Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory

Abstract

The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory (MTAI), developed by Walter W. Cook, Carroll H. Leeds, and Robert Callis in 1951, stands as one of the most widely utilized and historically influential psychometric instruments designed to measure teacher-pupil interpersonal attitudes and classroom management orientation. Comprising 150 self-report items evaluated on a 5-point Likert-type response continuum (Strongly Agree, Agree, Undecided or Uncertain, Disagree, and Strongly Disagree), the instrument quantifies the degree to which an educator embraces a progressive, child-centered, and democratic philosophy of classroom interaction versus an authoritarian, punitive, and restrictive pedagogical posture. The empirical scoring system yields a net composite score ranging from -150 to +150, reflecting an educator's relative location along an ideological spectrum extending from dogmatic traditionalism to developmental progressivism.

Psychometrically, the MTAI possesses a corrected split-half reliability coefficient of .93 in initial normative cohorts, demonstrating robust internal consistency. Criterion-related validation studies have documented significant correlations with external criteria, including supervisory evaluations by school principals (coefficients ranging from .19 to .46), independent classroom observer ratings (.40 to .59), and pupil satisfaction surveys (.31 to .49). Although originally conceptualized as a unidimensional metric of relational compatibility between educators and pupils, subsequent structural investigations—most notably the seminal exploratory factor analytic study conducted by Albert H. Yee and Benjamin Fruchter (1971)—identified five distinct, highly interpretable dimensions: (1) Children’s irresponsible tendencies and lack of self-control, (2) Conflict between teachers’ and pupils’ interests, (3) Rigidity and severity in handling pupils, (4) Pupils’ independence in learning, and (5) Pupils’ acquiescence to the teacher. The first three dimensions capture authoritarian traditionalism, whereas the latter two embody progressive pedagogical commitments.

Throughout over seven decades of educational and psychological research, the MTAI has illuminated the dynamics of teacher socialization, preservice professional development, the notorious wash-out effect—wherein idealistic progressive attitudes regress toward punitive traditionalism during the induction years—and the affective precursors of classroom learning environments. This comprehensive review examines the theoretical, structural, and applied psychometric properties of the MTAI, establishing its enduring relevance in the study of educator dispositions, pedagogical relationships, and educational measurement.

Keywords

Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory, MTAI, teacher-pupil relationships, classroom management, progressive education, authoritarian pedagogy, educational measurement, teacher socialization, teacher attitudes, psychometrics, pupil-teacher interaction, affective domain

Authors

The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory was developed through a sustained collaborative research program conducted primarily at the University of Minnesota during the late 1940s and early 1950s. The primary investigators and psychometricians responsible for its conception, operationalization, and empirical validation include:

• Walter Wellman Cook, Ph.D. (1899–1963): Professor of Educational Psychology and later Dean of the College of Education at the University of Minnesota. A nationally recognized figure in educational measurement, standardized testing, and student grouping paradigms, Cook served as the senior director of the MTAI research initiatives, guiding the criterion-group validation methodologies and theoretical underpinnings.
• Carroll Henshaw Leeds, Ph.D. (1912–1996): Professor of Psychology and Education at Furman University and former doctoral fellow at the University of Minnesota. Leeds conducted the foundational empirical legwork for the inventory as part of his doctoral dissertation, authoring the initial 378-item pool, directing extensive observational field studies in elementary classrooms, and demonstrating the inventory's predictive power against multi-source external criteria.
• Robert Callis, Ph.D. (1920–2010): Professor of Education and Educational Psychology, and long-time Director of the Testing and Counseling Bureau at the University of Missouri. Callis extended Leeds's original work by refining the psychometric architecture, contributing 21 specialized items to the final 150-item instrument, and conducting extensive longitudinal studies tracking attitudinal drift among teachers during preservice training and early-career professional placement.

Inquiries regarding the historical developmental records and archival test materials are preserved in the institutional collections of the University of Minnesota Archives and the historical publications archive of The Psychological Corporation (now integrated under Pearson Clinical Assessment).

