||boek: A practical introduction to measurement and evaluation|2nd edition - H.H. Remmers|N.L. Gage|J. Francis Rummel|Harper

||door: H.H. Remmers, N.L. Gage

||taal: en
||jaar: 1966
||druk: 2nd edition, reprinted
||pag.: 390p
||opm.: hardcover|like new|without cover

||isbn: N/A
||code: 1:002534

--- Over het boek (foto 1): A practical introduction to measurement and evaluation ---

!geen bespreking of samenvatting van te vinden (2024)!

--- Over (foto 2): H.H. Remmers ---

Remmers, H. H. (Hermann Henry), 1892-1969

Biographical Information

Hermann H. Remmers was born in Norden, Germany and came to the United States when he was eight years old. He studied for two years at Valparaiso University and then went on to the University of Iowa where he obtained his A.B. degree in 1921, his M.A. in 1922, and his Ph.D. in 1927, each in psychology.

Remmers served as an instructor in psychology and education at Colorado College for one year after receiving his M.A. He then joined the Purdue faculty in 1923 as an assistant professor of education and psychology. He became an associate professor in 1926 and a full professor in 1930. He served as major professor for 89 Ph.D. candidates as Purdue began its doctoral program in psychology. In 1928, he also became an administrator, serving as director of Purdue's Division of Educational Reference until his retirement.

He was a summer session lecturer over the years for a number of universities and colleges including the University of Iowa, University of California, University of Washington, University of Southern California, University of British Columbia, and the University of Puerto Rico.

In the field of measurement programs and instruments, he directed the development of the State High School Testing Service for Indiana, which began in the 1930s, and the Purdue Opinion Panel, which has annually, since 1941, conducted three polls of high school students on topics of educational, social, and psychological significance and in the process has amassed an analyzed archive of adolescent opinion.

From 1942 to 1945 he served as an expert consultant in the Personnel Research Section of the Military for the U.S. Army's Adjutant General's Office, and was also the regional director for Indiana, Illinois, and Kentucky of the U.S. Army's A-12 and the U.S. Navy's V-12 College Training Programs qualifying exams. These college training programs were initiated in 1943 to solve the problems of a shortage of commissioned officers in the expanded wartime military. These programs accepted students already enrolled in college reserve programs, enlisted men who were recommended by their commanding officers, and high school seniors who passed the above nationwide qualifying examinations.

Remmers contributed over 375 professional papers to psychological and educational journals and was the author or co-author of several books.

His professional affiliations included the American Association of the Advancement of Science for which he served as secretary of the education section (1940), the American Psychological Association for which he served as president of its Division of Educational Psychology (1951-1952), the American Association of Applied Psychologists, the National Education Association, the American Educational Research Association for which he served as president of the Association (1954-1955) and chairman of the Association's National Committee on Criteria of Teaching Effectiveness, the Society of Psychological Study of Social Issues, the National Society for Study of Education, and the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education. Remmers was also on the editorial board of the Journal of Experimental Psychology and was a member of Phi Beta Kappa, Sigma Xi, Phi Delta Kappa, and Sigma Alpha Epsilon.

He received the Gordon Barrows Memorial Award from the Indiana Psychological Association in 1964.

After retiring from Purdue in 1963, Remmers briefly taught graduate courses at Johns Hopkins University.

[source: https--archives.lib.purdue.edu/agents/people/879]

Studies in Industrial Empathy - Lois June Remmers, H. H. Remmers

I. Labor Leaders' Attitudes Toward Industrial Supervision and Their Estimate of Managements' Attitudes

First published: December 1959

H.H. Remmers is professor of psychology and Director of the Division of Educational Reference at Purdue University, where he has been since 1923. He received his Ph.D. from the State University of Iowa. In 1946, he was Director of Student Personnel Studies, Pharmaceutical Survey, American Council on Education. He is a member, among other organizations, of the American Psychological Association, the American Association of Applied Psychologists, the National Education Association, the American Education Research Association and a member of the executive committee of the Indiana Association of Clinical Psychologists. He is the author of a number of books and articles in the field of educational psychology, has been the editor of Purdue University Studies in Higher Education since 1927, and is the editor of the college series of books on education for Harper and Brothers.

