Based on the hypothesis that certain elementary texts generally assign negative unrealistic, and tertiary roles to technical-vocational work modes, the study indicated that quantitative and qualitative bias in favor of professional work modes does exist in elementary reading textbooks. Jobs occupying positions of less status, i.e., technical-vocational and unskilled, are mentioned (1) less frequently, (2) less realistically, (3) less positively, and (4) less emphatically than professional and paraprofessional work modes. When the comparisons were made by publisher and grade level, it was discovered that the same kind of bias existed in some grade levels and with some publishers. Each textbook was analyzed in terms of (1) quantitative bias--frequency of reference made to each work mode--and (2) qualitative bias--a contextual evaluation of each reference to a work mode. The basic instrument employed in the study was the Hollingshead "Two Factor Index of Social Position," employing seven different groupings of occupations in a continuum of low-to-high status. The analytical methodologies employed in this study were chi-square, goodness of fit, and contingency analysis. The body of the text is made up of tables substantiating the research findings. (MW)