SOCIAL MOBILITY THROUGH MARRIAGE - . 3 ' - OF YOUNG. WOMEN FROM A ‘ . . Thesis for the Degree of M. A.. MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY PHILIP NEAL FULTON 1972 IIIIIIIIIIIII ,3 *7 ‘IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII'IIIIIIIIII I ,_ ' 3 1293 20127 0315 . Michigan State University ABSTRACT SOCIAL MOBILITY THROUGH MARRIAGE OF YOUNG WOMEN FROM A RURAL COMMUNITY BY Philip Neal Fulton This thesis is concerned with the question of why some young women from rural communities are socially mobile through marriage while others are not. A survey of the literature reveals that access to advantageous social contact settings seems to be of fundamental importance in marriage mobility. Personal attributes and abilities appear to faciliate such access and influence success in the marriage market once the necessary contact setting is attained. The current study examines some of the characteristics of the young rural women who are socially mobile through mar- riage (MOBILES), as opposed to those who are not (NONMOBILES). It is hypothesized that MOBILES, as Opposed to NONMOBILES, will: 1) exhibit a higher incidence of migration, be more likely to move to large urban areas and remain there for a longer period of time; 2) exhibit higher intelligence; 3) exhibit higher academic achievement in high school, more college attendance, and higher overall educational attainment; Philip Neal Fulton 4) exhibit higher occupational attainment; 5) exhibit higher future status aspirations; and 6) be more likely to receive parental advice which is favorably oriented toward leaving the home community for career purposes. The data utilized derive from a female subsample of a sample of young people from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. The subjects were first studied while they were still enrolled in high school and then re-studied ten years later after being tracked during the decade. The results generally support the hypotheses with three notable exceptions. Contrary to expections, more NONMOBILES migrated initially to large urban centers. However, a greater proportion of MOBILES resided in large cities at the end of the post high school decade. Also contrary to expectations, NONMOBILES exhibited significantly higher intelligence and a higher level of high school academic achievement than did MOBILES. It was observed that these findings may indicate the importance of factors more closely related to motivation, such as status aspiration and parental influence, which lead to a greater awareness of paths to mobility chances. SOCIAL MOBILITY THROUGH MARRIAGE OF YOUNG WOMEN FROM A RURAL COMMUNITY BY Philip Neal Fulton A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF ARTS Department of Sociology 1972 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my sincere appreciation to a number of individuals who made the completion of this thesis possible. Professor J. Allan Beegle, my committee chairman, gave invaluable advice, encouragement, and support which was fundamental to the research effort presented here. Thanks also go to Dr. James J. Zuiches and Dr. Harry Perlstadt who, as members of my Guidance Committee, contributed their criti— cal examination of the thesis. Special thanks and gratitude is due to Dr. Jon H. Rieger, whose personal and professional attention in terms of time, patience, and tutelage during the course of this undertaking is deeply appreciated. ii CHAPTER I. II. III. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES O O O O O O I I C C C I O I O . Q THE RESEARCH PROBLEM. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Mobility Through Marriage . . . . . . Review of Literature . . . . . . . . . . . . Homogamy Versus Hypergamy . . . . . . . Measuring Social Mobility Through Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Social Contact Setting. . . . . . . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Research Problem. . . . . . Statements of the Hypotheses . . . . . . . . THE METHOD OF THE STUDY . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . The Ontonagon County Project, 1957- 1968. . . The Research Site . . . . . . . . . . . . The Research Sample . . . . . . . . . . . Operationalization of the Variables . . . Method of Analysis. . . . . . . . . . Operational Statements of the Hypotheses. RESULTS OF THE STUDY 0 O O O O O I O O I C O O 0 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Social Mobility Through Marriage . . . . . . Migration. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Initial Act of Migration. . . . . . . Size of Community of Initial Migration Destination. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Size of Community of Current Residence. . Intelligence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Educational Experience . . . . . . . . . . . iii Page 26 26 26 27 28 29 33 33 36 36 36 37 37 39 40 42 43 TABLE OF CONTENTS--Continued CHAPTER High School Academic Achievement. . . . College Attendance. . . . . . Overall Educational Attainment. . . . . Occupational Attainment. . . . . Status Aspiration. . . . . . . . Ideal Occupation. . . . . . . Qualities Desired in a Lifetime Job . . Parental Career Preferences. . . Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . IV. CONCLUSION. . . . . . . . . . . . . Introduction . . . . . . . . . . Social Mobility Through Marriage Women From Rural Areas. . . . Significance of the Findings . . BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPENDICES A. MAY 1957 INITIAL PHASE OF VOLUNTARY QUESTIONNAIRE. . . . . . . . . . of Young MIGRATION B. 1968 FIRST DECENNIAL RE-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE . iv Page 43 44 45 46 47 47 48 50 52 54 54 54 56 58 62 85 TABLE LIST OF TABLES Social Mobility Through Marriage by End of Post High School Decade (PHSD); Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors. . . Migration Status Subsequent to High School Grade uation; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . Percent Mobile Through Marriage, by Migration Behavior and Marriage Date; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors; N = 92 O O O O O O 0 O O O I O I O O O O C Q I C Size of Community of Initial Migration Destina— tion; Migrant Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage . . . . . . Size of Community of Residence at End of PHSD; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Non— mobile Through Marriage and Who Migrated . . . . Mean IQ Score During High School; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage . . .'. . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean High School Graduation Rank Percentile Score; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage . . . . . . . . . . . College Attendance of Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage. . Page 37 38 39 4O 41 42 43 LIST OF TABLES--Continued TABLE 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. Overall Educational Attainment; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Mean Highest Socioeconomic Status During Post High School Decade; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage . Mean Socioeconomic Status of Ideal Occupation; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage. . . . . . . . . . . Perceived Ideal Qualities in a Lifetime Occupa— tion; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage. . . . . . . . . . . Parental Career Preferences for the Period Sub- sequent to High School; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nommobile Through Marriage . vi Page 46 48 49 CHAPTER I THE RESEARCH PROBLEM Introduction Although social mobility is not to the point of being a cultural norm, young people growing up in contemporary American society are faced with the pressure of many upward mobility models which help determine their desire to improve their self-evaluations (Lipset and Bendix, 1960, p. 61). Parents often attempt to influence career decisions, the school system instills the value of education as a tool for advance- ment, and the entertainment media constantly besiege young people with the temptations of material possessions that accompany "success." Men are expected to achieve status through occupational attainment, but women have failed to achieve full equality in the employment market. This inequality may be attributed to a number of factors. Child-bearing is a severe handicap in competing for rewarding jobs. In fact, responsibilities placed upon the wife in the traditional family severely limit career chances. Regardless of marriage, ambitious women typically have been limited to a narrow choice of occupations such as clerical, teaching, nursing, and low-status white- collar positions. Because of these factors which often frustrate aspira- tions for occupational achievement, many girls realize that ". . . there is a much less risky and much more promising route to rewards. . . ." They ". . . stOp striving for success in the world of economics and politics, and compete instead in the marriage market and the world of the family." (Lenski, 1966, p. 405) As Goode explains: In a free market system such as our own, where the woman does not typically rise in social position through her occupation, she must seek a mobile husband if she wishes to be mobile herself. (1966, p. 593) In regard to competition for a mate, Lenski states that: DeSpite the fact that modern femininists are often critical Of this choice, they cannot ridicule it. It Offers almost as many Opportunities for attaining rewards as competition in the man's world, and the probabilities Of success are far, far greater. By an advantageous marriage, a woman may obtain half inter— est in a very substantial income, entree to exclusive circles, and leisure to do most of the things she wishes. Even a woman whose marriage is less successful by economic standards is usually provided with a measure Of economic security and, after the child-rearing years, considerable leisure. . . . Judging from the relative lack of interest shown in careers which must be pursued at the expense of marriage, it appears that the attrac- tions Of marriage more than match those Of careers, in the estimation of most women. (1966), pp. 405-406) Competition for a promising mate seems to be especially difficult for girls from rural communities. It is a well- known fact that the Opportunity structures of such communi- ties are Often severely limited for young people. Furthermore, most boys who aspire to socioeconomic advancement leave the local community to Obtain a college education or to seek the greater occupational possibilities which a city or metropolitan area offers. In addition, those young men who do not aspire to go to college, including those who migrate for reasons of employment, are frequently called upon for military service very soon after high school graduation. Thus the pool of eligible males in rural communities would appear to be quite small, and it is doubtful that those who remain there could provide much mobility potential for their spouses. The purpose of this thesis is to examine some aspects of the marriage experience of girls from a rural community subse- quent to high school graduation. The Objective is to discern how, faced with limited resources, some of these young women achieve social mobility through marriage while others remain virtually nonmobile. Particular consideration will be given to those factors which contribute most significantly to success in the marriage market. Social Mobility Through Marriage The predominant pattern of homogamy--"like marries like"—- is found in all societies (Goode, 1966). For example, Hollingshead (1949) found that of 90 young people who married in "Elmtown," 79, or 87.8%, of the Spouses belonged to the same social class. He discovered that socio-cultural factors other than "love" Often limited marital choices to persons in the same stratum. Such factors were typically folk rules Of I'equals should marry," "it's better that way," or "they won't have to fight their families." Nevertheless, that women marry up has long been assumed by sociologists concerned with intergenerational social mobility. In an early article Popenoe (1937) described the mating gradient as the "widespread tendency Of women to seek to marry above their own level." (p. 739) Anderson (1938) noted that although endogamy varies in intensity at different levels of class, hypergamy is quite common. Burchinal states that: The bulk of the data support the generalization that when status heterogamy occurs, men tend to marry down and women tend to marry up--a phenomenon known as the mating gradient. (1964, p. 654) Similarly, Zelditch states that: The available data suggest that hypergamy is more common than hypogamy--that is, females tend to marry males of higher social rank more Often than males tend to marry females of higher social rank. (1964, p. 688) Since a man's esteem is typically based upon his occupation, he can marry downward without losing prestige. This gives men a wider mate choice and forces women to be more selective in weighing the characteristics of a potential spouse. A girl's personal attributes would seem to be of crucial importance in attracting a promising mate. However, if attrac— tive mates are not available in the local area, as we have suggested, such attributes are Of no potential mobility value. Therefore, it appears that perhaps other factors may be more basic to success in the marriage market for young women from rural areas. In the next section we shall discuss some of the research literature which deals with this tOpic area and which bears on some of the questions that arise in connection with the analy- sis Of social mobility of women through marriage. Review of Literature Homogamy Versus Hypergamy Research dealing with social mobility through marriage has typically centered on the question of whether the hypergamy hypothesis (women tend to marry up) is valid even though homogamy (women tend to marry at their own level) seems to be the rule. Rubin (1968) provides an excellent summarization Of a number Of studies concerning both theories. Those studies suggesting that women do indeed marry up include Centers (1949), Hollingshead (1950), Sundal and McCormick (1951), Coombs and Kenkel (1966), and Kephart (1967). Laumann (1966) and Rubin (1968) are cited in support Of homogamy. Centers (1949) examined a national cross-section of adult white males who were married. Farmers and men married to farmers' daughters were excluded from the sample because respondents commonly did not supply enough information to sep- arate farm owners from farm laborers. In a comparison Of the sample members' occupations with those of their wives' fathers, females tended to be married to males of their own (father's) occupational stratum more commonly than to males of any other single level. However, Centers also found that the lower the occupa- tional level Of the female, marriage to a person from her own or a contiguous stratum was less predominant. In general, it was discovered that more females than males married up as opposed to marrying at their own level or down. Sixty-three percent of the females whose fathers had unskilled occupations, 49% with fathers who were semiskilled, and 48% of those fe- males with fathers who were skilled manual laborers married up. In contrast, only 24% with white-collar fathers, 24% whose fathers were small businessmen, and 20% of the females whose fathers were professionals married up. Hollingshead (1950) used marriage license data from New Haven, Connecticut during 1948 to indirectly locate newly married couples through parents and neighbors. A random sample of the couples was interviewed in 1949. One thousand eight marriages where the husband, wife, and both parental families were d3 fagtg residents of New Haven were examined to compare class origins of both spouses. Hollingshead measured social class by the residential area in which the spouses lived before marriage. Partners were found to have come from the same social class in 58.2% of the marriages. Nevertheless, it was also discovered that "when class lines were crossed the man selected a woman from a lower class far more frequently than was true for women.