Miss Lois June Remmers received her M.A. in Applied Psychology from Purdue University in 1948, and is now working toward her Doctorate in the Industrial and Labor Relations School at Cornell University. For a year in 1947, she was assistant to the Director, Department of Research and Education, Kentucky State Federation of Labor; prior to that, she worked on the Witness (an official publication of the Episcopalian Church) and the Aero-Mechanic, weekly of the Boeing Aircraft Machinists Union, A.F. of L., Seattle, Washington.

This study is a master's thesis in the Division of Education and Applied Psychology, Purdue University, It was financed in part by the Division of Educational Reference. A study has also been made to measure the stereotyping of management's attitude toward labor. It will be published as the second in this series.

[source: https--onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1744-6570.1959.tb01414.x]

--- Over (foto 3): N.L. Gage ---

Nathaniel Lees Gage (August 1, 1917 - August 17, 2008) was an American educational psychologist who made significant contributions to a scientific understanding of teaching. He conceived and edited the first Handbook of Research on Teaching (Gage, 1963), led the Stanford Center for Research and Development of Teaching, and served as president of the American Educational Research Association. Gage was a professor at the Stanford Graduate School of Education, where he moved in 1962 after 14 years at the University of Illinois. Deborah Stipek, dean of the Stanford School of Education, called Gage a "giant among educational researchers." David C. Berliner, Regents' Professor of Education at Arizona State University, called Gage "the father of the field of research on teaching."

Education

Nathaniel Lees Gewirtz was born in Union City, New Jersey, in 1917, his mother and father were both Polish immigrants; his eventual name change is explained below. Gage graduated from high school in 1934, which was during the Great Depression. He attended the City College of New York and the University of Minnesota. At the University of Minnesota, he worked in the laboratory of B.F. Skinner, who later became famous for his contributions to the theory of behaviorism. Gewirtz's duties included making food pellets used to reinforce the behavior of Skinner's laboratory rats. B.F. Skinner would later publish his theory, including the previous trials of laboratory rats, in numerous journals, including "The Experimental Analysis Of Behavior."

Gewirtz graduated magna cum laude in 1938 with a bachelor's degree in psychology, but was rejected by 10 graduate schools before being admitted to Purdue University. According to David Berliner, the many rejections were due to anti-Semitism. Gewirtz then changed his last name to Gage.

During World War II, Gage spent two years in the Army, where he joined the aviation psychology program and he developed aptitude tests for choosing navigators and radar observers. Gage earned a Ph.D. in psychology from Purdue University in 1947 after returning to the University in 1945.

Academic career

Gage taught at Purdue for a year, and at the University of Illinois for 14 years. In 1962, Gage became a professor at Stanford University, where he remained until his death. In 1965, Gage co-founded the Stanford Center for the Research and Development in Teaching (now known as the Center for Educational Research at Stanford), funded with a $4 million federal grant.

Gage said that teaching should not only be effective but also respected, according to his colleagues. The way to achieve both of these aspects, according to Gage, was through science. "Teaching is properly done by hunch, by intuition, by experience, by ideology; what it also needs is a basis in scientific research," he explained back in 1987 in his interview for the Stanford News Service.

Gage edited the Handbook of Research on Teaching (1963), and wrote The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching (1978) and Hard Gains in the Soft Sciences (1985). His books has been added to numerous Educational Psychology writings." He also contributed numerous research articles in journals throughout the field, including "Confronting Counsels of Despair for the Behavioral Sciences," which was first published in April of 1996. He was even published in the Journal of Educational Psychology of the American Psychological Association in March 1955 in a journal titled "Pupils' values and the validity of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory." He is also referenced in numerous courses across America, including one such as AIU, also known as the Atlantic International University.

