935.
C h arters, W. W., and W aples, Douglas, The Commonwealth TeacherT rain in g Study. Chicago: U n iv e rsity o f Chicago P re ss , 1929.
Coulton, Thomas E ., Speech as S ocial Behavior.
XVI, (March, 1937), pp. 298-305.
C raig, A lice E ., The Speech A r ts .
1934.
New York:
E ducational Method.
The Macmillan Company,
Cubberly, Ellwood P ., The Teaching P ro cess. Teacher Education
J o u rn a l. V ol. I I (September, 1940) No. 2, P. 76.
Davis, E s te lle H ., and Mammen, E. W., The Spoken Word in L ife and
A rt. New York: P re n tic e -H a ll, In c . 1933.
Dewey, John. Democracy and E ducation.
Company, 1923.
New York:
The Macmillan
81
E isenson, Jon, The Psychology o f Speech.
Company, 1938.
New York:
C ro fts and
E n g le h a rt, M. D ., and Tucker, L. R ., T ra its Related to Good and
Poor T each ers. School Review. (January, 1936), p . 28.
F airb an k s, G ran t, Voice and A r tic u la tio n D rillb o o k .
Athens P r e s s , 1938.
Iowa, C ity :
Fay, P au l J . , and M iddleton, Warren C ., Judgment of Occupation from
Voices as T ransm itted over a P ublic Address System and
Over a R adio. Jo u rn a l o f Applied Psychology. (O ctober,
1939).
Flanagen, J . C ., F a c to r A nalysis in th e Study o f P e rs o n a lity .
S ta n fo rd : S tan fo rd U n iv ersity P re ss, 1935.
G ardiner, A. H ., The Theory o f Speech and Language.
C laredon P re s s , 1932.
Oxford:
G a r re tt, Henry E ., S t a t i s t i c s in Psychology and Education.
Longmans, Green and Company, 1938.
G u ilfo rd , J . P ., Psychom etric Methods.
Company, 1936.
H a rt, F. W., Teachers and Teaching.
Company, 1934.
New York:
New York:
The
New York:
McGraw-Hill
The Macmillan
Holmes, F. L in co ln D ., A Handbook o f Voice and D ictio n .
F. S. C ro fts and Company, 1940.
New York:
H u ll, C lark L ., A p titu d e T e stin g .
1928.
New York:
World Book Company,
K arr, H. M., Your Speaking V oice.
Company, 1938.
G lendale:
G riffin -P u b lish in g
KLinghardt, H. and de Fourm estraus, M., French In to n a tio n E x e rc is e s .
Cambridge: W. H effer and Sons, 1928.
Knower, F ra n k lin , A Study o f Speech A ttitu d e s and Adjustm ents.
Speech Monographs. 1938.
Krous, G. T ., A Study o f T r a its and Q u a litie s o f Teachers and T h eir
E ffe c tiv e n e ss in Teaching Based on Estim ates o f T heir
S tu d e n ts . Unpublished T h esis, S tanford U n iv e rsity , 1935.
L ev en th al, E l i a s , Q u a litie s R elated to Success in High School
Teaching as Judged by Teachers and Adult Non-Teachers.
U npublished T h e sis, C ollege of th e C ity of New York, 1934.
82
L in d q u is t, E. F ., A F i r s t Course in S t a t i s t i c s .
Haughton M ifflin Company, 1938.
New York*
Mabie, E. C ., Speech T rain in g and In d iv id u a l Needs. Q uarterly
Jo u rn a l o f Speech, (June, 1933), p . 341.
Manahan, John L ., and Jarman, A. M., A Comparison o f S u p erio r and
I n f e r i o r T eachers. School Board Jo u rn a l, (A p ril, 1935)
p . 23.
Manser, Ruth, Speech C o rrectio n on th e C ontract P la n .
P r e n tic e -H a ll, 1935.
New York:
Meaders, J . R ., A Comparison o f Three Methods o f Teacher R atin g .
Unpublished T h e sis, Peabody, 1935.
Monroe, A. H ., Audience R eactions to Student Speakers. Purdue
U n iv e rsity B u lle tin , Volume XXXVIII, No. l a , S tudies
i n H igher E ducation.
Moore, W. E ., P e r s o n a lity T r a its and Voice Q uality D iffe re n c e s.
Jo u rn a l o f Speech D iso rd ers. Volume IV (1934).
M ulgrave, D orothy, Speech f o r th e Classroom Teacher.
New York: P re n tic e -H a ll, In c. 1936.
Murray, Elwood, The Speech P e rs o n a lity .
L ip p en co tt Company, 1937.
O d ell, C. W., E d u catio n al S t a t i s t i c s .
Comparer, 1925.
Chicago:
New York:
J . B.
The Century
O tis , A rthur S ., S t a t i s t i c a l Method in E ducational Measurement.
New York: World Book Company, 1925.
O rr, F. W., Voice f o r Speech.
Company, 1925.
New York:
P a r r is h , W. M., The T e a c h e r^ Speech.
B ro th e rs, 1939.
McGraw-Hill Book
New York:
Harper and
P e a r, T. H ., Speech as An Expression o f P e rs o n a lity . B r itis h
Jo u rn a l o f E ducational Psychology. (O ctober, 1932.)
P e a r, T. H ., Voice and P e r s o n a lity .
Sons, 1931.
London;
John Wiley and
P e a r, T. H ., The Psychology o f E ffe c tiv e Speaking. London:
N. P a u l, Trench, Trubner and Company, 1933.
R u s s e ll, W illiam , and R u ssell Ann, Young Ladies E lo cu tio n ary
R eader. Boston; James Monroe and Company, 1857.
83
Sandford, W. P . and Yeager, W. H ., P r in c ip le s of E ffe c tiv e
Speaking. New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1934.
S a p ir, Edward, Speech as a P e rs o n a lity
of S o cio lo g y . (May, 1927)
T ra it.
American Journal
S eashore, 0 . E ., Approaches to th e Science of Music and Speech.
Iowa C ity : U n iv ersity of Iowa P re s s , 1933
S tag n e r, Ross, Judgments of Voice and P e r s o n a lity .
E ducational Psychology. (A p ril, 1936)
Jo u rn a l of
S tin c h f ie ld , S . M., and P o tts , W. M., Speech and P e rs o n a lity
R a tin g s, American Speech. (December, 1931)
S u h rie , Ambrose H ., The American Teachers C o lleg e. Teacher Education
Jo u rn a l. Vol. I (December, 1939) No. 3 , p . 255.
Symonds, P . M., Diagnosing P e rs o n a lity and Conduct.
The Century Company, 1931.
New York:
T ie g s, E rn est VV., T e sts and Measurements in th e Improvement of
L earn in g . New York: Houghton M ifflin Company, 1939.
T re s id d e r, Argus, Reading to O th e rs.
Company, 1940.
New York:
S c o tt, Foresman and
Wagner, L o re tta A ., A Diagnosis of th e Speech Needs and A b ilitie s
o f P ro sp e ctiv e T eachers. Unpublished T h e sis, U n iv e rsity
o f Iowa, 1937.
Ward, L. C ., D efects of Speech.
Company, I n c ., 1923.
New York:
E. P . Dutton and
Weeks, Ruth Mary (Chairman), A C o rre la te d C urriculum .
D. Appleton-Century Company, 1936.
New York:
W oolbert, C. H ., Psychology from th e S tan d p o in t o f a Speech
Teacher. The Q u arterly Jo u rn al o f Speech. Volume I ,
(February, 1930)
APPENDIX
85
Addresses of Schools Considered in This Investigation
School Written
State
Colorado
Illinois
Indiana
Schools
Stating Willingness
Schools
Returning
Data
City
Boulder
Colorado Springs
Fort Collins
Grand Junction
Greeley
Alton
Aurora
Belleville
Benton
Bloomington
Canton
Champaign
Collinsville
Danville
Decatur
East St* Louis
Elgin
Elmhurst
Freeport
Galesburg
Granite City
Harrisburg
Highland Park
Jacksonville
Joliet
Anderson
Bedford
Bloomington
Connersville
Cranfordsville
Elkhart
Elvood
Frankfort
Goshen
Hammond
Huntington
Jeffersonville
x
X
X
X
x
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
86
Addresses o f Schools Considered in This In v estig a tio n
(Continued)
School Written
State
Indiana
-------
Schools
Stating Willingness
To Cooperate
Schools
Returning
Data
City
Kokomo
La Fayette
La Porte
Logansport
Michigan City
Mishawaka
New Albany
New Castle
Massachusetts
Adams
Amesburg
Arlington
Attleboro
Belmont
Beverly
Braintree
Brockton
Brookline
Chelsea
Chicopee
Clinton
Danvers
Dedham
Easthampton
Everett
Fairhaven
Fitchburg
Framingham
Gardner
Michigan
Adrian
Alpena
Ann Arbor
Battle Creek
Bay City
Benton Harbor
Dearborn
Ecorse
Escanaba
Hamtramek
Highland Park
Holland
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
87
Addresses o f S ch ools Considered in This In v estig a tio n
(Continued)
Schools
Stating Willingness
State
Michigan
Schools
Returning
City
Iron Mountain
Ironwood
Jackson
Marquette
Menominee
Monroe
Mount Clemlns
Muakegan Heights
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7
New York
Ashway Park
B elleville
Bloomfield
Bridgeton
Burlington
Carteret
Cliffside Park
Clifton
Collingswood
Cranford
Dover
East Orange
Englewood
Garfield
Gloucester City
Hakensack
Harrison
Hoboken
Irvington
Hearing
Amsterdam
Auburn
Baldwin
Batavia
Beucon
Cohoes
Cartland
Dunkirk
Endicott
Freeport
Fulton
Geneva
Glencove
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
88
Addresses o f Schools Considered In This in v estig a tio n
(Continued)
School Written
State
City
New York
Glens Falls
Gloversville
Hempstead
Herkimer
Hornell
Hudson
Ithica
Ohio
Alliance
Ashland
Ashtubula
Barberton
Bellaire
Bucyrus
Cambridge
Campbell
Chillicothe
Cleveland Heights
Conneant
Coshocton
East Cleveland
East Liverpool
Clyria
Findlay
Fostoria
Fremont
Garfield Heights
Hamilton
Pennsylvania
Aliquippa
Allentown
Altoona
Ambrldge
Ardmore
Arnold
Beaver Falls
Bellevue
Berwick
Bethlehem
Braddock
Schools
Stating Willingness
To Cooperate
x
Schools
Returning
Data
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
89
Addresses o f Schools Considered in This In v estig a tio n
(Continued)
School Written
Schools
Stating Willingness
To Cooperate
Schools
Returning
, , Pafo . .
State
Texas
Virginia
lia
Bradford
Bristol
Butler
Canonsburg
Carbondale
Carlisle
Carnegie
Chaabersburg
Charleroi
Abilene
Amarillo
Austen
Beaumont
Big Spring
Brownsville
Brownwood
Cleburne
Corpus Christ!
Corsicana
Denison
Galveston
Greenville
Laredo
Lubbock
Orange
Palestine
Paris
Port Arthur
San Angelo
Alexandria
Charlottesville
Danville
Hopewell
lynchburg
Newport News
Petersburg
Proanoke
Slaunton
Suffolk
X
X
X
X
X
X '
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
90
Addresses of Schools Considered in This Investigation
(Concluded)
School Written
State
City
Washington
Aberdeen
Bellingham
Bremerton
Hoquiam
Schools
Stating Willingness
To Cooperate
Schools
Returning
Data
x
x
117
82
Longview
Totals
200
91
COPY OP LETTER SENT TO
THE 200 PRINCIPALS
November 15, 1940
Mr*
Dear Mr*
, Principal
High School
:
Copies of this letter are being sent to
199 other high school principals in a
representative sampling of the nation. It
is the fir s t step in a research project
designed to suggest whether there is a
relationship between a teacher's speech and
his or her success as a teacher as judged by
the principal. Obviously for such a project
cooperation is essential. We hope that you
w ill aid in this endeavor so that a ll sections
of the nation sampled w ill be adequately
represented.
This cooperation w ill consist of your
rating not more than five teachers in your
system on six points, asking these teachers
to f i l l in a speech inventory blank which
takes about twenty minutes, and returning a ll
these data to us in a stamped self-addressed
envelope which we shall furnish. No name of
any teacher is desired; a ll identification
w ill be through numbers.
If you are willing to cooperate with us
to this extent, please f i l l in the enclosed
card and return i t to us. Hi return for this
assistance we shall said you a complete digest
of the results of the study.
Very truly yours,
Seth A. Fessenden
Department of English Educ.
92
CARD ENCLOSED IN INITIAL LETTER
Dear Mr. Fessendens
By m ailing t h i s card I am s ig n ify in g my
w illin g n e ss to co o p erate i n your p r o je c t.
In
re tu rn I expect to re c e iv e a d ig e s t o f th e study.
P r in c ip a l_______________________________
C ity and S ta te __________________________
93
COPT OF SECOND LETTER SENT TO ALL
PRINCIPALS WHO RETURNED THE INITIAL
CARD STATING THEIR WILLINGNESS TO
COOPERATE IN THIS STUD!
November 13, 1940
Mr.
, Principal
High School
Dear lb*.
Thank you for signifying your willingness
to aid us in the endeavor to correlate various
factors of a teacher's speech with his or her
success as a teacher. You w ill note from the
enclosed rating scale that this success has been
considered to be constituted of observable
qualities.
We are enclosing with this letter, in
addition to the teacher rating scale, five Speech
Inventory blanks to be answered by the teachers
whom you rate. On each of these blanks has been
placed an identification number. These numbers
also have been placed on the teacher rating
scale so that there w ill be no difficulty in
matching inventory responses with the ratings
given by you.
The enclosed envelope is for your convenience
in returning these data to us. We sincerely
appreciate your cooperation.
Very truly yours,
Seth A. Fessenden
Department of English Educ.
94
wFOLLOW-UP CARD1*
Sent on May 15, 1940, to fifty of the Principals who
had promised to send material but had neglected to do so
May 15, 1940
Dear Sir*
This card is merely to draw your attention to the
Speech Inventories and rating sheets sent you recently* If
you have not already returned them to us, we should appre*
date your giving them your early consideration.
You may be interested to learn that we have just com­
pleted another series of validating experiments on the
Inventory using as a criterion the judgments of five faculty
and graduate speech students* For voice quality the co­
efficient of correlation was *80* Further validation is
being done on enunciation, flex ib ility , language usage, and
manner of speaking*
Very truly yours,
Seth A* Fessenden
95
November 13, 1940
Dear Ur* Fessendeni
I am returning to you the speech
inventory forms*
I find that, from an inspection of
teaching results over a long period,
the speech element has had no apparent
effect on the teacher's success*
I dislike to ask any of our teachers
to f i l l out the questionnaire, since
it mould appear as a criticism for
mhich there is no remedy*
I am very sure that speech courses
are necessary and should be required
for a ll candidates for teachers'
certificates*
Very truly yours,
Principal
96
November 13, 1940
Dear Mr. Fessenden,
We have received the teacher rating
scale and speech Inventory blanks,
and find them excellent*
If you can send us thirty more
of the blanks, ire should like to use
them for the entire faculty; i f not,
we w ill f i l l in the five and return
them*
Very truly yours,
P rin cip a l
97
November 13, 1940
Dear Mr. Fessenden t
I am inclosing the ratings for
five of my teachers as you dll'scted.
We found i t most interesting, and I
would like to know your findings i f it
is at a ll possible.
I realized too late that I
had selected a ll my teachers from
English and foreign language depart­
ments. Perhaps you would have
preferred a wider spread.
Sincerely yours,
P rin cip a l
98
November IS, 1940
Dear Mr. Fessenden t
I have your letter of March 30.
The experiment sounds interesting.
If you want to send us the blanks
which you mention we shall try to
render what assistance we can*
Sincerely yours,
P rin cip a l
99
Table XV
R atings Given Each of Five Teachers on S ix Teacher Q u a litie s
by Five Judges i n a S in g le School System
Q u ality
Considered
Teachers Rated
363
364
Judge
361
362
A ttitu d e s
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A s s t. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average
Average
Low
High
Hi
Average
High
Average
Average
High
Hi 01
High
Average
Average
Low
L eadership
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average
Average
Low
Average
Average
Average
Low
Average
Average
Low
Average
Average
High
High
Hi 0 i
High
Average
Average
Low
Average
T act
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average High
Average High
Average Average
Average Hi 0 i
Hi 0 i
Average
Average
High
Hi 0 i
Average
High
Hi 01
Average
Low
Low
Hi 0 i
Sense of
Humor
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average High
Average Average
Low
Average
High
Hi £
Average
Average
Low
High
Hi 0 i
High
High
Hi 0 i
Average
Low
Low
High
R e la tio n
to
P u p ils
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A sst. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average
Average
Average
High
Average Average
Average Average
Average Average
High
High
High
Average
High
High
Average
Average
Low
Hi 0 i
In flu e n ce
on
P u p ils
P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
A s st. P rin c ip a l
D ept. Head
Average
Average
Low
High
High
Average
Average
Hi 0 i
Average
Average
Average
High
Average
Average
High
Hi 0 i
Low
Average
Low
Hi 0 i
365
100
Table XVI
Teaching F ie ld s and Years of S erv ic e
of 516 Cooperating Teachers
The fo llo w in g columns re p re s e n t: 1, Years o f S e rv ic e ; 2, E nglish
and Speech; 3, S o c ia l Science; 4, P hysical S cien ce; 5 , Languages;
6, M athem atics; 7 , Commerce; 8, Home Economics; 9, I n d u s t r ia l A rts;
10, Music; 11, A rt; 12, P hysical E ducation; 13, T o tals
1
2
3
4
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
1
3
7
2
5
1
2
1
3
1
1
1
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
4
1
5
2
1
1
4
5
2
9
14
6
2
1
5
2
-
1
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
—
-
—
—
-
—
1
3
—
-
—
10
12
9
15
-
— 15
10
- - 1 4
13
1
25
1
1
3
1
1
2
3
1
2
4
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
3
8
5
9
5
1
-
1
1
-
2
1
-
-
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
4
4
1
2
2
2
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
1
4
- - - - - - - 1
1
2
1
5
1
1
1
—
—
_ _ 6
1
1
1
1
1
3
-
-
1
1
2
1
2
1
-
-
-
15
4
2
-
-
12
2
13
8
8
6
1
-
-
11
-
—
1
1
-
-
1
2
-
10
-
2
2
2
-
2
2
5
9
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
1
6
1
7 8
-
2 ' 3
1
1
1
5
1
2
7
5
1
1
1
1
1
1
—
—
1
1
1
—
—
-
-
-
-
—
—
—
-
— 9
— 11
— 5
5
6
-
1
1
1
—
—
—
- 1
2
3
- 1
—
—
2
1
1
—
—
1
1
1
2
2
-
-
19
4
17
16
9
12
— 6
12
18
-
2
1 1
—
-
(Continued on n ext page)
101
1
2
3
4
31.
32.
35.
34.
35.
1
1
-
2
1
- - -
36.
37.
38.
-
1
-
5
-
-
-
6
-
2
1
7
8
-
-
-
-
-
-
9
-
10
- -
-
11
-
12
-
-
-
-
-
3
5
1
1
-
-
13
-
-
-
-
1
-
59.