“ (p. 626) However, Rubin (1968) is very critical Of this conclusion and claims that it is Of doubtful significance. He notes that although 23% Of the men in the sample married down, 19% married up. Furthermore, Rubin feels that particular examples of hypergamy in which four men from the highest class (Class I) married women from Class V and VI (the lowest class), as Opposed to the fact that no Class I women married a man from any class lower than Class III, were based on too few cases to be convincing. Sundal and McCormick (1951) attempted to identify each Madison, Wisconsin resident who married during three twelve- month periods Spaced about three years apart. The periods selected were calendar 1937, a comparatively prosperous pre- war year; the final six months Of 1940 and the first six months Of 1941, a national defense period; and 1943, a war year. Comparison was made between the brides' occupations and their husbands' occupations. The researchers anticipated that wartime influences might lead to some loosening of usual status barriers in mate choice. Comparison among these periods failed to reveal such a tendency, however. They found relative stability in pat- terns Of assortative mating by occupational group. In this sample there was a high correlation between occupations Of groom and bride, groom and bride's father, and the fathers of the two spouses. Yet, Sundal and McCormick noted that "about one in every three young women who married sons of professional and busi- nessmen were daughters Of skilled, semiskilled, or unskilled manual workers. . . .' (1951, p. 44) Rubin (1968) Objects to the use Of this study in support of the hypergamy hypothe- sis On the grounds that a girl's own occupation is not a valid indication Of the social status which she carries into marriage. Using a unique situation, Coombs and Kenkel (1966) studied the dating aspirations and satisfaction Of partners selected by a computer. Seven hundred thirty-four persons (368 males and 366 females) completed an original question- naire and at least one of two follow-up questionnaires. They found that girls tended tO exhibit higher aspirations for their dating partner than did men by specifying desired quali— ties which were more in keeping with high social approval. For instance, 83.6% of the girls expressed a preference that their date be above average scholastically as opposed to 74.4% Of the males. Although campus status did not seem to be of great importance, 16.5% of the girls compared to 5.5% Of the men preferred their date to be above average in this charac- teristic. In contrast with these high status areas, only 6.6% Of the girls said that physical attractiveness was very important compared to 21.5% for the men. In fact, 23.5% Of the girls felt that physical attractiveness was unimportant while only 8.6% Of the men agreed. Coombs and Kenkel concluded that the results were in line with their belief that women view dating partners in the broader social context of marriage and tend to be more Objective in their experience than do men. This conclusion was validated when the subjects were asked about romantic at- traction for their dates. Over 51.6% of the girls compared to 37.8% of the men said they felt "absolutely no romantic attraction at all," while 7.4% Of the girls and 18.6% Of the men expressed strong romantic attraction. Kephart (1967) analyzed questionnaire responses of 1,079 white college students to determine differences in the romantic orientation Of males and females. He found that the number Of romantic experiences of females decreased with age as they approached marriage and the monogamistic ideal of one man, one woman. The exact Opposite was discovered to be true for men. Therefore, Kephart concluded that females' romantic inclination is more adaptive and directive than that of men as marriage selection becomes more important. Interestingly enough, when the students were asked if they would marry a person who had all the qualities they desired even if they were not in love with that person, only 24% of the women ver- sus 65% of the men answered no," and 72% of the women com— pared tO 24% Of the men were undecided. In a study related to the hypergamy question, Strauss (1946) examined a sample of 373 engaged or recently married subjects. When the male sample members were asked which traits different from their ideal would eliminate a prospective mate from consideration, 33.5% listed different educational 10 status from their own, but only 27.8% listed different social background and 23.1% listed different economic status. Roth and Peck (1951) found that marital adjustment was better when the husband was one or more social classes higher than the wife at marriage than if the wife was one or more social clas- ses above the husband. Of the marriages they examined, adjustment in 35.3% Of the former type was discovered to be good compared to 27.7% in the latter. Nearly 32% of the marriages in the former group exhibited poor adjustment as opposed to 41.5% in the latter group. All Of the foregoing studies have found some support for the hypergamy hypothesis, i.e., that women do indeed advance up the social ladder through marriage. Although their number is less substantial, several studies have shown no indication of hypergamy and tend to support the concept of homogamy (marrying within own stratum). In a study of stratification in Cambridge and Belmont, Massachusetts, Laumann (1966) cross- tabulated the occupational status of the father and the father-in-law Of each subject. The father-in-law's status was measured at the time Of the respondent's marriage, and the father's status was estimated during the time the respondent was growing up. Laumann found a strong tendency in the sample to marry within the same occupational stratum. Men exhibited a slight tendency to marry down (hypogamy), but the evidence was weak and not statistically significant. The data gave a relatively balanced picture of upward and downward marriage ll mobility as Opposed to that Of Centers (1949) who found evidence that more higher-level persons married down than up, and more lower-level persons married up than down. Earlier research by Hunt (1940) also suggested occupa- tional class endogamy. Data from marriages occurring in Norwood, Massachusetts (population 15,000) between 1923 and 1937 was used to estimate the extent of movement through marriage. Farm marriages were excluded from consideration, and the occupation Of the wife, if she had one, was compared to that of the husband. The study found that males and females had, for the most part, married individuals Of the same status more frequently than individuals of any other particular status. Rubin (1968) examined data Obtained from a clustered sample of American men in the Current Population Survey of 1962. Cross-tabulations were made Of the husbands' fathers' occupations and their wives' fathers' occupations as of the time both spouses were 16 years Old. Occupations were scored on the Duncan socioeconomic index. Using a weighted hypergamy index (to take into account the supply Of persons marrying across class lines) Rubin concluded that ". . . any overall tendency toward hypergamy or hypogamy in the United States is negligible." (1968, p. 758) However, he found that farmers' daughters tended to marry up to white—collar workers' sons more Often than farm— ers' sons marry up to white—collar workers' daughters. 12 He also found that hypergamy was predominant among marriages between farmers' children and the children of professionals and upper-blue-collar workers. Rubin's study has the advantage of a national sample, yet it does not completely dispel the possibility of hyper- gamy being present in the social class structure, although there may admittedly be no overall tendency toward this pat- tern. The study also suggests that girls from rural areas are more likely than others to be upwardly mobile through marriage. We shall shed some further light on this possibil- ity in ensuing sections of the current research. Measuring Social Mobility Through Marriage Some disagreement is found in the literature with respect to how mobility through marriage is best determined. Centers (1949) compared the husband's occupation with that of the wive's father in order to give every wife a position whether she worked or not. Hollingshead (1950) measured social class by the residential area in which the spouses lived before marriage. Hunt (l940)‘and Sundal and McCormick (1951) com- pared the bride's status based On her own occupation with that Of her husband. Rubin (1968) compared the occupational status of the fathers Of the husband and wife when the latter were approxi- mately 16 years Old. Occupations were compared in terms of their Duncan socioeconomic index scores. In critical contrast, .- 1n ’U II *1- L) hi 1“- 13 Elder (1969) claims that such methodology excludes informa- tion important to understanding mobility in a complex society, such as the relative intergenerational mobility of each spouse. Like Centers, he compared the girls' fathers' socio- economic status tO the husbands' socioeconomic status because he felt that qualities which ambitious women look for in prospective mates include those which promise future achieve- ments. Comparing social class positions based upon residential area may have the least validity in respect to the effort to determine socioeconomic status. Basing the bride's status on her own occupation may also be questionable because of the limitations females face in the employment market and because some Of them have not been in the labor force. Elder's criticism of Rubin's methodology seems justified. Discounting the mobility potential of the husband by using his father's status score as a base results in a loss of valu- able data about the husband's occupational experience and factors related to it. Marriage usually occurs during what Miller and Form (1964) call the "trial period" in the lifework pattern. This is a ". . . period of job transition beginning when the worker seeks his first full—time work position and continuing until he has secured a work position in which he remains more or less permanently." (p. 542) Thus a high status male may be downwardly mobile if he does not achieve. . 1 the education or experience required to maintain himself at his l4 father's socioeconomic level, while a lower status male may be upwardly mobile from his father through superior education or job Opportunities. Therefore, comparing the husband's status with that Of the wive's father offers the least chance for information loss while taking into account relative intergenerational mobility as Elder suggests. The Social Contact Setting Perhaps the most important study to date dealing with the factors involved in the mobility of women through marriage is a relatively recent longitudinal analysis by Elder (1969) of 83 white females from the Oakland Growth Study. This re- search began in 1932 as an assessment of mental, physical, and social development of fifth and sixth grade girls, and the subjects were continuously Observed until 1939. The 76 mem— bers Of the sample who took part in at least one Of three adult follow-up studies were divided.into two groups, those with middle-class and those with lower-class backgrounds. Occupa- tional, educational, and marital status information was avail- able for all women in the sample up to 1958. The study measured attractiveness, status aspirations, academic aptitude, and mobility through marriage. Attractive- ness is of little concern for us here, but the other variables are extremely relevant. Status aspirations were measured by a woman's desire for social dominance (desire to control one's human environment by persuasion, suggestion, or command) and 15 her desire for high status. Intelligence and academic apti- tude were measured by averaging two Stanford-Binet IQ scores and by a rating Of academic interest and performance made by a panel Of teachers. Mobility through marriage was ascer- tained by comparing the father's social position and the husband's occupational status at approximately the same point in the life cycle. Cross-tabulations were made of these respective statuses in 1929 and 1958. Elder found a significant correlation between adolescent status aspiration, desire for social dominance among agemates, and future social mobility through marriage in both classes. He also found that middle-class girls were more likely to have completed at least some college, and of those who attended college, 72% of the middle-class girls and 50% Of the working- class girls were upwardly mobile. In both classes higher education and the marital Opportunities it provides were more likely to be available to girls above average in mental abil- ity and academic aptitude. Thus, Elder summarizes: A woman's prospect for social ascent through marriage is dependent on her access to men of higher status and on the exchange value of her personal resources for marriage. Such access, or contact between persons of differing class origin, is provided by settings with entry requirements that emphasize individual merit more than ascribed characteristics, such as institutions Of higher education. (1969, p. 531) In other words, the setting for social contact appears to be more basic than the girlls personal attributes. Without access to promising mates, personal qualities cannot be trans- lated into mobility. .eu n1. ‘1 R1 FIN NI. talk *4 16 This Observation is important in respect to the large body Of literature dealing with mate selection. In most cases, research in this area does not directly concern itself with the question Of social mobility through marriage. Nearly every conceivable dimension of mate selection has been discussed, including: physical characteristics (Harris, 1912; Burgess and Wallin, 1944; Holmes and Hatch, 1938; Elder, 1969), religion (Resnick, 1933; Slotkin, 1942; Thomas, 1951), pSychological characteristics (Jones, 1929; Kelley, 1940; Richardson, 1939; Winch, Ktsanes, and Ktsanes, 1954), ethnic origin (Bossard, 1939; Kennedy, 1944), residential propinquity (Bossard, 1932; Kennedy, 1943; Abrams, 1943), and social and cultural characteristics in general (Burgess and Wallin, 1943; Hollingshead, 1950). There has been a substantial amount of controversy in the literature on mate selection over the validity of "similarity" and "complementarity" theses. Evidence that in- dividuals who are similar to each other are most likely to choose each other as mates has been provided by Jones (1929), Burgess and Wallin (1943), Smith and Greenberg-Monane (1953), and Kerckhoff and Davis (1962). Much contrasting evidence has been presented supporting the theory of complementary needs, i.e., that individuals will seek a spouse with emotional needs which are Opposite from or complement their own (Winch, Ktsanes, and Ktsanes, 1954; Winch, 1955). Under this theory, a dominant male would most likely seek a submissive wife. 17 Yet, in both theses there exists a qualifying factor, for as Winch, Ktsanes, and Ktsanes state: In mate selection each individual seeks within his or her field Of eligibles for that person who gives the greatest promise Of providing him or her with maximum need gratification. (1954, p. 242) Here again the importance of a girl's "field of eligibles," as noted by Elder (1969) is apparent. She must place herself in a setting where her personal qualities are negotiable in exchange for status. Goode (1966) describes this situation as marriage between people of different class origins but very similar life styles. As he puts it, “one Of the Spouses is socially mobile, and has taken on the cultural patterns, attitudes, and even aspirations common in the class of the potential Spouse." (1966, p. 594) We have discussed Elder's (1969) finding that educa- tional attainment was related to subsequent mobility chances. Other researchers have found that high intelligence, desire to excell, and entrance into college is a path to upward social mobility among women as well as men (Lipset and Bendix, 1959, p. 235; Sewell and Shah, 1967). Thus intelligence, as a means to the college setting, becomes an indirect factor in a young woman's chances for advancement through marriage. High intel- ligence may also tend to increase the capacity Of lower status children to recognize the norms held by middle—class groups and their teachers in school. Such recognition is Often accompanied by an interest in adopting these norms (Lipset and Bendix, 1959, p. 229). In LA! (3 I” 'l ’1. 18 In his summary Of major findings on mobility through marriage, Goode (1966) states that women who marry upward are more likely to have higher than average IQ scores than women who marry within their own stratum, who in turn are more likely to have higher scores than those who marry down. This conclusion is based on a much-quoted study of the factors involved with womens' change of social status at marriage in Aberdeen, Scotland (Illsley, 1955). The study found that approximately 70% of the daughters Of manual workers who married nonmanual husbands scored above average on the Wechsler- Bellevue intelligence test. Only 20% to 25% of the daughters of manual workers who married manual husbands were above average. Seventy-five percent of the upper-strata daughters who married within the same class were above average, while 40% of the daughters in the upper-strata who married down were above average. Illsley also discovered that highly intelligent daughters of lower-strata fathers had more education than the class average and tended to be working in white-collar occu- pations at the time Of marriage to a nonmanual husband. This last finding is Of great interest in respect to a substantial body Of literature dealing with occupational pro- pinquity as it relates to mate selection. It appears that access to middle-class work settings is a pathway to a promis- ing field of eligible males similar to that Of the college campus. In an early study Popenoe (1937) showed that meetings occurring through business or professional contacts form one 19 Of the main Opportunities for marriage selection. Marvin (1918), in one Of the first studies Of this subject, analyzed Philadelphia marriages from 1913 through 1916. He found that marriage between men and women of the same industry was more common than chance expectancy. Sundal and McCormick (1951) also found evidence that the work setting was a path to marriage mobility in their study of Madison, Wisconsin marriages which we discussed previously. Their data ". . . suggest, although they do not prove, that the young men and women who were engaged in the same occupa- tion tended to be thrown together, and that this Often led to marriage.