Upon his retirement from active teaching in 1987, Gage became a professor emeritus, and still worked at his office five days a week. From 1987 through 2008, he wrote at least three books and more than 20 articles. He completed his last book, A Conception of Teaching, shortly before his death.

His many honors include a Guggenheim fellowship (1976-1977), election to the National Academy of Education (1979), the E.L. Thorndike Award for Career Achievement in Educational Psychology (1986), and an honorary doctorate from the Université de Liège in Belgium (2001).

Gage passed away on Aug. 21st, 2008, at a hospital at the age of 91. At the hospital, he received surgery to remove a blot clot after a head injury from a fall.

Family

Gage married Margaret "Maggie" Burrows Gage in 1942. They had four children. Margaret "Maggie" Burrows Gage passed two years before Nathaniel in 2006.

[source: wikipedia]

Nathaniel Gage and his Paradigm Shift in Educational Research [2015-05-12]

Educational research had a different orientation till a little over two decades ago when the emphasis was on an objective and scientific approach. The critics of this approach were active much before and were relentless in their pursuit to get educational research out of the close-ended absolutes that a scientific approach implied. Nathaniel L. Gage, who is considered to be the 'father of modern research on teaching,' (Sullivan, K., 2008) had been closely associated with educational research and thinking for the last half a century or more. Essentially a modernist, who stood for a scientific approach toward teaching, Gage appreciated the scale of opposition to a complete scientific approach but cautioned that science and objectivity cannot be ignored altogether.

Basis of rejection of the scientific method

The criticism of and the eventual rejection of the research on the scientific method of teaching was based on a number of factors which collectively came to be known as the Antinaturalist Critique. So severe was the criticism of the research on scientific method of teaching that it was said to be "at best, inconclusive, and at worst, barren" (Gage, N. American Educational Research Association) Other criticism have been no less harsh, even going to the extent of saying that teaching based on such methods would encourage thinking that "can only be implemented in an authoritarian, manipulative, bureaucratic system" (Gage, N. American Educational Research Association).

The Antinaturalist Critique argued that objectives related to human development especially teaching and training cannot be implemented merely on the basis of scientific facts and figures that could be inadequate. A scientific approach is not appropriate for regulating teachers' relationships with their students as there is a lot more in such relationships that are way beyond the boundaries of what science can possibly cover. The art of teaching and learning must not come under the influence of prediction and control that a scientific method implies; rather, it should rely on insights and observations to regulate the teacher-student relationship.

There were other schools of criticism of the scientific method of teaching led by a group known as the Interpretivists. Their argument is that individual actions are based on their interpretation of a given situation or reality because an individual is perfectly capable of constructing his own reality and act accordingly. This is because individuals differ in their responses to identical scenarios and any scientific approach is likely to overlook such subtle differences.

The other major criticism came from a group known as the Critical Theorists who argued from the social reconstruction point of view. In their opinion, an individual's social background considerably impacts his ability to impart teaching or absorb learning; all other factors are secondary at best or not worth deliberating upon. They suggest drastic changes in the whole structure of society which they say is grossly unequal for education to be imparted fairly (Hammersley, M. Educational Research and Evidence-based Practice.)

As a result of such multi-pronged attacks on the educational research of the 60s and 70s that focused on a methodical, scientific and objective approach, there has been considerable churning of ideas and approaches such as those that were covered in this review. In the end, the scientific approach lost out against the relentless criticism from different groups of researchers that had turned a new corner since 1989. Research on the scientific approach came to a standstill as scholars lost interest in what increasingly began appearing as a dead end with grants and funding drying up completely. Even journals, that used to publish literature on the subject, stopped doing so and before long this entire area of study became history.

Natheniel Gage, an educational researcher who worked on the scientific approach, also knew its limitations and advocated respect for a rational approach that also took the best of what the scientific approach had to offer. There is no doubt that the scientific approach had its drawbacks, but as Gage had cautioned, research on teaching methodology would remain poorer if the best of what the scientific approach achieved, continue to be ignored. There are no absolutes in this field and it would be an irony if the very forces that struggled against the absolutism of the scientific approach were themselves to conclude that they are untouchable.