Purpose

The fundamental purpose of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory is to assess and quantify those underlying teacher attitudes, values, and socio-emotional dispositions that govern interpersonal relationships with students and predict how effectively an educator will establish rapport, maintain constructive discipline, and cultivate a psychologically secure classroom environment. In the mid-twentieth century, teacher certification, hiring, and evaluation were dominated by cognitive indicators, academic transcripts, and pedagogical subject-matter examinations. However, educational administrators and developmental psychologists recognized that academic mastery was insufficient to guarantee successful teaching; relational friction, pervasive disciplinary conflict, and emotional alienation between educators and children accounted for a significant proportion of teacher attrition, student disengagement, and classroom dysfunction.

Cook, Leeds, and Callis intended the MTAI to fulfill several critical objectives across educational, clinical, and scientific domains:

• Predictive Pre-Service Screening and Selection: To provide teacher training institutions and school district hiring committees with an objective, empirical instrument capable of identifying candidates possessing interpersonal dispositions congruent with positive student development. The authors posited that individuals scoring high on the inventory would naturally exhibit mutual affection, warmth, respect, and democratic flexibility, whereas low-scoring candidates would drift toward punitive severity, interpersonal distrust, and rigid authoritarianism.
• Diagnostic and Evaluative Supervisory Feedback: To serve as a clinical supervisory tool for instructional coaches, principals, and teacher educators. By examining an educator's pattern of responses across disciplinary control and autonomy-supportive scenarios, supervisors could identify areas of professional vulnerability, such as unexamined hostility toward child non-compliance, over-reliance on coercive control mechanisms, or unrealistic expectations regarding child maturity.
• Empirical Research on Teacher Socialization: To facilitate scientific investigation into how institutional contexts, teacher training curricula, student-teaching practica, and bureaucratic school cultures alter educators' interpersonal orientations. Decades of educational research have employed the MTAI to map the systemic attitudinal shifts that occur when idealistic preservice teachers encounter the behavioral realities and institutional pressures of compulsory schooling.

Theoretically, the scale does not merely assess whether an individual likes children in an abstract, sentimental sense; rather, it operationalizes an integrated system of social perceptions regarding the nature of authority, the developmental competencies of youth, the legitimacy of pupil autonomy, and the emotional equilibrium of the instructor when confronted with non-normative behavior. The rationale maintains that educators who view children as inherently untrustworthy, rebellious, and socially irresponsible will construct an antagonistic classroom ecology grounded in fear, surveillance, and coercive compliance. Conversely, educators who conceptualize student misbehavior as developmental exploration or unmet psychological needs will construct collaborative, democratic environments characterized by mutual respect, shared decision-making, and intrinsic motivation.

Psychological Construct

The primary construct measured by the MTAI is Teacher-Pupil Relational Orientation, anchored on a continuum extending from Authoritarian Traditionalism at the negative extreme to Democratic Progressivism at the positive extreme. This broad construct encompasses both affective and cognitive components of pedagogical interaction. Although the scale was initially scored as a global unidimensional index, psychometric scrutiny has revealed that this construct is fundamentally multidimensional, encompassing five correlated psychological facets:

1. Children’s Irresponsible Tendencies and Lack of Self-Control

This dimension reflects an educator's fundamental attributional framework regarding child behavior. Educators who score high on the traditionalist side of this subscale endorse pessimistic, cynical views of childhood, attributing non-compliance, distraction, and impulsivity to malicious intent, moral deficiency, or innate rebelliousness. They conceptualize the child as an unruly agent who must be continuously monitored, constrained, and externally regulated. Conversely, high-scoring progressive educators view developmental immaturity, fluctuating attention, and emotional outbursts as normative developmental phenomena requiring instructional guidance, empathetic modeling, and contextual restructuring rather than punitive condemnation.

2. Conflict Between Teachers’ and Pupils’ Interests

This subscale captures the degree of adversarial framing that characterizes the teacher's mental representation of the classroom. In an adversarial dynamic, the classroom is perceived as an arena of competing wills: if students enjoy an activity, it must lack academic rigor; if a teacher yields to student interest, authority is compromised. Teachers holding traditionalist attitudes on this factor interpret student requests for autonomy or playful interactions as direct threats to their professional standing and classroom order. Progressive attitudes, in contrast, view student interests and curricular aims as fundamentally compatible, prioritizing collaborative inquiry, project-based tasks, and intrinsic motivational engagement.