“ (1951, p. 43) In the Madison sample almost 30% of the brides of doctors were found to be nurses or medical tech- nicians, compared with only about 12.5% of all professional men and slightly over 7% of all grooms who married nurses or technicians. More than one—third of the male teachers married women who were teachers, and a surprising number of brides and grooms worked in the same factory. The study also found a marked tendency for college students to marry "co-eds" and for cleri- cal men tO marry stenographers. Sundal and McCormick concluded that the large amount of association between occupations of brides and grooms reflected the influence of contacts in the educational world and the work situation. In fact, they went so far as to compare the wife's occupation with her future husband's to assess social mobility through marriage because 20 they felt the wife's occupation was a more valid predictor than her father's occupation. Summary In the foregoing sections we have discussed the research literature on the social mobility Of women through marriage. We have seen that the dominant question in this area, the ex— tent Of hypergamy as Opposed to homogamy in the social class structure, has not been answered conclusively. Although most studies Show a general pattern of homogamy, the occurrence Of hypergamy may be readily Observed in varying degree. Furthermore, we have seen that the measurement Of social mobility Of women through marriage has been attempted using several different methods of comparing socioeconomic status. It would appear that the Optimum measurement Of intergenera— tional mobility through marriage should contrast the husband's social status with that Of his spouse's father in order to take into account the possible effect of perceived mobility potential of the husband. The literature also suggests that the setting Of social contact which helps to determine the woman‘s field of eligible mates may be more fundamental to success in the marriage mar— ket than personal attributes as such. Physical attractiveness, Personality, and other positive qualities can play no role without the close proximity Of potentially mobile or higher Status males. Therefore, the aspiring young woman must seek 21 out an advantageous setting of social contact in which to make the most productive use of her charms. The college campus and middle-class work—settings appear to be the two localities with the greatest potential for such interaction. Most important for our purpose here, it would appear that no significant research has been undertaken in the area of social mobility Of women through marriage which focuses specif- ically on the experiences Of young women from a rural area. The majority of marriage mobility studies have used middle- class, urban samples which may or may not have applicability to the pattern exhibited by women from rural areas. Thus, there is a need for analysis Of the experiences of young rural women in the mate selection process. Such an analysis should 1) examine the extent Of hypergamy as opposed to homogamy, 2) measure social mobility through marriage, and 3) investigate the possible role of the setting Of social con- tact in influencing the mobility pattern. These matters have not heretofore been addressed jointly in the case of young rural women. Statement of the Research Problem From the research literature discussed above, we may con- struct a hypothetical picture of the process Of social mobil- ity through marriage among girls from rural areas. It seems clear that hypergamy will occur most readily when the aspiring young woman has access to advantageous settings Of social 22 contact such as middle-class work—settings or the college campus. Here she will have the widest field of potentially mobile mates. Because educational and cultural facilities, as well as occupational Opportunities are typically more restricted for those in rural than urban communities, highly motivated young people and their parents Often realize the need for young adults to leave their home communities to Obtain a college education or to seek the greater job prospects which a city or metrOpOlitan center offers. This would tend to make the pool Of attractive eligible males in rural communities quite small, and it is doubtful that those who remain there could provide much mobility potential for their spouses. Therefore, it seems reasonable to expect that those young rural women who are most successful in the marriage market will be those who leave their home communities subsequent to high school graduation to attend college or to seek the employment Oppor- tunities of an urban area and thus attain a middle—class work setting. The job restrictions which females traditionally encounter in the society force rural women into the same limited set of occupational alternatives as urban women such as teaching, nursing, social work, clerical work, and low-status white- collar jobs. Because the nature of these jobs and their entry requirements are widely known to rural girls, they are as likely as urban girls with similar intelligence and education 23 to seek training and aspire to them. Hence, confronted by the limited Opportunity Of the local community, girls from rural areas may tend to be oriented toward urban occupations (Sewell, 1964). A number of contributing factors will be important in determining whether a girl attends college or migrates to an urban area to seek employment. Intelligence and academic performance in high school have a direct bearing on college entrance, and it would seem that both factors would affect a girl's chances at a good job, either as basic qualifications or as determinants of a marketable college degree. Women who are socially mobile through marriage have a greater status aspiration and desire for dominating their human environment than those who are nonmobile. In sum, the mobility-through-marriage process in young women from rural areas may be seen in terms of their proximity to potentially mobile mates in college or urban, middle-class work-settings and the factors such as intelligence, academic performance, and status aspiration. The interrelationships among these various factors among rural females predict their differential social mobility through marriage. Statements of the Hypotheses HYpothesiS I: (Social Mobility Through Marriage) Of women from rural areas, a majority will be socially mObile through marriage. 24 Hypothesis II: (Migration) a) Of those women from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage, more will have moved away from their home communities subsequent to high school graduation than will be the case for women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. b) Of those women from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage, more will be found to have initially migrated to large urban areas subsequent to high school gradu- ation than will be the case for women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. c) Of those women from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage, more will be found to be living in large urban areas ten years after high school graduation than will be the case for women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. Hypothesis III: (Intelligence) Of women from rural areas, those who are socially mobile through marriage will exhibit higher intelligence than those who are nonmobile through marriage. Hypothesis IV: (Educational Experience) a) Of women from rural areas, those who are socially mObile through marriage will have exhibited higher academic aChievement in high school than those who are nonmobile through marriage . 25 b) Of women from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage, more will have attended college than will be the case for women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. c) Of women from rural areas, those who are socially mobile through marriage will exhibit higher overall educa— tional attainment than those who are nonmobile through mar- riage. Hypothesis V: (Occupational Attainment) WOmen from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage will have exhibited higher Occupational attainment subsequent to high school graduation than women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. Hypothesis VI: (Status Aspiration) Of women from rural areas, those who are socially mobile through marriage will have exhibited higher future status aspirations in high school than will be the case for those who are nonmobile through marriage. Hypothesis VII: (Parental Career Preferences) Parents of women from rural areas who are socially mobile through marriage will have been more favorably oriented toward their childrens' possible departure from the home community for career purposes than will be the case for parents Of women from rural areas who are nonmobile through marriage. CHAPTER II THE METHOD OF THE STUDY Introduction In the previous chapter we summarized the research literature dealing with social mobility Of women through marriage. We discussed the need for an analysis of generali- zations growing out of the literature as they apply to the experiences of young women from rural areas. Finally, we constructed a set Of hypotheses concerning some of the most pertinent factors. The purpose of this chapter is to outline a study formulated to provide a test Of those hypotheses. The Ontonagon County Prgject, 1957-1968 In 1957, Michigan State University sociologists began a study Of Ontonagon County, Michigan, a low income rural area in the Upper Peninsula with an extended history Of popu- lation loss. A study Of the "initial phase" of voluntary migration was conducted in May, 1957, in which extensive data were collected from and about a sample Of high school youth. The students filled out a mimeographed questionnaire1 which 1See Appendix A. 26 27 dealt with their activities, attitudes, plans and aspirations, and future expectations dealing with education, their commun— ity, and a career. Other information including their academic performance and intelligence scores was Obtained from school records. Goldsmith and Beegle (1962) presented an analysis of the 1957 data in their study of the "initial phase“ Of voluntary migration. The second phase Of the Ontonagon County project was undertaken in 1967 when a follow-up study of the former high school students was made. The sample members were relocated and, using a mail-back questionnaire,2 new data were collected concerning the events which had taken place Since 1957. Such information as the various places in which the young people lived, the jobs they had held, marriage and family formation, characteristics of their spouses, attitudes toward their home and present communities, and their assessment of their ten years' experience was Obtained. The present study of social mobility Of rural women through marriage is based on a portion Of the extensive data now available for this sample Of persons from Ontonagon County, Michigan. The Research Site Ontonagon County is a rural area in the western part of Michigan's Upper Peninsula. The total population of the 2See Appendix B. 28 county in 1960 was 10,584 with the largest community, the village of Ontonagon, having approximately 2,360 persons at that time. The remainder of the county's population lived in smaller villages and in the Open country. The county is an economically depressed community char— acterized by out-migration, low educational attainment, high unemployment, and dependency on lumbering and poor agriculture for its economic livelihood. During the decade 1950—1960, the introduction Of new mining industry did not change the picture greatly, and the depressed condition has persisted. One continuing result of such a situation has been outmigra— tion Of the young. The Research Sample In May Of 1957, all the juniors and seniors enrolled in high school in the county participated in the Michigan State University study of the initial phase of voluntary migration. A total of 269 students, 127 males and 142 females, who were present on the day the data were collected, took part. During the period March, 1968, to December, 1969, all of the students still living were relocated (three had died), and new data covering the ten years since high school were gathered. Mail-back questionnaires were sent to the sample members to be completed by them and returned to the university. Follow-up phone calls and interviews were used where necessary to insure maximum recovery Of data. Usable data were recovered from 29 95.5% of the living members of the original sample, and secondary source information was Obtained to cover the remain- ing cases. For this study of social mobility of women through marriage, only the female subsample is used. All but six girls in the original sample Of 142 had married during the post high school decade (PHSD). In two other cases, informa- tion provided in the restudy questionnaire was insufficient to assign the husband a socioeconomic status score. Therefore, for the purpose Of the present study the remaining group of 134 females will be used, with the six unmarried and two in- sufficient information cases being omitted. Operationalization of the Variables The variables to be dealt with in this study include a) socioeconomic status, b) migration, c) size Of place Of initial migration destination, d) size of place Of current residence, e) intelligence, f) high school academic achieve- ment, 9) college attendance, h) overall educational attainment, i) status aspiration, and j) parental career preferences. Socioeconomic Status. Fathers' occu ations were coded P according to the Duncan "Socioeconomic Index for Occupations in the Detailed Classification of the Bureau of the Census: 1950" in Albert Reiss (1961) from information supplied on the initial phase questionnaire (Appendix A, p. 19) and corrobo— rated by school staff. The subjects' highest level occupation 30 ever held during the post high school decade (PHSD) as re- ported by them in the restudy questionnaire (Appendix B, pp. 6-9) were similarly coded. Their husbands' highest level occupation ever held during the PHSD as reported in the restudy questionnaire (Appendix B, pp. 6-9) were coded in the same manner. Migration. This variable was measured by items in the restudy questionnaire (p. 4, question II.l.a and pp. 6-9, question III.1.a) eliciting the subjects' descriptions of the places they had lived for a month or more during the PHSD. A response Of one residence meant that the subject had never moved from the community of origin in Ontonagon County, while two or more residences represented migration. Size Of Place Of Initial Migration Destination. Measure- ment Of this variable in the Ontonagon County project was done using the procedure Of Blau and Duncan (1967) to provide a basis for appropriate comparisons. Rural areas were defined as those communities under 2,500 population. Small cities were defined as incorporated places Of 2,500 to 49,999 which were not part Of the 213 "urbanized areas" identified in the 1960 Census. Large cities were defined as all incorporated places Of at least 50,000 population plus the surrounding unin— corporated but developed urban and suburban fringe. This classification was made up Of the 213 "urbanized areas." Size of place Of the initial migration destination after leav- ing Ontonagon County was listed in the restudy questionnaire (Appendix B, p. 4, question II.l.a.2). 31 Size Of Place of Current Residence. This variable was measured using the same format described for the size of place Of the initial migration destination. Residence as of the end Of the PHSD as listed in the restudy questionnaire (Appendix B, pp. 4, 9) was designated the place Of current residence. Intelligence. The most recent intelligence test scores were Obtained from school records. Only those results from standardized tests which were recorded in classical IQ format were used. High School Academic Achievement. The high school aca- demic ability Of the students was measured by their graduation rank converted into a percentile rank. Ranks Were assigned on the basis Of an evaluation Of their academic performance while still enrolled for cases in which individuals did not actually graduate. College Attendance. Any education or training completed by the subjects during the PHSD was elicited in response to a question to that effect on the restudy questionnaire (Appendix B, p. 3). Overall Educational Attainment. This variable was meas— ured by the highest education or training completed by the subject as of the end Of the PHSD, listed on the restudy ques- tionnaire (Appendix B, p. 3) in response to the question of any education or training completed during that period. Those subjects who completed high school or less will be classified 32 as having low educational attainment, while subjects who started or finished a business or commercial course after high school will be classed as moderate educational attain- ment. Subjects who had some college, some graduate school, or completed a degree at either level will be classified as having high educational attainment. Status Aspiration. This variable was measured by respon- ses elicited from the subjects on two questions included in the initial phase questionnaire. The first question, dealing with the subjects' idealistic occupational status aspirations, asked that they list the job they most desired if it were available regardless of the training or experience required (p. 9, question 3). Responses were coded according to the Duncan socioeconomic index. The second question, dealing with desired qualities in a lifetime job, included responses which indicated a desire for such things as money, status, security, or benefit to humanity (Appendix A, p. 15, question 7). Parental Career Preferences. Parental career preferences for their daughters were assessed by an item on the initial phase questionnaire (Appendix A, p. 9, question 5) eliciting the subjects' perceptions as to the course Of action their parents have urged them to follow after high school. Advice involved staying near home or the chance to live away from home. 33 Method Of Analysis Each subject will be assigned two socioeconomic status scores using the Duncan socioeconomic index, one score repre- senting her father's occupation at the time Of the initial 1957 study and the other score representing her husband's highest SES achieved during the post high school decade. The difference, if any, between the two scores for each subject will then be ascertained and the subjects divided into two mobility categories based on the magnitude and the direction Of the difference. Following the procedure of Blau and Duncan (1967, p. 251-252), sample members whose husband's score is five or more scale points higher than their father's will be grouped as mobile, and the remaining subjects will be grouped as non- mobile. These categories, the MOBILES and the NONMOBILES, will make up the working sub-sample groups for the analysis. Cross-classifications will then be made between the MOBILES and the NONMOBILES in respect to the variables in question. Chi square tests of statistical significance will be used to check the validity of the results. Operational Statements of the Hypotheses Hypothesis I: (Social Mobility Through Marriage) Of female Ontonagon County 1957 high school juniors and seniors, a majority will be classified as MOBILES (spouse's Duncan index score five or more points higher than own father's) and the remainder will be classified as NONMOBILES. 