An Analysis of the Teacher-Pupil Verbal Interaction in Special Classes for the Mentally Retarded [electronic resource] / Esther Hirsch Minskoff.

The study analyzed teacher-pupil interaction in the classes of nine experimental (E) and eight control (C) teachers and their 167 mentally retarded pupils (mean age = 10.2, mean IQ = 68.76) The E-teachers were given 32 training sessions in an experimental curriculum and the inductive teaching method...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Online Access: Full Text (via ERIC)
Main Author: Minskoff, Esther Hirsch
Corporate Author: Yeshiva University
Format: Electronic eBook
Language:English
Published: [S.l.] : Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse, 1967.
Subjects:

MARC

LEADER 00000cam a22000002u 4500
001 b6460940
003 CoU
005 20090120104431.2
006 m d f
007 cr un
008 670201s1967 xx |||| o ||| | eng d
035 |a (ERIC)ed021355 
040 |a ericd  |c ericd  |d MvI 
099 |f ERIC DOC #  |a ED021355 
100 1 |a Minskoff, Esther Hirsch. 
245 1 3 |a An Analysis of the Teacher-Pupil Verbal Interaction in Special Classes for the Mentally Retarded  |h [electronic resource] /  |c Esther Hirsch Minskoff. 
260 |a [S.l.] :  |b Distributed by ERIC Clearinghouse,  |c 1967. 
300 |a 191 p. 
500 |a Sponsoring Agency: Office of Education (DHEW), Washington, DC. Bureau of Research.  |5 ericd. 
500 |a Contract Number: OEG-32-42-1700-6008.  |5 ericd. 
500 |a ERIC Document Number: ED021355. 
520 |a The study analyzed teacher-pupil interaction in the classes of nine experimental (E) and eight control (C) teachers and their 167 mentally retarded pupils (mean age = 10.2, mean IQ = 68.76) The E-teachers were given 32 training sessions in an experimental curriculum and the inductive teaching method. Classes were tape recorded for 1 day. Analysis indicated that the distribution of the E-teachers' questions was cognitive-memory (88%), evaluative thinking (5%), convergent thinking (4%), and divergent thinking (3%). Significantly more (.001 level) cognitive-memory questions were asked by the teachers than any of the other three types of questions. A comparison of the experimental and control groups demonstrated that E-teachers did not ask significantly more productive thinking or ask for significantly more evaluations after the students' incorrect answers than C-teachers, (2) there was less consistency for E-teachers' questions irrespective of subject matter areas, and (3) there were no significant differences between the E- and C-teachers' statements in the categories studied. Additional data on teacher and student characteristics are considered. Appendixes describe the Gallagher-Aschner Classification System and provide samples of teacher-pupil interactions demonstrating aspects of the inductive method. (JD) 
650 0 7 |a Classroom Communication.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Cognitive Development.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Cognitive Processes.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Convergent Thinking.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Divergent Thinking.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Evaluative Thinking.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Exceptional Child Research.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Interaction.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Language Patterns.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Mental Retardation.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Mild Mental Retardation.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Student Characteristics.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Student Teacher Relationship.  |2 ericd. 
650 0 7 |a Teacher Characteristics.  |2 ericd. 
650 1 7 |a Teaching Methods.  |2 ericd. 
710 2 |a Yeshiva University. 
856 4 0 |u http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED021355.pdf  |z Full Text (via ERIC) 
907 |a .b64609406  |b 07-06-22  |c 10-19-10 
998 |a web  |b 10-11-12  |c f  |d m   |e -  |f eng  |g xx   |h 3  |i 1 
956 |a ERIC 
999 f f |i c46b5058-abd0-5b87-ac38-da4f58a9eec3  |s 471af5c1-e864-5cbb-991c-876c038c5075 
952 f f |p Can circulate  |a University of Colorado Boulder  |b Online  |c Online  |d Online  |e ED021355  |h Other scheme  |i web  |n 1