3. Rigidity and Severity in Handling Pupils

This dimension assesses the educator's behavioral inclination toward disciplinary absolutism, corporal punishment, punitive retribution, and psychological control. High rigidity is manifested in beliefs that obedience must be immediate, unconditional, and unquestioning, and that infractions must be met with severe, public sanctions to preserve collective deterrent value. Such educators view flexibility or negotiation as signs of weakness. Progressive orientations on this dimension emphasize restorative disciplinary practices, proactive behavioral interventions, private corrective dialogue, and empathetic limit-setting that preserves the student's self-esteem and dignity.

4. Pupils’ Independence in Learning

Representing a core pillar of progressive pedagogy, this dimension measures the educator's willingness to cede didactic control and empower students as autonomous cognitive agents. Educators favoring independence encourage critical inquiry, self-directed exploration, peer collaboration, and experiential discovery. They view pedagogical error not as a failure to be punished, but as an indispensable cognitive stepping-stone toward deeper conceptual mastery. In contrast, low-scoring educators view learning as the passive absorption of predetermined curricula delivered solely via authoritative direct instruction.

5. Pupils’ Acquiescence to the Teacher

This facet evaluates the extent to which an educator demands uncritical deference, passive subordination, and emotional conformity from students. Authoritarian educators equate successful classroom management with silent, compliant uniformity where students speak only when spoken to and accept the teacher's pronouncements as infallible. Progressive educators reject passive acquiescence as antithetical to democratic citizenship, deliberately creating an environment wherein students are encouraged to formulate independent viewpoints, engage in respectful dissent, and participate actively in establishing classroom norms.

Theoretical Framework

The conceptual framework of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory emerged at the confluence of three dominant psychological and educational paradigms of the mid-twentieth century: Progressive Educational Philosophy, Authoritarian Personality Theory, and Lewinian Group Dynamics.

Progressive Education vs. Pedagogical Essentialism

The philosophical foundation of the MTAI is heavily grounded in the educational theories of John Dewey and the subsequent Progressive Education movement. Dewey argued in Democracy and Education (1916) and Experience and Education (1938) that traditional education relied on an arbitrary, top-down imposition of adult standards upon immature minds, creating an artificial separation between the child's natural experiential world and the school curriculum. Dewey advocated for child-centered learning environments where democratic cooperation, scientific inquiry, and mutual social interest guided instructional activity.

Cook and Leeds operationalized Deweyan philosophy by establishing contrast groups of teachers who either embodied progressive, child-centered practices or rigid, subject-centered essentialism (as championed by theorists like William C. Bagley). The MTAI was explicitly formulated to detect whether an educator views the school as an autocracy designed to enforce societal conformity or as an embryonic democratic community designed to foster individual growth and cooperative living.

The Authoritarian Personality and Dynamic Psychopathology

Concurrently, the postwar social sciences were deeply preoccupied with the psychological foundations of authoritarianism, obedience, and prejudice, culminating in the publication of The Authoritarian Personality by Theodor W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel Levinson, and Nevitt Sanford in 1950. The MTAI reflects striking parallels to the California F-Scale (Fascism Scale) developed in that project. Authoritarian dynamics—such as conventionalism, authoritarian submission, authoritarian aggression, anti-intraception, and an obsession with power and toughness—were mirrored in the MTAI's operationalization of the punitive, defensive teacher.

According to Cook and colleagues, teachers who exhibit severe disciplinary attitudes often project their own unresolved psychological insecurities, defensive mechanisms, and latent hostility onto their pupils. The classroom provides a socially sanctioned venue where an authoritarian adult can exercise absolute power over vulnerable individuals, rationalizing cruelty as moral instruction and administrative necessity.

Lewinian Social Climates

The social-psychological experiments of Kurt Lewin, Ronald Lippitt, and Ralph K. White (1939) on democratic, authoritarian, and laissez-faire leadership atmospheres in small groups exerted profound influence on the MTAI's formulation. Lewin and his associates demonstrated empirically that authoritarian leadership provoked either acute rebellion or passive apathy, accompanied by high levels of inter-member hostility, scapegoating, and anxiety. In contrast, democratic leadership fostered sustained intrinsic interest, collaborative productivity, mutual support, and lower social friction. The MTAI operationalizes these social climates from the perspective of teacher attitude, positing that a teacher's implicit philosophy predictably instantiates either an authoritarian or a democratic group atmosphere.