34 Hypothesis II: (Migration) a) More MOBILES will have moved away from their home community subsequent to high school graduation than will be the case for NONMOBILES. b) Of those who migrated, more MOBILES will be found to have initially migrated to a place of over 50,000 population than will be the case for NONMOBILES. c) Of thOse who migrated, more MOBILES will be found to be living in places of over 50,000 population at the end of the PHSD than will be the case for NONMOBILES. Hypothesis III: (Intelligence) MOBILES will have a higher mean IQ score than NONMOBILES. Hypothesis IV: (Educational Experience) a) MOBILES will have exhibited a higher mean high school graduation rank percentile score than NONMOBILES. b) A larger proportion Of MOBILES will have attended college than will be the case for NONMOBILES. c) MOBILES will exhibit more post-high school education and training during the PHSD than will be the case for NONMOBILES. Hypothesis V: (Occupational Attainment) MOBILES will have exhibited a higher mean SES score for their own occupations during the PHSD than will be the case for NONMOBILES. 35 Hypothesis VI: (Status Aspiration) a) MOBILES will have exhibited a higher mean SES score in their choice of the occupation they would most like to have than will be the case for NONMOBILES. b) The proportion of MOBILES expressing a desire for money, power and authority, prestige, and public recognition in a lifetime job will be greater than that of NONMOBILES. Hypothesis VII: (Parental Career Preferences) Parents of MOBILES will have been more likely to express career preferences for their daughters which allow for leav- ing the home community after high school than will be the case for parents of NONMOBILES. CHAPTER III RESULTS OF THE STUDY Introduction In the previous chapter we described a research study designed to test a series of hypotheses concerning the social mobility through marriage of young women from a rural commun- ity. The purpose Of this chapter is to report the results of the research and the tests of the hypotheses outlined earlier. Social Mobility Through Marriage In Hypothesis I we predicted that a majority of the girls would be socially mobile through marriage during the post high school decade. Mobility occurred if the spouse's Duncan index score was five or more points higher than the father's score. The actual outcome is Shown in Table 1. It can be seen from the table that the results clearly support the hypothesis, with over two-thirds of the young women exhibiting social mobility through marriage. The results are significant at the .01 level. Given the economic depression of Ontonagon County and the limited Opportunities there, it is interesting that such a 36 37 Table 1. Social Mobility Through Marriage by End of Post High School Decade (PHSD); Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Social mobility group Total Mobile Nonmobile Number: 134 92 42 Percent: 100.0 68.7 31.3 large proportion Of the sample should be mobile. This dis- tinct difference suggests that important selectivity factors are Operating for the two subgroups. Migration The Initial Act of Migration In Hypothesis IIa we predicted that more MOBILES1 would have moved away from their home communities after high school graduation than would be the case for NONMOBILES. The re— Sults are shown in Table 2. From Table 2 it can be seen that the data are consistent with the hypothesis, although the difference is not Signifi- cant at the .05 level. It is important to note that there 1It should be kept in mind that MOBILE and NONMOBILE refer to social mobility through marriage, not geographic mobility. 38 Table 2. Migration Status Subsequent to High School Gradua- tion; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Migration status Mobility group Migrants Nonmigrants Total NO. % No. % NO. % Mobile 83 90.2 9 9.8 92 100.0 Nonmobile 35 83.3 7 16.7 42 100.0 Total 118 88.1 16 11.9 134 100.0 is a strong overall trend tO geographic mobility (88.1%) among these girls, emphasizing a perceived need to seek a future elsewhere. However, the fact that 90.2% of the MOBILES as Opposed to 83.3% of the NONMOBILES migrated suggests that migration is one of the selective factors related to social mobility through marriage. These results could be questioned from the standpoint that in a small rural area such as Ontonagon County, girls may Often marry their high school sweethearts soon after gradua- tion. Then, if such couples left their home communities, the act Of migration would not play a part in the girls' subse- quent chances for marriage mobility even though they would be classified as migrants. Table 3 shows the result of this consideration. 39 Table 3. Percent Mobile Through Marriage, by Migration Be- havior and Marriage Date; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors; N = 92 Marriage date Migrants Nonmigrants Total NO. % NO. % No. % Within 1 year after high school graduation 23 25.0 4 4.3 27 29.3 Over 1 year after high school graduation 60 65.2 5 5.4 65 70.7 Table 3 shows migration to have an even stronger influ- ence on marriage mobility than did Table 2. Of those girls who were socially mobile through marriage, 25% married within one year after high school graduation and were migrants, as Opposed to 65.2% who were migrants but waited more than one year after graduation for marriage. If we assume that marriage to an Ontonagon County male would have taken place soon after high school, the effect of migration before marriage is Obvious. Size Of Community Of Initial Migration Destination It has been established that MOBILES were more likely to have migrated after high school than were NONMOBILES. We now come to the question of the migration destination. In Hypothe- sis IIb we predicted that more MOBILES would migrate initially to large urban communities than would be the case for 40 NONMOBILES. Table 4 presents the actual initial destinations for the two groups. Table 4. Size Of Community Of Initial Migration Destination; Migrant Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Whoawere Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Size Of community Rural community or Large city Mobility group small city under 50,000+ Total 50,000 No. % NO. % NO. % Mobile 38 47.5 ‘ 42 52.5 80* 100.0 Nonmobile 15 42.9 20 57.1 35 100.0 Total 53 46.1 62 53.9 115 100.0 *Excludes three cases in military locations of indeterminant size. The results are Slightly contrary to expectations. Although over half of the migrants in each subgroup initially migrated to large urban centers, only 52.5% Of the MOBILES as Opposed to 57.5% of the NONMOBILES did so. The difference is not significant at the .05 level. Size Of Community Of Current Residence In Hypothesis IIc we predicted that more MOBILES would be living in large urban centers at the end of the post high 41 school decade than would be the case for NONMOBILES. The re- sults are presented in Table 5. Table 5. Size Of Community of Residence at End of PHSD; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage and Who Migrated Size Of community Rural community or Large city Mobility group small city under 50,000+ Total 50,000 NO. % NO. % No. % Mobile 47 58.0 34 42.0 81 100.0 Nonmobile 22 66.7 11 33.3 33 100.0 Total 69 60.5 45 39.5 114* 100.0 *Excludes two subjects in military locations of indeterminant size, one deceased case, and one subject living in a remote New Zealand village Of indeterminant size. The data indicate support for the hypothesis although the difference is not large enough to be significant at the .05 level. Forty-two percent Of the MOBILES, compared to 33:3% Of the NONMOBILES, were living in large urban centers at the end of the PHSD. Comparison of Tables 4 and 5 reveals that there was move- ment back tO smaller communities during the ten years. While 53.9% Of the sample moved initially to large cities, only 39.5% Of the sample were located in such places ten years later. 42 Only 33.3% Of the NONMOBILES resided in large urban centers at the end of the PHSD compared to 57.5% Of the MOBILES initially migrated to large cities with 42% remaining at the end of the decade. Intelligence In Hypothesis III we predicted that MOBILES would exhibit higher intelligence than NONMOBILES. The actual results are Shown in Table 6. Table 6. Mean IQ Score During High School; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Social mobility group Total Mobile Nonmobile Number: 113* 76 37 Mean IQ: 102.9 100.8 107.0 *Information was insufficient for 21 subjects. From the table we Observe that the outcomes are contrary to the hypothesis and to our expectations based on the litera— ture. In fact, the difference between the mean IQ scores of the two mobility groups is statistically significant at the .05 level. 43 This perplexing result may indicate that factors more closely related to motivation, such as status aspiration and parental influence, have a strong effect on marriage mobility. Greater awareness Of the paths to mobility chances, resulting from parental guidance and career planning, appears to be independent of high measured intelligence in this case. Educational Experience High School Academic Achievement In Hypothesis IVa we predicted that MOBILES would have exhibited higher academic achievement in high school than NONMOBILES. Table 7 presents a comparison Of the mean high school graduation rank percentile scores for the two groups. Table 7. Mean High School Graduation Rank Percentile Score; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Social mobility group Total Mobile Nonmobile Number: 130* 90 40 Mean percentile: 56.3 54.6 60.0 *Information was insufficient for 4 subjects. 44 Here the results are clearly contrary to expectations, although not significant at the .05 level. NONMOBILES averaged the 60th percentile while MOBILES averaged just under the 55th percentile. Such results are in contrast with the literature which relates education to mobility chances. However, we have seen that the NONMOBILES also exhibited a higher average IQ score than did the MOBILES. Hence the superior high school academic achievement among the NONMOBILES, while surprising, is logically consistent with their measured ability. College Attendance In Hypothesis IVb we predicted that more MOBILES would have attended college than would be the case for NONMOBILES. Table 8 presents the outcomes in this regard. Table 8. College Attendance of Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage College attendance Mobility group Attended College Did not attend Total College NO. % No. % No. % Mobile 16 17.4 76 82.6 92 100.0 Nonmobile 7 16.7 35 83.3 42 100.0 Total 23 17.1 111 82.9 134 100.0 45 The findings show a small proportion Of college attend- ance (17.1%) for the entire sample. Nevertheless, the MOBILES do appear to exhibit a slightly higher, though statistically insignificant, rate Of college attendance (17.4%) than the NONMOBILES (16.7%). More than 80% of the sample left the com- munity after high school, while only a small number went to college, implying that most migrated for reasons other than education, i.e., employment. Overall Educational Attainment We have seen that NONMOBILES graduate from high school with higher class ranks than MOBILES, but that MOBILES were slightly more likely to attend college than were NONMOBILES. Now we consider the question of overall educational attain- ment by the end Of the PHSD. This broader measure includes all forms Of training received since high school. In Hypothesis IVc we predicted that MOBILES would exhibit higher overall educational attainment than would be the case for NONMOBILES. Table 9 presents a comparison of the educa— tional attainment for the two mobility groups. The results are in the hypothesized direction, although they are not statistically significant at the .05 level. As previously indicated, 17.4% of the MOBILES, as Opposed to 16.7% Of the NONMOBILES, achieved high educational attainment (some college or higher). More MOBILES (27.2%) than NON— MOBILES (23.8%) also achieved moderate educational attainment 46 Table 9. Overall Educational Attainment; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Mobility group Educational attainment Mobile Nonmobile Total level NO. % NO. % NO. % Low educational attain- ment (high school or less) 51 55.4 25 59.5 75 56.7 Moderate educational attainment (post-high school training other than college) 25 27.2 10 23.8 35 26.1 High educational attainment (some college or higher) 16 17.4 7 16.7 23 17.2 Total 92 100.0 42 100.0 123 100.0 (post-high school training other than college). If the cases Of high and moderate attainment are combined for each group, MOBILES show a 44.6% representation versus 40.5% for the NONMOBILES. Occupational Attainment In Hypothesis V we predicted that MOBILES would exhibit higher occupational attainment subsequent to high school graduation than would NONMOBILES. The results are presented in Table 10. 47 Table 10. Mean Highest Socioeconomic Status During Post High School Decade; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Social mobility group Total Mobile Nonmobile Number: 134 92 42 Mean SES: 51.7 52.1 50.7 The findings indicate a slight trend in the direction of the hypothesis short of statistical significance at the .05 level. MOBILES attained an average SES score Of 52.1, while NONMOBILES attained an average SES score Of 50.7. These results, merely suggestive in themselves, are reinforced when considered alongside the ideal occupations that members of each mobility group selected. Status Aspiration Ideal Occupation In Hypothesis VIa we predicted that MOBILES would have exhibited higher ideal occupational aspirations than would be the case for NONMOBILES. The results are given in Table 11. Although not statistically significant, the average SES scores for the subjects' ideal occupations are quite consis— tent in magnitude and direction with differences between their 48 Table 11. Mean Socioeconomic Status of Ideal Occupation; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Social mobility group Total Mobile Nonmobile Number: 130* 89 41 Mean SES: 57.8 58.4 56.6 *Four subjects failed to respond to the question; three MOBILES and one NONMOBILE. actual attainments during the PHSD. The MOBILES' occupa- tional attainment was 6.4 points less than their expressed ideal, while NONMOBILES achievement was 5.9 points less than, their ideal. Qualities Desired in a Lifetime Job Another measure of status aspirations may be found in some of the qualities most desired in a lifetime job. In Hypothesis VIb we predicted that MOBILES would be more likely to express a desire for such qualities as money, prestige, power and authority, and public recognition than would be the case for NONMOBILES. The outcomes are reported in Table 12. From the table it may be seen that the results are some- what ambiguous. Regarding the subjects' expressed desire for money, 48.9% of the MOBILES versus 42.9% of the NONMOBILES 49 m.m NH m.vH w m.m m Hmnuo o.He mm s.mm ma m.me oe mammss sense on mean. m.Hm Ne G.se om m.mm mm menswear on uhmmcmm «.5H mm s.GH s «.5H SH cosuncmoomn unansm «.ms HOH m.om em m.ms he sunnsomm o.se mm m.