Results indicated significant differences between the verbal interaction patterns of classes where the teacher had training in interaction process analysis, and the classes where the teacher had no such training. The trained teachers explained more, gave fewer directions, accepted more pupil ideas, and rejected fewer behaviors. Pupils in the classes with the trained teachers responded with more broad answers and initiated more talk to other pupils. The classes of trained teachers had more short silences and less confusion than the classes of untrained teachers. There were no significant differences between the teachers regarding characteristic behaviors, and only one area of the pupil attitude inventory was significantly different for the two groups. Pupils in classes with teachers not trained in interaction process analysis perceived their classes to be less competitive than did the pupils in classes with teachers who were trained. The verbal behaviors of the former Professional Semester II teachers and their pupils were found to be similar to those of teachers and pupils reported in previous studies.

Data collected included a systematic analysis of the verbal behaviors of teachers and pupils in a live observation using the Verbal Interaction Category System. Each teacher completed the Fundamental Interpersonal Relationships Orientation - Behavior, and all pupils completed the My Class Inventory.

The design of this investigation was to compare verbal interaction behaviors in classrooms where teachers had preservice training in interaction process analysis in Professional Semester II with those of teachers who had no preservice training in interaction process analysis. The intent of this investigation was to describe and compare (1) verbal interaction behavior patterns present, (2) pupil classroom attitudes, and (3) characteristic teacher behaviors.

The sample for this study was a group of six teachers who had training in interaction process analysis in Professional Semester II at the University of Oklahoma, compared to a group of six teachers who had no such training. Consideration in matching was given to number of years of experience, teaching assignment, age, sex, and grade point average.