-
- -
- -
- -
- -
- -
-
40.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
T o ta ls
142
52
30
30
30
22
9
5
3
2
1
516
102
Table XVII
RATING AND SCORING OF CRITERION GROUP
Average ra tin g s and sco res o f th e f i f t y E a stern I l l i n o i s S ta te
Teachers College summer school s tu d e n ts . These r a tin g s a re th e averages
o f th e judgments rendered as reco rd ed i n Table XV, The sco res are
th o se made on each of th e two a d m in is tra tio n s o f th e Speech Inv en to ry ,
A r a tin g of 1 ,0 i s E x c e lle n t ;
Student
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score;
2nd Score;
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score;
2nd Score:
Rated?
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Voice
1 .6
10
10
1 .8
9
8
1.8
8
8
1 .6
10
9
2 .0
9
13
1 .6
9
9
1 .6
10
11
1 .7
10
13
1 .9
7
7
2 .1
9
9
1 ,6
9
10
a r a tin g o f more th a n 3.0 i s poor.
E nunciation
1 .6
IS
13
1 .6
11
12
1 .4
13
11
1 .8
8
7
2 .3
4
8
1 .4
16
15
1.7
12
12
2.2
8
8
1 .7
10
9
2 .1
5
8
1.7
12
11
F l e x i b i l i ty
1 .3
19
16
1.8
11
9
1 .2
21
17
2.3
11
5
1.9
14
15
1 .5
19
19
2 .3
15
13
2 .4
11
10
1 .9
17
14
2.7
9
5
1 .8
14
15
Language
1 .6
12
14
1 .6
10
10
1 .3
13
12
1 .8
6
9
1 .8
14
12
1 .6
10
11
2 .1
11
10
2 .3
7
10
2 .2
12
8
2 .5
4
9
1 .8
13
13
Manner
1.2
16
13
1.5
10
8
1.0
17
15
1.6
10
10
1.8
12
15
1.7
12
14
2.1
11
11
2.2
7
8
1.6
11
12
2.3
4
7
1.5
15
15
(Continued on next page)
105
Student
12
13
14
IS
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
Voice
Rated:
1 .7
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
1 .6
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd S core:
1 .8
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 .7
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
2 .1
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 .4
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 .4
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
2 .4
1 s t S core:
2nd Score:
2 .3
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd S core:
Rated:
1 .1
1 s t S core:
2nd S core:
Rated;
1 .0
1 s t S core;
2nd S core:
1 .2
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd S core:
Rated:
1 .5
1 st Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 .5
1 s t S core:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 .5
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
E nunciation
2.3
13
11
2 .4
12
8
2 .1
IS
10
1.7
1 .6
2 .0
14
13
1.8
12
10
1 .6
1.8
11
9
1.9
2.2
13
11
1 .5
11
12
1.5
13
17
10
11
14
9
19
11
1 .9
10
10
1 .2
1 .5
2 .2
9
10
11
10
19
15
6
8
12
12
1 .0
1.4
1 .2
1 .9
1 .2
13
13
8
9
7
10
11
1
15
11
1.1
1 .9
1 .2
11
11
2.1
1 .2
15
13
13
13
11
13
9
7
16
16
1 .0
1 .4
12
11
1.5
1 .6
1 .3
10
11
10
11
14
12
14
11
13
16
2.0
1 .9
2.3
1 .2
13
11
1.5
6
6
9
12
7
8
11
13
14
16
2.6
1 .8
2.3
6
9
2.4
1 .2
8
8
6
6
9
9
12
13
12
13
17
19
11
10
1 .4
2.1
2.7
2.0
8
8
11
8
12
8
19
21
1 .5
1 .5
9
10
2.0
1.7
2 .4
13
14
15
12
15
12
16
16
1 .3
2.1
2 .4
12
9
14
11
16
15
11
8
12
13
1 .4
2.2
2 .0
1 .4
14
8
12
10
11
12
12
10
2.7
12
10
12
10
12
10
12
10
1
11
11
F l e x i b i l i t y Language Manner
7
11
1 .6
16
13
(Continued on next page)
14
12
104
Student
B ated:
27 1 s t S core:
2nd S core:
B ated:
28 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
29 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
SO 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
Bated:
31 1 s t S co re:
2nd S co re:
Batedt
32 1 s t S co re:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
33 1 s t S co re:
2nd S core:
B ated:
34 1 s t S co re:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
35 1 s t S co re:
2nd S core:
B ated:
36 1 s t S core:
2nd S core:
B ated:
37 1 s t S co re:
2nd S core:
B ated:
38 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
39 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
B ated:
40 1 s t S core:
2nd S core:
B ated:
41 1 s t S core:
2nd S co re:
Voice
1 .5
11
11
2.7
9
8
3.5
5
4
2.7
6
4
2 .6
10
7
1 .4
13
12
1.7
11
10
2 .1
8
10
1 .4
12
12
1 .4
10
10
2.2
10
11
2.8
6
4
3.3
2
1
1 .3
10
10
3 .0
2
2
E nunciation
1 .7
8
9
2.7
9
8
2.7
9
10
2 .4
4
2
2.8
7
9
1 .7
10
14
1 .6
10
9
2 .0
6
10
1 .6
10
11
1 .8
9
7
2 .1
12
12
2 .0
11
11
3 .1
4
5
1 .5
15
15
2 .5
6
4
F le x ib ility
1.9
10
9
2.0
10
17
3.2
14
13
2.7
4
3
5.2
6
12
1 .6
16
18
2.0
12
13
2.0
15
14
1.9
14
15
2.2
12
9
2.4
15
19
2.5
n
9
2.8
3
4
1 .6
15
15
2.8
5
4
Language
1 .8
13
10
2 .1
18
13
2 .8
7
9
1 .9
8
6
2 .8
8
9
2 .1
11
11
1 .6
12
11
2 .4
9
10
1 .8
13
13
2 .0
10
6
2 .0
11
11
2.2
11
11
2.9
7
5
1 .3
17
17
2 .5
5
5
Manner
1 .5
12
9
1 .3
13
11
2 .6
7
8
2 .1
7
5
2 .3
6
8
1 .7
11
12
1 .2
13
10
2 .0
10
9
1 .1
15
14
2 .0
8
5
1 .8
11
10
1 .7
10
8
3 .0
4
4
1 .5
11
12
2.6
3
5
(Continued on next page)
105
S tu d en t
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
R ated;
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
Rated;
1 s t Score:
2nd Score:
R ated:
1 s t Score:
2nd S core:
Voice
E nunciation
2,7
2.3
2.6
6
5
2 .3
8
9
2.3
4
6
2.0
7
6
8
7
1.7
1.7
1.9
2 .1
5
9
9
2 .4
9
9
7
7
1 .2
1.7
11
12
2 .1
2.4
8
5
1 .8
8
10
14
12
9
8
14
9
1.9
1.7
4
6
11
10
15
12
1.8
2.2
1.9
2 .0
1 .3
7
9
6
1 .4
9
11
15
14
2.2
6
8
1 .6
1.4
14
12
10
11
13
10
10
12
10
9
1 .4
1 .8
1.7
1.3
8
6
12
11
17
12
13
13
7
5
1 .6
1 .8
1.8
1.4
8
8
2 .1
8
7
12
10
11
10
12
11
11
8
2.4
1.9
Manner
1 .8
2.4
6
5
10
8
1.8
2 .6
Language
8
10
2.5
6
7
2.7
F l e x i b i l i ty
11
10
1 .3
6
6
8
10
106
Table XVIII
C\2
H
OtlOCO'4't>'4, MO>C0COriOOO>O>(Ol
H
IO ^tO rtH lO rlN rllM IO
COI
M Ut «
d
CJ HO
to
to
CO
t o to
to
COM
H
02 02 t o
Ot
H|*
00
02
02
h* h*
02 to
02
O
02
tO
CO|
Course in Speech According to 1939-1940
Catalogues of Sixteen C olleges
00 to to 00
to
tO
to
h* t o t o t o t|« 02
tol
02
02 tO
LOj
O
to j
02
in
tO
021
I
tO
02
tO tO j
00
hH
tO
tO 02 CO
to
rH
t J*
tO
00 ^
O 02
tO 02
to
to
«0*
to
to oo
02
H to
02 H
to
(O 02
to to
hJC h}C
02 CO 02
tO
to
r-J tO
02
U)
Hi*
to to
02
H
02
02
t)0o>
to
8
to
to
tO 02 tO lO tO 021
O-
02
02
02
h#
to
S
O H CO
•
°
C c8
2 %
h
p £§
•
-d
Ml
0)
Pi
oo
•
O
O
•
rH
C5 • • • O
co
■P
COCOH
•
Eh
Z O H
O
e
<D U
eh -P
(0 co
•
.Sj d rt CO to
o ® ©
ta -p -p
• •
E H fH
Eh
•
•
•
O
<8 *
o
•
EH
Xt
•» • 0> O
© -H 01 -P
o
• •
o o •
•31
f it)S
O ft 0)
*r b
©c w
5 £ ci js © ,rt
j l a p p •2 - -g ° w
rd o • • • © § § • • •
2 2 l ? ! s a cu co co fes ^
3
■O
P
Eh
107
Seth A. Fessenden
School of Education
New York University
for use with
THE SPEECH INVENTORY
S P E E C H
E A T I N G
S C A L E
This scale does not presume to determine any of the specific items which
might influence any of the following qualities. It seeks general impressions.
It is concerned with effects only, not with the reasons for tunso effects.
Th judge is reguested to consider each quality in the light of the questions
given for analysis. Under each quality there arc tnree such questions: one
suggesting favorable aspects, one suggesting unfavorable aspects, and one
suDi_esting a combination of favorable and unfavorable aspects.
•Judge each individual as you believe he rates in each quality.
As tne KEY use:
1 to indicate EXCELLENT; 2 to indicate PRETTY GOOD; 3 to indicate ACCEPTABLEj
and U to indicate BELOW STaJ'JDaHD.
VOICE -Is the voice full, round, clear,
smooth, and agreeable? Does the voice seem
to be free from such qualities as huskiness
which might cause it to be disagreeable to
listeners? Are the pitch and volume pleasant
and unaffected?
-
i.;U.;Cj.aT10N-Is the mode of enunciation neither
too slovenly nor too precise? Does the speaker
show evidence of a poor speech background?
Does tjne speaker seem to possess a high degree
of speech competency?
FLEXIBILITY -Is there freedom from monotony in
pitch, rate, volume, and foi’ce? Does the
speaker use inflections which nelp shade the
meanings of his words? Does the speech seem
to truage and labor, or does the flow seem to
be unhampered?
LANGUAGE -Is the spirit ana style of the
speaker’s language warm and colorful? Does
he occasionally seem to have difficulty in
finding words to express his ideas? Does the
Language used seem to be free and easy rather
than pedantic and stirlo?
MANNER -Does the speaker suem interested in
what he has to say? Is he friendly and free
from non-social attitudes? Does it seem tnnt the
speaker fails to communicate his message in a
manner best adapted to the situation?
Jud^e
108
VOICE DIVISION
The fo llo w in g s e r ie s o f questions c o n s titu te a means f o r c l a s s i f y ­
in g your v o ice as t o q u a lity , p itc h , and g en eral tim b re . Some o f th e
experim ents which you a re asked to perform w i l l p re s e n t a c h allen g e to
yo u r a u r a l d is c rim in a tio n . The value o f t h i s d iv is io n r e s t s upon th e
se rio u s n e ss o f your e f f o r t to re p o rt a c c u ra te ly .
1.
What i s th e p itc h o f your normalspeaking voice?
Very lo w
Low
Low average
Average
High Average
High
Very high
2 . P la c e your hands over your ears and hum a s e r i e s o f n o tes s t a r t ­
in g a t a p o in t below your normal p itc h and con tin u in g s e v e ra l n o tes
above. I f you m ain tain th e v ocal volume a t an even s tr e n g th , you w i l l
n o te t h a t th e re so n a tin g v ib ra tio n s in your head w i l l v a ry . D iscover
th e p itc h a t which th e v ib ra tio n s resonance i s th e g r e a t e s t.
higher
This p itc h i s lower
th e same as
your normal speaking v o ic e ,
3 . P lace th e palm o f your hand on your ch est i n a p o s itio n so
th e b ase o f your fo re f in g e r j u s t to uches the_bottom o f th e space be­
tween your c o l l a r bones.
Say aloud ee, ah, u .
Yes
ee
Do you f e e l any v ib ra tio n w ith ah
u ______
No
_______
_______
______
4.
Take a h o ld , v ery l i g h t l y , o f your nose i n such a manner t h a t
th e to p s o f your thumb and f o re fin g e r j u s t touch th e bonv s tr u c tu r e .
Do not p r e s s . Prolong th e follow ing underlined sounds and check in th e
spade provided each which when sounded aloud causes v ib r a tio n s t h a t you
can f e e l .
him _____
sin _____
lo n g
te a _____
tin _____
t i l l _____
l e t _________t w o _____
cat _______
a
law _______
r ______
continued on next page.
109
5* What changes do you n o tic e in th e sound o f th e follow ing
sen te n ces when re a d aloud in your n a tu ra l method and read w ith your
n o s t r i l s pinched shut*
He walked t o th e show*
Sounds l i k e c o n sid e ra b le change
He could r id e a b ik e .
Sounds l i k e c o n sid e ra b le change
:
very l i t t l e change_____; none
*
:
very l i t t l e change
*
: none
6.
On one normal breath count aloud as far as possible. Make no
effort to maintain the voice quality but le t the voice perform freely.
On which number d id your voice s t a r t to r i s e in p itc h ?
On which number d id your voice became u n p leasan t i n q u a lity ?
What was th e h ig h e st number you reached on t h i s one breath ?
At t h i s p o in t had your voice reached a r e l a t i v e h ig h p itc h ?
Yes
: Ho
*
7* L iste n to y o u rse lf c a r e fu lly as you emphasize th e u n d erlin e d
words in th e fo llo w in g sentence*
"That would be a l l r ig h t f o r some people b u t n o t f o r me.**
As you emphasized th e se words d id you in c re a se volume or
r a i s e your p itc h ?
some.
me*
Volume
___________________
P itc h
___________________
8* Voice o r ig in a te s i n th e larynx as mere sound* As we use t h i s
sound f o r speech we c a l l in to a c tio n th e v ario u s re so n a tin g chambers o f
head and th r o a t t o re in fo rc e th e sound and give i t to n e or q u a lity . T his
q u a lity w i l l v a ry w ith th e reg io n o f g r e a te s t resonance*
As you speak where does i t seem to you t h a t th e r e i s th e g r e a te s t
s e n sa tio n o f tone?
Deep in th e th r o a t
Upper p a r t o f th e th ro a t
Back o f th e mouth
Back o f upper f ro n t t e e t h
N asal c a v ity
Front o f head
Top o f head
9* Follow ing a re v ario u s types of g en eral v o ic e c la s s if ic a tio n s *
In d ic a te th e degree to which you th in k you possess them by u sin g 0 f o r
no amount, 1 f o r a v ery sm all degree, Z m oderate, and 3 f o r a consid­
e ra b le degree*
a* B reatheness - evidenced by th e sound o f escaping b re a th which
covers th e pure tone* S im ila r to a c o n fid e n tia l tone o f c o ic e which
approxim ates a s ta g e w h isp er.
.
continue^ on next page*
110
b . H uskiness - evidenced by th e same escaping b re a th b u t te n se d
and somewhat fo rc e d .
.
c . S trid e n c y - evidenced by fe e lin g o f nervous s t r a i n . U sually
accompanied by extrem e te n s io n o f th e th r o a t and tongue, and a jaw
h e ld s t i f f and unmoving.
«
d . D e n a sa liz a tio n - evidenced by th e s im ila r ity t o th e to n e o f
one w ith a head co ld or la r g e adenoids. O ften caused by th r o a t te n s e ­
ness.
•
e . M outhiness - evidenced by an undue e f f o r t f o r e x a c t enunci­
a tio n .
.
f . Thin to n e .
.
g . F l a t to n e - evidenced by a lack o f f u lln e s s , o f te n caused by
th e l i p s being drawn f l a t a g a in s t th e te e th and th e jaw held c lo s e .
Ill
DIVISION OF ENUNCIATION
T his d iv is io n o f th e t e s t i s p rim a rily designed to in d ic a te your
normal methods o f sp eaking. Most o f th e follow ing q u estio n s have no
r ig h t o r wrong answ er; t h e i r purpose i s to d e sig n a te your in d iv id u a l
method o f a r t i c u l a t i o n . The e ffic a c y o f th e t e s t i s determ ined by th e
accuracy o f y our responses*
PHYSICAL FACTORS
As speaking i s a product o f p h y sica l a c tio n some knowledge o f such
p h y s ic a l equipm ent i s n e c essary f o r an o b je c tiv e a n a ly s is .
1* When your mouth i s in normal r e s t p o s itio n are your lower f r o n t
t e e t h : Back o f upper t e e t h
: even w ith upper t e e t h
:
in f r o n t o f upper t e e t h
.
2.
Have you had any d e n ta l work which in any way in te r f e r e s w ith
your speech?
Yes
: No
.
5* When your jaws a re t i g h t l y clo sed does your tongue seem t o have
c o n sid e ra b le room f o r movement?
Yes
: No
*
4* When you open your mouth about th e w idth o f two f in g e rs can you
e a s i ly to u ch th e ro o f o f your mouth w ith the t i p o f your tongue*
»
Yes_______ ; No
5.
W ith which o f th e follo w in g s y lla b le s a r e your l i p s widest spread?
e ff
e e ff
6.
___
awff_
none
Check th e one o f each o f th e follow ing s e ts of s y lla b le s which
seems t o be th e e a s ie r f o r you to say* I f no d iff e r e n c e , check
both*
a.
b.
Come to t e a a t two.
Come to t e a a t te n ._______
A. i , e , u, e , u._
B. a , W, e , e , I
a . ah , e , u, i , o.
b. e, e, i , a,
continued on n ex t page.
112
7*
Check th e vowel sound in each o f th e follow ing groups which when
u tte re d norm ally seems t o cause your te e th to be th e w id est apart*
a.
b*
c.
a.
b.
c.
8*
am-
e
a.
i.
a.
b*
c.
a.
aw.
ah.
3.
u.
ah.
a.
b.
c*
e.
e.
a*
P lace your f in g e r l i g h t l y on your “Adam’ s Apple*" Check th e word
in each o f th e fo llo w in g groups which when u tte r e d alo u d seems to
cause th e "Adam's Apple" to move through th e w id est range* I f
th e r e i s no d iffe re n c e check both*
t i c k _______
d ig _______
s ix _______
g ig
b id
p i t _______
ARTICULATORY FACTORS
A r tic u la tio n depends on th e movement of c e r ta in m uscles, v ario u s p o s i­
tio n s r e s u l t i n v ario u s sounds and q u a litie s o f sound*
1.
When you make th e sound o f " s " , as in " se e ", where i s th e t i p o f
your tongue?
A gainst low er t e e t h
A gainst upper t e e t h
»
Between t e e t h
•
Back o f upper te e th
«
2*
When you say " la s s " do th e s id e s of your tongue p re s s s li g h t l y
a g a in s t your upper te e th ? Yes.
? No
. Firm ly_______
Yes
t No
«
5*
When you make th e sound o f " t" as in "top" does your tongue touch?
A gainst low er t e e t h
*
Between t e e t h
»
A gainst upper t e e t h
.
Back o f upper t e e t h
«
4.
When you make th e sound o f " t" as in "top" does your tongue seem
to be q u ite p o in ted ? Yes.
: No._______ •
5*
When you say th e word "loud" what i s th e p o s itio n o f your tongue
f o r th e »d"?
A gainst lower t e e t h
*
Between t e e t h
*
A gainst upper t e e t h
Back o f upper t e e t h
.
