ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF IMAGES OF THE UNIVERSITY AND STUDENT ROLE EXPECTATIONS by Frederick Alden Leafgren This study is an investigation of the images of Michigan State University and student role expectations held by freshmen students enrolled at Michigan State Uni- versity fall term, 1961. It is also an investigation of the changes that occur in these images and student role expectations during the freshmen year. Personal charac- teristics of the student related to their images and role expectations were identified. Personal characteristics and college experiences of the student related to changes in their images of the institution and role expectations were also identified. An initial sample of 1,000 students from a total pop- ulation of 5,000 students was chosen. An instrument, the College Characteristics Inventory, was designed to measure the student‘s academic image of the institution, social image of the institution, academic student role expectation and social student role expectation. The instrument was administered to the population at the time of arrival at the University (Summer-Counseling Clinic or Fall Orientation Week) to determine their initial images of the institution Frederick Alden Leafgren and student role expectations. At-the end of the first year the instrument was administered a second time to determine the changes in their images of the institution and student role expectations. The analysis of variance technique was used to test the data for statistical significance. Twelve of the fifteen personal characteristics of the students included in the inventory proved to be related to the students' initial image of the institution and to their role expectations. These were sex of the student, the father's occupation, mother's education, home environment, state of residence, individual who helped make the decision to attend college, reason for coming to college, reason for selecting M.S.U., academic major, amount of education antic— ipated, definiteness of vocational choice, and anticipated social position. Changes in the image of the institution and role ex- pectation during the first year in college proved to be related to only four of the personal characteristics identi- fied in the fall. These were home environment, state of residence, reason for selecting M.S.U., and the amount of higher education anticipated. College experiences found to be related to changes in images of the institution and role expectations were summer counseling clinic, students' per- ception of the primary function of the university, attri— butes necessary for success, source of financial support, place of residence, assignment to a living-learning center, Frederick Alden Leafgren topic discussed most frequently among themselves, kind of recognition desired, Greek affiliation, social position, and grade point average. Although the overall change in image scores held by students decreased, the findings revealed that some students had increases in their image scores. The study shows that students come to college with certain preconceived ideas about the institution, academic and social, and ideas about how they will perform, academ- ically and socially, which are associated with personal characteristics of the individual, his background, socio- economic level, aspirations, etc., but that the changes during the first year are related primarily to experiences of the students in the college environment and only second- arily to background and other personal characteristics. ‘22. _ AN INVESTIGATION OF IMAGES OF THE UNIVERSITY AND STUDENT ROLE EXPECTATIONS By Frederick Alden Leafgren A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Counseling, Personnel Services, and Educational Psychology 1968 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author gratefully acknowledges and expresses his sincere gratitude to his committee chairman, Dr. Buford Stefflre, for his counsel, instruction, and assistance during the entire graduate program. He is also greatly indebted to Dr. Stefflre and to Dr. Margaret Lorimer for their valuable suggestions and guidance in the preparation of this thesis. Their continuing interest in the writer and this investigation was a major factor in the realization of a completed study. The writer is also indebted to Dr. Joseph Saupe for his advice and consultation in the statistical treatment of the data. An expression of thanks is also extended to the other members of the writer‘s doctoral committee, Dr. William Kell and Dr. James Costar. ii "\ 3—. 1".7‘. ,, ___,.._,r...____ In)! I ,4 4.4.1? ..I .119. 14.9... I‘... i v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS CHAPTER I. THE PROBLEM Introduction . Statement of the Problem . . Theoretical Background of the Study. Images and the Self . . . Images and the Institution. Images and the Role Theory. . The Problems . . . . . . . Definition of Terms . . Scope and Limitations of the Study Importance of the Study. . . Summary . . . . . . . . II. A REVIEW OF LITERATURE. Institutional Environmental Measures Institutional Images. . . . . . Student Characteristics. . . . . Role Perceptions . . . . . Imp ct of the Institution . Basia far Individual Change Summary . . . . . . III. METHOD OF INVESTIGATION . . . . Design of the Study . . . . Definition of Population Preparation of the instrument. Description of Scales . . Procedure for Collection of Data. Data Gathering and Recording iii Page ii Vi ° xxiii Chapter IV. ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Problem 1 . . . . . . . Home and Family Background. . . Variables Associated with Student' s Decision to Attend College Goals Established for College Attendance. . . . Conclusions Regarding Problem 1 . Problem 2 . . Home and Family Background. . Variables for Student's Decision to Attend College . . Goals Established for College Attendance. . . Conclusions Regarding Problem 2 Problem 3 . . . . . . Problem A . . . . . . Problem 5 . Home and Family Background. . Variables for Student's Decision to Attend College . Goals Established for College Attendance. . College Experiences . . Conclusions Regarding Problem 5 Problem 6 . . . . . . . Home and Family Background. . . Variables on Student's Decision to Attend College . Goals Established for College Attendance. . . . . . . . College Experiences Conclusions Regarding Problem 6 Summary . . . . . . . . . V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH Summary . . . . . . . . Purpose and Procedures . . . . . Findings 0 o o ' Academic Image of the Institution. Social Image of the Institution . Academic Student Role Expectation. Social Student Role Expectation . Conclusions. . . . Implications for Further Research . iv Page A6 51 52 60 68 76 77 78 8A 90 97 100 101 102 103 109 112 116 135 137 137 1A2 1A6 150 163 165 169 169 169 170 173 176 178 182 18“ 186 Chapter BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . APPENDICES. O O I O O O O I O O O O O O A—-Image Study Structured Interview Record Form B—-College Characteristics Inventory Pre Test and Post Test. . . . . . . . . . . C--College Characteristics Inventory Image Scales. Page 188 201 202 211 222 Table 10. 11. 12. LIST OF TABLES Reliabilities of image scales . . . . . . Intercorrelations of image scales. . . . . Means and standard deviations for image scores obtained from pre-enrollment testing . . Mean differences in pre-test and predicted post-test image scores. . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women. . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. . . . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by parents' income. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by father's education . . . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by mother's education . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by home environment. . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified as in-state residents and out-of-state residents . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by the individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college . . . . . . vi Page 39 no 147 50 52 5A 56 57 58 59 60 61 Table 13. 1A. 15. 16. 