Thirty-seven counseling students completed the Paragraph Completion Method, which is used to determine conceptual level. All students then viewed a videotape of a client in a counseling session and completed the Clinical Assessment Questionnaire, which is designed to elicit information regarding counselors' hypotheses about a client's problem. The Clinical Assessment Questionnaire responses were scored on seven categories relevant to clinical judgment and information processing. Two factors were considered in a multiple regression analysis of the data: (a) conceptual level and (b) clinical experience. The results indicated that experience level was not significantly related to the characteristics of the students' clinical hypothesis formation. Conceptual level was significantly related to the overall quality and clarity of expression in clinical hypotheses (p < . 002) and the number of divergent questions asked about the client's problems (p < .004). Methodological and counselor-training implications of these results are discussed.
An interactional analysis system, Blumberg's System for Analyzing Supervisor-Teacher Interaction (BIA), adopted from research in teacher education is used to characterize beginning supervisory style. Two dimensions of the supervisor's interaction with the trainee are considered: (a) the amount of variance in supervisory interaction behaviors in a group of beginning supervisors, and (b) the stability of interactional behavior of individual supervisors across two interviews, each with two different trainees. Twenty-four supervision interviews, two interviews with two different trainees from each of 12 beginning doctoral students, were videotaped and later analyzed with the BIA. A repeated measures two-way analysis of variance was used to analyze the BIA scores. The results indicated that the interview content differed significantly (p < .05) between supervisors on 7 of the 11 BIA variables and that individual supervisors differed significantly (p < .05) across two interviews on 3 of the 11 BIA variables. It was concluded that beginning supervisors have individual predilections for supervisory behaviors that are stable across interviews with different trainees. The implication of these "style" differences for the training of supervisors is discussed. Reavis, C. A. A test of the clinical supervision model.
The theory of causal attribution was applied to the problem of mathematics avoidance or the under-enrollment of females in nonrequired high school mathematics courses. It was hypothesized that sex differences in attributions of performance in mathematics would parallel previously documented sex differences in attributions in other achievement areas. Twelve hundred and twenty-four high school females (N=647) and males (N=577) took the Mathematics Attribution Scale and a test of mathematics achievement. As predicted, males and females differed in the strength of various attributions used to explain successful and unsuccessful performance in mathematics. Further, it was determined that sex and achievement in mathematics contribute separately to the variance in attribution patterns.
Males, more than females, elect advanced mathematics courses. This differential in the number of mathematics courses elected has been cited as a major explanation of sex-related differences in adults' mathematics performance and in their participation in mathematics-related careers. Knowledge about some of the variables that enter into the decision to persist in the study of mathematics is essential for those who are interested in encouraging females, as well as males, to adequately prepare themselves in mathematics. This study identified some attitudinal and attributional variables that relate to the election of mathematics courses by females and males. A small set of variables was found to explain some of the variance in female and male mathematics plans. These results might help in understanding why females do not continue in as large a proportion as males to elect mathematics and/or to enter mathematics-related careers.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.