6*
When you say th e words "wear" and "when" w ith which word i s th e
more b re a th ex p elled ? Wear._______ j When.
; N either
continued on next page*
113
7.
P rolong each o f th e follovrlng words about fiv e seco n d s. In d ic a te
i n th e space provided th e l e t t e r which bears th e g r e a t e s t burden
o f th e p ro lo n g a tio n ,
Ram__
Roms
E el '
a rm _
S lin g
Long_
VOCAL FACTQ3S
The q u a lity o f vowel sounds has considerable in flu e n c e on th e
g e n e ra l speech p a tte r n ; th e re fo re , your method o f pronouncing
ce rta in sounds i s an im portant clue to en u n ciatio n ,
1,
Check th e words in each o f th e follow ing l i s t s which a r e pro­
nounced e x a c tly a l i k e ,
b a re
hand
bear
san d
2.
where
s ta ir
c h a ir
wear
can
desk
man
Don
ask
stock
s ta r k
lock
la r k
cork
Check th e words in each o f th e follow ing l i s t w hich rhyme,
fin g e r
lin g e r __________
sin g e r
4,
c a lm
so u rce
sauce
p s a lm
Check th e words in each o f th e follow ing l i s t s which rhyme.
hand
farm
calm
pend
s ta rt
5,
weather
send
whether
le n d
anger
banger
hanger
because
across
by-laws
Check th e word " p h o n e tic a lly spelled" in each o f th e fo llo w in g l i s t s
which seems to most resem ble your pronunciation o f th e f i r s t word o f
each l i s t ,
n o is e
n o is
n o iz
ask
esk
a sk
ask_______
house ______
hahus
haus
hauus________
moat
moust
most
continued on n ex t page.
114
5*
P rolong th e consonant sounds In th e fo llo w in g words* P lace i n
th e space provided a l l o f th e u n d erlin e d consonants sounds which
a re a t a l l d i f f i c u l t fo r you to prolong*
th e s e
p r iv a te
lo ne
c la s s
c ra s h
prove
r id e
th in
brave
115
DIVISION OF ENUNCIATION
1 . Do you have any d e n ta l c o n d itio n which a f f e c ts th e c l a r i t y
of your en u n ciatio n ? (Yes ____ , N o _____)
2 . Did you grow up in an environment wherein a fo reig n
language o r d i a l e c t was fre q u e n tly used? I f so p lease in d ic a te
th e language o r languages. _________________
3. When your mouth i s opened so t h a t your te e th are about an
inch a p a r t, can you touch th e ro o f o f your mouth w ith your tongue?
(Yes ___, No ___ )
4. Rank th e fo llo w in g sentences according to th e amount o f
l i p movement re q u ired to say them.
Come to te a a t tw o.___
L e t's have te a a t t e n .___
Then y o u 'l l s ta y to t e n .___
5. Which o f th e follow ing words cause you to open your mouth
th e w idest? Check two i f n e c essary .
Less_______
Lass_______
Lease______
Loss_______
6. Check th e p a ir s o f words you pronounce a lik e .
aim, a rm
; so u rce, sauce
j s to c k , s to rk
; Merry, Mary
7. P lace th e back of your hand c lo se to your l i p s say aloud
th e accompanying w ords. In d ic a te th o se th a t cause a p u ff of a i r
to be f e l t on th e hand.
keen
, pay
, p ray
, try
, tab _____
8. With th e back o f your hand c lo se to your l i p s say aloud
th e accompanying w ords. With which i s th e g r e a te r amount of a i r f e l t ?
wear
, where______ , (both a l ik e ) ______
9. Check th e words in which you sound th e "g".
fin g e r______ , l in g e r ______ ,_s in g e r_____
10. P lace th e palm of your hand on your th r o a t s ta r tin g j u s t
below th e jaw bone. Check th e words in which you f e e l a v ib ra tio n
extending beyond th e in s e r te d hyphen when th e words are sa id aloud,
r a i- s e _______ , n o i-s e
, b o-ss_______ , boy-s_____ , becau-se
11. Locate th e p o s itio n of th e typ o f your tongue as you say
th e "s" in so o th e.
ag a in st low er te e th
, a g a in s t upper te e th
, p ro tru d in g beyond
(Continued on the next page)
116
upper t e e t h
, c lo se t o upper te e th
, w ell back o f upper te e th _
12. Where does your tongue touch as you make th e nt n in two o r th e
"d11 in done?
upper t e e t h
, upper gum rid g e
, ro o f of mouth_______ .
117
LANGUAGE DIVISION
In th e fo llo w in g in sta n c e s you are t o choose th e word or phrase
which you f e e l you would be most ap t to use under th e circum stances
p re s e n te d . Check th e word or phrase which re p re s e n ts your f i r s t
im pression o r re a c tio n .
A.
You have j u s t fin is h e d teach in g a f r i e n d 's c la s s . The c la s s
was u n ru ly and d isco u rteo u s p rim a rily because of one boy whom we s h a ll
c a l l John. (1) You are asked by an o th er te a c h e r what you th in k of
John. What would you c a l l him? In d ic a te w ith a T*
blacksheep
hoodlum_____
r a t _____
b rat
lo u se
scamp
b u lly
monster
scoundrel_
bum
rascal
u rch in ___
d e v il
rowdy
v a r le t___
d e lin q u e n t
r u ff ia n
wretch_
(2) The p r in c ip a l o f th e school asks you th e same q u e s tio n .
Under t h i s circum stance what would you c a l l him? Use P.
B. You have
d i s t a s t e f u l . You
p eo p le. A member
would you answer,
j u s t atten d ed a p ic tu r e show which you found very
f e e l t h a t i t would have very bad in flu e n c e onyoung
o f your c la s s asks your opinion o f th e
show.What
in d ic a te w ith an S.
a p p a llin g
d is tre s s in g
offensive_
aw ful
in to le r a b le
r e p u ls iv e _
bad t a s t e
loathsome
r e v o ltin g ^
d e p lo ra b le
lo u sy
shocking__
d is g u s tin g
odious
stinking_
d is p le a s in g
obnoxious
u n p leasan t_____
The same q u estio n i s asked by an a d u lt not connected w ith
e d u c atio n . What would be your answer? In d ic a te w ith th e l e t t e r A.
C.
You have j u s t read in a popular magazine a poem which seems
to you t o be o f u n u su ally high q u a lity . You w ish t o encourage a frie n d
to a ls o read th e poem. How would you d e sc rib e i t t o in d ic a te th e
p le a su re i t gave you? Use th e l e t t e r F .
bew itching
e n tic in g
p le a sin g _____
d a in ty
e leg an t
n ice_____
d e le c ta b le
e x q u is ite
sweet_____
d e lig h tf u l
engaging
sw ell_____
enchanting
lo v e ly
t h r i l l i n g _____
keen
in te r e s tin g
charming_____
You w ish to i n t e r e s t a group o f high school s tu d e n ts in the
poem. What word would you use? In d ic a te w ith th e l e t t e r S.
Continued on the next page
118
D.
You a r e in charge o f an assem bly program fo r which you have
proudly announced th e appearance o f a well-known a r t i s t whom a l l th e
stu d e n ts adm ire. J u s t b efo re tim e f o r h is appearance th e guest a r t i s t
c a l l s to say he has been unavoidably d eta in e d and w i l l not be able to
be on th e program. You are d isa p p o in te d . You express your d isa p p o in t­
ment to him. What word would you use to him to express your fe e lin g s ?
In d ic a te w ith th e use of A.
annoying
irrita tin g
u n s a tis fa c to r y
a b o th er
maddening
unlucky_____
d isp le a sin g
a mess
unaccommodating___
d istu rb in g
a m isfortune
unpleasant_____
d is tr e s s in g
provoking
unwelcome_____
d isa s tro u s
a shame_____
I t now becomes n e c e ssa ry f o r you t o d isap p o in t th e student body
in th e assem bly. In d ic a te w ith an S, th e word you would use to
announce th e s it u a t i o n to t h i s assem bly.
119
SPEECH - PERSONALITY INVENTORY
This in v e n to ry i s to c o n sid er your normal speaking voice and
manner o f e n u n c ia tio n . From th e mass o f experim ents and t e s t s t h a t
have been d ev ised th e fo llo w in g have been s e le c te d as most ad ap tab le
to s e lf - a d m in is tra tio n w ith a minimum o f se lf-o b se rv a tio n e r r o r .
C onscientious c o n s id e ra tio n given t o th e se item s w ill in d ic a te your
general v o ice q u a l i t y and speech competency.
1. The v o ice to n e ten d s to f e e l t o most people as predom inately
centered i n e i t h e r th e upper f r o n t p a r t o f th e head or below the
e a r s . Read t h i s statem en t aloud i n your normal speaking voice and
see i f you can d isc o v e r when i t f e e l s to you th e preponderance of
your se n sa tio n o f tone i s lo c a te d . Check th e blank which b e s t
re p re se n ts your answ ers.
Upper f ro n t p a r t of head_____
Below the e a rs_____
2. The fo llo w in g i s a sim ple t e s t designed to determine th e degree
o f nasal reso n an ce. Read th e follow ing tw ice; one in a normal
speaking manner and once holding your nose, sh u ttin g o ff any sound
th a t might be b ein g reso n ated in th e n a sa l chambers. Note th e change
o f q u a lity , i f any, and reco rd i t by c ir c lin g one of the follow ing
numbers•
See how Aurora throws h er f a i r ,
none
F r e s h -q u ilte d co lo rs through th e a i r .
1 2
3 4
much
5
3. In a l l v o ices th e r e a re a t l e a s t th re e r e g is te r s or n a tu ra l changes
o f q u a lity o f to n e . The p o in ts where th e se changes occur can be found
by noting th e d egree o f te n sio n in th e th ro a t a t th e p o in ts of change.
This te n sio n can be c re a te d by varying th e amount of b reath which
supports th e to n e . This experim ent i s to discover these p o in ts .
Count alo u d , making no e f f o r t to co n tro l th e q u a lity , on a
sin g le b re a th a t th e r a te of about tw ice your pulse beat and l i s t e n
c a re fu lly t o th e q u a lity o f your to n e . As you begin to run sh o rt o f
b re ath you w ill n o te a change. At what number did i t occur? _____ .
As you co ntinue t o count on th e same b re a th you w ill note a second
change. At what number d id t h i s occur? _____ .
4. How much a re you capable o f saying on a sin g le breath? T rained
sin g ers handle th e f i r s t paragraph of th e follow ing. Read th e
follow ing aloud in a normal manner w ith th e amount of b re a th you have
f o r use in o rd in a ry speech. C irc le th e l a s t word you can read in
Continued on the next page
120
t h i s manner.
In b o th cases only one b re a th i s to be used.
5. I f you p lac e th e back of your hand about two inches in f r o n t o f
y our mouth and say •'puff'* you w ill undoubtedly f e e l a p u ff of a i r on
y our hand. This expu lsio n of a i r a t tim es i s e s s e n tia l f o r c le a r
e n u n c ia tio n , w hile i t i s u n d esirab le as ever p re c is io n in o th e r
circ u m sta n ce s. Read th e follow ing aloud and c i r c le each u n d erlin e d
l e t t e r which causes a p u ff of a i r on your hand. Do not fo rc e th e
m a tte r, b u t record your normal a c tio n .
P assio n and p re ju d ic e and propaganda im pregnate p u b lic opin io n .
N ig h t's can d les are bu rn t o u t, and jocund day stan d s tip to e
on th e m isty mountain to p s .
T o rc h lig h t crimson on th e copper k e ttle -d ru m s. Then th e
tu c k e ts , th en th e tru m p ets, then th e cannon, and he comes.
6. The f a c i l i t y w ith which one handles c e r ta in to n g u e -tw is te rs i s
an in d ic a tio n o f th e g en eral a r tic u la tio n p a t t e r . Below a re e ig h t
o f th e s e each d e a lin g w ith a d if f e r e n t p o rtio n of our a r tic u la tio n
o rg an s. Read each v ery ra p id ly and in d ic a te by c i r c l in g one o f th e
numbers on th e r ig h t th e degree of d i f f i c u l t y which you en co u n ter.
Davy Dollrum dreamsd he drove a dragon.
Easy
1 2
3
Hard
4 5
R eary Rumpus rode a rawboned race h o rse.
1
2
3
4 5
Three thousand t h i s t l e s through th e th ic k of
h is thumb.
1 2
3
4 5
The s e e th in g sea c e a se th and i t s u ff ic e th u s .
1 2
3
4 5
The lo y a l youth yearned to use the yellow y ach t.
1 2
3
4 5
U n c le 's u s h e r urged an u g ly u rc h in .
1 2
3
4 5
2
3
4 5
1 2
3
4 5
L i l t i n g l i t h e l y and l a z i l y th e ro y al r u le r leagped. 1
The ru b b er baby buggy bumper bumped th e bouncing
baby.
121
SPEECH COMPETENCY
1.
"What do you consider to be th e normal p itc h o f your speaking voice?
High_________ Low__________ Average__________
2* Hum down to th e low est note you can s u s ta in . Using t h i s n o te as one.
sin g up th e sc a le to your h ig h e st to n e counting th e number o f n o tes by
sin g in g one, two, th re e , e t c . in s te a d of th e o rd in a ry do, r e , mi.
What was th e h ig h est number you could sin g w ithout usin g a " f a ls e t t o ”
voice?_________
"What number b e s t re p re se n te d your normal speaking voice?____________
S. Most voices c re a te a se n sa tio n o f tone which can be lo c a te d in one of
two g e n era l re g io n s, th e upper p o rtio n of th e fa c e o r below th e e a r s .
By fo rc in g th e sound ee, upwards and to th e f r o n t o f th e face and hy
sw allowing th e sound aw, most people can lo c a te th e se re s p e c tiv e a re a s .
Where do you fin d th e preponderance.
How su re are you o f th is ? F a ir ly c e r t a i n ,
u n c e r ta in ,______ .
4 . To determ ine th e use o f th e n a s a l c a v ity in speech read th e follow ing
sentence alo u d . Read in your normal voice th e f i r s t l i n e th en pinch your
nose sh u t as you re a d th e second l i n e . Note th e degree of change in
q u a lity t h a t r e s u l t s .
See how Aurora throw s h er f a i r .
None
some
much
F re sh -q u ilte d c o lo rs through th e a i r .
5 . The q u a lity of voice changes f o r th e worse when in s u f f ic ie n tly supported
by b r e a th . By counting as f a r a s p o s s ib le on a s in g le b re a th you w ill
n o te your q u a lity th in s and your p itc h r a i s e s . Most voices have two p o in ts
where t h i s o ccu rs, u su a lly between 15 - 20 and 25 - 40. Make no e f f o r t to
c o n tro l th e p itc h o r q u a lity count a s f a r as p o s s ib le on a s in g le deep
b re a th a t about th e r a te o f your normal speech.
On what number d id you fin d th e f i r s t change______
On what number d id you f in d th e second change_____
Were th ese changes easy to id e n tify ? Yes
No_____
What was th e h ig h e st number you could count_______
6 . P lace your hand about two in ch es from your mouth and re p e a t th e follow ­
in g w ords. In d ic a te in th e space provided th e number of p u ffs each word
p roduces.
C arpenter
pocket________ tip p e canoe________
7 . P lace your f in g e r on th e c e n te r o f your upper l i p . Repeat th e follow ­
in g sentence and record in th e space provided th e number of tim es you can
f e e l your l i p buldge n o tic e a b ly . The q u estio n aw aited our d e c is io n .______
8. P lace your thumb and fin g e r on th e bone of th e jaw so a s to fe e l any
up and down movement. Repeat th e above sentence re c o rd th e number of times
you f e e l a d e f in ite movement._______
122
9 . Following are a l i s t o f words to pronounce alo u d . C irc le yes i f i t i s
easy to do w e ll, no i f d i f f i c u l t t o do w e ll, ? i f you d o n 't know th e p ro n o u n ciatio n of th e word. Your c r i t e r i o n f o r t h i s judgment i s , "could I
use t h i s word e a s ily in a smooth flow ing sentence?"
a r tic u la to r y
c o n s titu tio n a lity
co n fisc a to ry
in e x p lic a b le
a u th o r ita tiv e ly
a p o c a ly p tic a lly
in d is s o la b ly
lu g ubrious
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
?
9
?
?
?
?
?
ju s tific a to ry
c o n g ra tu la to ry
in c o n tr a v e r tib le
fra tric id a l
e llip tic a lly
pyram idal
in tra n s ig e a n t
•? e x h o rta to ry
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
in d e fa tig a b le
a rtis tic a lly
an g u larly
sim u lta n e ity
yes
yes
yes
yes
j
no ?
no ?
no ?
no
125
THE PRELIMINARY SPEECH INVENTORY
T his in v e n to ry has been designed to enable you by s e lf-o b s e rv a tio n
to s e p a ra te c e r t a i n o f your speech a s s e ts from p o s sib le speech l i a b i l i t i e s .
I t i s concerned "with g en e ra l vocal e ffe c tiv e n e s s and does n o t, th e r e f o r e ,
endeavor t o e s ta b li s h or supp ort any s in g le standard of speech.
T his in v e n to ry has been compiled by s e le c tin g from p ro fe s s io n a l w ritin g s ,
published t e s t s , and p r a c tic e th o se item s which seem t o provide th e most
v a lid and r e l ia b le d a ta when s e l f ad m in istered . I f a l l of th e item s a re
c o n sc ie n tio u sly answered, th e y should provide an index t o your p e r s o n a lity
as i t i s expressed i n your sp eech. Your answers w ill be tr e a te d i n th e
s t r i c t e s t co n fid en ce, so you may f e e l f r e e t o give candid r e p l i e s .
NAME______________________________ SCHOOL
CITY______________________________ STATE
TEACHING MAJOR________________
TEACHING MINOR
YEARS OF SERVICE________________________________
Speech T ra in in g —Below a re l i s t e d tw elve general f i e l d s o f speech
a c t i v i t i e s under which headings you a re asked to in d ic a te th e form al
school t r a in i n g you have had i n speech, th e f ie ld s in which you would l i k e
to have f u r th e r t r a i n i n g , and th e th r e e f ie ld s you f e e l are most im­
p o rta n t f o r th e te a c h e r . Use a check mark fo r your answersj do n o t
attem pt to p ro v id e th e number o f h o u rs.
F ie ld i n which
F ie ld in which
you have had
you should l i k e
form al tra in in g . form al tr a in in g
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
A cting
Choral Speaking
C onversation
Debate
O ral I n te r p r e ta tio n
P h o n etics
P u b lic Speaking
Radio Speaking
Speech C o rre ctio n
S o c ia l Graces
S to ry T e llin g
Voice C u ltu re
THREE
f i e l d s most
IMPORTANT TO
th e te a c h e r
124
Voice and E nunciation D iv isio n .
This page i s devoted to the c o n s id e ra tio n of your voice and en u n ciatio n .
No attem p t i s made to c l a s s i f y your voice as good o r bad o r to d eterm ine the
in d iv id u a l e n u n cia tio n problem s. T his d iv is io n i s designed to d if f e r e n tia te
among v ario u s ty p e s o f voices and en u n ciatio n p a t t e r n s . In answering a l l
o f th e s e item s p le a se b e ar i n mind th a t i t i s your normal speaking voice which
i s t o be re p re s e n te d .
1.
What do you co n sid er to be th e u su a l p itc h o f your speaking voice?
R ather Low
. About Average_____ , R ather High_____.
