Record Details
Trends, practices, and beliefs regarding the teaching of undergraduate home economics methods courses
ScholarsArchive at Oregon State University
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
| Title | Trends, practices, and beliefs regarding the teaching of undergraduate home economics methods courses |
| Names |
Eighme, Mary Margaret
(creator) DuBois, May (advisor) |
| Date Issued | 1965-06-23 (iso8601) |
| Note | Graduation date: 1966 |
| Abstract | The purpose of this study was to discover what the present trends, practices and beliefs of home economics educators were concerning the teaching of the undergraduate special home economics methods courses. In order to accomplish this purpose it was believed desirable to discover what was being done and what home economics educators believed should be done in these courses if there were no limiting factors. The following were the five areas of concern. 1. What facilities and equipment were available to teachers and students in the special methods courses. 2. What assignments were required in the special methods courses. 3. What content was included in the special methods courses. 4. What instructional materials were used and taught to students in the special methods courses. 5. What methods were used and taught to students in the special methods courses. To obtain the information that this study was based on, a survey questionnaire was constructed, validated and sent to the head of the home economics department in 210 colleges or universities in the United States. The 111 that were returned in usable form were divided into five groups on the basis of the division of the academic year and the number of special methods courses offered. The results obtained from the analysis of these data indicated, in most instances, what the present practices and beliefs of home economics educators were but the responses to the trends and beliefs of these educators regarding what they thought should be done if there were no limiting factors was poor, so any statements concerning trends had to be of a general nature. The facilities and equipment which were available a majority of the time to the home economics education teachers and students included projectors, resource materials and subject-matter files, and the seminar-library room. The respondents desired more access to the instructional materials center, multipurpose laboratory, seminar-library room and the opaque and overhead projectors. A similar group of assignments were believed desirable and were required by the 111 respondents. These included the development of plans, evaluative and illustrative materials and the study of guides, journals, resource materials, textbooks and topics of special interest to the students. Content believed desirable and included by the teacher educators were similar. This content included philosophy, trends, curriculum, evaluation, understanding and working with students, management of and interpreting the department, teaching of special areas and professional obligations. The instructional materials the respondents used and taught students to use included bulletin boards, charts, chalk boards, exhibits, films and filmstrips, flannel boards and posters. The home economics educators believed it was desirable to use the opaque and overhead projectors, photographs and tape recorders more than they were at the time of this study. The methods used by teacher educators which they also taught students to use included development of concepts and generalizations, cooperative planning, discussion methods, demonstrations, evaluation and grading, family centered teaching, field trips, laboratory, lecture, problem solving, reports and role playing. In addition to these, the students were taught to use case studies, home and extended experiences, home visits, sociograms and supervised study. Also included in the methods used by teachers and students were taught to use was learning experiences to develop an understanding of how to develop creativity. It appeared desirable to use some methods more than they were used at the time of this study. These methods included activities to develop creativity, case studies, home and extended experiences, home visits, interviews, problem solving, programmed learning, puppets, supervised study and team teaching. |
| Genre | Thesis/Dissertation |
| Topic | Home economics teachers |
| Identifier | http://hdl.handle.net/1957/47870 |