~e ma m.me me ammo: m.oe Sm ~.me as o.mm mm uommmwn no manummnm G.SN mm m.mm OH o.m~ mm mmcmnamao HmsuomanmucH s.o m H.s m m.G G Sansonnsm one umzom «.ms Am S.Hs om m.ms so mnmxnoz zonamm nuns asamecmnnm G.Hs em H.mm mm m.ms he rememoam>em mom mocmao a.SH om m.HH m m.GH ma uoa>mamn mo eoemmnm w noncommou w mOmGOQmOH w noncommmH mo .02 mo .02 mo .02 HmuOB mawnossoz OHHQOE huflamou HMOOH moose wuwdwnofi HOHOOm wmmflunmz smsouze wawnoasoz HO washes SHHOHOOm mums onz mnownmm can muowsoo Hoosom sown hmma mussoo commsouco masses usoflummoooo mfiflummaq O SH mmwuflamso HOOOH om>wmonmm .NH manna I 50 reported this preference in line with our expectations. MOBILES also expressed a slightly greater desire (17.4%) for public recognition than did the NONMOBILES (16.7%). However, 7.1% Of the NONMOBILES as Opposed to 6.5% of the MOBILES desired power and authority, and 45.2% of the NOMMOBILES, compared to 38.0% of the MOBILES, wanted prestige or respect. None Of the differences is significant at the .05 level. It is interesting that over 75% Of the entire sample desired security in their occupations, over 72% wanted friend- ship with fellow workers, and 71.6% looked for a chance for advancement in their work. We may reasonably speculate that such a preference for the first two qualities stems from the rural background of the subjects, while the latter quality indicates an overall realization by the young women that a lifetime job must provide a chance to get out of the rut in which many of their parents find themselves. In this connec— tion, 72.8% Of the MOBILES, as opposed to 69.1% of the NON- MOBILES, expressed the need for occupational advancement opportunity. Parental Career Preferences In Hypothesis VII we predicted that parents of MOBILES would be more favorably oriented toward their childrens' possible departure from the home community for career purposes than would be the case for NONMOBILES. The outcome is re- ported in Table 13. 51 Table 13. Parental Career Preferences for the Period Subse- quent to High School; Female Ontonagon County 1957 High School Juniors and Seniors Who Were Socially Mobile or Nonmobile Through Marriage Social mobility group Parental career Mobile Nonmobile Total preference NO. % No. % No. % Advice urging daughter to seek a career at or near home 22 24.2 8 19.1 30 22.6 Advice allowing daughter Option to seek a career away from home 58 63.7 25 59.5 83 62.4 Other advice 11 12.1 9 21.4 20 15.0 Total *91 100.0 42 100.0 133 100.0 *One MOBILE subject did not respond to the question. From the table it may be seen that the results seem to be in the hypothesized direction, although they are not statistically significant at the .05 level. Nearly 64% of the parents of MOBILES gave their daughters advice which allowed them to seek a career away from home, while 59.5% Of the parents Of NONMOBILES gave their daughters this advice. However, 24.2% Of the parents Of MOBILES also advised their daughters to seek a career near home as Opposed to only 19.1% of the parents of NONMOBILES who chose this course Of action. Thus, the trend toward support Of the hypothesis must be 52 viewed with some reservation. Overall, there exists a strong feeling among the parents (over 60%) that their daughters must leave the home community for a chance at a good job. Summary In this chapter we have examined data designed to pro- vide tests of our hypotheses concerning determinant factors in the social mobility through marriage of young women from a rural community. We first compared the SES scores of the girls' fathers with those Of their husbands and found that a majority Of the women had married up. Next we investigated various factors which may have significant influence upon whether girls were mobile or nonmobile. We found that more MOBILES than NONMOBILES had moved away from their home communities after graduating from high school, but more NONMOBILES left initially for large urban centers. Nevertheless, at the end of the PHSD, a greater proportion of MOBILES than NONMOBILES resided in large cities. An unexpected finding occurred regarding the average intelligence of the two mobility groups. Contrary to expec- tations, we found that the NONMOBILES exhibited a significantly higher mean IQ than did the MOBILES. This phenomenon also seemed to affect the subjects' educational experience some- what, as NONMOBILES had, on the average, graduated with higher high school graduation rank percentile scores than had MOBILES. 53 Yet we discovered that MOBILES were more likely to attend college and exhibited higher overall educational attainment than did NONMOBILES. In assessing the girls' own highest SES for the post high school decade, we found that MOBILES, on the average, had attained a slightly higher occupational level than had the NONMOBILES. Similarly, we saw that the ideal occupational choices reported by the MOBILES while they were in high school were generally higher in socioeconomic status than were the choices Of NONMOBILES. Regarding status qualities desired in these occupations, MOBILES were more likely than NONMOBILES to want money, public recognition, and a chance for advance- ment. However, NONMOBILES exhibited a greater desire than did MOBILES for power, authority, and prestige. Finally, we found that parents of MOBILES were more likely than the parents Of NONMOBILES tO have career prefer— ences for their daughters which allowed them to seek a career away from home. Altogether, the findings Show incomplete agreement with the generalizations found in the literature on social mobil— ity Of women through marriage. The experiences of girls from Ontonagon County would appear to be different from the pat- tern for women from urban backgrounds. This divergence will be discussed further in the following chapter. CHAPTER IV CONCLUSION Introduction In Chapter I the literature dealing with social mobility Of women through marriage was discussed. A series Of hypothe- ses was constructed to be tested in an attempt to compare the findings Of previous research in this area to the experiences of young women from a rural community. In Chapter II a study was outlined which would provide a means Of testing the hy- potheses. In Chapter III we reported the results Of the study and found a slightly different picture Of mobility be- havior than we expected based upon the literature. The task Of the present chapter is to discuss the general significance of the results Of the study. Social Mobility Through Marriage of Young Women From Rural Areas From the results in this study, considered alongside previous research on the subject Of marriage mobility, it would appear that the phenomenon Of social mobility through marriage is substantial among young rural women. This seems especially true for girls from economically depressed areas 54 55 which force them to leave their home community in order to increase their life-chances. Those rural women who migrate after high school gradua- tion are more likely to be socially mobile through marriage than those who remain at home. Although there is a general tendency for all migrants to move initially tO large urban centers, women who remain in such localities instead of re- turning tO smaller communities exhibit a higher rate of mobil- ity through marriage. Intelligence and high graduation rank in high school may not necessarily be related to college attendance or job chances and the marital Opportunities which these experiences provide for young rural women. Nevertheless, girls who at- tend college and achieve a higher level of educational attain- ment are more likely to be socially mobile through marriage. Girls from rural areas who exhibit a high level Of per- sonal occupational attainment may have a greater chance at marrying up than girls who achieve lower job status. Similar- ly, young rural women who eXpress higher occupational goals before they enter the labor market have a higher incidence of mobility through marriage than do girls who seek a lower occu- pational level. However, the desire for high-status attributes in their job is a general trait of both women who are subse- quently mobile or nonmobile through marriage. Finally, although most young women from depressed rural areas may be urged by their parents to seek the best employment 56 or educational opportunity possible, even if it means leaving their home community, those women who later marry up are more likely to receive such advice than are their counterparts who do not marry up. Significance Of the Findings None Of the previous research on which our original hypotheses were based exclusively examined the experiences of young rural women as they relate to social mobility through marriage. In most studies an urban or college student sample has been used. Furthermore, no prior research attempted tO assess the effects Of all Significant variables which appear to have a determinative influence over a girl's marriage mobility chances. The findings in the present study give an indication Of the unique situation of these young women from a rural com— munity. It should be carefully noted that the Obvious lack Of relationship between intelligence, academic ability in high school, and subsequent social mobility through marriage is extremely divergent from the ideas found in other research on the subject. It would be erroneous to generalize the results Of this study for all rural areas. Such areas are likely to vary in physical characteristics, economic stability, and occupational structure SO as tO provide different expectations, aspira- tions, and Opportunities for their young people. Nevertheless, 57 it seems reasonable to expect that in rural communities which, like Ontonagon County, exhibit depressed economies and high rates of out-migration, those young women who achieve social mobility through marriage will be the ones who seek out advantageous settings for social contact away from the home community. In these settings the availability Of poten— tially mobile or high status males is enhanced, and girls' personal qualities take on added instrumental value. BIBLIOGRAPHY Abrams, Ray H. "Residential Propinquity as a Factor in Mate Selection; Fifty Year Trends in Philadelphia,“ American Sociological Review, Vol. 8, NO. 3 (June, 1943), pp. 288-294. Anderson, C. Arnold. "Our Present Knowledge of Assortive Mating," Rural Sociology, Vol. 3, NO. 3 (September, 1938): pp. 296-302. Blau, Peter M., and Duncan, Otis Dudley. TheiAmerican Occupa— tional Structure. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1967. Bossard, James H. 8. "Residential Propinquity as a Factor in Marriage Selection," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 38, NO. 2 (September, 1932), pp. 219—224. Bossard, James H. S. "Nationality and Nativity as Factors in Marriage," American Sociological Review, Vol. 4, NO. 6 (December, I939), PP. 792F798. Burchinal, Lee G. “The Premarital Dyad and Love Involvement,“ in Christensen, Harold T. (ed.), Handbook Of‘Marriage and the Family. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964, pp. 623— 674. Burgess, Ernest W., and Wallin, Paul. "Homogamy in Social Characteristics," American Journal Of Sociology, Vol. 49, NO. 2 (September: 1943), pp. 109-124. Centers, Richard. "Marital Selection and Occupational Strata,“ American Jogrnal gf Sociology, Vol. 54, NO. 6 (May, 1949). pp. 530—535. Coombs, Robert H., and Kenkel, William F. “Sex Differences in Dating Aspirations and Satisfaction With Computer- Selected Partners," Journal Of Marriage and the Familyfi Vol. 28, NO. 1 (February, 1966), pp. 62-66. Elder, Glen H., Jr. "Appearance and Education in Marriage Mobility," American Sociglogical Review, VOl. 34, NO. 4 (August, 1969), pp. 519-533. ' 58 59 Goldsmith, Harold, and Beegle, J. Allan. "The Initial Phase Of Voluntary Migration," Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station, Rural Sociology Studies NO. 1, January 1962. (Mimeograph) Goode, William J. "Family and Mobility," in Bendix, Reinhard, and Lipset, Seymour M. (eds.), Class, Status, and Power. (Revised edition), New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1966, pp. 582-601. Harris, J. Arthur. "Assortive Mating in Man," PO ular Science Monthly, Vol. 80, NO. 28 (May, 1912), pp. 479- 492. Holmes, S. J., and Hatch, C. E. "Personal Appearance as Re- lated tO Scholastic Records and Marriage Selection in College Women," Human Biology, Vol. 10, NO. 1 (February, 1938), PP. 65-76. Hollingshead, August B. Elmtown's Youth. New York: Wiley and Sons, 1949, pp. 432-435. Hollingshead, August B. "Cultural Factors in the Selection Of Marriage Mates," American Sociological Review, Vol. 15, No. 5 (October, 1950T, pp. 619—620. Hunt, Thomas C. "Occupational Status and Marriage Selection,“ American Sociological Review, Vol. 5, NO. 4 (August, 1940), pp. 495-504. Illsley, R. "Social Class Selection and Class Differences in Relation to Stillbirths and Infant Deaths,“ British Medical Journal, December 24, 1955, pp. 1520-1524. Jones, Harold E. “Homogamy in Intellectual Abilities,“ American Journal Of Sociology, Vol. 35, NO. 3 (November, Kelley, E. Lowell. "Psychological Factors in Assortive Mating," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 37, NO. 7 (July, 1940), p. 576. Kennedy, Ruby JO Reeves, "Pre-Marital Residential Propinquity and Ethnic Endogamy," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 48, NO. 5 (March, 1943), pp. 580-584. Kennedy, Ruby JO Reeves. “Single or Triple Melting—Pot? Intermarriage Trends in New Haven, 1870-1940," American Journal Of Sociology, Vol. 49, NO. 4 (January, 1944), pp. 331-339. 60 Kephart, William M. "Some Correlates of Romantic Love," Journal of Marriage and the Family, Vol. 29, NO. 3 (August, 1967), pp. 470-474. Kerckhoff, Alan, and Davis, Keith E. "Value Consensus and Need Complementarity in Mate Selection," American Sociological Review, Vol. 27, NO. 3 (June, 1962), pp. 295-303. Laumann, Edward O. Prestige and Association in an Urban Community: an Analysis of an Urban Stratification System. New York: Bobbs-MerrIll CO., 1966, pp. 74-77. Lenski, Gerhard. Power and Privilege: A Theory Of Social Stratification. New York: McGraw—Hill, 1966. Lipset, Seymour M., and Bendix, Reinhard. Social Mobility in Industrial Society. Berkeley, California: Univer— sity of California Press, 1960. Marvin, D. M. "Occupational Propinquity as a Factor in Marriage Selection," Publications of the American Statistical Association, Vol. 16 (1918-1919), pp. 131— 150. Miller, Delbert C., and Form, William H. Industrial Socir Ology: The Sociology of Work Organizations. (Second’edition), New York: Harper and Row, 1964, p. 542. Popenoe, Paul. "Mate Selection," American Sociological Review, VOl. 2, NO. 5 (October, 1937), pp. 735-743. Reiss, Albert J., Jr. Occupations and Social Status. New York: Free Press, 1961. Resnick, Reuben R. "Some Sociological Aspects Of Inter— marriage Of Jew and Non-Jew," Social Forces, Vol. 12, NO. 1 (October, 1933), pp. 94-102. Richardson, Helen M. "Studies Of Mental Resemblance Between Husbands and Wives and Between Friends," Psychological Bulletin, Vol. 36, No. 2 (February, 1939), pp. 104-120. Rieger, Jon H. "Geographical Mobility and Occupational Achievement of Rural Youth: A Ten Year Longitudinal Study Of an Upper Michigan Sample," Unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Sociology, Michigan State Univer- sity, East Lansing, Michigan, 1971. Roth, Julius and Peck, Robert F. "Social Class and Social Mobility Factors Related to Marital Adjustment," Amsrican Sogiological Review, Vol. 16, No. 4 (August, 1951). PP. 478-487. 61 Rubin, Zick. "DO American Women Marry Up?" ‘American Socio- lggical Review, Vol. 33, No. 5 (October, 1968), pp. 750-760. Sewell, William H. "Community of Residence and College Plans," American Sociological Review, VOl. 29, NO. 1 (February, 1964): PP. 24-38. Sewell, William H., and Shad, Vimal P. "Socioeconomic Status, Intelligence, and the Attainment of Higher Education," Sociology Of Education, Vol. 40, No. 1 (Winter, 1967), pp. 1-23. Slotkin, J. S. "Jewish-Gentile Intermarriage in Chicago," American Sociological Review, Vol. 7, NO. 1 (February, 1942)) PP. 34-39. Smith, Eleanor, and Greenberg-Monane, J. M. "Courtship Values in a Youth Sample," American Sociological Review, Vol. 18, NO. 6 (December, 1953), pp. 635-640. Strauss, Anselm. "The Ideal and the Chosen Mate," American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 52, No. 3 (November, 1946), pp. 204-208. Sundal, A. Philip, and McCormick, Thomas C. "Age at Marriage and Mate Selection: Madison, Wisconsin, 1937-1943,“ Amgrican Sociological Review, Vol. 16, No. 1 (February, 1951), pp. 37-48. Thomas, John L. "The Factor of Religion in the Selection Of Marriage Mates," American Sociolggical Review, Vol. 16, NO. 4 (August, 1951), pp. 487-491. Winch, Robert F. "The Theory of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: A Test Of One Kind of Complementariness," Amgrican Sociological Review, Vol. 20, NO. 1 (February, 1955), PP. 52-56. Winch, Robert F., Ktsanes, Thomas, and Ktsanes, Virginia. "The Theory Of Complementary Needs in Mate Selection: An Analytic and Descriptive Study," American Sociological Review, Vol. 19, No. 3 (June, 1954), pp. 241-249. Zelditch, Morris, Jr. "Family, Marriage, and Kinship," in Paris, Robert E. L. (ed.), Handbook Of Modern Sociology. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1964, pp. 680-733. APPENDICES APPENDIX A MAY 1957 INITIAL PHASE OF VOLUNTARY MIGRATION QUESTIONNAIRE 62 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Department of Sociology and Anthropology WHAT THIS STUDY IS ABOUT This survey is an attempt to get a better picture of the problems high school students in Michigan face in selecting an area where they would like to live and work. You and only you can provide the answers. By carefully filling out this questionnaire you will help us to gain a better understanding of these problems. This information will be of great value in developing counseling programs for high school students. For this reason we are anxious to have you answer the questions on this form to the best of your ability. PLEASE FOLLOW THESE DIRECTIONS 1. Read each question and all items listed beneath the question care- fully. Then answer the question to the best of your knowledge. 2. Be sure to answer each question, but do not spend too much time on any one question. 