2 . How much h ig h er i s th e u su al p itc h
o f your speaking voice than th e
lo w est p itc h you can reach ? Answer t h i s by counting down, th e s c a le , one,
two, t h r e e , e t c . , one n o te a t a tim e. S t a r t a t your u su a l p itc h w ith one
and p la c e i n th e fo llo w in g blank th e low est number you can c o u n t._____
3 . Follow ing a re f iv e "tongue tw is te r s 11. Attempt to read them a t
a r a t e as f a s t a s you can say "Jack Robinson". Answer by s e le c tin g th e
one you th in k i s th e h a rd e s t and c i r c l e th e 1 . Grade th e o th e r fo u r by
c i r c l in g 2 f o r n o t q u ite as hard and 3 f o r much e a s i e r .
Give Grimes Jim 's g re a t g i l t gag w hip.
The b leak breeze b lig h te d th e b r ig h t broom blossom s.
She v i s i t e d Mrs. S m ith's f is h sauce shop.
She says she s h a ll sew a s h e e t.
Catch th e c a ts w ith a knapsack s tr a p .
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
1 2
3
3
3
3
3
4 . Voices vary as to t h e ir co n ten t of n a s a l reso n an ce. This i s to be
disco v ered in your v oice by asking you to read th e fo llo w in g s e t of l i n e s j
read th e f i r s t lin e i n a normal manner, th e n co n tin u e w ith th e second l in e
w h ile p in ch in g your n o s t r i l s clo se d , l i s t e n c a r e f u l l y and check th e answer
which re p re s e n ts th e d iffe re n c e in th e sound o f th e two l i n e s .
0 young Lochinvar has come out of th e W est.
(Close N o s tr ils ) In a l l th e wide border h is s te e d i s th e b e s t.
5 . P lace your fin g e r on th e c e n te r of your upper l i p . Read th e
fo llo w in g l i n e s from Poe in a manner t h a t resem bles your normal speech.
Record i n th e space provided th e number o f tim es you f e e l your l i p buldge
n o tic e a b ly .
Once upon a m idnight d re a ry , w hile I pondered weak and weary.
6. Read th e fo llo w in g s e le c tio n aloud a s you would i f you were to
rea d i t to a group. Draw a l in e / between th e words being read every tim e
you ta k e a b r e a th . This i s n o t a t e s t of lung c a p a c ity b u t r a th e r a search
f o r c e r ta in o f your b re a th in g h a b its when re a d in g . T o tal in the space
provided th e number o f tim e you in h aled d u rin g th e read in g o f th e passage.
125
The s o f t o u te r covering o f h is f le s h , p e r s o n a lity , and voice, and th e
hard s tr a ta beneath i t , tu rn in g a l l th e surrounding m ateria l world to g o ld ,
as a s n a il g a th e rs h e r surrounding world o f d u s t and sand to form h er s h e ll ,
gave one an uncanny and t e r r i f y i n g f e e lin g , as of th e presence of some unknown,
s lu g -lik e c re a tu re i n f i n i t e l y p e rv e rte d by th e in v ersio n of i t s m a te ria l
b e in g .________
A c tiv ity and A ttitu d e D iv isio n .
In answering th e fo llo w in g q u e stio n s c ir c l e e ith e r yes or no in a l l
p o s s ib le c a se s. I f you a re unable to answer yes or no then c ir c le th e
q u estio n mark.
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no •>
no ?
no ?
no ?
no •>
no ?
no ?
no ?
no •}
no ?
no ?
no ?
no f
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
no ?
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
no
no
•
•
?
?
?
?
?
?
?
Do you express y o u rs e lf more e a s ily in speech than in w ritin g ?
Does th e m ispronounciation o f words by o th ers annoy you?
Do you u s u a lly co n scio u sly t r y to speak d is tin c tly ?
Do you co n sid e r people who make puns c le v e re r than o th ers?
Do you t e l l s t o r i e s in d ia l e c t e ffe c tiv e ly ?
Do you co n sid e r y o u rs e lf a good judge o f voice q u a lity ?
Would you l i k e to a c t in a school play?
Do you c r i t i c i s e a frie n d when th e frie n d asks f o r c ritic is m ?
Can you e x p re ss y o u r s e lf c le a r ly when angry?
Are you in c lin e d to keep in th e background on s o c ia l occasions?
Do you enjoy arg u in g m erely f o r th e sake of arguing?
In s o c ia l c o n v ersatio n a re you more of a lis t e n e r th an a ta lk e r ?
At a p a r ty do you enjoy in tro d u c in g a s tra n g e r to th e o th e r g u ests?
Do you th in k t h a t "snappy comebacks" in d ic a te a g i l i t y of mind?
Have you found t h a t sarcasm h e lp s emphasize a point?
Do you c o n scio u sly use g e s tu re s as you speak?
Do you endeavor t o ex p ress y o u rs e lf in unusual and novel ways?
Do you enjoy ta lk in g w ith l i t t l e ch ild ren ?
Are you annoyed by people who speak in broken English?
In speaking t o a group of people do you use jokes e f fe c tiv e ly ?
Would you welcome th e change to coach speech c o n testa n ts?
I f you d i s l i k e a person could you t a l k p le a s a n tly w ith him?
Do you o fte n h u r t o th e r p e o p le ’s fe e lin g s w ithout meaning to do so?
Do you ev er f e e l l i k e ap o lo g izin g when you make a speech?
In group or f a c u l t y m eetings do you o fte n s t a r t d iscu ssio n s?
Are you fre q u e n tly asked to re p e a t q uestions?
As you speak do your words, id e a s , v o ice, and g estu res seem
to co operate?
Do you o fte n u se l i t e r a r y re fe re n c e s when you speak to groups?
Do people who c a r e f u lly weigh t h e i r words annqy you?
Are you c a r e f u l to make each p o in t c le a r when you speak?
I f a member o f your audience heckled you would you continue speaking?
Do you c o n sid e r y o u r s e lf good a t read in g aloud?
Can you ex p ress your id eas through pantomine?
Are you c le v e r a t im ita tin g th e speech of o th e rs.
126
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
yes
yes
yes
yes
no
no
no
no
no
yes
yes
no
no
yes
no
yes
yes
no
no
Can you speak w ith g re a te r ease i f you have something i n your hand?
Can you r e a d ily s t a r t conversation w ith a person you have ju s t met?
Do you f e e l t h a t people often m is in te rp re t what you say?
Do you o fte n h e s it a t e to speak out in a group m eeting?
Does your th ro a t fre q u e n tly f e e l very t i r e d tow ard th e end of th e
day?
? Can you always make an ap p ro p riate remark i n group conversation?
? Can you hold your own in inform al ta b le co n v ersatio n ?
? Could you ta lk over a boarding house telephone f r e e ly ?
? Do you f in d d i f f i c u l t y in fin d in g words to ex p ress your meanings?
•> Do you consider th e ra p id speaker as e f f e c tiv e as th e d e lib e r a te
sp e a k e r.
Do you ev er enjoy s o lic it in g funds?
? Have you had a number of experiences in ap p earin g b e fo re p u b lic
g a th e r in g s .
? Do you l i k e to p a r tic ip a te in f e s t i v a l g a th e rin g s and l i v e l y
p a rtie s .
? Do you p re fe r t o work w ith o th ers r a th e r th a n alone?
? At a re c e p tio n o r a te a do you seek to meet th e g u e st o f honor?
?
?
?
?
?
Language D iv is io n .
T his d iv is io n i s not in ten d ed to search th e e x te n t o f your vocabulary
o r t h e c o r re c tn e s s of your language usages. The purpose i s to c o n s id e r
th e choice o f words which you might use under c e rta in circu m sta n c e s. You
may f e e l t h a t none o f th e words o ffered s a t i s f i e s your d e s ir e . I n such a
case check th e word which seems to be the b e s t s u b s titu tio n f o r t h e word
or phase you would p refe r*
1 . You have j u s t fin is h e d te a c h in g a f r i e n d 's c la s s . The c la s s was
u n ru ly and d isc o u rte o u s p rim a rily because of one boy. The f r i e n d
whose c la s s you to o k comes t o you l a t e r in th e day and asks you ab o u t th e
boy. I n d ic a te by a T in th e space provided what you would c a l l him .
I f th e p r in c ip a l were to ask you th e same question w ith a P th e word you
would probably u s e to him.
blacksheep
b ra t
d e v il
d elin q u en t
scamp
problem
rascal
rowdy
r u f f ia n
scoundrel
2 . You have r e c e n tly atten d ed a p ic tu re show which you f e e l would have
very u n d e s ira b le in flu e n c e on young people. A member o f your c l a s s , in
c la s s , asks you about th e show. In d ic a te w ith a S a word which you might
use i n r e p l y . I n d ic a te w ith a T a word you might use i f asked about th e
show i n p r iv a te by another te a c h e r.
awful
bad t a s t e
o ffe n s iv e
d ep lo ra b le
re p u ls iv e
d isg u stin g
shocking
d isp le a s in g
lo u sy
un p leasan t
3 . You have j u s t read in a p opular magazine a poem which seemed t o you to
be u n u su a lly f i n e . You w ish to encourage a frie n d to re a d i t . I n d ic a te w ith
127
th e l e t t e r F a word which you might use i n your d e s c rip tio n of
a poem which you might l i k e . You t e l l your c la s s about i t .
In d ic a te w ith th e l e t t e r S a word you might use as you t a l k to
them about i t .
d e lig h tf u l
keen
lo v e ly
enchanting
moving
e x q u is ite
sw ell
g rip p in g
in te r e s tin g
th rillin g
4 . In your o rd in a ry speech, a re you c a re fu l to avoid p o ssib le
am b ig u ities? Do you u s u a lly say such a sj
Laid in th e cold ground (not coal ground)
H alf I see th e p a rtin g s p i r i t sig h (not s p i r i t 's eye)
Would th a t a l l d iffe re n c e s o f s e c ts were a t an end (not sex)
Oh, stu d ied d e c e it (not study)
His crime moved me (not cry)
Yes
No
128
I
PHYSICAL ACTIVITY
A* In each of the following cases try to express the idea contained
in the words by means of gestures only. Do not say anything aloud. Check
your accomplishment In one of the three columns.
Gesture
Gesture Gesture
feels
feels
feels
convincing foolish meaningless
1.
2.
5.
4*
6*
6.
7.
8.
9*
10*
What was that noise?
Yes, you are perfectly correct*................................................ .............
No, no, nol
What do you want?
.......
..............
No, that's the wrong idea.
The fish was this long*
..
Keep s t ill a moment*
Let me have your attention.
.
Hurry up.
Get out of here.
.... .
. .
B* The following questions are to be answered by remembering your
feelings in previous circumstances. It is not concerned with how you
think you should feel or how you think you would feel i f confronted with
such a situation at a future time*
Answer in space provided by means of the following key* 0 i f you
have had no such experience, 1 for definitely no, 2 for a moderate
amount, 5 for definitely yes.
1* Do you enjoy pantomining?______
2. When you are speaking before an audience do you find it difficult
to use your hands effectively?
5. Do you feel that your gestures are merely "tacked on" instead of
parts of the whole speaking situation?
4. When your audience is made of persons you know quite well are you
i l l at ease?
5* Do you feel more at ease when spoaking in familiar surroundings?
6* When you are speaking do you feel more at ease when you have a chair
or desk to stand behind or lean on?
7* Do you feel a tenseness in your body when speaking?______
Continued on next page*
129
8. When you lode directly at your audience are you able to recognize
the features of various individuals?
9* Do you find it easier to look directly at your audience than to
keep your eyes elsewhere?
10* Are you able to speak with greater ease when holding a pencil,
watch chain, or the like?
11. Do you use many gestures while speaking?
12. Is your face expressive of your ideas while speaking?
15. Do you feel that many of your gestures are jerky and not very expres­
sive?______
14. While speaking do you feel a general coordination of words, vocal
expressiveness, and gesture?
15. Do you prefer to move about the platform w hile speaking?
150
SPEECH TRAINING
Below a re l i s t e d tw en ty -fiv e f i e l d s o f speech a c t i v i t y .
You a re asked to judge them on th re e countss
1.
have had
In th e f i r s t column check th e se f ie ld s in
form al school tr a in in g .
which you
2.
In th e second column check any a d d itio n a l
which you would lik e to have had form al tr a in in g .
f ie ld s in
3.
In th e t h i r d column check th e fiv e f i e l d s
th in k a re most im portant f o r th e te a c h e r .
which you
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Argumentation
A cting
Choral speaking
Conversation
Declamation
Debate
D ia le c ts
Drama
G esture
Interview ing
O ral reading of P o etry
Oral reading of Prose
Phonetics
Physics of Voice
Physiology of Voice
Radio
Speech Pathology
Stage Design
S o cial graces
Salesmanship
S to ry T e llin g
Telephoning
Voice C ulture
P latform speaking
Theatre H isto ry
2
3
131
ADAPTABILITY DIVISION
In each o f th e follow ing item s check one o r more of th e
conditio n s which cause th e s itu a tio n p re se n te d . For each of
th e se co n d itio n s check th e degree o f e f f e c t .
A. In which o f th e follow ing speech s itu a tio n s do you
fin d your b re a th i n s u f f ic ie n t o r s h o rt?
G reat
Degree of Conditions
Moderate Very S lig h t
1.
When speaking b efo re a la rg e
audience.___
2 . Reading p rin te d m a tte r to a group.___
3.
Expressing an opinion in a forum .___
4. Conversing w ith s u p e rio r s .___
5. Never.___
B. In which o f th e follow ing
speech s itu a tio n s do you use many
g estu res?
1.
2.
When making e x p la n a tio n s.___
When emphasizing a p o i n t .___
3.
When very in te r e s te d in s u b je c t.___
4 . In animated argum ent.___
5. Never.___
C. In which o f th e fo llo w in g
speech s itu a tio n s do you have
d i f f i c u l t y in being heard?
1.
2.
In group c o n v e rsa tio n . _
When th ro a t f e e ls te n s e .___
3.
In outdoor s i t u a t i o n s .___
4 . Before la rg e a u d ie n c e s.___
5. Never.___
D. In which o f th e follow ing
speech s itu a tio n s do you fin d i t
d i f f i c u l t to make your a t t i t u d e
toward the thought o f your ta l k
apparent?
Continued on the next page
132
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Degree of C onditions
Reading aloud new m a te r ia l.
Great
Moderate Very S lig h t
Reading P o e try t o a group.___
Making ex p la n a tio n s o f a b s tr a c t
id e a s .___
Speaking b e fo re an u n fa m ilia r audience.___
N ever.___
E.
In which o f the follow ing
speech s i t u a t i o n s a re you very
c a re fu l about your choice of w ords.
1.
2.
5.
4.
5.
Always.___
When in tro d u c in g a new s u b je c t.___
When e x p la in in g a p o in t o f view .___
When d is c u s s in g a c o n tro v e rs ia l
s u b je c t.___
N ever.___
133
sjg cfi mMmm mm.
The following is a lis t of questions relative to your attitude
toward different speech situations. Check your attitude in the col*
umn, which best describes your feelings.
always usually seldom never
Do You
1. Start discussions in a forum or
discussion group.
2. Have difficulty in making your
speech distinct.
5. Have difficulty in finding words
to express yourself.
4. Express yourself in unusual and
novel ways.
5. Use quotations and literary
references when speaking.
6. Hake puns on words.
7. Hold the attention of those to
whom you are speaking.
8. Consciously try to speak dis­
tinctly.
9. Find yourself speaking too rapidly
at times.
10. Imitate the speech of others with
ease.
11. Use dialects successfully in te ll­
ing stories.
12. Have difficulty in being under­
stood over the telephone.
13. Find that speaking tires you
physically.
14. Become annoyed at mispronun­
ciation.
continued on n ext page
154
always usually seldom never
15* Enjoy introducing people around.
X6« Bajoy working in amateur shows.
«
GO
H
17* Have difficulty in persuading
people to your point of view.
Easily hold your own in a group
conversation.
19. Make "snappy comebacks."
20. Express your point of view
regardless of consequenoes.
Speak with more ease when
sitting.
22. Hesitate to talk with superiors.
21 .
to.
N
Feel like apologising when you
make a speech.
24. Find that sarcasm helps empha­
size points.
25. Talk in a loud voice.
155
SPEECH SITUATIONS
Below are speech s itu a tio n s to which you are to respond accordto th e degree o f ease you have in m eeting them. Use a 0 to in d ic a te
im p o s s ib ility , 1 i f i t i s d i f f i c u l t , 2 i f i t ta k e s a t l e a s t some
e f f o r t , and 3 i f you can meet th e s itu a tio n w ith e a se . I f you have
not had an experience e stim a te your probable reactio n *
1.
2.
3.
4.
5*
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24*
25.
Interv iew in g an im p o rtant person f o r inform ation*
P resen tin g a p la n o r p ro p o sitio n in a m eeting and
supporting i t a g a in s t o p p o sitio n .
C r itic is in g o th e rs when c r itic is m i s due.
Serving as a guide f o r a group of s tr a n g e r s ,
Making a speech in a la r g e auditorium .
P o inting out e r r o r s in a n o th e r 's reaso n in g .
Opening a co n v e rsa tio n w ith a s tr a n g e r .
Carrying on ta b le c o n v e rsa tio n .
Squelching a person who deserves i t .
D irectin g people to p la c e s u n fa m ilia r to them.
Encouraging people to do t h e i r b e s t.
Developing i n t e r e s t and a tte n tio n in an audience.
Talking p le a s a n tly w ith a person you d i s l i k e .
Talking on a phone when o th e rs are li s t e n i n g .
Talking when th e re a re many d is t r a c tio n s .
Speaking b ru sq u ely to a s tra n g e r who i r r i t a t e s you.
Advising people to do what you th in k th e y should do.
Q uestioning a s u p e r io r 's judgment when you d isag ree
w ith him.
Talking w ith v ery young c h ild re n .
Expressing your p o in t o f view when y o u 're angry.
Reading P o e try a lo u d .
Reading Prose alo u d .
Reading m a te ria l a t S ig h t to a group.
T e llin g s to r i e s to sm all c h ild re n .
P ra isin g a person f o r good work.
1.
2.
3*
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9._
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.,
20.
21.,
22.
23.
24.
25.,
136
SPEECH ACTIVITIES
Check in th e column which in d ic a te s your a t t i t u d e toward
engaging in th e fo llo w ing a c t i v i t i e s . This i s to in d ic a te
your p re se n t p o in t o f view, not p a s t ex p erien ce.
Like
1.
D iscussing p h ilo so p h ic a l q u e stio n s
2.
Making form al speeches
3.
Talking w ith stra n g e rs
4.
D iscussing books
5.
T e llin g jokes
6.
Formal in te rv ie w
7.
Conducting group games
8.
Serving as program chairman
9.
Making a f te r- d in n e r ta lk s
10.
A cting in p lay s
11.
Coaching c o n te sta n ts
12.
Inform al group d isc u ssio n s
13.
Judging c o n te s ts
14.
Organizing clubs
15.
S o lic itin g funds
I n d if f e re n t
D islik e
157
INTONATION DIVISION
The primary purpose of this division is to consider the patterns
which the voice follows in normal speech* Much of the ability to con­
vey accurate meaning and hold interest is dependent upon the changes of
pitch and stress which we use. This division is designed to discover
the intonation patterns of your speech*
A* Following are five groups of words whose combinations produce
speaking difficulties of varying degrees* Bead each of these groups
aloud rapidly being careful to give each sound its proper value* Check
in the space provided the degree of difficulty you find*
easy
fair ly fairly
easy difficult difficult
1. Log cabinT wash dayr watch tick.
2. Porch ,1am. which zoor beach sand.
3* South Jones, rim? finger. watch chain.