Validity

The validity of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory has been investigated across numerous empirical dimensions, including criterion-related, construct, convergent, and discriminant validity paradigms.

Criterion-Related Validity: Foundational Studies

The initial criterion-related validation program conducted by Carroll H. Leeds (1950, 1952) employed an extensive multi-trait, multi-rater methodology involving elementary classroom teachers:

• Principals' Ratings: Building principals evaluated participating teachers on an independent, multi-item behavioral rating scale measuring teacher-pupil rapport, disciplinary competence, and emotional climate. The observed correlation between MTAI composite scores and principals' ratings was r = .46.
• Expert Observers' Ratings: Trained educational researchers spent substantial unannounced observational time inside the classrooms of participating teachers, scoring instructional interactions using standardized observational rubrics without prior knowledge of the teachers' MTAI scores. The correlation between MTAI scores and objective observer ratings reached r = .59, indicating robust criterion association with real-world classroom behavioral dynamics.
• Pupils' Ratings: An innovative feature of Leeds's validation design was the collection of direct pupil ratings via a standardized 50-item questionnaire (the My Teacher inventory) administered to students in grades 4 through 6. The correlation between teacher MTAI scores and their students' affective evaluations was r = .31. When composite criterion indices combining principal, observer, and student ratings were constructed, the predictive correlation with the MTAI rose to r = .60.

In a subsequent extensive replication study conducted by Robert Callis (1953) with an independent sample of classroom practitioners, the correlations demonstrated consistent, though variable, alignment across raters:

• Correlation with School Principals' Evaluations: r = .19
• Correlation with Trained Outside Observers: r = .40
• Correlation with Direct Student Evaluative Ratings: r = .49

The elevated correlation observed with student ratings in Callis's cohort reinforces the psychometric principle that the ultimate consumers of pedagogical attitudes—the students themselves—are sensitive observers of classroom relational climate, frequently detecting emotional undercurrents that formal supervisory walkthroughs miss.

Construct, Convergent, and Discriminant Validity

Substantial empirical research has supported the MTAI's construct validity through cross-sectional group comparisons and convergent testing against allied psychological constructs:

• Academic and Instructional Specialization: Empirical studies consistently reveal that elementary education candidates score significantly higher on the MTAI than secondary education candidates. Within secondary specializations, humanities and fine arts educators regularly outscore math and natural science educators. These empirical findings align precisely with theoretical predictions regarding student-centered versus subject-centered pedagogical orientations.
• Convergent Validity with Personality Metrics: Researchers have documented significant negative correlations between the MTAI and scales measuring dogmatism (Rokeach's Dogmatism Scale) and authoritarianism (California F-Scale), typically ranging from r = -.35 to r = -.52. Conversely, the MTAI correlates positively with measures of emotional empathy, interpersonal sensitivity, and cognitive flexibility.
• Susceptibility to Social Desirability and Faking: A significant body of research (e.g., Rabinowitz, 1954; Callis, 1950) examined the degree to which the MTAI could be deliberately faked by respondents seeking to appear progressive. Under explicit experimental instructions to fake good, subjects can elevate their scores by approximately one standard deviation. However, under standard, standardized administrative conditions where anonymity or neutral instructional conditions prevail, social desirability response bias accounts for a modest proportion of variance, preserving criterion predictive utility.

Reliability

The reliability of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory has been evaluated across internal consistency metrics, test-retest longitudinal intervals, and across distinct populations ranging from undergraduate education majors to experienced career educators.

Internal Consistency

In the original normative and validation investigations directed by Cook, Leeds, and Callis (1951), the reliability of the 150-item scale was established utilizing the split-half methodology (correlating odd-numbered items against even-numbered items). The resulting correlation coefficient, corrected for test length using the Spearman-Brown prophecy formula, yielded an internal consistency estimate of r = .93. Subsequent investigations utilizing Kuder-Richardson Formula 20 (KR-20) and Cronbach's alpha across varied teacher cohorts have reported internal consistency coefficients reliably falling within the .88 to .94 range, demonstrating high item homogeneity and measurement precision across the total composite scale.

