The relative contributions of misbehavior, academic incompetence, and exposure to nonretarded children to the explanation of retarded children's sociometric status were explored. Teachers and peers rated retarded children on the dimensions of misbehavior and academic performance. The results indicated that perceived academic incompetence was associated with educable mentally retarded children's level of social acceptance, whereas perceived misbehavior was associated with retarded children's social rejection by peers. Amount of exposure to nonretarded children did not relate significantly to retarded children's social status. The data were discussed in terms of the assumptions underlying the mainstreaming of retarded children into regular classes.

Invariance of factor structure was demonstrated across 3 semester subsamples and across teacher-sex, and factorscore reliabilities were computed. Female teachers were higher than males on Dimensions I and V. Correlations with 2 attitude inventories were low, but significant. Relationships of factor-scores to supervisorrated effectiveness were linear and positive for Factors I, II, and IV, except for a curvilinear effect with males on Factor I.

No abstract

A standard intelligence test (CTMM) used as a measure of convergent thinking (CT), and a composite measure of divergent thinking ability (DT) were the independent variables for a series of 2factorialjinalyses of variance, based on 192 talented junior high-school pupils (X for CTMM = 124). High DT Ss scored higher on tests of word fluency, reading ability, and Holtzman Inkblot Technique scores for movement, anxiety, hostility, color, penetration, and use of large areas of the blots. On a biographical form, high CT Ss indicated higher grades, less trouble with schoolwork, and more parental interest in college. The Junior Personality Quiz failed to discriminate among the 4 subgroups.

Indicates that recent studies have concluded that only the quality of the student body, and not the quality of the school or its teaching staff, "makes a difference" on measures of student learning. These studies, however, have measured only presage variables and have used schools rather than teachers as the unit of analysis. Regression equation data from pupil records in the present study, which used 115 2nd- and 3rd-grade teachers with 5 or more consecutive years of experience teaching at their respective grade levels, show that teachers do affect student learning to a degree that is both statistically and practically significant. Teacher effects were especially robust in the data from Title I schools serving disadvantaged populations.