4. Beach shells, kind oin. village church*
5* Stick oin. ash chain, village ,1ail*
B* The meaning of a sentence is often conveyed by the manner in which
i t is spoken. The same sentence can be spoken to give a variety of meanings* If we ask, "Is that so?,** the meaning is certainly different from
our cynical comment, "Is THAT sol"
1* Say the sentence, "Teaching is an art as well as a science," in
a manner which implies certainty* (Of course i t is , that's an obvious
factI)
On the basis of your satisfaction with the effort you produced cheek
one answer to each of the following questions; the checks need not coincide
in any case*
Do you think you sounded convincing?
very somewhat no difficult
Was i t an easy task to accomplish?
continued on next page.
158
Z • With the given sentences convey the idea of, defiance*
deny it l)
(I dare you
year somewhat no difficult
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
3*
Of,
defense*(I donft care what
others say, I know it 's so*)
___________________________
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
4* Of, advice* (Be careful, remember
teaching is more than rules*)
_________________________
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
5*
Of,
boasting.(I'm an artist,
teaching is creating*)
.
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
6* Of, contempt. (oh Teahl Don't kid
me that way.)
_________________________
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
7.
Of,
caution.(Let's be careful
about this, we may be wrong*)
______________________
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
8*
Of,
contention. (I in sist thatI'm
right*)
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
9* Of, agreement* (I agree with you
perfectly.)
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
10* Of, doubt* (Maybe it 's so but it
doesn't seem right*)
...
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
11* Of, discourteous* (You're a ll wrong
and too dumb to see i t .)
_____________________
Sound convincing? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Easily accomplished? _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
continued on next page.
139
very somewhat no difficult
12* Of, dejection, (Then a ll is lo st.)
.
Sound convincing?
_________________
Easily accomplished? ____________
15. Of, hope. (Is it possible; then we
can do it I)
Sound convincing?
Easily accomplished?
.
14. Of, modesty. (I'm really not f it
for such a noble task*)
__________________________
Sound convincing?
:
:_____
Easily accomplished?
15* Of, refusal. (For this reason you
mustn't do i t .)
______________________________
Sound convincing? __________________________
Easily accomplished? ___________________________________
140
Personality Questions from which the Final Fifty Questions
Used in the Speech Inventory Were Chosen
1. Would you like to be invited to speak before a strange P. T.
Association?
2.
In speaking to a group of people do you use jokes effectively?
5* Wouldyou like to represent your school to interview a famous
person?
4. Do you try to become chairman of programs?
5* Wouldyou like to act in a school faculty play?
6* Wouldyou welcome the opportunity to coach speech contestants?
7. When a judge is needed and you are capable, do you volunteer?
8. If a new club were to be organised, would you like to be In charge?
9* If an activity you were sponsoring needed funds, would you so licit
for them?
10* Do you criticize a friend when the friend asks for criticism?
11* If someone annoyed you in public would you endeavor to squelch him?
12.
Do you have the knack of holding your audience’s Interest?
15* If you disliked a person could you talk pleasantly with him?
14* Could you talk over a boarding house telephone as freely as you
do at home?
15. If a member of the audience heckled you, could you continue
speaking?
16. Are you sure enough of your opinions to advise others?
continued on next page*
141
P erso n a lity Q uestions (continued)
17* I f you knew your superior was in error would you correct him?
18* Can you express yourself clearly when angry?
19* Do you consider yourself good at reading aloud?
20• Are you clever at imitating others?
21* Can you express your ideas through pantomime?
22* Do your hands ever bother you when you are speaking?
23. Do you make a practice of looking directly at your audience?
24. Can you speak with greater ease i f you have something in your hand?
25* Do you prefer to move about when speaking to a group?
26* Do you express yourself more easily in speech than in writing?
27* Do you prefer to read about a thing rather than to experience it?
28* Do you prefer to work with others rather than alone?
29* Do you like to persuade others to your point of view?
30* Are you inclined to keep in the background on social occasions?
31* Do you usually dislike to change opinions you have already formed?
52* Do you enjoy getting acquainted with most people?
35. Are you inclined to keep quiet when out in a social group?
34* Do you express such emotions as delight, sorrow, anger, and the
like readily?
35• Are you inclined to think about yourself much of the time?
36* Do you like to se ll things?
37* Do you find i t easy, as a*rule, to make new acquaintances?
38• Do you dislike to form new acquaintances?
39, Were you ever 'the life of the party'?
continued on n ext page*
142
P erso n a lity Questions (continued)
40* Do you often hurt other people's feelings without meaning to do it?
41* Do you enjoy taking part in an argument merely for the sake of
arguing?
42. Do you prefer not to speak in public if you can avoid doing so?
43* Can you think quickly in a situation that demands prompt action?
44. Are you inclined to take life too seriously?
45. When slighted or insulted by another person, are you inclined to
conceal your hurt?
46. Are you much depressed by the criticism of others?
47* Are you worried about being shy?
48. Do you usually prefer to let someone else take the lead on social
occasions?
49. Is i t difficult to hurt your feelings, even when the joke is on you?
50. Do you hesitate to confide in others, even in close friends?
51. Would you (or do you) like to be a salesman of any kind?
52. Do you generally feel uncomfortable when you are the center of
attention on social occasions?
55. Would you rather be a political organizer than an artist?
54. Do you find it easy to ask others for help?
55. Are you troubled with shyness?
56. Would you feel very self-conscious i f you had to volunteer an
idea to start a discussion in a group of people?
57. Do you have difficulty in starting a conversation with a person
to whom you have just been introduced?
continued on next page.
143
P erso n a lity Q uestions (continued)
58* Have you frequently known the answer to a question in a class
but failed when called upon, because you were afraid to speak
out before the class?
59* Have you had a number of experiences in appearing before public
gatherings?
60* Do you find i t very difficult to speak in public?
61* Are you troubled with feelings of inferiority?
62* When you want something from a person with whom you arenot very
well acquainted, would you rather write a note orletter
to the
individual than go and ask him or her personally?
63. Do you feel very self-conscious in the presence of people whom
you greatly admire, but with whom you are not well acquainted?
64.
Are you subject to to n sillitis or laryngitis?
65.
Are you sometimes the leader at social affairs?
66.
Are your feelings easily hurt?
67* If you come late to a meeting would you rather stand or leave
than take a front seat?
68* Do you frequently have difficulty in breathing through your nose?
69.
Are you often the center of favorite attention at aparty?
70. Do you find that you tend to have a few very close friends rather
than many casual acquaintances.
71*
Does criticism disturb you greatly?
72. Do you feel embarrassed i f you have to ask permission to leave
a group of people?
continued on next page*
144
P e rso n a lity Q uestions (continued)
73* Does it upset you considerably to have a teacher call on you
unexpectedly?
74* Do you find it difficult to start a conversation with a stranger?
75• Do you like to participate in festival gatherings and lively parties?
76* Do you feel self-conscious when you recite in class?
77* Do you hesitate to volunteer in a class recitation?
78. Can you usually receive well-meant criticism without feeling hurt?
79. Would you rather write a play than be the leading actor in it?
80. In social conversation are you usually a listener rather than a
talker?
81. Do you pride yourself upon being able to control your emotions?
82. Do you often feel that you could do things better than the leader
of your group?
83* Do you believe that people often misunderstand what you say?
84. Does i t upset you considerably to have some one ask you to speak
when you have had no time to prepare your talk?
85. Do you make friends readily?
86. Do you often hesitate to speak out in a group lest you say and
do the wrong thing?
87. Are you sometimes the leader at a social affair?
88. Do you blush easily?
89. Do you ever cross the street to avoid meeting somebody?
90. Do you greatly enjoy social dancing?
91. Do you get discouraged easily?
continued on next page.
145
Personality Questions (continued)
92,
Do you frequently feel very tired toward the end of the day?
93* Did you ever take the lead to enliven a dull party?
94 • Do you often feel lonesome even when you are with people?
95.
At a reception or a tea do you seek to meet the important person
present?
96. Do you often have much difficulty in thinking of an appropriate
remark to make in group conversation?
97. Do you feel embarrassed when you have to enter a public assembly
after everyone else has been seated?
98* In school is i t d ifficu lt for you to give an oral report before
the class?
99. When riding on a train or a bus do you sometimes engage fellowstravelers in conversation?
146
Table XIX
Response of F orty-five New York U niversity Students
To the I n i t i a l Speech Training Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d i n th is ta b le may be i d e n tif i e d by re fe re n c e
to th e Speech T raining q u e s tio n n a ire page 130
F ie ld o f T raining
Number Having Number D esirin g
Had T raining
F u rth e r T rain in g
F ie ld s Considered
Most Im portant
Argumsn t a t ion
5
13
7
A cting
4
13
6
Choral speaking
4
4
3
C onversation
9
25
33
Declamation
2
5
5
13
9
15
D ia le c ts
0
4
0
Drama
4
10
5
G esture
0
4
6
In terv iew in g
10
18
13
O ral re a d in g o f P oetry
15
8
8
O ral re a d in g of Prose
4
6
19
20
12
17
Physics o f Voice
4
7
8
Physiology o f Voice
3
4
7
Radio
0
12
0
Speech Pathology
0
3
10
Stage Design
0
9
1
Debate
Phonetics
(Continued on next page)
147
F ie ld of T raining
Number Having
Had T rain in g
Number D esirin g
F u rth e r T rain in g
F ie ld s Considered
Most Im portant
S o c ia l graces
3
14
9
Salesmanship
2
9
0
S to ry t e l l i n g
7
13
20
Telephoning
5
11
2
Voice c u ltu re
5
27
26
P la tf o m speaking
7
21
14
T heatre H istory
0
4
0
148
Table XX
The Response Given by F o rr ty
ty--fiv
f iv e New York U niversity
n iv ersity Students
. to th e Voice D ivision Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by refe re n c e
to th e Voice D iv isio n q u e s tio n n a ire included in th e appendix.
Item 1 r e f e r s to th e p itc h o f th e speaking voice:
Very L ow ........................................... .........................................
Low.................................................................................................
Low Average................................................................................ 14
Average.........................................................................................23
..........................................
High Average
H i g h .............................................................................................
Very High.
............................................................................
0
3
5
0
0
Item 2 compares th e p i t c h o f th e speaking voice to th e p itc h a t which
head resonance i s found to be a maximum:
H ig h e r ............................................................................................. 22
Lower
...................................................................
17
The same a s ................................................................................
5
Item 3 considers v ib ra tio n s found i n th e ch est bones w ith c e rta in sounds:
ee .............................. . . . . . . . . . . . .
a h ................................................................................
u ................................................................................
Yes
35
31
39
No
10
9
4
Item 4 considers th e p resen ce of n a s a l v ib ra tio n s w ith c e r ta in sounds:
him.
......................................
42
s i n ...............................................................................
44
l o n g ................................................................................................. 41
t e a .................................................................................................
5
t i e .................................................................................................
3
t i l l .............................................................................................
4
l e t ...................................................................................
3
c a t ...................................................................
3
law ..................................................................................................... 11
two.............................
3
z .................................
21
r
................................................................................
7
(continued on next page)
149
Item 5 r e f e r s t o th e amount of n a sa l resonance in d ic a te d by d if f e r in g
d eg rees o f change in tone when th e n ares a re open and clo se d :
show
b ik e
C onsiderable
18
15
Very L i t t l e
17
20
None
10
10
Item 6 d e a ls w ith th e p o in t a t which th e voice q u a lity changes when
counting i s done i n a s in g le b re a th :
Range o f Count
10-15
16-20
21-25
26-30
31-35
36-40
41-45
46-50
51-55
56
S ta rte d to Rise
U npleasant
T o ta l Count
7
13
8
11
—
5
5
6
4
6
9
5
_
—
—
-
-
—
3
5
3
3
8
9
3
3
5
—
—
-
7 c o n sid e rs th e method of emphasis:
Volume
some .......................................... 33 . . .
me . . . .
P itc h
Item 8 co n sid e rs th e g e n era l placem ent of th e v o ice:
Deep i n th e t h r o a t ...................................................................
4
Upper p a r t o f t h r o a t .....................................................
24
Back o f th e mouth....................
7
Back o f upper f r o n t te e th .
..................................
3
N asal c a v i t y ...........................................................
F ro n t o f h ead. . . . . . ...................................................
3
Top o f h ead.
...............................................................
0
Item 9 c o n sid e rs th e degree o f voice d i f f i c u l t i e s possessed:
B re a th in e ss
H uskiness
S trid e n c y
D e n a sa liz a tio n
M outhiness
Thin to n e
F l a t to n e
No Amount Small Degree Moderate C onsiderable
22
15
6
0
28
11
3
1
22
7
12
1
30
6
5
1
24
13
2
1
21
8
4
1
32
6
3
2
3
150
Table XXI
The Responses Given by F o rty -fiv e New York U niversity Students
To the short D ivision o f Enunciation Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n ti f ie d by referen ce
to th e s h o rt D ivision of E nunciation Q u estio n n aire page
Item 1:
Presence o f a d e n ta l c o n d itio n a f f e c tin g c l a r i t y o f speech;
y e s .....................................
n o ..................................................
Item 2;
9
36
F oreign language environment:
I t a l i a n ...................................................................................
4
10
J e w i s h ....................
J e w i s h .................................................
2
Hungarian...............................................................................
1
F r e n c h .................................................................................
1
Greek............................................................
S panish...................................................................................
1
Albanian ...............................................................................
1
P o lish ................................................................................
1
R ussian. .
............................................................
L ith u a n ia n ...........................................................................
1
Item 3: A b ility to touch th e ro o f o f th e mouth w ith th e tongue
when th e mouth i s opened:
y e s .................................
n o ...................................................
Item 4:
Amount of l i p movement n e c essary , ranked i n o rd er:
1.
2.
3.
Item 5:
42
3
Come to te a a t two.
L e t's have te a a t te n .
Then y o u 'l l s ta y to t e a .
^£3 152 215 251 312 521
12 11 7
4
3
4
Words re q u irin g g r e a te s t jaw movement:
l e s s ...............................................
l a s s ...............................................
l e a s e ...............................................
l o s s ...............................................
0
11
3
13
(continued on next page)
1
1
151
Item 6;
S im ila r p ro n u n c ia tio n :
aim , a r m .....................................
so u rc e , sa u ce ..............................
s to c k , s to r k ..............................
m erry, Mary....................
Item 7:
Comparison o f a s p ir a tio n w ith d if f e r e n t words:
w e a r .................................
w here.....................................
b o th a l i k e ..................................
Item 8:
40
38
10
Presence o f voiced f i n a l sounds in c e r ta in words:
r a i s e ...............................................
n o is e .....................................
b a s s ...............................................
b o y s ...............................................
b ecau se...........................................
Item I I ;
9
44
39
17
17
Presence o f ngg:
f i n g e r .........................
......................
lin g e r
s i n g e r ...........................................
Item 10:
1
42
2
Presence o f a s p ir a tio n w ith words;
k e e n ..............................................
p ay ...................................................
p r a y .....................................
t r y ...................................................
t a b ...................................................
Item 9:
10
9
0
6
32
35
2
28
32
P o sitio n o f th e tongue t i p f o r ,rs M:
A gainst low er t e e t h ..................................................
A gainst u p p er t e e t h .
....................
P ro tru d in g beyond upper t e e t h ............................
Close t o u p p er t e e t h ..............................................
..................................
Well back o f upper te e t h
Item 12;
24
4
4
9
4
P o sitio n o f tongue t i p f o r i n i t i a l Mt" :
Upper t e e t h .....................
.................
Upper gum rid g e*
Roof o f mouth. ...................... . . . . . . . . .
9
32
5
(continued on next page)
3
152
Item 1 5 :
P o s itio n o f tongue t i p f o r f i n a l Mt Mj
Upper t e e t h • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •
Upper gum rid g e
Roof o f mouth...................................................................
Item 1 4 :
11
C ondition o f tongue in item s 12 and 13:
p o in te d ................................ ♦ . .
b lu n t..............................................
Item 1 5 ;
4
29
15
29
D if f ic u lty o f prolonging underlined sounds in c e r ta in w ords;
fa th e r . . . . . . . . . . .
p r id e ..............................................
b a n g ..............................................
r a i n ..............................................
3
3
3
2
153
Table XXII
The Responses of F o r ty -fiv e New York U n iversity Students
To the Intonation D iv isio n Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d i n t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by
re fe re n c e t o th e sh o rt D iv isio n o f E n u n ciatio n Q uestionnaire page 137
A.
S ectio n A considers th e d i f f i c u l t y of read in g word com binations:
Word Groups
Easy
F a ir ly
Easy
30
10
26
19
18
14
24
16
17
18
F a ir ly
Hard Hard
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Log cab in , wash day, watch tic k
Porch jam, which zoo , beach sand
South Jones, rin g f in g e r , watch ch a in
Beach s h e lls , kind p in , v illa g e church
S tic k pen, ash chain , v illa g e j a i l
B.
S ectio n B considers th e ease o f conveying meanings by I n f le c tio n .
The sentence used was: "Teaching i s an a r t as w ell as a
s c ie n c e ."
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
1
11
3
9
9
Convincing?
Very
14
Easy?
Convincing?
11
22
28
19
6
3
0
1
Easy?
Convincing?
25
21
16
19
4
4
0
1
Easy?
Convincing?
18
17
22
21
3
6
2
1
Easy?
Convincing?
19
12
16
19
7
9
3
4
Easy?
Convincing?
8
26
22
15
7
1
7
3
Easy?
Convincing?
21
24
16
17
5
2
3
2
Easy?__________ 21_____ 17_____ 3
2
Somewhat No D if f ic u lt
31
0
0
With c e r ta in ty
With d efiance
In defense
As advice
With b o astin g
With contempt
As a cau tio n
(continued on next page)
0
0
0
0
0
154
Convincing?
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Very Somewhat No D if f ic u l t
25
13
5
2
With c o n te n tio n
Easy?__________23
Convincing?
32
14
11
6
1
2
1
Easy?__________29
Convincing?
24
13
15
2
4
1
2
Easy?__________21
Convincing?
16
16
19
7
6
1
4
Easy?__________17
Convincing?
12
14
21
7
10
7
1
Easy?__________11
Convincing?
16
20
21
8
7
5
1
In agreem ent
D oubtful
D iscourteous
With d e je c tio n
With hope
Easy?__________ 18____18_____ 6____ 5
Convincing?
14
17
10
4
14.
M odestly
Easy?________ 11______19_____ 9____ 6
Convincing?
14
18
11
2
15.
As r e f u s a l
Easy?__________ 13____16
11____ 5
155
Table XXIII
The Responses Given by F o r ty -fiv e New York U niversity
Students to the A daptability D iv isio n Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by
re fe re n c e t o th e sh o rt D ivision o f E n u n ciatio n Q uestionnaire page 151
A. In which o f the follow ing speech
s itu a tio n s do you fin d your breath
G reat
i n s u f f i c i e n t o r sh o rt?
1. Mien speaking before a la rg e
au d ien ce. 21
2. Reading p rin te d m a tter to a
group. 20
3. E xpressing an opinion i n a
forum .
10
4. Conversing w ith s u p e rio rs.
11
5. Never. 5
Degree o f C ondition
Moderate
Very s lig h t
7
8
1
10
1
5
1
7
3
2
16
13
4
5
4
9
13
8
2
2
5.