3. If you are in doubt or don't understand an item, raise your hand and you will receive aid. 1. Your name: (First) (Middle) (Last) 2. Your mailing address: Do you live on a farm? Yes No If you do not live on a farm, have you ever lived on a farm? Yes No 3. Your high school: (Name and Location) 4. Your sex: Male Female 5. How old are you? Your date of birth: Month Day Year 63 6. 7. Your class: Junior Senior With whom do you live regularly? a. My own parents b. A parent and a step-parent c. One parent only d. My grandparents e. Uncle or Aunt f. Others (write in who they are) Your church preference is: a. Baptist e. Methodist b. Catholic f. Presbyterian c. Episcopal g. Other (write in the name) d. Lutheran Are you a member: Yes No YOUR ACTIVITIES: Many students participate in some activities in their school and in their community. We would now like to know something about your activities and what you think about them. 1. XXXXXXX The kinds of extra-curricular activities in which you participate are: (Check the ones in which you participate actively, and add to the list if necessary.) a. band-orchestra h. school paper b. chorus-vocal 1. annual (year book) c. dramatics j. student government d. debates k. hobby club e. 4—H or FFA l. hunting or fishing f. high school teams m. other 3. other athletics (specify) When you have some free time, what do you like best to do? 64 Compared with most students in your high school, the number of activities you are in is: a. greater than average b. about average c. less than average Compared with most students in your high school, your leadership activities are: a. greater than average b. about average c. less than average How Often do you feel that you would like to take part in more activities? a. very often b. often c. sometimes d. never How Often do you feel that you do not get along with your classmates? . very often often sometimes . never QaOO‘D How often do you avoid your classmates because they are unkind or unfriendly? a. very often b. Often c. sometimes d. never What do you usually do at the following times: (1£_you have g_job, state what kind) a. Immediately after school? b. In the evenings? c. On Saturdays? d. On Sundays? 65 9. Write the names and ages of your three closest friends. a. Your closest friend (Name) (A86) b. Your next closest friend (Name) (Age) c. Your next closest friend (Name) (Age) YOUR COMMUNITY: All of us have feelings about the community in which we live; there are things in it that we like and things that we do not like. we should like to have your honest opinion about the following questions as they apply to your community. XXXXXXX 1. Below is a list of statements that express opinions about any given community. Read each item carefully and quickly check the phrase that most nearly represents ygur personal belief about the community in or near which you live. Strongly Unde- Dis- Strongly Agree Agree cided agree Disagree SAMPLE: Working is great fun. )< a. Anything of a progressive nature is generally approved. b. With few exceptions the leaders are capable and ambitious. c. It is difficult for the people to get together on anything. d. The-people as a whole mind their own business. e. Everyone helps to decide how things should be run. f. The future of the community looks bright. g. No one seems to care how the community looks. 66 It will never seem like home to me. Quite a number of the resi- dents have really amounted to something. Persons with real ability are usually given recogni- tion. Not much can be said in favor of a place this size. The church services as a rule are well worth attending. The community is not located in a very desirable place. The people have to do with- out a good many conveniences like telephone service, sew- age disposal, water works, and good roads. A person has to leave town in order to have a good time. There are not many families you would care to marry into. Few if any of the neighboring towns are able to surpass it. Cultural and educational facilities like colleges, libraries, theaters, and museums are adequate. People have to do without adequate shopping facilities. Strongly Unde- Agree Agree cided Dis- agree 67 Strongly Disagree 2. After graduation many changes will take place in your way of life. You and your friends will be looking for jobs, thinking of getting married, going to college, or moving to a new town. Many of the activities that you formerly engaged in like playing basketball or just visiting will be difficult to do since many of your friends will not be around. Thinking about the chagggg that take place after graduation, read each statement below carefully and quickly check the phrase that most nearly represents your personal belief about your community. XXXXXXX AFTER GRADUATION YOUR Strongly Unde- Dis- Strongly COMMUNITY WILL BE: Agree Agree cided agree Disagree a. A good place to engage in farming b. A good place to get the job you would like to have c. A good place to find someone you would like to marry d. A good place to find people your own age e. A good place to live since there are facilities in town or close by for young adults to have a good time f. A good place to have fun with people your own age-- like dating, visiting, going to movies, or other such socia1,activities g. A good place to have fun with people your own age-- like watching or playing volleyball, basketball, or other such organized sports h. A good place to go hunting, fishing, hiking, or other similar outdoor activities 1. A good place to enjoy being members of adult organiza- tions like the VFW, the Eagles, the Rotary, the church, or womens' clubs 68 Strongly Unde- Dis- Strongly Agree Agree cided agree Disagree 1. A good place to build a home and raise a family k. A good place to remain close to your friends 1. A good place to remain close to your relatives 3. What facilities or activities should a community have for young adults, that your community does not have? a. b. c. 4. As a place to live soon.after graduation, how well do you like your community? a. strongly dislike it d. I like it b. I dislike it e. I an enthusiastic about it c. I am indifferent 5. After you are married and have a family, how well would you like your community as a place to live? a. strongly dislike it d. I would like it b. I would dislike it .e. I would be enthusiastic about it c. I would be indifferent YOU AND YOUR PARENTS: Below is a list of statements about the relations between parents and their children. We would like to have your honest opinion about these statements as they apply to your family. (If you do not live with your parents, answer the question in terms of your guardian, or the people you live with.) XXXXXXX 1. Regarding your relationships with your parents (or guardian, the peOple you live with): (Check the phrase that most nearly represents your own personal belief.) Strongly Unde- Dis- Strongly Agree Agree cided agree Disagree a. It is hard for me to feel pleasant at home. b. My parents try to understand my problems and worries. ~ 69 Strongly Unde- Dis- Strongly Agree Agree cided agree Disagree As far as my ideas are con- cerned my parents and I live in two different worlds. There is real love and affection for me at home. My parents criticize me too much. My friends have happier homes than I do. Too often my parents compare me unfavorably with other children. As I have known it, family life is happy. My parents expect too much of me. When do you think your parents are most likely to consider you an adult? (Write your answer here) What right did your parents (or guardian, the people you live with) have to make decisions for you whengyou were in the 9thggrade (beginning high school)? a. They had a definite right to help make my decisions. b. They had some right to help make my decisions. c. They had no right, but they could give me their opinions. d. They had no right to even give their opinions. What right do your parents have to make decisions for you after you graduate from high school? a. They have a definite right to help make my decisions. b. They have some right to help make my decisions. c. They have no right, but they may give me their opinions. d. They have no right even to give their opinions. 70 10. Which of the following statements best indicates what your parents have encouraged you to do after graduation? a. Get a full time job and continue to live at home. b. Get a full time job and live as close to home as possible. c. Get the best full time job possible even if you have to move to another community. d. Continue your education or training, and then return to your community. e. Continue your education or training, and then get the best job possible even if you have to move to another community. f. Other (indicate) Do your parents expect you to help support them after graduation? Yes No Will your parents be able to help you in getting a start or continuing your education after graduation from high school? a. They will be financially able to help you a great deal. b. They will be financially able to give you some help. c. They will be financially able to give you gg_he1p. How willing will your parents be to help you after you graduate from high school? a. Willing to help you a great deal. b. Willing to give you some help. c. Willing to give you gg_help. When the time comes for a boy to take a job, he should stay near his parents even if it means giving up a good job? Yes No Undecided Even when teenagers get married, their first loyalty still belongs to their parents. Yes No undecided LEAVING YOUR COMMUNITY: At times many have considered moving away from their communities. We would now like to know if you have considered leaving your community, and something about your reasons. XXXXXXX Have you ever seriously considered moving away from your community? Yes No Are you considering moving away from your community after graduation? Yes No 71 10 How eager are you to stay or move from your community after graduation? a. Eager to stay b. Probably stay, but not eager to stay c. Probably leave, but not eager to leave d. Eager to leave If you are considering leaving your community soon after graduation, what are your two main reasons? a. First reason b. Second reason Below is a list of reasons high school students sometimes give for leaving their communities after graduation. If the statement repre- sents a reason for your wanting to leave your community, check yes; if not, check 22, Yes No Undecided a. Few good jobs available b. Unable to make a go Of farming c. Little chance of finding someone I would like to marry d. Few people of my own age e. Feeling pleasant at home is difficult for me f. Few occasions to engage in activities you consider important g. Few occasions to engage in outdoor sports h. To get away from the domination of my family 1. Not enough facilities in town or nearby to have a good time 3. No privacy--everyone knows my business k. The climate is not good 1. Not enough night life for young adults 72 11 Yes NO Undecided m. Feeling pleasant with some of the people my own age is difficult n. The community has no future o. The location is poor p. Parents criticize me too much q. To be able to make my own decisions r. Public services such as telephone service, water supply, sewage disposal, and road repairs are poor a. My reputation in the community is not as I want it t. My community is not a good place to raise a family u. There are not enough good shopping centers nearby v. There are not enough facilities like libraries, museums, art galleries, and colleges w. I want a change of scenery and new experiences A. Which of the above do you consider most important? (Please write the letter of the two most important) First Second . NEW COMMUNITY: The following questions seek to find out some of your preferences about the kind of place in which you would like to live. XXXXXXX 73 Co 12 Which of the following best indicates the kind of community in which you would prefer to live: (Please check only one). a. In the open country b. In a village under 2,500 (like Ewen or Ontonagon) c. In a city of 10,000 to 100,000 (like Marquette or Lansing) d. In a city of over 100,000 (like Detroit or Chicago) e. In a suburb outside a large city A. If you checked the open country or a villagg, do you prefer the location to be near a big city? Yes No . IF YES, how near? . B. Do you have any specific place in mind? Yes No IF YES, where? How important are the following qualities of the community in which you would eventually like to live? (Read each statement carefully and quickly check the phrase that most nearly represents your own personal belief.) Very Of Some Of Little or Important Importance No Importance The community should have libraries, museums, art galleries, and colleges. The community should have avail- able entertainment like con- certs, lectures, and plays. The community should have avail- able entertainment like movies or bowling. . The community should have good TV reception. The community should have avail- able sports events, like boxing, football, baseball, and basket- ball. The community should be one in which a person can be close to nature with opportunities for hunting, fishing, and hiking. 74 13 Very Of Some Of Little or Important Importance No Importance The community should have con- veniences like telephone ser- vice, water supply, good trans- portation, sewage disposal and good roads. The community should have a climate that you like. The community should have an open country atmosphere away from the hustle, bustle, and noise of the city. The community should be busy and exciting with lots of people and no one knowing your business. The community should have many avenues to success, and not limit a person to a job they may not like. The community should be one where there are good jobs. The community should be one in which you can be close to your friends. The community should be near shopping centers with depart- ment stores and supermarkets. The community should have or be close to some interesting and ‘exciting night life. What other qualities not men- tioned above should the com- munity have? (write your answer here) Which of the above do you consider most important? (Please write the letter of the two most important.) First Second 75 14 YOUR FUTURE OCCUPATION: Now that high school graduation is nearing, we'd like to know something about your plans for your future life's work. XXXXXXX Of all the jobs in this community, which job would you like best? Which least? . How do you think that farming compares with city jobs like working in a factory, store, or office? Better Worse Undecided . How do you think that mining compares with city jobs like working in a factory, store, or office? Better Worse Undecided . How do you think that woods work compares with city jobs like working in a factory, store, or office? Better Worse Undecided . If you could have any job you wanted, regardless of the training or experience required, what job would you pick? . What jobs have your parents mentioned that they would like to see you do? a. b. c. What jobs are you now seriously considering as a lifetime work? a. First choice . Have your parents encouraged this? Yes No b. Second choice . Have your parents encouraged this? Yes No Regarding your first choice, what do you think are the reasons for your selecting it? (Check as many reasons as apply) a. Encouraged by family g. Interest developed out of b. Advised by friends experience c. Suggested by school study h. Most profitable work I could get d. Suggested by motion i. Suggested by counseling and pictures testing e. Suggested by TV or radio j. Admired someone in this job f. Suggested by magazines k. Other (indicate) and books A. Which of the above do you consider most important? (Please write the letter of the two most important). First Second . 76 7. 15 Generally, what do you most expect of the job you want to make your life's work? (Check as many statements as apply). a. Freedom of behavior g. Money b. Chance for advancement h Security c. Friendship with fellow i. Public recognition employees j. Benefit to humanity d. Power and authority k. Time to enjoy myself e. Intellectual challenge 1. Other (indicate) f. Prestige or respect A. Which of the above do you consider most important? (Please write the letter of the two most important) First Second . How do you expect to get started in the job you want for your life's work? Do you intend to get further training after high school? Yes- No Don't know . If Yes, what do you plan? a.____College. Where b.____Trade School. Where c.____Apprentice. Where d._y__pther. What and Where If Yes, how do you intend to pay for the training? (Check as many as Lapply.and underline the most important.) ' a. Parents will help b. WOrk on the side c. Scholarships d. Borrow the money e. Other (Specify) f. Don't know If Yes, when do you intend to start? a. When the new term starts in the fall b. After working for a year or so c. After military service d. Other (indicate) 77 10. 11. 12. 16 Do you expect to enter military service soon after graduation? Yes; No Don't know If Yes, for how long? a. Permanent career b. Two years only c. Other (indicate) Has the possibility of military service affected your job plans? Yes No Don't know If Yes, check in what way or ways? a. Delayed making any definite plans b. Employers are hesitant to hire me c. Figured I'd get it out of the way and then decide d. Other (indicate) Do you have a job waiting for you when you graduate? Yes No Don't Know (If yes, please check the following; if no or don't know, go to Question 13.) If yes, what type of job is it? (If more than one job is available, state than in order of your preference.) Who would you be working for? (For your first choice if more than one job.) Parents Other relatives Non relatives . Do your parents expect you to take that job? Yes No Don't Know They Don't Care What is the location of the job? Do you intend to keep the job permanently? Yes No Don't Know If no or don't know, which of the following best indicates what you would do? a. Not take the job b. Take the job temporarily until c. Other (specify) . d. Don't know 78 13. 