170 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified according to primary reason for coming to college. . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by primary source of information about the institution Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women for the primary reason for selecting M.S.U. . . . . . . . . Reasons for selecting M.S.U. associated with the academic image of the institution listed in descending order of AII scores . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by academic major . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by the amount of higher education anticipated . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational choice . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and socia1~ image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by anticipated social position . . . . . . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women. . . . . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women classified by father's occupation . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by parents' income . . vii Page 63 65 67 69 71 72 7A 75 78 79 80 In: in; i Table Page 2“. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by father's education . 82- 25. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by mother's-education . 82 26. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by home environment. . 83 27. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by in-state and out-of-state . . . . . . . . . . . 8A 28. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by the individual who was most important in determining the decision to go to college. . . . . . . 85 29. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college . . . . . . . . . 87 30. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by the main source of information about the institution . . . . 89 31. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by primary reason for selecting this institution . . . . . . 91- 32. Reasons for selecting M.S.U. in descending order of academic student role expectation scores for men and women . . . . . . . 92. 33. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified according to academic major . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9A 3A. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated . . . . . . . . 95 viii Table 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. A0. A1. A2. 43. Page Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men. and women classified by definiteness of vocational plans. . . . . . . . . . 96 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by anticipated social position . . . . . . . . . . . . 98 Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean pre-test and post-test scores, differences in mean scores, correlation of pre-test and post- test scores, and t-values obtained from t-test of significance of differences in means . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean pre-test and post-test scores, differences in mean scores, correlation of pre—test and post- test scores, and t-values obtained from t-test of significance of differences in means . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102 Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women . . . . . . . 10A Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by parents' income . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105 Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by father's education . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by mother's education . . . . . . . . . . . . 107 ix Table AA. A5. A6. A7. A8. A9. 50. 51. 52. 53. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by home environment. . . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by in-state and out-of-state residence. . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by the individual most important in determining the decision to attend college . . . . . Academic image of the institution and soCial image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women.classified by primary reason for selecting this institution . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by academic major . . . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational choice . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for-men and women classified by attendance at the summer counseling clinic Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by most important function of the university . . . X Page 108 109 110 111 113 11A 115 116 118 121 Table 5A. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. 62. 63. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by attribute most necessary for success . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary means of financial support. . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by place of residence . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by living-learning center and other residence Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by the topic discussed most frequently outside of class . . . . . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by recognition desired. . . . J. . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by Greek affiliation . . . . . . . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by social position . . . . . . . . . Anticipated social position and actual social position frequency for men and women . . Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by con- tinuation at the university . . . . . xi Page 122 123 12A 125 127 128 130 131 132 133 Table 6A. 65. 66. 67. 68. 690 70. 71. 72. 73. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by grade point average. . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women . . . . . Academic student rule expectation and social student-role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by parents' income . . . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by father's education . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by mother's education . . . . . . . . Academic student role expectation and socialv student role expectation mean change in, scores for men and women classified by home environment. . . . . .. . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by in-state and out-of-state residence . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by the individual most important in determining the decision to attend college . . . . Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college . xii Page 13A 138 138 139 1A0 1A0 1A1 1A2 1A3 1A5 Table 7A. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for selecting M.S.U. 75. Academic student role expectations and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by academic major . . . . . . . . . 76. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated . 77. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational plans . . . . 78. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by attendance at summer counseling clinic and fall orientation . . . . . . . . 79. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by most important function of the university . 80. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by attribute most necessary for success . . . 81. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women for principal means of financial support . . . . . . 82. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by place of residence . . . . . . . . . 83. Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by type of residence hall . . xiii Page 1A7 1A8 1A9 150 151 152 153 155 155 156 - 'mv' Table 8A. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 7.1. 8.1. Page Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by the topic discussed most frequently outside of class . . . . . . . . . . . . 158 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by recognition desired. . . . . . . . . 159 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in, scores for men and women classified by Greek affiliation and non-Greek affiliation. 160 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by social position . . . . . . . . . . 