In which o f th e follow ing speech
s itu a tio n s do you use many gestures?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Mien making explanations* 23
Mien emphasizing a p o in t. 18
Mien v ery in te r e s te d in th e
su b .iect. 19
In anim ated argument. 19
Never. 3
C. In which o f th e follow ing speech
s itu a tio n s do you have d i f f i c u l t y in
b ein g heard?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
In group co n v ersatio n s. 5
"When th r o a t f e e ls te n s e . 15
In outdoor s itu a tio n s . 8
B efore la rg e audiences. 14
Never. 18
1
1
3
5
7
1
1
4
5
6
8
0
__________________________
(continued on next page)
156
D.
In which o f th e fo llo w in g speech
s itu a tio n s do you f in d i t d i f f i c u l t to
make your a t t i t u d e toward th e thought
o f your t a lk apparent?
Great
1.
2.
5.
4.
5.
Degree of C ondition
Moderate
Very s lig h t
7
5
10
4
5
1
3
8
5
7
7
0
9
17
0
9
9
2
15
3
0
Reading aloud new m a te r ia l. 22
Reading p o e try t o a group. 10
Making ex p lan atio n s o f a b s tr a c t
id e a s . 16
Speaking b efo re an u n fa m ilia r
audience. 14
Never. 4
E.
In which o f th e fo llo w in g speech
s itu a tio n s a re you v ery c a r e f u l about
your choice o f words?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Always. 15
When in tro d u c in g a new s u b je c t.
26
When ex p lain in g a p o in t o f
view. 20
When d isc u s s in g a c o n tro v e rsa l
s u b je c t. 16
Never. 0
157
Table XXIV
The Responses Given by F o r ty -fiv e New York U n iversity Students
to th e P h ysical A c tiv ity Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d i n t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by
re fe re n c e to th e s h o rt D iv isio n o f E nunciation Q uestionnaire page 128
A. The fo llo w in g id e a s a r e
expressed by means o f g e stu re o n ly .
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
What was t h a t v o ice?
Yes, you a re p e r f e c t l y c o r r e c t.
No, no, no I
What do you want?
No, t h a t 's th e wrong id e a .
The f i s h was t h i s lo n g .
Keep s t i l l a moment.
L et me have your a tte n tio n .
H urry up.
Get o ut o f h e re .
B. Q uestions, th e c o n te n ts o f
which a re b u t suggested h e re :
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
G esture
fe e ls
Convincing
24
32
35
15
28
28
29
21
33
31
No
Experience
Enjoy pantomiming?
Use g estu res e f f e c tiv e ly ?
Are g e stu re s u n ifie d ?
Does a f a m ilia r audience help?
Do f a m ilia r su rro u n d in g s help?
Does a c h a ir h elp ?
Any te n se n e ss?
See your audience?
Look a t audience?
Help to hold p e n c ils ?
Many g e stu re s?
Face ex p ressiv e?
G estures jerk y ?
Do your g e stu re s f i t th e words?
Move as you speak?
Gesture
seems
F o o lish
15
4
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
0
1
4
0
3
Gesture
seems
M eaningless
5
3
5
9
6
14
7
9
2
6
16
10
5
21
11
3
9
15
10
8
No
Some
Yes
7
11
21
0
1
7
6
5
11
15
19
6
17
6
13
12
21
16
7
9
14
27
17
15
11
24
22
16
10
17
10
9
6
38
35
9
12
22
18
14
2
13
7
28
12
158
Table XXV
The Responses Given by F o r ty -fiv e New York U niversity
Students to th e Speech A ttitu d es Habits Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by
re fe re n c e to th e s h o r t D iv isio n o f E nunciation Q uestionnaire page 133
Do you?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
15.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
S t a r t d is c u s s io n s i n a forum
or d is c u s s io n group?
Have d i f f i c u l t y i n making your
speech d i s t i n c t ?
Have d i f f i c u l t y i n fin d in g
words to e x p re ss y o u rse lf?
Express y o u r s e lf i n unusual
and nover ways?
Use q u o ta tio n s and l i t e r a r y
re fe re n c e s when speaking?
Make puns on words?
Hold th e a t t e n t i o n o f th o se to
whom you a r e sp eak in g?
C onsciously t r y to speak
d is tin c tly ?
Find y o u rs e lf sp eak in g too
r a p id ly a t tim es?
Im ita te th e speech of o th e rs
w ith ease?
Use d i a l e c t s s u c c e s s fu lly i n
te llin g s to rie s ?
Have d i f f i c u l t y in being under­
sto o d over th e telep hone?
Find t h a t sp eak in g t i r e s you
p h y s ic a lly ?
Become annoyed a t m ispronuncia­
tio n ?
Enjoy in tro d u c in g people
around?
Enjoy w orking i n am ature shows?
Have d i f f i c u l t y i n persuading
peo p le to y o u r p o in t o f view?
E a s ily h o ld y o u r own i n a group
co n v ersatio n ?
Make "snappy comebacks"?
Always
U sually
Seldom
0
17
25
3
0
7
30
8
1
12
26
5
0
7
27
9
0
1
6
10
29
24
10
8
8
40
1
O
11
20
12
1
0
16
23
6
0
15
18
12
2
7
22
14
0
3
18
23
0
5
10
30
9
23
11
2
10
12
21
8
6
15
8
10
0
11
31
2
8
6
32
18
3
18
1
5
Never
(continued on next page)
159
Do you:
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
Always
Express y our p o in t o f view
re g a rd le s s o f consequences?
Speak w ith more e ase when
s ittin g ?
H e s ita te to t a l k w ith
s u p e rio rs ?
F e e l l i k e a p o lo g iz in g when you
make a speech?
Find t h a t sarcasm h elp s empha­
s iz e p o in ts .
Talk i n a loud voice?
U su ally
Seldom
Never
5
18
18
4
8
17
9
10
0
9
21
14
1
10
17
17
2
1
7
7
22
28
14
9
160
Table XXVI
The Responses Given by F o r ty -fiv e New Tork U n iversity
Students to the Speech A c t iv it ie s Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be i d e n t if ie d by
re fe re n c e to th e s h o rt D ivision o f E n u n ciatio n Q uestionnaire page 153
A c tiv itie s :
A ttitu d e Toward A c tiv itie s
L ike I n d if f e r e n t D is lik e
22
13
8
1.
D iscussing p h ilo so p h ic a l q u e stio n s
2.
Making form al speeches
7
15
23
3.
T alking w ith stra n g e rs
28
14
2
4.
D iscussing books
32
12
1
5.
T e llin g jokes
24
18
3
6.
Formal in te rv ie w s
7
21
15
7.
Conducting group games
21
20
2
8.
S erving as program chairman
18
20
6
9.
Making a f te r- d in n e r ta lk s
6
6
32
10.
A cting in p la y s
21
17
6
11.
Coaching c o n te sta n ts
15
24
6
12.
Inform al group d iscu ssio n s
40
3
1
13.
Judging c o n te s ts
17
20
8
14.
O rganizing clubs
23
17
3
15.
S o lic itin g funds
6
15
24
161
Table XXVII
The Responses Given by F o r ty -fiv e New York U niversity
Students to the Speech S itu a tio n s Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n tif ie d by
re fe re n c e to th e sh o rt D iv isio n o f E nunciation Q uestionnaire page 135
S itu a tio n :
ImNot
p o ssib le Hard Hard Easy
1.
Interview ing an im portant person
0
8
24
13
2.
Presenting a plan i n a meeting
1
7
24
13
3.
C ritic is in g others
1
4
21
19
4.
Serving as a guide
0
4
17
24
Making a speech
6
21
16
2
6.
Pointing out errors in reasoning
0
7
23
15
7.
Opening a conversation
0
4
17
24
8.
Table conversation
1
1
10
33
9.
Squelching a person
0
9
16
20
10.
D irecting people
0
1
16
28
11.
Encouraging people
0
2
14
29
12.
Developing in te r e s t
2
12
27
4
13.
Talking pleasantly
2
8
18
17
14.
Talking on a phone
0
8
18
19
15.
Talking w ith d is tra c tio n s
1
9
25
10
16.
Speaking brusquely
2
13
17
13
17.
Advising people t o do th in g s
3
10
21
11
18.
Questioning a su p e rio r’s judgment
1
14
18
12
19.
Talking w ith very young c h ild re n
1
3
4
37
(Continued on next page)
162
ImNot
possible
Hard
Hard
Easy
3SS55ESBSSS35 SSS&S3 ASSESS tS B S B B S
20* Expressing your p o in t of view
0
9
20
16
21* Heading p o e try aloud
0
13
15
17
22.
Reading prose aloud
0
12
13
20
23*
Heading m a te ria l a t s ig h t
0
10
19
16
24*
T ellin g s to r ie s
1
3
12
29
0
0
9
36
25* P ra isin g a person f o r good work
163
Table XXVIII
The Responses Given by F o rty -fiv e New York U niversity
Students to th e Language D ivision Questionnaire
The item s in d ic a te d in t h i s ta b le may be id e n t i f i e d by
re fe re n c e to th e s h o rt D iv isio n of E nunciation Q uestionnaire page 117
A.
Would c a l l an u n ru ly boy;
blacksheep
b ra t
b u lly
bum
d e v il
d e lin q u e n t
hoodlum
lo u se
m onster
rascal
rowdy
r u f f ia n
ra t
scamp
scoundrel
u rc h in
v a rle t
w retch
Would c a l l a d is ta s te fu l p ic tu re :
a p p a llin g
awful
bad t a s t e
d ep lo rab le
d is g u s tin g
d is p le a s in g
d is tr e s s in g
in to le r a b le
loathsom e
lo u sy
odious
obnoxious
o ffe n siv e
re p u ls iv e
re v o ltin g
shocking
s tin k in g
u n p leasan t
To a
Teacher
To a
P r in c ip a l
3
10
0
0
10
1
0
1
0
10
7
1
0
0
5
2
3
0
0
5
2
0
0
11
5
4
0
3
1
1
0
0
2
0
0
0
To a
F rien d
1
4
8
1
6
10
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
1
0
7
To a
C lass
1
5
6
1
5
1
2
1
1
2
0
1
5
4
0
2
0
6
(continued on next page)
164
C.
Would c a l l a high q u a lity poem?
bew itching
daintyd e le c ta b le
d e lig h tf u l
en chanting
keen
e n tic in g
e le g a n t
e x q u is ite
engaging
lo n e ly
in te re s tin g
p le a s in g
n ic e
sweet
sw ell
th rillin g
charming
D.
Would c a l l a d isap p o in tin g
s itu a tio n ?
annoying
a b o th er
d is p le a s in g
d i s tr e s s in g
d is tu r b in g
d is a s tro u s
irrita tin g
maddening
a mess
a m isfo rtu n e
provoking
a shame
u n s a tis f a c to r y
unlucky
unaccommodating
u n p leasan t
unwelcome
To a
F rien d
To a
P u p il
1
0
0
15
6
3
1
0
4
1
2
4
1
1
0
2
5
2
1
0
1
11
5
3
1
1
2
2
0
6
1
0
0
2
4
1
To Him who
To a High
cau ses th e
School
D isappointm ent Assembly
1
0
0
6
2
0
0
0
1
21
0
11
0
1
0
0
0
0
1
0
11
1
1
0
0
0
16
0
5
0
4
0
4
1
165
Table XXIX
The Scores Made in Voice By One-hundred
Representative Teachers Rated in Each of the Teacher Q ualities
The follow ing columns r e p re s e n t: 1—Voice Score on Speech
Training* 2—Voice Score on Voice and E nunciations 3—Voice
Score on A ttitu d e s j 4— T o tal Voice Score
1_______ 2
3
4
A ttitu d e s
High
Average
Low
93
89
46
475
455
477
311
315
336
879
859
859
Leadership
High
Average
Low
78
82
68
464
462
489
312
300
276
854
844
833
Tact
High
Average
Low
91
93
89
440
472
481
298
304
261
829
869
831
High
Average
Low
65
83
118
464
460
521
319
266
242
848
809
881
R elatio n to
P upils
High
Average
Low
94
99
123
458
469
507
314
312
300
867
880
930
In flu en ce
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
86
93
117
470
485
496
285
307
265
841
880
878
T otal
Teaching
Q uality
High
Average
Low
85
92
107
467
469
498
316
302
276
868
863
881
Sense o f
Humor
166
TABLE XXX
The Scores Made in Enunciation by One-hundred Representative
Teachers Rated in Each of th e Teacher Q u a lities
The fo llo w in g columns re p re s e n t: 1—E nunciation Score on
Speech T raining^ 2—E nunciation Score on Voice and Enun­
c ia tio n j 3—E n u n ciatio n Score on A ttitu d e sj 4— E nunciation
Score on Language j 5—T o ta l E nunciation Score
1
2
3
4
5
A ttitu d e s
High
Average
Low
58
54
55
268
264
235
750
774
777
35
37
12
1111
1129
1077
L eadership
High
Average
Low-
66
55
21
264
260
268
769
726
719
32
34
25
1131
1075
1033
Tact
High
Average
Low-
56
49
44
269
272
274
759
737
750
33
42
21
1107
1100
1089
Sense o f
Humor
High
Average
Low
58
64
27
266
259
303
728
717
705
37
70
10
1089
1110
1045
R e la tio n
to
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
67
55
38
263
261
291
741
760
744
35
32
8
1106
1108
1081
In flu e n c e
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
63
54
41
267
260
289
747
729
718
32
35
65
1109
1078
1113
T o tal
Teaching
Q u a lity
High
Average
Low
61
35
37
264
263
282
753
728
740
34
36
18
1112
1082
1077
167
Table XXXI
The Scores Made in F le x ib ilit y by One-hundred Representative
Teachers Rated in Each of the Teacher Q u alities
The fo llo w in g columns re p re se n t: 1—F l e x i b i l i t y Score on
Speech T rain in g ; 2—F le x ib ility Score on Voice and Enun­
c ia tio n ; 3—F l e x i b i l i t y Score on A ttitu d e s ; 4—F l e x i b i l i ty
Score on Language; 5—T otal F l e x i b i l i t y Score
1
2
3
4
5
A ttitu d e s
H i#i
Average
Low
75
68
83
233
237
223
958
977
946
55
59
41
1321
1341
1293
L eadership
High
Average
Low
75
80
50
230
231
257
991
901
879
56
54
54
1352
1266
1240
Tact
High
Average
Low-
77
76
67
225
244
255
907
953
894
60
44
71
1269
1317
1287
Sense o f
Humor
High
Average
Low
69
79
82
233
232
267
944
917
896
53
57
55
1299
1285
1300
R e la tio n to
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
70
73
84
230
238
253
951
956
931
53
60
39
1304
1327
1307
In flu e n ce
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
84
73
53
236
236
265
945
931
911
59
48
55
1324
1288
1282
T o tal
Teaching
Q u ality
High
Average
Low
75
64
68
232
237
260
969
941
906
56
53
54
1332
1295
1288
168
Table XXXII
The Scores Made in Language by One-hundred Representative
Teachers Rated in Each o f the Teacher Q u alities
The fo llo w in g columns r e p re s e n t: 1—Language Score on Speech
T rain in g ; 2—Language Score on Voice and E nunciation; S—Lan­
guage Score on A ttitu d e s ; 4—Language Score on Language
5—T o ta l Language Score
1
2
3
4
5
A ttitu d e s
High
Average
Low
158
138
153
105
89
77
456
457
512
318
330
270
1037
1014
1012
Leadership
High
Average
Low
157
153
157
95
98
89
475
413
404
296
330
298
1023
994
948
Tact
High
Average
Low
152
153
168
89
97
96
440
453
434
330
312
317
1011
1015
1015
Sense o f
Humor
High
Average
Low
148
152
182
98
96
122
459
402
391
308
325
324
1015
975
1019
R e latio n to
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
146
156
161
95
100
84
414
457
429
316
336
306
971
1049
980
In flu en ce
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
166
147
147
99
104
95
441
430
383
325
317
325
1031
998
950
T o tal
Teaching
Q u ality
High
Average
Low
155
126
162
97
97
95
463
439
425
320
314
273
1035
976
955
169
Table XXXIII
The Scores Made in Manner by One-hundred Representative
Teachers Rated in Each o f the Teacher Q ualities
The follo w in g columns re p re s e n t: 1—Manner Score on Speech
T rain in g ; 2—Manner Score on Voice and E nunciation;
3—Manner Score on A ttitu d e s ; 4—Manner Score on Language
5 ~ T o ta l Manner Score
1
2
3
4
5
A ttitu d e s
High
Average
Low-
415
407
442
286
279
241
400
406
394
120
129
93
1221
1221
1170
Leadership
High Average
Low
430
419
280
276
279
300
402
374
357
133
118
102
1241
1190
1037
Tact
High
Average
Low
396
434
380
265
288
292
378
408
373
128
118
122
1167
1248
1167
Sense of
Humor
High
Average
Low
429
413
372
280
280
317
397
347
363
118
126
78
1224
1167
1130
R elatio n to
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
424
400
322
278
283
276
394
366
414
121
135
69
1217
1184
1081
Influence
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
417
421
285
274
286
289
390
417
364
123
124
111
1204
1248
1049
T o tal
Teaching
Quality-
High
Average
Low
420
417
346
279
283
279
397
395
375
124
125
104
1220
1220
1120
170
Table XXXIV
The Scores Made in Total Speech by One-hundred
Representative Teachers Rated in Each o f the
Teacher Q ualities
The follow ing columns re p re s e n t: 1—T o ta l Speech Score on
Speech T rain in g j 2—T o tal Speech Score on Voice and
Enunciation* 3—T o ta l Speech Score on A ttitu d e s j 4— T o tal
Speech Score on Languagej 5—T o tal, T o ta l Speech Score
1
2
3
4
5
A ttitu d e s
High
Average
Low
629
608
582
535
532
500
1583
1615
1617
353
374
358
3100
3120
3057
Leadership
High
Average
Low
639
634
501
525
524
550
1623
1540
1468
337
366
327
3124
3064
2846
Tact
High
Average
Low
614
636
592
503
532
537
1529
1560
1488
368
357
345
3014
3085
2962
Sense o f
Humor
High
Average
Low
609
617
608
527
521
580
1588
1481
1440
350
368
352
3074
2987
2980
R elatio n
To
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
636
561
514
520
527
568
1593
1605
1536
356
380
321
3085
3073
2939
In flu en ce
on
P u p ils
High
Average
Low
631
624
520
527
541
549
1564
1565
1518
369
355
348
3091
3085
2935
T o ta l
Teaching
Q u ality
High
Average
Low
627
611
517
527
530
557
1598
1551
1500
356
356
347
3108
3048
2921
171
Table XXXV
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision o f the Speech
Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in the Teacher C h a ra cteristic A ttitu d es.
Have
Would
F ie ld s______Had T raining_____ D esire T rain in g
Consider Most
Im portant F ie ld s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
39
33
41
22
15
18
8
8
6
6
5
6
19
21
12
1
1
0
43
37
47
12
9
6
6
4
0
Group D iscussion 36
37
47
31
35
35
56
47
71
O ral I n te r p r e ta ­
tio n
43
46
35
18
20
23
42
35
35
P arliam en tary
Procedure
38
39
53
17
20
6
8
12
6
P honetics
28
40
18
25
21
18
14
21
29
P u b lic Speaking
66
62
65
32
29
23
61
60
23
Speech C orrection 26
21
18
39
37
47
39
43
59
54
40
41
49
41
53
60
56
47
A cting
Choral Speaking
Debate
Voice T raining
The columns in d ic a te the number o f te a c h e rs ra te d according to
th e subheadings who s ta te they would use th e words p re se n te d under
th e circum stances described in th e In v e n to ry and in d ic a te d by th e
column headings.
172
Table XXXVI
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision o f the Speech
Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in the Teacher C h aracteristic Leadership.