Test-Retest Stability and the Wash-Out Phenomenon

Short-term test-retest reliability across intervals of one to four weeks among undergraduate students has demonstrated stability coefficients ranging from r = .85 to .91, confirming that the inventory possesses high short-term stability when educational contexts remain invariant.

However, when evaluated longitudinally across pivotal career transition points, MTAI scores exhibit profound systemic fluctuations. Callis (1950), Day (1959), and later Yee (1970) tracked teacher education candidates from the commencement of their coursework, through student teaching practica, and into their initial years of full-time professional service. These longitudinal studies revealed a recurring developmental trajectory:

1. The Preservice Ascent: MTAI scores consistently rise during collegiate teacher preparation coursework, reflecting the assimilation of progressive educational ideals, developmental psychology, and student-centered pedagogical theory.
2. The Student Teaching Decline: Upon entering clinical student teaching, scores begin a statistically significant downward drift as preservice candidates encounter real-world classroom management demands and institutional pressures.
3. The Induction Wash-Out: During the first year of regular, autonomous classroom teaching, teachers experience a marked drop in MTAI scores, often descending below their baseline scores recorded prior to entering teacher training. This empirical shift toward traditionalist, punitive, and defensive attitudes is driven by reality shock, bureaucratic socialization, teacher burnout, and the immediate imperative to establish behavioral control within crowded, under-resourced institutional settings.

Consequently, the MTAI possesses high psychometric stability across static conditions, while remaining acutely sensitive to contextual, occupational, and environmental transitions.

Factor Analysis

Although the MTAI was constructed as a unidimensional instrument scored via an empirical key derived from contrast groups, researchers soon questioned whether a single global score could capture the psychological complexities of teacher-student interactions. The definitive empirical investigation of the inventory's latent structure was executed by Albert H. Yee and Benjamin Fruchter (1971).

The Yee and Fruchter (1971) Investigation

Yee and Fruchter conducted an exploratory factor analysis on the full 150-item MTAI administered to a sample of elementary and secondary school educators. The correlation matrix was subjected to principal components extraction followed by an orthogonal varimax rotation. Applying an item-retention threshold requiring factor loadings of λ ≥ .42, Yee and Fruchter identified five interpretable factors comprising 60 highly discriminating items:

Yee and Fruchter observed that the first three factors—accounting for 47 items out of the 60 retained items—cluster tightly around traditional, defensive, and punitive perspectives regarding student regulation. Factors IV and V reflect progressive educational philosophies emphasizing pupil self-determination, cognitive independence, and egalitarian teacher-pupil relationships. This structural analysis proved that the MTAI was not a pure unidimensional scale, but rather a structurally complex psychometric instrument wherein traditionalist attitudes dominate the variance, while progressive commitments provide a distinct secondary dimension.

Instrument / Measurement Tool

The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory is standardized as an omnibus self-administered questionnaire. Its structural, administrative, and evaluative characteristics are summarized below:

• Test Classification: Psychological self-report inventory / Non-cognitive affective assessment
• Primary Target Population: Preservice teacher candidates, practicing K-12 educators, educational administrators, and instructional specialists across elementary and secondary school environments
• Administration Modality: Paper-and-pencil or computer-administered questionnaire; group or individual administration
• Estimated Administration Time: Approximately 20 to 30 minutes (un-timed format; respondents are instructed to work rapidly without lingering excessively on individual statements)
• Total Item Count: 150 items (129 authored by Leeds; 21 authored by Callis)
• Response Scale Anchors: 5-point Likert-type continuum:
  • Strongly Agree
  • Agree
  • Undecided or Uncertain
  • Disagree
  • Strongly Disagree
• Scoring Methodologies:
  • Standard Empirical Scoring (Cook et al., 1951): Items were calibrated against the responses of the original contrast groups (teachers independently identified as superior versus inferior). An item response that differentiated in favor of the superior group is assigned a weight of +1; an item response that differentiated in favor of the inferior group is assigned a weight of -1; and non-differentiating or omitted responses receive a weight of 0. Consequently, theoretical composite raw scores range continuously from -150 (extreme authoritarian traditionalism) to +150 (extreme progressive student-centeredness).
  • Symmetric Likert Scoring (Yee & Kriewall, 1969): In research contexts seeking uniform parametric properties without complex differential empirical keys, items are scored symmetrically from +2, +1, 0, -1, to -2 according to progressive directionality.
• Score Interpretation Guidelines:
  • High Positive Scores (+60 to +150): Reflect warm, flexible, democratic attitudes toward children, collaborative conflict resolution, emotional resilience in the face of disruptive behavior, and a commitment to nurturing student autonomy.
  • Intermediate Scores (-20 to +59): Indicate a moderate balance between instructional authority and student freedom, or inconsistent attitudes across different classroom management challenges.
  • Low Negative Scores (-150 to -21): Indicate rigid, authoritarian classroom management attitudes, high personal defensiveness, an expectation of unquestioning obedience, and a propensity toward punitive disciplinary methods.