17 If you don't have a job you intend to take, and don't expect to go to college (or on for additional training) or into the Service, do you expect to seek a job near home or away from home? a. I expect to seek a job near where I live. b. I expect to look for a job away from home. c. I don't know as yet just what I will do. What type of job will you be looking for? YOUR COMMUNITY AFTER GRADUATION: Now we would like to know something about the community you intend to reside in after graduation. l. 2. XXXXXXXX Where do you expect to live while working or going to school soon (5 or 6 months) after graduation? (place) Why do you intend to live in the community named in the above question? (Check as many statements as apply.) a. Because the community has cultural facilties like libraries, museums, and colleges. b. Because the community has recreational and entertainment facilities you consider important. c. Because the community has adequate conveniences like telephone service, water supply, good transportation, sewage disposal, and good roads. d.____Because the community has a good climate. e.____Because the community is the size you want. fn___gBecause the community has many good jobs available. g.____Because the community has good shopping centers. h.____Because you have a job waiting for you there. 1. Because you will be going to school there. j. Because many of your friends are there. k. Because many of your relatives are there. 1. Because you will have freedom of behavior there. 79 18 m. Because the community will be a 'change of scenery', a place where you can have new and exciting experiences. n. Better chance to find someone you want to marry. 0. Because there are more people your own age there. p. Because the community has an open country atmosphere away from the hustle and bustle of the city. q. Because the community has more avenues to success and advancement. r. Other A. Which of the above do you consider most important? (Please write the letter of the two most important.) First Second B. If the community you intend to live in after graduation is not your home community, how did you learn about it? . Do you have a second choice of a community where you would like to live soon (5 or 6 months) after graduation? Yes No Don't Know If Yes, where? If Yes, why did you select the first choice rather than the second? Now, considering the kind of job and the way of life you eventually wish to have, do you think it is necessary for you to move from your present community? Yes No Don't Know Would you remain or eventually return to your community if jobs were available? Yes No Don't Know Twenty years from now, what job do you expect to have? . Where to you expect to be living twenty years from now? First choice . Second choice . ' 80 19 YOUR PARENTS: Now we would like to have some information about your parents: XXXXXXX 1. Your parents are: a. Both living together b. Both dead c. Father is dead d. Mbther is dead e. Divorced f. Separated 2. Your mother: a. has no job outside the home. b. has a part-time job outside the home. c. has a full-time job outside the home. 3. Your father's occupation is: (or was, if dead or retired) (Specify the kind of work he does and not where he works.) Main occupation Part-time occupation If your father is a farmer, how many acres does he operate How many milk cows does he have 4. What does your father think of his occupation: a. Completely satisfactory b. Fairly satisfactory c. Good enough d. Not very good e. Very poor 5. Where was your father born? (State or Country) Where was your mother born? (State or Country) 6. What nationality is your father? What nationality is your mother? 81 7. 10. ll. . 12. 20 How much formal schooling (does, did) your father have? a. Less than 4 years b. 5-7 years c. 8 years d. 9-11 years e. High school graduate f. Some college g. College graduate h. Don't know 1. Other (indicate) How much formal schooling (does, did) your mother have? a. Less than 4 years b. 5-7 years c. 8 years d. 9-11 years e. High school graduate f. Some college 3. College graduate h. Don't know i. Other (indicate) How old is your father? Your mother? Indicate by a check )( the number of the category in which your parents' income fell last year. (If not sure, make an estimate.) a. Under $1,000 e. 4,000 to b. ‘1,000 to 1,999 f. 5,000 to c. 2,000 to 2,999 g. 6,000 to d. 3,000 to 3,999 h. 7,000 to 1. 9,000 and over How many brothers do you have? 4,999 5,999 6,999 8,999 How many are older than you? How many sisters do you have? How many are older than you? 82 21 13. IN THE SPACE BELOW WRITE THE NAME, SEX, OCCUPATION AND PLACE OF RESIDENCE OF EACH OF YOUR OLDER BROTHERS AND SISTERS: (Start with your oldest brother or sister and include all your older brothers and sisters. If in school, put "student." If older sister is married and not working outside the home, put "housewife." IMale orI | Place or Residence Name .Female 1 Occupation (town and state) i--- ——-1>—--ir-—-I-——qp—— P--I-———— un- -J+--lL—- P—dp--_-1-—b-1--—- YOUR HOME: Now we would like to know something about your home. XXXXXXX 1. Your parents home is: a. owned b. rented c. being bought If renting, how much is your rent? . 2. The number of persons who live in your house is: . The number of rooms in your house is? . (Do not include basements, bathrooms, porches, closets, halls.) 3. The construction of your house is: a. brick b. Unpainted frame c. Painted frame d. Other (specify) 4. The lighting in your house is: a. Oil lamps b. Electric c. Gas, mantle, or pressure lamps d. Other or none. ' 83 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 22 What kind of refrigeration do you have? a. ice b. mechanical (gas or electric) c. other or none Do you have a deep freeze locker in your house? Yes No Do you have running water in your house? Yes No Do you have an indoor toilet? Yes No . Does your family take a daily newspaper? Yes No . Does your family have a power washing machine in your home? Yes No . Do you have a radio in your home? Yes No . Does this radio work? (Yes No Do you have a TV set in your home? Yes No Does your family have a car? (other than a truck) Yes____ No . Does your home have a telephone? Yes No . Does your father (or guardian) go to church at least once a month? Yes No Does your mother (or guardian) go to church at least once a month? Yes No 84 APPENDIX B 1968 FIRST DECENNIAL RE-STUDY QUESTIONNAIRE 85 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY FIRST DECENNIAL RE-STlIDY ONIONAGON comm! men scHooL STUDENTS WHAT THIS STUDY IS ABOUT In May 1957 you and your classmates participated in the first phase of a study of the problems faced by young people in preparing for the world of work and in selecting an area where they would like to live. This second phase of the study inquires into events since high school. We would like to learn of the experiences you have had, the problems you have faced, your successes and frustrations, and your thoughts concerning the past ten years and the future. This information will be of great value in developing better counseling programs for high school students from rural areas. Obviously, only you can help us, by being as frank as possible in completing this questionnaire. Your answers will be kept in strict confidence and your name will not be linked to the findings. PLEASE FOLLOW THE DIRECTIONS 1. Read each item carefully. Then answer it to the best of your knowledge. This is not a test, so there are no right or wrong answers. 2. Be sure to answer each question completely. The outcome of the study will be successful only if you are careful to provide accurate and complete information. Special "guides," indicated by the symbol «*, are included to help you inter- pret some questions. 3. If you are in doubt, or do not understand an item, make a note of it in the margin, and complete the rest of the questions. Upon return of the question- naire, a member of the project staff will then contact you and complete it by phone conversation or personal interview, at your convenience. I. BIOGRAPHICAL INFORMATION 1.1. We would like to know a little bit about yourself: Elm. a. What is your name? [:Z] Mrs. [::3 Miss (First) (Initial) (Maiden) (Last) b. What is your current mailing address? » c. Your birth date? (Honth) (Day) V(Year) Zip: d. Your present age? [:Z] Single E Married Local phone: [:Z] Widowed e. Your present marital status? [:Z] Separated or divorced f. Your high school and graduation class? (School) (Year) g. Have you served on active duty in any branch of the armed forces? D Yes D No 1. If "Yes": What branch 2. Period on of service? active duty: From: (Month) (Year) 3. Highest rank and pay grade held while on active duty: To: (Rank) _(§ay grade)4’ W(Month) (Year) b. How many brothers and sisters do you have? 1. Please indicate age, sex, and occupation of all brothers and sisters 18 years old and older: Age Sex Job What does he/she do?) Age Sex Job (What does he/she do?) 1.2. If you are now married, we would like to know something of your marriage and family: a. What is your D wife's E husband's name? (First) 4(Initial) (Last) b. What was her/his hometown and state? __7 ‘(Towfi) (State) c. Where did you first get to know her/him? (Town), (State) d. What was the highest grade c. On what date did she/he completed in school? you get married? (Month) (Day74’ (Year) 1'. Have you had children? [3 Yes [:1 No 1. If "Yes": List the date of birth for each child (month and year): 1.3. We would like to learn about any further educational experience you have had since high school: a. Have you obtained further qualification by APPRENTICESHIP 0R ON-THE—JOB TRAINING? D Yes [I] No If ”Yes," please give details: Organization or Firm Type of Job or Apprenticeship Inel“Sive Dates Certification (Specific skills in which you of the Training earned, if any were trained) City State “0m T0 b. Have you attended a TRADE, VOCATIONAL, 0R TECHNICAL SCHOOL? [:1 Yes [:3 No If ”Yes," please give details: Inclusive Dates Name of School SPGC1f1° Program of Training of the Training (Course of training in which you were enrolled) Diploma earned, if any City State From To c. Have you obtained further ACADEMIC EDUCATION since leaving high school? [:3 Yes I: No If "Yes," please give details: Inclusive Dates Institution of Attendance Degree Academic Major earned, if any City State From To II. R E S I D E N C E H I S T O R Y 1957 - 1968 II.l. a. Starting with your residence at the time you were completing high school, list each of the places you have lived since that time. *List addresses as nearly as you can remember them for each place lived at Do NOT include We would like to learn about your for a month or more. changes of house within the same town or conmunity. 1. (Residence at time of high school) b. What month and year did you move to this place? I experiences since leaving high school: c. Why did you move? . . 'fl {3182 , . 131'? :73 *We are interested not only in why you daiMJ5'33:;; t0 leave, but also why you chose to go imam {Dari Ans you did. 1 . ‘8‘. 2T5 [of if? 2. l (2.0.) (City) (St-an) me.) Mr.) A 3. (2.9,) (Citv) (Smgm (Ii-i) eefi h. Jam) (Citv) (SltL—m‘ai) Mr.) #A‘. 5. .‘ (12-0-) (CitlL (smml (mi 4N 6. 1 12-0-) (CitvL (Stath—L—LMQAI Hr-) _——-—--“‘\. 7. (P.0. L (City) iState) (Mm) (Yr. ) 4A 8. Jami (City) (Sun) (Mm) (Yr.) 4A. 9. (12.0.) (City) (State) he.) (Yr.) 4A, 10. 1 (9.0.) (City) (State) We.) (Yr.) /L on have friends , elatives living 3"- near this place e. If you had friends or relatives living in or near this place (or who f. Looking back over your social participation while living in this place: time were thinking were thinking of moving 1. On the whole, how much 2. Did you 3. Did you make wing here) at the here) how much do you would you say you became participate any friend- ymiwere consid- think that fact affected involved in affairs and in any local ships with gnawing here? your decision to move to activities in the local organiza- other resi- this place? community? tions? dents which you consider Would you say it had: important? ids Relatives a little to a to a to major some or no consid- moder- only a not affect? affect? affect? erable ate slight at Yes No Yes No No Yes No degree degree degree all “ET ’; _ h [/7 _ I} I I I . E M P L O Y M E N T A N D I N C O M E l 9 5 7 - 1 9 6 T 111.1. This question deals with your work experience and income over thegperiod since May 1957: *Look over the question caremlly to be sure you understand what to do, and then fill in each section, working across the page. a. YOUR RESIDENCE: Mark in your residences, and draw vertical lines between them indicating the approximate date you moved from one to another. (You may, of course, copy this information from the previous page). i When filled in, this section shows where you lived 1957-1967, and should help to pinpoint your Jobs during that time. b. YOUR WORK EXPERIENCE: 1. FULL-TIME EMPLOYMENT. In this section mark in the full—time Jobs you have had (tell what you did at your Job), and draw vertical lines indicating the approximate dates you began and quit each full-time Job. .When filled in, this section shows your full-time employment 1957-1967. 2. PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT. In this section mark in the part-time Jobs you have had (tell what you did at your Job), and draw vertical lines indicating the approximate dates you began and quit each part-time Job. *When filled in, this section shows all part-time work 1957-1967. c. YOUR WIFE{§[HUSBAND'S WORK EXPERIENCE: Mark in the full-time Jobs your wife/husband has had (tell what she/he did at the Job), and draw vertical lines indicating the approximate dates she/he began and quit each Job. 'I'When filled in, this section shows your wife's/husband's work experience 1957-1967. d. YOUR ESTIMATED TOTAL FAMILY INCOME (BEFORE TAXES): (or your own personal income if not married) Mark the box which represents the closest estimate of your family/personal income for the years indi— cated. (Do not include support from parents or other relatives). Looking over the Jobs held during each year may help you in estimating your income. fiWhen filled in, this section shows your estimated income 1957-1967. 1957 " 'V V V " r7r7r7r7 r7r7r7r7 (/ IP' I . ' a I i .. | 's 1959 .9... commuwC) sisssszésefisgi “8 A g A v v r 1 v 1 sue to include not only where you worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB YOU DID.) i mre to include not only where you worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB YOU DID.) / I I ; WW! to include not only where she/he worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB SHE/HE DID.) \ \\ \\ \\ \ \ \\ \\ \\ \ \ D n n i J T , 00 - 10, 000 Over $10,000 DDDD DDDD V 1960 nder $2,500 .500 ‘ 3.999 ,000 - h,999 .000 - 5.999 000 - 6,999 .000 - 7.999 ,000 - 10,000 Over $10,000 0999 @999 A ”I / DDDD DDDD {/I III.1 EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME 1957-1967 (Continued) 1962 1963 1954 Ne SDI-4 hf: 9.05 flflhhh 0.0 .0 h( gtgt glg‘tijigtgca‘g . gtg sea .£%&:£t§ lg:§:8£8e§ cg §+£¢£M§J£g 'g ' ' 1 .1 k ,.._ a. YOUR RESIDENCE: (Continued) b. YOUR WORK i EXPERIENCE: — (Continued) 1. FULL-TIME . EMPLOYMENT: ‘44:: SN 2. PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT: sh c. YOUR WIFE'S/ HUSBAND'S WORK EXPERIENCE: (Continued) I l A! inin .niniii 1.. ..i_i_a—+l-3‘;: Y Y ~« \ 1962 1963 196“ [:1 Under $2,500 1:: Under $2,500 [:1 Under 333‘; d. YOUR ESTIMATED [:1 2.500 - 3.999 E: 2.500 - 3.999 [:3 2.500 '3'” TOTAL FAMILY/ [:1 “.000 - 15999 C3 1‘.000 - M999 [:1 U130 'j', pgggomg [:1 5.000 - 5,999 (:3 5.000 - 5.999 [:1 5.030 ‘ INCOME: I [:3 6,000 - 6,999 [:3 6,000 - 6,999 C3 6.000 ’9; (Continued) [:1 7,000 - 7,999 [:1 7.000 - 7.999 [3 7.000 12° 1:] 8,000 - 10,000 E] 8,000 - 10,000 [:1 8900.71.10 C] Over $10,000 [:1 Over $10,000 [:1 Over 3“." _/ 8 \ 1965 1966 1967 EEEEEEE 2 EE Eu EEEEEEEEEEEE melee“ E *EEEEE fine to include not only where you worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB YOU DID.) ’u'e to include not only where you worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB YOU DID.) ire to include not only where she/he worked but WHAT SPECIFIC JOB SHE/HE DID.) ’# I A n I A L 1'7 a 1 l n L J A a i 4 n ! J A J A 1 1 L j 4 A JT L A V V V 1965 1966 1967 [:3 Under $2,500 [:1 Under $2,500 [:1 U der $2,500 [I] 2,500 - 3.999 [:1 2.500 - 3,999 [2:] 2.500 - 3.999 D h,ooo - 14,999 B h,ooo - h,999 : h,ooo - h,999 I: 5,000 - 5.999 [:2] 5.000 - 5.999 C] 5.000 - 5.999 D 6,000 - 6,999 C] 6,000 - 6,999 [:1 6,000 - 6,999 CI) 7,000 - 7,999 [:3 7.000 - 7.999 [:1 7,000 - 7.999 [:1 8,000 - 10,000 I: 8,000 - 10,000 [:1 8,000 - 10,000 [3 Over $10,000 [:1 Over $10,000 [:1 Over $10,000 III.2. f. g. h. We would like to learn of your experience and opinions concerning education, work, and income: In the period since high school, what have been the greatest handicaps to getting ahead? Looking back over the period since high school, what would you do differently if you had it to do all over again? Based on your experience since high school, what changes in content or in emphasis would you recommend for rural high schools (such as the one you attended) to better prepare young people for the future? In general, have things turned out as you expected them to while you were still in high school? C] Things have turned out less well than I expected :3 Things have turned out about as I expected D Things have turned out better than I expected Don't know In general, how much education do you think a young person should have nowadays? C] Some high school B Some college D Complete high school C] Complete college Business, vocational, or trade school B Graduate or professional training How many hours did YOU work last week outside the home? [3 Some, but less than 15 hours C] 140 - 50 hours [3 15 - 30 hours B More than 50 hours [3 3O - 110 hours [3 None 1. Is your work seasonal? D Yes D No Some people would like to work more hours per week if they could get paid for it. Others would prefer to work fewer hours a week even if they earned less. What would you do if you could? D Work more hours B Work less hours B Don't know 1. Why do you say this? J...