F ie ld s
A cting
Have
Would
Consider Most
Had T rain in g
D esire T raining Im portant F ie ld s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
45
33
14
18
18
18
11
5
4
6
6
0
21
22
7
0
1
0
42
43
25
11
11
11
5
5
0
Group D iscussion 37
39
25
28
37
36
54
58
43
O ral I n te r p r e ta ­
tio n
47
41
28
19
18
18
46
37
46
P arliam en tary
Procedure
41
39
28
15
22
14
9
9
11
P honetics
32
34
21
20
29
11
15
17
28
P u b lic Speaking
66
66
39
28
33
54
57
65
57
Speech Correction 23
24
21
37
41
25
41
41
43
Voice T raining
36
36
46
45
50
57
58
68
C horal Speaking
Debate
37
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f teach ers ra te d according to
th e subheadings who s ta t e th e y would use th e words p resen ted under
th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d by th e
column headings.
173
Table XXXVII
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision o f the Speech
Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in the Teacher C haracteristic Tact,
F ie ld s
Have
Had T rain in g
Would
D esire T raining
C onsider Most
Im portant F ie ld s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
30
33
33
19
20
15
8
8
7
6
12
11
26
16
11
1
1
0
41
43
37
10
11
11
5
6
0
Group D iscu ssio n 37
37
33
30
34
41
51
60
56
O ra l I n te r p r e ta ­
44
tio n
44
37
17
19
22
39
40
56
P a rlia m e n ta ry
Procedure
37
42
33
19
19
n
9
8
4
P h o n etics
30
33
33
22
25
15
14
20
22
P u b lic Speaking
64
65
59
30
31
41
61
62
48
Speech Correc­
tio n
21
25
26
41
37
26
42
42
59
Voice T rain in g
35
40
22
47
39
48
62
53
56
A cting
C horal Speaking
Debate
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f teachers ra te d according to
th e subheadings who s t a t e they would use th e words p re se n te d under
th e circum stances d esc rib e d in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d by th e
column h ead in g s.
174
Table XXXVIII
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision o f the Speech
Inventory o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in the Teacher C haracteristic Sense o f Humor,
F ie ld s
A cting
Have
Would
C onsider Most
Had Training
D esire T raining Im portant F ie ld s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
40
40
18
22
17
14
9
7
5
8
4
9
18
24
9
1
1
0
38
44
27
10
9
14
7
3
5
Group D iscussion 40
34
36
26
35
45
51
55
73
O ral I n te r p r e ta ­
55
tio n
41
36
17
17
27
40
41
68
P arliam en tary
Procedure
42
36
27
15
20
14
8
8
14
P honetics
31
31
32
22
25
9
14
21
18
P u b lic Speaking
66
65
50
30
27
59
35
56
59
Speech Correc­
tio n
23
25
23
40
38
23
42
44
36
Voice T rain in g
35
38
41
46
43
41
57
56
41
Choral Speaking
Debate
The columns in d ic a te the number o f teach ers r a te d acco rd in g to
th e subheadings who s t a t e they would use the words p re s e n te d under
th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d by th e
column h eadings.
175
Table XXXIX
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision o f th e Speech
Inventory of an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in the Teacher C h aracteristic R elation to P up ils.
Have
F ie ld s ______ Had T raining
Would
D esire T rain in g
Consider Most
Im portant F ie ld s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
A cting
46
35
23
23
17
8
11
5
0
7
5
0
21
20
15
1
0
0
45
42
38
11
13
0
6
2
0
Group D iscussion 40
28
46
28
42
15
49
53
69
O ral I n te r p r e ta ­
tio n
42
43
31
19
17
23
41
42
54
P arliam en tary
Procedure
41
36
15
24
17
23
8
9
15
P honetics
30
35
8
24
24
15
15
21
23
P u b lic Speaking
65
63
54
35
35
69
59
64
54
Speech Correc­
tio n
24
41
15
39
40
23
42
39
46
Voice T rain in g
35
39
23
46
47
38
56
61
38
Choral Speaking
Debate
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs r a te d according to
th e subheadings who s ta t e they would use th e words p re se n te d under
th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d by th e
column headings.
176
Table XL
Responses Made to the Speech Training D ivision of the Speech
Inventory o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High, Average,
and Low in th e Te&cher C h aracteristic Influence on P upils,
F ie ld s
Have
Had T rain in g
Would
D esire T raining
Consider Most
Im portant F ield s
High Average Low High Average Low High Average Low
40
36
29
21
22
12
9
8
0
7
5
0
23
18
12
1
1
0
41
42
29
91
15
6
4
6
0
Group D iscussion 33
36
35
29
35
41
61
55
41
O ral In te rp r e ta ­
tio n
43
44
23
17
23
6
45
36
71
P arliam entary
Procedure
41
36
23
21
18
23
9
8
18
P honetics
30
33
29
23
25
12
12
20
29
P ublic Speaking
63
72
35
29
26
53
57
67
64
Speech Correc­
tio n
22
25
12
38
42
29
45
41
41
Voice Training
36
37
29
47
38
53
60
56
35
A cting
Choral Speaking
Debate
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs ra te d according to
th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would u se th e words p resen ted under th e
circum stances d esc rib e d in th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d by th e column
headings*
177
Table XLI
Responses Made to the Voice and Enunciation D ivision o f the
Speech I n v e n t o r y o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in th e Teacher C haracteristic A ttitu d es.
Item
High
6
71
23
Teacher Rated
Average
6
75
18
Low
0
88
12
1.
Low P itc h
Average P itc h
High P itc h
n♦
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
1
1
2
11
21
24
14
19
2
0
4
18
18
14
12
19
0
12
6
0
6
29
12
18
3.
0 .(1 )
0 .( 2 )
0 .(3 )
S .( l)
S .(2 )
S .(3 )
L .( l)
L. (2)
L .(3 )
B. (1)
B .(2 )
B. (3)
M. (1)
M. (2)
M.(3)
42
27
15
24
17
18
16
20
19
11
27
24
4
10
16
51
18
9
22
18
14
15
24
21
8
24
24
2
7
22
41
12
23
35
23
18
6
18
29
6
41
23
6
6
6
4.
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
85
15
0
84
16
0
94
0
0
Continued on the next page
178
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
5.
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
76
22
1
77
21
2
77
23
0
6.
No. 4
No. 5
67
30
65
24
88
12
7
(♦
No. 4
No. 5
71
28
65
30
53
41
8.
None
Some
Much
13
52
33
19
37
44
6
71
25
A.
U.
28
53
12
5
2
35
59
S.
N.
26
58
9
4
3
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
1
4
34
47
16
0
5
38
36
21
0
12
47
18
23
9.
0 .
0
0
6
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs r a te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta t e th ey would use th e words p resen ted
under th e circu m stan ces d escribed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column h ead in g s.
179
Table XLII
Responses Made to the Voice and Enunciation D ivision of the
Speech Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in th e Teacher C h aracteristic Leadership.
I t an
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
1.
Low P itc h
Average P itch
High P itc h
5
69
26
8
75
15
4
92
4
O
<c•
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
1
1
1
14
18
24
15
18
1
2
5
14
21
15
12
17
0
0
0
0
14
32
4
32
0 .(1 )
G .(2)
G .(3)
S .(2 )
S . (3)
L. (1)
L .(2 )
L .(5 )
B. (1)
B .(2)
B .(3 )
M. (1)
M. (2)
M. (3)
42
22
17
26
15
17
13
21
21
12
26
21
3
10
18
49
18
10
20
20
18
19
21
18
7
25
32
5
7
15
54
21
11
25
11
14
11
21
28
11
36
28
0
11
18
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
85
15
0
83
16
0
89
11
0
s .(i)
3.
4.
Continued on th e next page
180
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
77
22
0
76
21
3
75
25
0
69
30
65
31
72
25
5.
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
6.
No. 4
No. 5
7
No. 4
No. 5
69
30
65
34
72
21
8.
None
Some
Much
15
46
38
12
52
33
14
43
43
9.
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
30
54
8
4
4
24
58
12
4
1
21
50
11
0
4
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
0
4
37
41
17
1
4
33
40
19
0
5
43
39
14
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta te th e y would u se th e words p resented
under th e circum stances d escribed i n th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
181
Table XLIII
Responses Made to the Voice and Enunciation D ivision of th e
Speech Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in the Teacher C haracteristic Tact.
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
5
70
23
7
75
18
4
85
11
2
16
0
1
4
14
17
23
17
22
0
0
4
11
15
22
18
18
3.
0 .(1 )
0 .(2 )
0 .(5 )
8 .(1 )
S .(2)
S .(5 )
L .( l)
L.(2)
L .(3)
B. (1)
B.(2)
B.(5)
M. (1)
M.(2)
M. (3)
44
20
15
22
15
22
15
22
18
12
26
22
4
11
16
46
23
12
25
22
11
17
24
24
7
27
29
4
7
19
48
15
11
22
15
18
11
33
18
11
22
33
4
4
15
4.
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Impossible
83
11
0
86
14
0
89
11
0
Item
1.
Low P itch
Average P itc h
High P itc h
2.
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
0
1
14
21
19
15
Continued on the next page
182
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
5.
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
66
19
1
74
25
1
78
22
0
6
No* 4
No. 5
68
SO
67
31
63
33
No. 4
No. 5
64
34
73
27
70
22
8.
None
Some
Much
16
45
37
11
53
36
22
41
37
9.
A.
u.
0.
S.
N.
30
54
7
4
3
25
60
12
4
3
22
63
U
0
4
10.
A.
u.
0.
s.
N.
0
4
35
35
15
1
4
37
37
21
0
9
41
33
18
'•
The columns in d ic a te th e number of teach ers r a te d according
to th e subheadings 'who s t a t e th e y would use th e words p re se n te d
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e In v a ito ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
183
Table X1IV
Responses Made to th e Voice and Enunciation D ivision o f the
Speech Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in the Teacher C haracteristic Sense o f Humor,
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
1.
Low P itc h
Average P itc h
High P itc h
S
69
24
7
77
15
9
77
14
1
0
1
13
18
24
14
18
0
o
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
4
13
21
17
12
21
0
5
5
14
18
18
18
14
G .(l)
G.(2)
G.(3)
S. (2)
S . (3)
L .( l)
L .(2)
L .(3)
B .( l)
B. (2)
B .(3)
M, (1)
M.(2)
M.(3)
44
20
18
26
19
15
15
17
22
8
28
25
4
9
15
48
24
9
21
20
20
15
21
18
11
24
28
1
9
19
59
14
14
18
9
18
9
41
14
9
32
32
9
5
23
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
84
14
0
83
16
0
95
5
0
s.(D
3.
4.
Z
Continued on th e next page
184
Item
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
5.
Easy
D if f ic u lt
Im possible
79
19
0
73
24
5
73
27
0
ao •
No. 4
No. 5
66
30
66
34
77
23
n( «
No. 4
No. 5
68
29
65
32
77
23
8.
None
Some
Much
13
45
40
18
52
33
14
54
32
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
25
56
10
5
4
35
57
9
2
2
9
81
5
5
0
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
1
5
33
42
18
0
4
37
39
16
0
5
27
41
27
The columns In d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta te th e y would use th e words p resen ted
under th e circum stances described in th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings*
185
Table XLV
Responses Made to the Voice and Enunciation D ivision o f the
Speech Inventory o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Low in the Teacher C h aracteristic R elation to P u p ils.
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
1 .
Low P itc h
Average P itc h
High P itc h
6
69
24
6
80
14
8
77
8
O
C •
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
2
1
3
11
17
24
14
17
1
1
5
10
20
13
13
25
0
8
8
8
15
23
8
8
a .(i)
G.(2)
G.(3)
44
22
14
24
17
19
16
24
20
11
24
24
3
9
9
50
18
11
24
21
15
15
17
24
7
32
32
5
9
17
54
15
15
31
8
15
0
46
23
8
23
23
8
8
23
85
14
83
17
0
100
0
0
s.(D
S . (2)
S .(3 )
3.
4.
M l)
L .(2)
L .(3)
B .( l)
B .(2)
B .(3)
M .(l)
M.(2)
M. (3)
Easy
D if fic u lt
Im possible
0
Continued on the next page
186
Item
High
Teacher Rated
Average
low
5.
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
71
22
1
76
22
2
85
8
8
D.
No. 4
No. 5
69
28
65
34
92
8
n( •
No. 4
No. 5
69
30
65
30
69
31
8.
None
Some
Much
14
44
39
14
53
32
23
38
38
9.
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
28
53
10
3
3
26
61
20
5
2
23
69
8
0
0
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
1
4
34
42
17
0
5
42
39
16
0
8
23
15
54
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta te th e y would use th e words presented
under the circu m stan ces d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column h ead in g s.
187
Table XLVI
Responses Made to the Voice and Enunciation D ivision of th e
Speech Inventory o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High,
Average, and Lew in the Teacher C haracteristic Influence on P u p ils.
Item
Hipfc
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
1.
Low P itc h
Average P itc h
High P itc h
4
10
25
8
76
16
6
88
6
o
Do
Ti
La
Sol
Fa
Mi
Re
Do
2
0
2
12
19
23
14
16
0
2
3
15
19
18
13
22
0
6
0
6
18
29
6
29
0 .(1 )
0 .(2 )
0 .(3 )
S .( l)
S . (2)
S . (3)
B. (1)
B*(2)
B .(3)
M .(l)
M. (2)
M.(3)
44
22
16
23
17
16
15
20
16
13
26
21
1
9
17
45
20
12
25
18
14
17
21
22
6
29
29
7
9
17
59
18
6
18
23
18
6
29
23
6
18
41
6
12
12
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
93
7
0
83
14
0
94
6
0
3.
MD
L .(2 )
MS)
4.
Continued on the next page
188
Item
Teacher Rated
Average
Low
5.
Easy
D iffic u lt
Im possible
75
19
1
83
15
0
77
23
0
o.
No. 4
No. 5
66
32
70
29
71
29
7
t.
No. 4
No. 5
67
31
69
29
71
29
8.
None
Some
Much
16
48
34
11
51
29
29
41
29
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
31
54
9
3
2
22
60
10
5
4
23
77
0
0
0
A.
U.
0.
S.
N.
0
4
43
45
7
0
5
42
44
17
0
0
41
18
41
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs r a te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta t e th ey would use the words p resen ted
under th e circum stances described in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column h eadings.
189
Table XLVII
Responses Made to the A ttitu des D ivision of th e Speech Inventoiy
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic A ttitu d es.
Item
1.
2.
5.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
47
41
47
82
88
78
88
83
81
12
15
13
29
21
18
68
53
62
0
8
9
77
52
55
29
17
20
49
59
57
50
35
51
41
46
50
47
40
46
18
17
41
41
18
28
6
3
4
18
21
20
6
33
34
88
77
83
18
11
13
23
35
38
12
27
34
88
80
83
23
15
12
12
21
16
12
23
29
35
32
30
0
2
2
12
10
6
41
38
43
6
35
34
82
83
78
47
59
64
35
24
26
No_______
Teachers Rated
SLgh Average Low
47
59
39
12
12
13
12
15
17
88
83
79
59
68
69
29
20
27
59
77
70
12
34
37
59
81
79
23
29
20
37
47
38
38
43
59
23
43
42
70
77
67
59
75
68
87
77
85
71
73
65
88
60
60
12
18
14
71
85
82
41
40
32
59
51
44
12
6
12
59
68
40
53
57
67
68
77
66
59
63
66
88
91
87
88
88
91
35
74
49
94
51
59
6
0
8
12
13
11
59
59
59
?
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
12
14
14
6
4
1
3
0
2
0
8
3
12
9
13
18
11
11
41
15
20
12
10
14
12
2
3
18
22
15
18
14
10
0
12
11
23
17
12
0
12
14
0
8
5
18
8
9
12
5
10
6
9
7
0
5
3
12
5
5
35
20
25
29
21
22
6
6
6
18
18
18
35
23
17
12
8
10
6
5
4
12
9
7
2
0
3
23
8
13
0
12
5
18
11
14
41
29
24
6
17
20
Continued on the next page
190
Item
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42 .
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
48
17
39
70
21
7
51
35
88
77
27
44
9
50
71
50
54
13
39
69
20
17
49
32
91
79
20
47
11
42
66
51
53
12
47
88
6
6
47
29
94
88
23
41
12
53
59
47
No_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
35
68
57
21
85
86
45
45
4
13
65
43
85
47
24
57
30
72
56
20
66
74
48
44
5
11
73
46
86
53
25
34
18
82
41
12
82
88
41
53
6
0
65
47
88
47
35
41
?________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
17
16
5
9
15
7
4
23
4
10
7
13
4
3
6
14
15
16
5
11
12
9
5
24
5
10
8
5
4
5
9
15
29
6
12
0
12
6
6
18
0
12
12
12
0
0
6
12
The columns in d ic a te the number of teach ers r a te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta t e they would use th e words p re se n te d
under th e circum stances described in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by the column h eadings.
191
Table XLVIII
Responses Made to the A ttitud es D ivision o f the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Leadership.
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
45
80
77
14
24
77
7
60
20
56
46
52
44
24
25
3
14
34
80
10
38
25
83
13
18
25
36
2
4
41
33
79
50
84
86
12
15
58
9
46
19
65
56
42
46
19
28
4
21
30
79
12
41
31
82
12
19
27
25
0
9
36
25
79
46
82
79
14
14
50
11
54
14
46
54
32
32
18
32
0
28
14
86
11
39
18
86
11
18
25
28
4
11
21
36
89
No___________
?________
Teachers Rated
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
High Average Low
13
39
15
40
37
11
14
12
5
3
4
10
2
21
3
12
0
15
9
5
0
77
83
86
14
4
79
9
60
76
39
9
16
7
14
24
21
68
20
19
73
72
32
12
14
42
10
30
82
4
1
4
75
80
21
28
19
15
25
19
12
32
36
10
11
44
10
12
57
11
37
34
12
14
39
54
14
42
70
11
12
11
65
69
4
5
5
67
64
80
82
8
7
18
88
88
7
20
19
64
66
60
10
8
7
79
56
62
7
14
6
0
15
11
82
3
6
7
82
86
22
23
36
37
25
38
22
14
68
19
48
50
7
5
4
13
11
10
20
18
11
79
69
66
24
21
61
16
55
35
72
9
10
4
63
64
1
68
7
4
57
74
82
7
11
14
93
88
3
89
5
0
91
88
18
57
11
11
52
48
7
7
57
8
67
58
14
15
7
4
6
7
Continued on the next page
I t e m _______ Yes
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
53.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
60
27
55
17
40
72
20
12
46
34
92
79
19
45
7
48
70
47
60
23
45
12
39
69
16
9
49
31
91
77
25
39
13
42
65
52
21
28
50
14
28
70
28
18
39
32
89
79
43
36
7
25
68
46
No
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
13
55
29
62
55
18
64
79
48
38
3
10
73
43
87
43
21
36
10
53
34
77
55
22
70
85
40
49
3
8
67
46
84
53
27
35
7
57
39
82
57
21
57
75
54
64
11
18
46
54
92
72
25
39
?
Teachers Rated
Average Low
h
27
16
14
20
5
9
14
9
5
27
3
9
8
12
5
3
8
15
30
16
21
11
5
10
14
6
3
20
5
15
8
14
3
3
7
12
32
11
14
4
14
7
11
7
4
4
0
4
11
11
0
4
7
14
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f t eachers rate d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th ey would use the words p resen ted
under th e circum stances d escrib ed i n th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by the column h ead in g s.
193
Table XLEC
Responses Made t o the A ttitu d es D ivision of the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Loir in
the Teacher C haracteristic Tact.