Permissions & Fee and Test Year

The Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory was officially published and copyrighted in 1951 by The Psychological Corporation (555 Academic Court, San Antonio, TX 78204-2498; now a business unit of Pearson PLC under Pearson Clinical Assessment). Historically, test booklets, hand-scoring stencils, and interpretive manuals were commercially distributed to colleges of education, school districts, and university researchers under formal purchase agreements.

Because the original 1951 edition remains under copyright management, the reproduction of the full 150-item instrument for commercial testing, mass digital dissemination, or large-scale clinical administration requires written permission or appropriate licensing from the copyright holder. In non-commercial university research settings, academic scholars have frequently utilized the instrument or its validated 60-item factorial subsets under fair-use research exemptions and standard scholarly protocol, citing original publication sources. Researchers seeking official test kits, normative percentile conversions, or institutional permissions should contact the licensing division of Pearson Clinical Assessment.

References

• Adorno, T. W., Frenkel-Brunswik, E., Levinson, D. J., & Sanford, R. N. (1950). The Authoritarian Personality. Harper & Row.
• Callis, R. (1950). Change in teacher-pupil attitudes related to training and experience. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 10(4), 718–727. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316445001000414
• Callis, R. (1953). The efficiency of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory for predicting interpersonal relations in the classroom. The Journal of Applied Psychology, 37(2), 82–85. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0058988
• Cook, W. W., Leeds, C. H., & Callis, R. (1951). Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory: Manual. The Psychological Corporation.
• Day, H. P. (1959). A study of predictive validity of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. The Journal of Educational Research, 53(1), 37–38. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1959.10882604
• Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education. Macmillan.
• Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and Education. Kappa Delta Pi.
• Ferguson, J. L., Brown, K. B., & Callis, R. (1954). Factor analysis of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. The Journal of Experimental Education, 23(1), 89–92. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220973.1954.11010502
• Johnson, W. A. (1983). Personality correlates of preferences for preprofessional training by special education and regular class trainees. Education, 103(4), 360–368.
• Leeds, C. H. (1950). A scale for measuring teacher-pupil attitudes and its value in teachers' selection. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 64(6), 1–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0093635
• Leeds, C. H. (1952). A second validity study of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. The Elementary School Journal, 52(7), 398–405. https://doi.org/10.1086/459384
• Lewin, K., Lippitt, R., & White, R. K. (1939). Patterns of aggressive behavior in experimentally created social climates. The Journal of Social Psychology, 10(2), 269–299. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224545.1939.9713366
• Rabinowitz, W. (1954). The faking of teacher attitudes. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 14(4), 656–664. https://doi.org/10.1177/001316445401400408
• Yee, A. H. (1970). Do principals' interpersonal attitudes agree with those of teachers and pupils? Educational Administration Quarterly, 6(2), 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1177/0013161X7000600202
• Yee, A. H., & Fruchter, B. (1971). Factor content of the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. American Educational Research Journal, 8(1), 119–133. https://doi.org/10.3102/00028312008001119
• Yee, A. H., & Kriewall, T. (1969). A new approach to scoring the Minnesota Teacher Attitude Inventory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 6(4), 261–266. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1969.tb00684.x

13. Items of the Scale (Questionnaire)