[source: https--devkumaropinionsupfront.blogspot.com/2015/05/nathaniel-gage-and-his-paradigm-shift.html]

Nathaniel L. Gage - A Conception of Teaching

"This is an important book by the top scholar on research on teaching. As always, Professor Gage has much to say - and he says it well." --Tom Good - Professor of Education, University of Arizona

"The scope and import of N. L. Gage's scholarship is easily documented. Others
have described this. Less tangible or apparent is his impact on those who had the
immeasurable good fortune to enjoy his mentorship. He modeled devotion to the
disciplines of scholarship - a never satisfied striving toward thoroughness, dedica-
tion to clarity especially about methodologies that color interpretations, insistence
on clarifying foggy arguments, and commitment to stimulating rather than disparag-
ing other scholars' thinking. His extraordinarily high expectations blended naturally
with gentleness in corrections and patience in explaining not just what was the case
but how a case came to be the case. These qualities were all the more special in the
context of almost always being much too near a deadline. Like other superb mentors,
Nate taught students and colleagues a very great deal about educational psychology.
More significantly, he led us to learn and prize the ethic of scholarship." --Phil Winne - Professor & Canada Research Chair, Simon Fraser University

"Besides being a superb scholar and an exacting editor, Nate Gage was a consum-
mate gentleman of the old school. I remember a meeting of the "Invisible College"
at Syracuse University in the early 1980s. Nate was reporting on the procedures he
had used in his planning and preparation for the National Institute of Education's
1974 Conference on Studies in Teaching, which he chaired. He showed a slide of a
chalkboard used during the planning process. On the chalkboard he had listed the
ten panels that were to make up the conference, along with the chairs and members
of each panel. I was struck by the fact that all the male participants were identified
by last name only, while the female participants were identified by both first and
last name. Given the concerns about gender equity of that time period, I wondered
if this could be an instance of sexism. But when I asked him to explain the
difference in recording of the names, he said that he thought it would be rude
to refer to women by their last name only. He clearly cared about issues of gender equity. When Ann Lieberman and I organized a special workshop on problems of
two-career marriages at a later AERA conference, Nate attended, and confessed to
the assembled group that he felt guilty about the ways that he had probably inhib-
ited Maggie, his dear wife, from exploring her own career possibilities. He knew
that his early views on the role of women were constrained by the social expecta-
tions of that period, and he really worked at understanding and accepting the newer
perceptions of appropriate roles. The number of women scholars who served as
members of the NIE panels reflected that new understanding. His chalkboard notes
demonstrated how his early views of appropriate ways of addressing women were
incorporated into his newer views of appropriate roles for women. I have long
cherished the memory of that chalkboard image. For me, it captures one of the ways
Nate's personal beliefs contributed to his professional relationships." --Greta Morine-Dershimer - Emeritus Professor of Education, University of Virginia

"I met Nate Gage in August of 1974. I was a newly admitted doctoral student in
educational psychology at Stanford University, and Nate was my academic advisor.
We sat together in Cubberly Library reviewing my resume, and he asked me how I
came to know my previous employer who had written a letter of recommendation for
my file. I told him that Bob Baker's daughter was my best friend in high school and
after we graduated college, and Bob asked if I would like to come to California and
work in his research lab. Nate responded with a chuckle, and said with a twinkle in
his eye, "Well, you must have impressed him in some other way because he could not
write a letter like this otherwise." Nate still had this same, warmly playful spirit the
last time I saw him as well. Almost exactly 33 years later, in August of 2007, Nate
appeared unexpectedly, walking down the aisle with his assistant, at my outgoing
address as the president of Division 15 (Educational Psychology) of the American
Psychological Association. I was so moved that he would make the effort at 90 plus
years of age to come to San Francisco to hear me speak that I had to take a moment,
pause, and introduce him to the many younger faces in the audience. That same twin-
kle was there in his eye then, and the last thing he said to me as he left the reception
afterward was, "Baby girl, you did me proud." Perhaps the most meaningful thing I
can say about Nate Gage is simply that he was there for me throughout my career." --Lyn Corno - Teachers College, Columbia University