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8,
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
44
79
81
14
19
70
9
50
17
64
50
54
45
19
25
5
19
32
81
11
41
29
85
8
14
22
32
1
3
38
28
77
44
85
87
15
20
56
6
51
23
56
50
40
43
21
25
1
15
31
78
9
39
25
81
20
22
24
31
1
6
42
29
81
44
78
81
7
15
59
11
66
22
52
56
41
44
22
30
7
18
22
74
11
37
11
78
11
15
22
37
4
18
26
30
89
No_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
38
11
17
87
61
22
71
36
81
19
36
50
39
70
70
86
62
58
11
84
35
50
8
73
65
67
63
88
87
51
67
9
40
13
12
80
63
29
75
33
75
25
44
42
47
50
71
93
65
61
14
87
39
50
12
62
58
66
62
94
91
45
59
3
48
18
18
85
81
30
70
30
74
37
33
44
44
52
66
70
70
78
18
78
44
59
22
74
66
74
63
81
81
63
59
7
?______
Teachers Rated
High Average Lew
13
5
2
4
10
8
20
9
1
17
11
9
16
11
5
9
19
9
7
5
23
21
6
19
20
9
5
10
4
9
5
13
15
2
1
5
16
16
19
17
2
19
6
14
10
13
5
6
20
8
5
4
24
25
7
18
20
10
7
5
3
13
11
15
Continued on the next page
7
4
0
7
4
11
18
4
4
11
11
11
11
26
0
22
11
0
7
11
18
26
0
15
18
4
0
13
0
11
7
4
194
Item
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45 .
46.
47.
48 .
49.
50.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
Hieh Average Low
61
28
49
17
37
73
20
8
51
56
91
80
24
43
9
51
70
52
56
23
51
13
41
71
13
13
46
50
92
81
21
42
11
42
61
44
65
37
37
11
33
59
15
11
70
18
89
78
50
33
11
37
66
52
No_____ _
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
12
48
34
68
59
19
63
89
44
41
5
10
69
48
87
46
23
31
11
58
29
69
50
18
69
75
48
48
2
9
69
42
84
53
25
42
7
44
37
81
59
30
70
89
26
52
11
15
66
59
85
56
30
37
?______
Teachers Rated
HLgh Average Low
27
19
17
15
3
8
16
7
4
23
4
10
7
12
9
2
7
16
29
18
16
18
6
10
18
10
6
21
4
10
10
15
4
4
9
13
30
18
26
7
7
11
15
0
0
30
0
7
4
7
4
7
4
11
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
t o th e subheadings who s ta te they would u s e th e words p resented
under th e circum stances described i n th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings*
195
Table L
Responses Made to the A ttitu d es D iv isio n o f the Speech Inventory
of an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C h aracteristic Sense of Humor*
I te m _______Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
54
85
69
15
26
55
8
53
26
64
45
47
45
21
27
3
15
34
83
12
45
29
81
13
17
24
33
2
5
36
30
75
42
81
85
13
14
63
7
57
16
54
57
45
43
19
22
3
18
29
72
11
29
24
82
14
19
24
24
2
6
39
37
82
45
81
81
0
14
54
14
59
14
54
68
41
50
18
32
0
36
23
68
14
45
18
81
9
23
36
36
0
18
41
32
90
No_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
36
10
17
77
61
27
74
34
76
19
40
37
41
68
65
87
67
56
10
84
32
43
9
69
69
60
57
88
92
54
61
9
45
15
17
81
78
27
72
37
85
29
34
44
43
68
73
88
62
66
14
82
44
38
10
67
56
69
72
85
39
24
24 .
3
41
18
18
95
73
23
73
23
81
27
18
59
41
75
68
77
50
68
23
77
32
73
18
77
50
54
54
90
81
45
59
5
?______ _
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
14
5
4
8
13
13
19
15
13
18
14
9
13
11
7
8
18
10
7
3
21
27
7
18
14
10
5
10
3
10
7
16
13
4
0
5
9
8
21
5
1
16
8
11
14
14
4
8
20
5
6
7
27
19
7
19
25
7
4
6
3
11
7
11
Continued on the next page
14
0
0
5
14
23
14
18
5
18
14
0
9
9
0
23
14
9
9
9
23
9
0
18
27
9
9
9
0
14
9
5
196
Item
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
59.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
61
61
45
27
25
28
46
50
56
9
19
9
23
36
43
63
54
74
23
21
19
10
13
18
57
64
44
18
34
33
94
86
92
94
82
90
18
29
9
37
45
49
12
0
9
27
58
42
64
75
45
49
41
50
No________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
13
53
31
62
56
16
61
81
53
43
3
11
70
37
85
38
21
34
4
22
11
34
27
10
29
37
17
23
4
5
31
24
41
29
14
20
5
64
23
81
73
36
64
73
32
45
5
5
81
54
100
68
45
45
?
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
26
18
13
19
4
8
14
9
3
23
5
7
10
14
3
4
4
16
27
20
20
12
7
10
14
7
6
20
2
16
5
12
5
3
8
11
50
9
27
9
5
9
14
9
5
36
5
5
9
0
0
5
9
14
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs rated according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would use th e words p resented
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Lnventoiy and in d ic a te d
by th e column h ead in g s.
197
Table LI
Responses Made to the A ttitu d es D ivision of the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Relation to P u p ils.
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
_______ Yes________
Teachers Rated
High Average Lcm
48
81
78
17
21
66
9
49
19
66
49
47
42
20
26
4
17
31
81
11
35
26
84
12
17
25
32
1
6
38
30
76
43
83
85
14
18
69
4
55
17
55
51
50
46
20
26
2
15
31
85
11
38
26
81
15
19
27
29
2
9
41
30
84
54
85
85
8
8
38
15
69
15
54
61
46
38
15
15
0
38
15
61
0
54
23
92
8
15
15
46
0
0
31
38
77
No_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
37
14
19
78
68
27
73
34
78
20
40
41
42
67
68
87
63
58
11
62
27
40
■ 10
42
43
64
61
94
90
51
63
7
45
14
14
83
69
21
76
37
83
26
37
39
40
74
72
90
68
61
13
83
37
54
16
69
58
60
60
90
90
49
63
6
38
15
15
92
77
23
61
23
77
31
31
54
46
85
85
85
46
85
23
100
38
69
0
69
61
69
38
92
100
46
46
8
?______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
14
5
3
5
11
7
18
14
3
14
11
11
15
12
5
9
19
9
5
4
24
24
6
16
17
10
6
5
4
10
7
15
12
2
1
3
12
10
20
8
1
18
12
11
13
6
2
7
17
7
2
6
24
20
3
16
23
6
6
8
1
10
7
10
Continued on the next page
8
0
0
0
15
38
23
8
8
15
8
0
15
0
0
15
15
0
15
0
8
8
8
23
23
15
15
8
0
25
15
15
198
Item
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
_______ Yes_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
60
25
53
15
32
70
20
10
49
36
96
78
22
45
10
52
69
49
65
26
50
14
44
79
19
9
52
32
93
77
26
38
8
42
72
49
46
31
54
15
38
54
23
15
61
31
92
92
8
54
8
46
46
46
No_______
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
14
63
32
66
58
21
66
79
46
45
3
7
68
43
85
46
24
36
9
56
32
73
47
16
70
88
45
52
4
10
69
51
90
55
20
36
8
69
23
85
54
38
61
77
31
38
8
8
85
31
92
54
38
38
?________
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
26
12
15
17
4
9
14
10
3
23
1
10
10
12
4
2
7
15
26
18
18
13
6
6
11
3
3
16
3
13
6
11
2
3
8
13
46
0
23
0
8
8
15
8
8
31
0
0
8
15
0
0
15
15
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta t e th ey would use th e words p resen ted
under th e circum stances d escribed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
199
Table I I I
Responses Made to the A ttitu d es D ivision o f th e Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C h aracteristic Influence on P u p ils.
Item
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8,
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
Yes
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
50
84
76
11
19
64
10
56
16
65
48
50
43
18
25
3
19
31
76
12
41
26
85
11
19
29
32
1
5
41
31
78
49
83
82
14
18
63
4
51
19
57
51
44
49
20
25
2
15
30
78
12
36
28
87
13
15
37
34
2
7
46
33
64
47
77
82
6
23
53
12
59
12
35
53
41
29
18
29
0
35
35
88
0
41
12
77
18
18
23
18
0
12
47
29
82
No
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
20
9
18
79
63
20
71
34
80
20
37
40
43
67
69
88
63
32
13
85
34
49
8
71
63
72
64
91
90
48
61
8
36
15
15
82
70
25
72
34
73
28
38
41
38
65
69
90
65
63
15
81
41
50
9
68
63
63
60
93
87
46
58
33
53
18
18
94
59
18
64
35
82
41
35
53
53
77
64
71
47
64
0
88
35
71
12
71
71
71
41
82
88
47
53
6
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
17
7
2
10
12
10
17
9
3
15
12
10
14
15
6
6
15
8
6
3
22
24
7
18
21
7
4
8
4
8
7
13
12
1
2
4
10
12
24
15
2
19
12
14
12
15
4
8
20
7
6
7
25
22
4
19
21
10
6
5
3
8
7
14
0
6
0
0
18
29
18
6
6
23
12
6
12
6
6
29
18
0
12
12
23
18
6
12
12
6
6
18
0
6
18
12
Continued on the next page
Item _______ Yea
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
60
30
52
16
40
85
22
10
52
33
88
77
25
48
3
42
71
43
63
38
65
19
50
58
27
13
65
41
75
63
33
58
10
61
73
52
64
47
35
12
23
77
29
18
64
35
94
77
23
53
6
41
77
49
No
Teachers Rated
itt£h Average Low
13
51
32
67
55
9
62
80
44
44
3
7
63
42
94
47
22
58
24
46
27
50
50
29
52
56
29
37
22
33
51
33
56
35
22
41
12
47
29
88
64
18
47
82
29
41
6
12
77
41
59
41
18
29
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
27
18
16
17
3
6
16
10
4
23
3
11
7
10
3
3
7
13
12
21
9
13
0
11
10
6
4
21
4
4
11
6
4
4
5
7
23
6
35
0
12
6
23
0
6
23
0
12
0
6
0
0
6
12
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e they would use th e words presented
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e In v en to ry and in d icated
by th e column h eadings.
201
Table LIII
Responses Made to the Language D ivision of the Speech Inventory
of an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C h aracteristic A ttitu d es,
Item 1
Blacksheep
Brat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad Taste
D isg u stin g
D isp leasin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
R epulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
2
14
12
1
34
10
18
4
8
2
2
15
12
0
31
10
20
1
8
0
0
0
12
0
23
18
35
0
12
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
6
15
29
2
8
1
16
13
7
2
5
15
40
2
3
2
9
15
6
2
0
6
29
0
6
12
18
6
12
12
Would Say
To P rin c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
4
2
4
82
3
2
0
1
0
1
2
2
3
70
3
12
2
2
1
0
0
0
0
77
0
18
6
0
0
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
*v
31
13
10
3
1
8
4
2
24
5
34
15
11
1
0
5
5
1
21
Continued on the next page
6
23
23
12
6
0
6
6
0
18
202
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F a sc in a tin g
G ripping
I n te r e s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h r illin g
Would Say To
A dult Friend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
26
8
17
16
7
13
2
6
1
0
34
5
21
17
8
7
0
3
1
0
29
0
18
29
12
6
0
0
6
0
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
30
2
4
15
8
24
1
8
1
7
29
6
2
21
8
19
1
7
0
5
35
0
0
23
6
23
0
12
0
6
The columns in d ic a te th e number of teachers ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s t a t e they would use th e words p re se n te d
under th e circum stances described in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
203
Table LIV
Responses Made to the Language D ivision o f the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Leadership.
Item 1
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
Blacksheep
B rat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isg u stin g
D isp le a sin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
R epulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
2
14
13
1
34
10
14
2
6
0
2
13
11
0
29
11
18
3
9
2
4
14
7
0
32
11
21
4
4
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
3
15
33
2
7
1
17
13
7
3
6
15
27
3
6
2
11
15
7
1
11
18
46
0
0
4
4
4
7
4
Would Say
To P rin c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
4
2
1
79
5
4
1
1
0
1
2
3
5
80
2
6
2
1
0
0
0
0
0
75
0
11
7
4
4
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
2
34
10
11
3
1
6
1
4
1
5
29
18
9
3
0
6
5
2
20
Continued on the next page
4
28
18
21
0
0
14
7
0
7
204
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F a sc in a tin g
G ripping
I n te r e s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h r illin g
Would Say To
A dult Friend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
34
7
17
13
8
10
1
7
2
0
31
5
22
21
5
10
1
3
0
1
21
4
7
28
11
7
0
11
4
0
Would Say
To S tudents
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
32
3
2
19
8
21
1
6
1
5
28
3
4
18
5
24
1
9
1
8
21
0
4
21
18
28
0
4
0
4
The columns in d ic a te th e number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
t o th e subheadings who s ta t e th e y would use th e words p resen ted
under th e circum stances d escribed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
205
Table LV
Responses Made to the Language D ivision o f the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Tact.
Item 1
Blacksheep
Brat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isgusting
D ispleasing
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
R epulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
1
13
12
1
37
10
14
2
8
1
4
22
11
0
26
12
17
4
7
1
0
7
15
0
37
7
30
0
0
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
5
17
30
1
6
0
15
14
6
1
6
9
35
4
7
2
12
13
10
3
4
26
30
0
4
7
7
7
7
4
Would Say
To P rin c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
3
2
1
82
3
4
0
0
1
1
2
2
4
74
2
8
2
3
0
0
0
0
4
78
0
7
4
0
0
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
3
35
12
9
2
0
8
3
2
21
3
25
17
11
2
1
5
5
1
29
Continued on the next page
4
45
15
11
4
0
4
7
0
7
206
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F a s c in a tin g
G ripping
I n te r e s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h r illin g
Would Say To
A dult F riend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
30
7
19
15
6
11
1
7
0
0
35
4
17
20
7
10
1
4
3
0
26
4
15
22
11
4
0
4
0
4
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
30
2
5
18
6
21
1
8
0
6
25
4
1
19
8
21
1
6
1
7
18
0
0
11
18
37
0
7
4
0
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs ra te d acco rd in g
to th e subheadings who s ta t e th e y would use the words p re se n te d
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column h eadings.
207
Table LVI
Responses Made to the Language D ivision of the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Sense o f Humor,
Item 1
Blacksheep
B rat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isg u stin g
D isp leasin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
Repulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
1
15
14
0
36
9
12
2
6
1
4
14
10
1
28
13
17
2
9
1
0
0
9
0
27
9
45
5
9
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
6
15
29
2
7
1
15
15
7
2
5
14
38
2
5
2
11
12
6
1
0
18
27
0
9
5
18
5
14
9
Would Say
To P r in c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
4
2
3
78
4
3
1
1
0
1
1
2
2
81
1
7
2
1
1
0
0
5
5
64
0
23
5
5
0
Would Say
To S tudents
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
3
31
12
0
2
1
7
3
1
26
2
33
14
14
1
0
6
6
1
20
Continued on the next page
5
23
23
14
5
0
9
5
0
23
208
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F ascin a tin g
Gripping
In te re s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h rillin g
Would Say To
A dult F riend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
35
6
19
14
7
11
1
4
2
0
30
5
17
22
4
11
1
9
0
1
14
5
14
18
32
5
0
5
5
5
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
18
3
2
17
9
22
2
7
0
7
34
2
4
15
6
21
2
8
1
6
23
9
0
36
9
23
0
0
5
0
The columns in d ic a te th e number of teach ers rated acco rd in g
to th e subheadings who s t a t e th e y would use th e words p rese n te d
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
209
Table LVII
Responses Made to the Language D ivision of the Speech Inventory
o f an Equal Number of Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C haracteristic Relation t o P u p ils»
Item 1
Blacksheep
B ra t
D ev il
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R u ffia n
Scamp
S coundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isg u stin g
D isp le a sin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffen siv e
R ep u lsiv e
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
2
15
14
1
33
8
14
2
7
1
3
13
9
0
28
15
20
2
7
2
0
0
0
0
46
8
38
8
0
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
6
14
30
2
7
1
16
13
6
2
3
16
39
2
6
2
' 9
13
9
2
0
8
15
0
8
8
23
0
15
15
Would Say
To P r in c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
3
3
3
80
3
4
0
2
0
1
1
2
1
85
2
9
3
2
1
0
0
0
15
61
0
15
8
0
0
Would Say
To S tu d en ts
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
2
30
17
11
3
0
6
4
2
23
5
35
14
9
2
1
6
5
1
21
0
31
15
8
0
0
15
8
0
23
Continued on the next page
210
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F a sc in a tin g
G ripping
In te r e s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Sw ell
T h r illin g
Would Say To
Adult F rien d
Teachers Hated
High Average Lew
31
6
18
17
5
12
1
5
1
0
35
6
17
18
7
6
1
7
2
1
IS
0
23
15
58
8
0
0
0
0
Would Say
To S tudents
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
28
4
3
17
11
24
1
8
0
6
35
3
3
17
6
19
2
6
2
6
15
8
0
23
23
31
0
0
0
0
The columns in d ic a te th e number o f te a c h e rs ra te d according
to th e subheadings who s ta te th e y would use th e words presented
under th e circum stances d escrib ed in th e Inventory and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
211
Table L V Z II
Responses Made to the Language D ivision of the Speech Inventory
of an Equal Number o f Teachers Rated High, Average, and Low in
the Teacher C h aracteristic Influence on P u p ils.
Item 1
Blacksheep
B rat
D evil
D elinquent
Problem
R ascal
Rowdy
R uffian
Scamp
Scoundrel
Item 2
Awful
Bad t a s t e
D isgusting
D isp leasin g
Lousy
Moronic
O ffensive
Repulsive
Shocking
U npleasant
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
Z
Z
11
15
1
38
10
18
17
12
0
25
11
19
4
5
1
Z
9
1
0
12
0
0
41
12
29
0
0
0
Would Say To
Fellow Teacher
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
5
18
29
4
5
1
16
15
7
3
4
12
39
2
8
3
11
11
7
1
0
12
23
0
C
0
18
6
12
18
Would Say
To P rin c ip a l
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
0
2
2
3
81
3
4
0
2
0
1
3
3
2
75
2
8
3
1
1
0
0
0
12
77
0
12
0
0
0
Would Say
To Students
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
3
30
15
9
3
0
7
4
2
23
4
30
15
12
2
1
7
4
1
23
Continued on the next page
0
41
18
12
0
0
6
12
0
12
Item 3
D e lig h tfu l
Enchanting
E x q u isite
F a sc in a tin g
G ripping
I n te r e s tin g
Keen
Lovely
Swell
T h r illin g
Would Say To
A dult Friend
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
33
7
17
16
6
12
1
6
1
0
32
4
20
18
8
10
1
5
2
1
Would Say
To S tudents
Teachers Rated
High Average Low
23
6
18
18
12
12
0
6
0
0
29
3
3
16
8
21
1
8
0
7
30
2
3
19
7
22
1
7
1
5
23
6
0
12
18
35
0
0
0
6
The columns in d ic a te the number of te a c h e rs ra te d according
t o th e subheadings who s ta te th ey would u se th e words p resen ted
under th e circum stances described in th e In v en to ry and in d ic a te d
by th e column headings.
NEW YORK U NIVE RSITY
SC H O O L OF EDUCATION
»
h
'v
m
CY
®
Документ
Категория
Без категории
Просмотров
4
Размер файла
7 674 Кб
Теги
sdewsdweddes
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа