Martinek, T. J., & Karper, W. B. (1983). A 
research model for determining causal 
effects of teacher expectations in 
physical education instruction. Quest, 
35(2), 155-168. 
Renee Brown 
Adam Keath
Description of a Research Prototype 
• Self fulfilling prophecy research 
– Previous research has been descriptive/correlational 
in nature, only showing that teacher expectations do 
exist and often add variability to student outcomes. 
• Causal Connections 
– Establish causal connections in expectation research 
– Help identify effective teaching strategies to 
counteract negative outcomes from teacher 
expectancy
Significance? 
• The Causal Model 
– Development of a model to determine the effects 
of expectation in physical education 
– Builds upon proposed models by Rosenshine and 
Furst (1973) and Kerman (1979)
Three Step Model 
• Step 1: “Determine, descriptively, why teachers form 
expectations about their students and how these 
expectations may affect teacher-student interactions and 
student growth.” (Martinek & Karper,1983, pp 156) 
• Step 2: Teachers in one group receive in service training 
based on results of descriptive expectations. While a 
second group of teachers (control) receive no intervention. 
• Step 3: Determine causal relationships and compare 
findings to see if how expectations and outcomes align for 
the two groups.
Analysis Methods 
• Primary concern: What is the best method of 
answering the research question with simple 
clarity. 
• Quantitative or Qualitative: 
– Teacher 
– Student outcome data 
– Teacher expectations
Main Argument 
• There is a relationship between teacher expectation 
and student outcome. 
• There is not enough descriptive research to identify the 
cause of this relationship. 
• Develop a research model to provide more definitive 
information on the link between cause and effect of 
teacher expectancy research.
Draft Picks 
A B C D E 
F G H I J
Questions? 
• How did the information on this article affect 
your attitude during the activity?
Takeaways 
• Renee 
• Adam

Pet 735 presentation article 1f martinek

  • 1.
    Martinek, T. J.,& Karper, W. B. (1983). A research model for determining causal effects of teacher expectations in physical education instruction. Quest, 35(2), 155-168. Renee Brown Adam Keath
  • 2.
    Description of aResearch Prototype • Self fulfilling prophecy research – Previous research has been descriptive/correlational in nature, only showing that teacher expectations do exist and often add variability to student outcomes. • Causal Connections – Establish causal connections in expectation research – Help identify effective teaching strategies to counteract negative outcomes from teacher expectancy
  • 3.
    Significance? • TheCausal Model – Development of a model to determine the effects of expectation in physical education – Builds upon proposed models by Rosenshine and Furst (1973) and Kerman (1979)
  • 4.
    Three Step Model • Step 1: “Determine, descriptively, why teachers form expectations about their students and how these expectations may affect teacher-student interactions and student growth.” (Martinek & Karper,1983, pp 156) • Step 2: Teachers in one group receive in service training based on results of descriptive expectations. While a second group of teachers (control) receive no intervention. • Step 3: Determine causal relationships and compare findings to see if how expectations and outcomes align for the two groups.
  • 5.
    Analysis Methods •Primary concern: What is the best method of answering the research question with simple clarity. • Quantitative or Qualitative: – Teacher – Student outcome data – Teacher expectations
  • 6.
    Main Argument •There is a relationship between teacher expectation and student outcome. • There is not enough descriptive research to identify the cause of this relationship. • Develop a research model to provide more definitive information on the link between cause and effect of teacher expectancy research.
  • 7.
    Draft Picks AB C D E F G H I J
  • 8.
    Questions? • Howdid the information on this article affect your attitude during the activity?
  • 9.