NATE GAGE: A MAN FOR ALL SEASONS

"Although Nate was known as a psychologist, his work encompassed much more
- some philosophy of education, some history of education, some sociology of
education. All aspects were brought to bear in his attempt to create a theory of
teaching that was both rigorous and based on empirical evidence. It was his quest
for empirical evidence that brought us together. Nate joined the Stanford faculty in
1962, a year after I arrived. We often discussed some of the research questions in
education. He posed a problem that often plagued social scientists, namely, that
although there may be numerous studies on a particular subject, the evidence from any single study may not be convincing. This might be due to small sample sizes
(often the case in dissertations), or there may be heterogeneity in the data. However,
the composite of the studies seem to point in one direction. Nate's question was
whether this disparate evidence could be combined in a statistically rigorous way
so as to yield a convincing conclusion. Statistical methods for combining the results
of independent studies have been called meta-analysis, and Nate's question was a
catalyst for me to begin working on the development of statistical methods for the
analysis of such data.

Nate had a kind sense of humor. He had a number of sentences that he liked and
which he would repeat. One such would come out at faculty meetings after I would
make some comment involving numbers. Nate would say, "Ingram, you know that
at a restaurant.

For the last 45 years Nate has been a friend, a colleague, and an intellectual
stimulus. Most recently, he expressed concern that the education community recog-
nize that teaching had a scientific foundation. This book represents his legacy in
showing that such a foundation exists." --Ingram Olkin - Professor of Statistics and Education, Stanford University

"When I first met Nate Gage in 1972, he was described as the "father of research
on teaching." I didn't quite know what that meant at the time, being a new staff
member at the National Institute of Education, just completing my dissertation on
students' achievement motivation. I soon learned. Nate Gage worked relentlessly
on developing and sustaining research on teaching and bringing to it the prestige
required to be accepted as an educational research field. Nate's strong focus on
research on teaching, its concept, conduct, power, and use continued throughout his
lifetime. He was a humble man: one who never placed himself in front of the pack,
and would converse with anyone - young or older academics, school people, poli-
ticians - with respect and grace. His knowledge of the field was simply remarkable.
He was, indeed, the Father of Research on Teaching, and will be sorely missed." --Virginia Richardson - Professor of Education Emerita, University of Michigan

"Nate was a mentor and safe harbor during my graduate student days at Stanford
(1968-1970) and then a colleague and good friend throughout the remainder of his
career. Many memories come flooding back, but two stand out as a graduate student
and are still vivid. The first memory is that of a big fight Nate and I got into at a
meeting of the Psychological Studies in Education faculty. He was a chaired profes-
sor; I was a graduate student representative. The fight was whether psychological
principles were general or subject-matter specific. Nate held the former view and
I held the latter. We got into a real match... so much so that Lee Cronbach caught
up with me after the meeting saying that it was apparent that senior faculty as well
as graduate students could make fools of themselves! The "debate" was quickly
forgotten and had no bearing on Nate as a mentor and friend.
you are no good with numbers." This was also said when we had to check the bill
xx Tribute

The second memory is of Nate at home. Nate and Maggie often invited graduate
students over for wine, cheese, and conversation. On one such occasion I learned
that Nate was on volume Q of the Encyclopedia Britannica. Nate was reading the
encyclopedia from A to Z, no doubt editing as he went along!

