Dimensionality of Teacher Educational Beliefs: A Validation Study.

A sample of 320 elementary school teachers was ad ministered 35 items determined from an earlier factor analytic study to measure four dimensions of teacher educational belief. An additional 46 items perceived to be potentially effective measures of the four concepts were used as a supplement to the original 35 items. An oblique factor solution of responses to the pooled items yielded two dimensions of belief identified as student centered and directive. IN AN EARLIER STUDY by Bunting (1984), a series of items describing notions about how learning occurs, what priorities are important in education, and how teachers should relate to students was administered to a sample of 290 teachers assigned to kindergarten and grades one through six. An oblique factor solution of responses yielded four moderately independent dimen sions of belief describing affective and cognitive educa tional values, directive teaching behavior, and relevancy in subject matter. The initial factor labeled "affective" addressed the importance of emotional development as an educational goal. Self-awareness and self-esteem were identified as significant educational objectives, with empathetic sup portive relationships as an important means of facilitat ing emotional growth. This dimension followed closely one of two goal dimensions identified earlier by Wehling and Charters (1969) labeled "personal adjustment ideol ogy" and dimensions observed by Wolfe and Engel (1978) focusing on the importance of emotional development and on students' need for affection in order to achieve. The second dimension, labeled "cognitive," contained items focusing on cognitive psychology. Included were descriptions of instructional techniques providing for the active and direct involvement of students in the learning process as they predict, infer, generalize, and evaluate. While at least one Wehling and Charters (1969) dimension could be considered a philosophical counterpart to the cognitive dimension, no clear parallel to this concept was evident in previous research. Another dimension, labeled "directive," suggested a lack of confidence in the students' ability to make deci sions and monitor their behavior appropriately. Accord ingly, teachers were expected to accept responsibility for decision making in the classroom and to closely super vise the students to assure a high level of conformity to regulations. Traditional curricula were also espoused, the assumption being that innovative, more student oriented materials would fail because of false premises about students' abilities. The directive dimension cor responded to teacher-centered dimensions observed by Yee and Fruchter (1971) and Horn and Morrison (1965) in factor studies of the well-known Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory (MTAI) (Cooke, Leeds, & Callis, 1951) and to a cluster of dimensions observed by Wehl ing and Charters (1969) suggesting the value of subject matter and teacher control in the educational process. The remaining dimension, labeled "interpretive," re flected the importance of meaning and relevancy in the teaching of subject matter. Although several means were prescribed for accomplishing this goal, the method incorporating the greatest number of items was that of subject matter investigation. Additional means included the relating of subject matter to the problems and con cerns of the world and the linking of subject matter to important educational goals. The interpretive dimen sion was similar to a dimension derived by Wehling and