EDITORIAL COMMENT: GUEST COMMENTARY TEACHERS'THEORETICAL ORIENTATIONS AND THE REAL CLASSROOM

A four year‐study of teacher beliefs and conceptions about reading is reported. Teacher beliefs were determined outside the classroom context and while conducting instruction. It was determined that classroom teachers can articulate theories of reading outside the classroom but that their actual instructional practice is governed by a complex set of contextual factors. It is concluded that reading educators must not only teach reading theory but must also help teachers apply theory to the complex instructional context of classrooms.     

GUEST EDITORIAL MBR: RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT

It was hypothesized that paired-comparison judgments of multiple-cue profiles would be a joint function of instruction set,- cue-inconsistency, and individual differences. Thirty-one subjects judged all possible pairs of 22 profiles containing eight cues in an own-control, counterbalanced design. A comparison of instructions providing no attribute for judging similarity with those which did provide an attribute revealed systematic differences with respect to both the number and kind of perceived profile dimensions. However, within each instruction set individual differences emerged with respect to the perceived profile dimensionality which would have been obscured with a group-averaging multidimensional scaling procedure. Further, more individual difference variability was present in the instructional set providing no attribute for judgment. Finally, many subgroups of response-homogeneous judges were found to base their judgments of profile similarity on discrepant cues whereas others did not. The possibility was raised that resolution of inconsistent cues may involve either weighting of one or the other of the cues or utilizing an entirely new cue for judgment.     

COMMENTARY

Salzman's commentary initially examines two theoretical considerations of the genesis of substance abuse. He elaborates on the hypothesis that changes in the family precede abuse and relates it to conceptual similarities with research on schizophrenic families. He points out that the proposed research that focuses on ongoing processes rather than causality also fails to identify factors leading to the selection of symptomatology. The author concludes with comments on his work in the area of psychoactive drugs and group functioning and suggests that the inclusion of the following methodologies in research design might be instructive: (a) the combining of self, group, and experimenter observations; (b) the comparison of family interactional patterns when the drug-abusing member is under chemical influence and when he is not; and (c) informal observations and discussions focused on the family's perception of the research as well as on task performance.