Two memories of Nate stand out as a colleague. The first: I had written a paper
to present at a conference and asked Nate to read it. He did, editing copiously as
was his want. He allowed as how it was a good paper but wasn't ready for publica-
tion. I told him I didn't plan to publish the paper. He told me that he never wrote a
paper he didn't intend to publish and that stuck with me throughout my career...
inhibiting some writing, but, alas, not enough! The second: While I was dean at the
Stanford University School of Education (1995-2000), a retired Nate came to talk
to me - Nate was working for me, no longer vice versa! He was concerned about
finding funding for his next project... a book integrating research on teaching and
research on instruction. I suggested he apply for a small grant from the Spencer
Foundation. He did so and received funding. He came to my office to report the
grant with a smile that made the Cheshire cat look as if it were pouting. And best
of all for Nate, his receiving this grant meant he was still in close competition with
his brother who, like Nate, was famous in his own field. As fate would have it, our
paths crossed in mysterious ways. Nate held the Margaret Jacks chair in Education;
I now hold that chair... and it feels good that Nate sat in it as well." --Richard J. Shavelson - Margaret Jacks Professor of Education, Stanford University

"Good philosophical training cultivates a skeptical eye, and good philosophical
training in education often uses educational research to train one's skeptical eye.
When I first began to read Nate Gage, I presumed his work would be grist of the
mill for my newly cultivated skepticism. Instead, something quite different hap-
pened. I realized that his work was "really good stuff," and if I was going to critique
it I would have to work very hard. Thus began nearly three decades of back-and-
forth exchanges between us that I know were far more beneficial to me than they
were for Nate." --Gary D. Fenstermacher - Professor of Education Emeritus, University of Michigan

[source: https--content.e-bookshelf.de/media/reading/L-99-b280bc9d57.pdf]

The multiple roles of N.L. Gage in the creation of educational effectiveness fields - Sam Stringfield, Charles Teddlie [2004-05-00]

Abstract

One measure of a scholar's contributions to his field is the extent to which his work has impact beyond his area or original focus. The authors' examine N.L. Gage's impact in the area of school effects research. The first of Gage's impacts has been in arguing for a pragmatic orientation to the building of a scientific base for the study of education. The second has been in both leading and supporting studies that focused on direct observation of classroom teaching processes, and linking those processes to measurable outcomes. Four examples of the impacts of Gage's work are presented and discussed. The school effects field would not have made as much progress had not the teacher effects field generally, and the work of N.L. Gage in particular, preceded it.
Introduction

One measure of a scholar's contributions to his science is the extent to which his impact is felt beyond his originally defined circle. The diversity of N.L. Gage's impact cannot be accurately reflected in a single article or a single field. In this paper we highlight one example of Gage's impact beyond teacher effects research by examining scholarship at the school level.

The fact that Gage's work has had impact in the school-level effects field is readily demonstrated. With six separate studies and books noted in the International Handbook of School Effectiveness Research (Teddlie & Reynolds, 2000), Gage is one of the most referenced scholars in school effects research. Those contributions fall into two general categories, building a scientific basis for the art of schooling, and using low inference classroom observation systems as building blocks for school-level process-product studies. We discuss each contribution in turn in the two sections that follow.

Section snippets

Leading a pragmatic search for a scientific basis for the art of education

For over four decades, N.L. Gage has both forwarded and analyzed a set of paradigms through which teaching can be studied. In Paradigms for research on teaching (1963) and The scientific basis of the art of teaching (Gage, 1978), Gage offered a pragmatism toward the "soft sciences" (Gage, 1985) that was and remains fully within the traditions of William James and John Dewey. Predating the pragmatism defined by Cherryholmes (1992) and Tashakkori and Teddlie (1998), Gage embraced both ...

Toward a scientific basis for the art of schooling

Gage's dedication and tremendous attention to detail has produced a series of Hard Gains in the Soft Sciences (Gage, 1985). His efforts, building on psychological traditions of theory building, inspired both teacher effects researchers and scholars who were attempting to build toward practical models of teacher effects.

At the level of relating aggregated processes to aggregated products, the school effects field is in some ways identical to and in other ways more complex than research on ...

Summary

One measure of the impact of a scholar is the extent to which his work has influenced fields beyond his own, and, on occasion, built new bridges between his own field and others. In establishing a pragmatic, process-product logic of data gathering and analysis, and in insisting on the careful gathering of detailed, classroom-level data, N.L. Gage has made seminal contributions to the teacher effects field. Less often discussed are the impacts of those contributions in other fields ...

[source: https--www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0742051X04000228]