— What was your approximte family income (personal income, if unmarried) last month? 35 _________..- 1. Was last month a typical month? [:1 Yes [2 No D It is higher now 2. How would you compare your income to what it was a year ago? l:] It is lower now D It is about the same DOV 10 *Answer Questions 1, j, k, and 1, if you are usually employed part- or full-time. 1. How do you usually go about looking for a job? (Check as many as apply) D Check the newspaper [:ZJ Get leads from friends and relatives Go to the union Go to the public employment office Go to a private employment office Go to employers directly D Other (specify) °fifififi”’ 1. Write the letter of the most useful: j. How sure are you that you have identified the kind of job you want to make your life's work? [:Z] Very sure [:Z] Fairly sure EZZJ Unsure k. What features do you think are important in a job? (Check as many as apply) Freedom of behavior Chance for advancement Friendship with fellow employees Power and authority Intellectual challenge Prestige and respect Money Security Public recognition Benefit to humanity Enjoyment of the work Time to enjoy myself Other (specify) 665666 5666665 1. write the letter of the most important: 1. Ten years from now what job do you expect you will have? IV. YOUR COMMUNITY AND PARTICIPATION IV.1. We would like to learn about yourgparticipation, if any, in organizations and in political affairs: a. What kinds of clubs, associations, unions, church groups, or other organizations, if any, do you participate in? Do you Are you a Are you, or have you Do your Do your Name of attend member of a ever been, an officer FRIENDS Organization ? committee? zat ? be Y Yes No Y s No Yes 11 b. Other than organizations (as mentioned on the previous page), what other kinds of activities, if up, do you engage in during your free time? C. Are you a registered voter? [:1 Yes [3 No d. Did you vote in the last presidential election (196A)? D Yes D No e. Have you voted in: 1. State elections? [:Z] Regularly [:Z] Sometimes C::] Never 2. City or local elec- tions and referendums? I: Regularly E Sometimes E: lever f. Have you ever actively participated in a political party? l::j Yes [::3 No 3. Have you ever held, or are you now holding, a political or civic office? D Yes D No 1. If "Yes," please name the positions or offices: h. Has the amount of your commnity participation varied greatly? That is, was there ever a time in the last 10 years that you participated a great deal more or a great deal less than you do at the present time? [3 Yes D No 1. If "Yes," why do you feel you participated differently then? 2. Were you living then in the same community that you are living in now? EZZJ Yes E::]No 17.2. We would like to learn of the facilities and services in your community: a. Below is a list of facilities and services often found in communities. Please check how often you and/or your family use each: Not avail- able here never Facility or service Nei ters Re 8 t Pre-sc ces Bars -car services t c cs Welfare coun h ams tres Parks and ounds se 5 1. Write the letters of those you consider most important: First: Second: Third: 12 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \«\ IV.3. 1. If "Yes": b. Have you had contact with one or more community agencies in the past two years? [:Z] Yes [II] No With what agency have you had the most contact? 2. Did you receive aid or assistance from this agency? [::3 Yes [::3 No a. If "Yes": What exactly did this agency do for you? b. Did you feel that the service of this agency was difficult to get? [:Z] Yes [::3 No Explain: We would like to know your opinions concerning your present community: a. Below is a series of statements that express various opinions about any given community. Read each statement carefully and quickly check the column to the right which most nearly represents your own personal belief about the community $g_gy_near which you live: Statements Strongly agree Agree Undecided Disagree Strongly disagree Anything of a progressive nature is generally approved. 2. With few exceptions the leaders are capable and ambitious. 3. It is difficult for the people to get together on anything. The people, as a whole, mind their own business. The future of the community looks bright. No one seems to care how the community looks. It will never seem like home to me. Not much can be said for a place this size. 9. The community is not located in a very desirable place. 10. Few if any of the neighboring towns are able to surpass it. 11. People have to do without adequate shopping facilities. 12. Persons with real ability are usually given recognition. b. What do you think people in your community need most? 1. How do you think they should go about getting this? 13 IV.h. we would like to know something of your relations with your neighbors: a. About how many people who live in your present community do you think you would recognize by'sight if you saw them in a large crowd? [3 Almost all a )hny D Some D Very few E None b. About how often would you say you chat or visit with your neighbors? D Very often a Often [:3 Sometimes C: Seldom [:3 Never c. Do you or your neighbors ever take care of each other's family when you or they are sick or busy? [::3 Yes [::3 No 1. If "Yes," about how often does this occur? D Very often D Often D Sometimes I: Seldom d. Do you and your neighbors ever talk over problems with each other? I: Yes D No 1. If "Yes," about how often does this occur? [:3 Very often D Often D Sometimes I: Seldom e. Do you have relatives who are living in this comnity, but who are not living with you? [:3 Yes a No 1. If "Yes," about how often do you visit with them? I: Very often : Often :] Sometimes (:J Seldom IV.5. We are interested inpypur thoughts about the possibility of moving away from your present communuag a. Would you like to move to some other place? a Yes I: No CI] Don't know 1. If "Yes," where would you like to move? (Neighborhood, city, state, etc.) 2. What would be better there? 3. Why would you like to move away from here (present community)? b. Is there anybody you would miss so much that you would prefer not to move away from your present community? (:3 Yes D No 1. If "Yes," would you leave anyway if you had a good job opportunity? [:Z] Yes [:Z] No C. Which of the following best indicates the kind of community you would most prefer to live in? On a farm in the open country In the open country but not on a farm In a village under 2,500 people In a town or city of 2,500 to 10,000 In a city of 10,000 to 100,000 In a city over 100,000 In a suburb outside a large city DDDDDDD 1h PERSONS NOW LIVING WITHIN ONTONAGON COUNTY {7 d. How would you estimate the chance that you will move out of Ontonagon County? D Better than 75% CI 50 to 75% [:I About 50-50 E] 25 to 50% D Less than 25% 9. During the past twelve months, how often did you visit relatives outside Ontonagon County? C] More than once [:3 Once a Not at all D No relatives living outside the county f. During the past twelve months, how often did you visit friends outside Ontonagon County? B More than once D Once [:3 Not at all C] No friends living outside the county 3. Do you subscribe to the ONTONAGON HERALD? D Yes 1:] No h. Overall, how would you describe your ties to the Ontonagon County area? [:3 Very strong D Moderately strong Average D D Moderately weak [3 Little or no ties at all 15 *Depending on where you presently live, answer the questions in the appropriate column below: PERSONS NOW LIVING OUTSIDE ONTONAGON COUNTY ‘0' d. How would you estimate the chance that you will move back to Ontonagon County? :1 Better than 75% (:1 so to 75% [I] About 50-50 II] 25 to 50% 1:] Less than 251 e. During the past twelve months, how often did you visit relatives in Ontonagon County? [:3 More than once [:3 Once D Not at all C] No relatives living there f. During the past twelve months, how often did you visit friends in Ontonagon County? [:1 More than once D Once D Not at all D No friends living there g. Do you subscribe to the ONTONAGON HERALD? [:3 Yes I: No h. Overall, how would you describe your ties to the Ontonagon County area? D Very strong D Moderately strong g Average D Moderately weak D Little or no ties at all * IF YOU ARE PRESENTLY AN ONTONAGON COUNTY RESIDENT, BUT LIVED AWAY FROM ONTONAGON COUNTY FOR A MONTH OR mRE ANY TIME SINCE 1957, ANSWER THE QUESTIONS ON PAGES 16 — 19. ALL OTHERS SHOULD PROCEED TO PAGE 20. *Answer the questions on pages 16, 17, 13, and 19 only if you are now living in Ontonagon County and lived away from the area for a period of one month or more sometime since Aby'1957. ALL OTHERS SHOULD PROCEED TO PAGE 20. V. RETURNING TO ONTONAGON COUNTY v.1. RETURNING TO ONTONAGON COUNTY: Some of your classmates moved away after high school, either to other rural areas or to cities, and have since returned to live in Ontonagon County. There are many reasons why people leave and then return to their original community. We are interested in why you returned: a. Below is a series of statements which express various reasons given by peonle for moving away and then returning. Read each statement carefully and quickly check the column to the right whichimmt nearly represents its importance as a reason for your returning to Ontonagon County. Importance as a reason for my returning Statements No Great Some A little importance importance importance importance or doesn't apply l. I like the climate here. 2. I felt I could make a better living here. I like the outdoor recreational Oppor- tunities such as hunting and fishing. I couldn't find the specific type of work I like elsewhere. I enjoy being near my relatives and wanted to remain close to them. 6 I had no special reason for returning, ' it was just happenstance. I felt this is a good place to enjoy being 7. a member of adult organizations like Vet- erans, PTA, church or women's clubs. 8 I felt I wanted to return and enter ' another line of work. It seemed others were prejudiced against me, I just didn't fit in. I found I just didn't like the city 10' (or other areas). I felt the children could get a good 11. education here. 12 Finding a job in the other place(s) ° was difficult. 13 I didn't have enough education to get anywhere in the city. I just wanted a change of scenery and 1h. the Chance to travel, or to work in different places before settling down. CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PACE Q 16 RETURNING TO ONTONAGON COUNTY (Continued) Importance as a reason for my returning Great importance Some importance A little importance No importance or doesn't apply I15. I felt the people in the other places were less friendly. 16. While my present location in Ontonagon has a lot of disadvantages, other places I had lived seemed even worse. 17. I wanted to raise my family here. 18. While the peonle in other areas seemed friendly enough, I just didn't feel comfortable with them. 19. I found I didn't have enough vocational training for the job I would have liked. 20. I felt my parents would like to have me near them. 21. I think, all in all, the cost of living is lower here. I feel I have more say in my own and/or community life. 23. This is a good place to have fun with people your own age. 2h. There was a specific job here that I wanted to look into. 25. My career plans changed. 26. I felt it was a good place to find someone I would like to marry. 27. I went away to attend (college, work training or military duty). 28. I feel that here I can show more initiative in things I do. 29. Life just wasn't very interesting to me in the other area(s). 30. After a while I became rather lonely for the pe0ple I had known here. 31. There are more opportunities here for such things as visiting, going to movies, sports or other social activities. This is a good place for me to engage in the kind of work I want to do. 33. I felt I had to return to help support parents or relatives. 3h. Life seemed more interesting to me here than anywhere else I had been. 1? CONTINUED ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE » RETURNING TO ONTONAGON COUNTY (Continued) Importance as a reason for my returning No Great Some A little importmme importance importance importance or doemft apply I feel like I am a person of more 35' importance in this community. I prefer the kind of residential housing 36' in a small community. I just assumed I would always come back 37. and after a while I did. My (husband) (wife) had been urging that we return here. 38. A (man)(woman) is more (his)(her) own 39. b 085 here. I like to live in a smaller size community no' where there is plenty of space and scenery. A1. I felt a lack of security in other area(s). A2. I don't like city traffic and commuting. I had always wanted to be away from my h3- parents and community for a while after high school. I decided to sacrifice some potential income AA. in order to live here. hS. This has always seemed like home to me. b. In general, which of the reasons you have indicated above do you consider the most ipportant hlyour returning to Ontonagon County? Write the numbers of the three most important reasons: First: Second: Third: Those statements listed above are, of course, only some of the possible reasons for returning: 1. What other reasons, if any, did you have for returning? (Please discuss) c. Which of the following combinations best describes your situation at the time you first left Ontonagon County subsequent to May 1957? (Check one) (Check one) C::] I left for a specific purpose or [:Z] thought I would return one day. purposes and [:3 did not think it was likely that C::] I left for unspecific or rather I would return. general reasons [:Z] didn't really know whether I'd return or not. 18 d. Many people who have left an area and then returned have had similar experiences. We would like to learn of the experiences you have had. Check the column which best represents the amount of your agreement or disagreement with each statement as it applies to your experience: Statements Strongly agree Somewhat agree Somewhat Strongly Undecided disagree disagree 1. I liked it, generally, in the other place(s). I found I really preferred the kind of living here. The other place(s) had little to do with my returning. I was rather unsure how successful I would be in the other place(s). I really had little preference one way or the other for the other place(s). I felt I had to return for certain obligatory reasons. I didn't particularly like the other place(s). It is just chance circumstance that I happen to be here. e. We would like to know something of your own, your family's, and your community's expectations at the time you first left Ontonagon County to live elsewhere: 1. 3. (Complete the sentence) I O O O O O O O O O O 0 O O O Wfamily.......... My family and I . . . . . . . Others in the community . . . DDDD D DDD DDD DDD expected that I would settle down in this community. expected that I would settle down somewhere else. really didn't know whether I would settle here or elsewhere. expected that I would settle down in this community. expected that I would settle down somewhere else. wasn't much concerned where I settled. discussed where I would settle and we were in agreement. discussed where I would settle and'we were in disagreement. discussed where I would settle but we never reached any particular conclusion. did not discuss the matter of where I would settle. expected that I would settle down in this community. expected that I would settle down somewhere else. weren't much concerned where I settled. don't know PROCEED TO THE LAST PAGE é * “J. PERSONS SHOULD ANSWER THE QUESTIONS on THIS PAGE. VI. DISCUSSION VI.l We would like to have your thougts about the Ontonagg County area as a place to live: a.‘ How would you feel if your children were to eventually settle in Ontonagon County? D Very pleased D Somewhat pleased [:1 Indifferent Somewhat displeased D Very displeased 1. Why would you feel that way? b. If you were advising a high school student now enrolled in school in mtmaga: County, what advice would you give him regarding staying or moving away subsequent to his completing high school? V1.2 what we have tried to do in this questionnaire is to get as accurate and complete a picture as possible of your present situation and your experiences since high school. As you look back over these pages, reflecting on your experience in the past ten years, please Isle some .1th as to how adequate a picture is given by this questionnaire. The space below is pro- vided for you to discuss those aspects you feel we should be more fully aware of to understand your experience and what it has meant. Please feel free 22 discuss a_ny asmct m wish. i ‘. THANK YOU VERY MUCH . HICHIGQN STRTE UNIV. LIBRRRIES 31293201270315