161 Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for student continuing at the univer- sity and those leaving the university during the first academic year . . . . . . . 16A Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by grade point average. . . . . . . . . 16A Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores-for men-and women . . . 233 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's occupation. . . . . . . . . 23A Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for parents' income . . . . . . . . . . 235 Analysis of variance data for academic imagev of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's education . . . . . . . . . 236 xiv Table 9.1. 10.1. 11.1. 12.1. 13.1. 1A.1. 15.1. 17.1. 18.1. 19.1. Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores mother's education Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores home environment. Analysis of variance' of the institution institution scores data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for in-state and out-of-state residencs . Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores data for academic image and social image of the for men and women classified by the individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores primary reason for Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for coming to college . . data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for primary source of information about the institution . Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores primary reason for Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores academic major . Analysis of variance of the institution institution-scores data for academic image and social image of the for men and women-for selecting M.S.U. . . data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for the amount of higher education anticipated Analysis of variance of the institution institution scores data for academic image and social image of the for men and women for definiteness of vocational plans . . . XV Page 237 238 239 2A0 2A1 2A2 2A3 2AA 2A5 2A6 Table 20.1. 21.1. 22.1. 23.1. 2A.1. 25.1. 26.1. 27.1. 28.1. 29.1. Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men-and women for anticipated social position . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's occupation. . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for parents' income . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's education . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for mother's education . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for home environment. . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for in-state and out-of-state residents, . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for~attending college . . . xvi Page 2A7 2A8 2A9 250 251 252 253 25A 255 256 Table 30.1. 31.1. 33.1. 3A.l. 35.1. 36.1. 39.1. A0.l. A1.1. A2.1. Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role. expectation scores for men and women for. primary source of information about the institution . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for selecting this institution . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for academic major» . . . '. . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation-scores for men-and women for the amount of higher education anticipated . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role- expectation scores for men and women for» definiteness of vocational plans . . . . Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for anticipated social position . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women . . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's occupation . . . . . Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for parents' income. . . . . . . Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's education. . . . . . xvii Page 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 26A 265 266 1A interviewing. Because of the breadth of the study which involved numerous characteristics a larger sample was required than would have been feasible had the interview technique been used for data gathering. Importance of the Study The Committee on the Future of Michigan State Uni- versity (89) stated, The image . . . of the University . . . must be adequately and accurately interpreted if the University is to achieve the role that is envi- sioned by the Committee. The many groups that compose the audience of the University have varied views and for this reason it is many things to many people. It was recommended that a committee be established to assist in the formation of the image of the University. Dr. Paul Miller, at the time Provost of Michigan State University, urged the Student Congress in an article in the Michigan State News (92) to help build an image of Michigan State University in the eyes of its own students and faculty. Studies such as those of Clark (15) have indicated that the image of an institution as perceived by its public, determines to a significant degree the type of student who enrolls and probably to a great degree the type of instructional program it is able to conduct. Certainly, the achievement of desired outcomes by an institution will be hindered if it is unable to adequately convey to its public what it is trying to do, so that it 15 is able to enroll those students who have goals congruent with those of the institution. Research needs to be undertaken to identify the images held by students' faculty, and the various publics. These images may be fairly complete and accurate if they are based on contact with others who have attended the institution or on personal visits to the campus which provided meaningful experiences which helped convey an accurate image of the institution and the student environ- ment. On the other hand, the images may be quite inaccu— rate if they arise from very limited or distorted infor- mation received from unreliable sources. Clark (15) maintains that even more so in the future than in the past, the general need of most colleges that want to reach and maintain a high academic status will be to construct and communicate a special identity. Inves— tigations need to be made to determine the images an institution conveys to its students. Coogan (19) states, The American People, broadly speaking, do not fully understand the vital role played by uni- versities in this rapidly changing world of ours. If somehow, and I think we need to know what our 'image' is beforehand, we could individually and collectively break through this almost invisible barrier between us and a lot of our many publics we would render an incalculable service to higher education. Summary Knowledge about student characteristics and the impact of the colleges on these characteristics is of 16 great concern to institutions of higher education. Research into the relationships which exist is complicated by the complexity of the human personality and the diffi- culty of translating institutional objectives into measur- able variables. The feasibility of studying factors of role expec- tations, institutional images, and changes in these images and expectations has been established. However, the lack of existing research in this area and the need for further studies is great. Although there are many questions to be answered in the area of student characteristics this study is limited to students'images of the institution, their role, and the institutional impact on these images. More specifi- cally this study is concerned with the students' images of the institution and students' role perceptions prior to their enrollment as freshmen; the personal character- istics of the students related to their images of the institution and role perceptions; and the impact of their college experiences in changing their images of the insti- tution and their role perceptions at Michigan State Uni- versity. Such findings are needed to expand the limited amount of research in the area of student characteristics. Research studies on personality, values, attitudes, have been reported, but almost no research exists in the area of images or image change. 17 The chapter to follow will summarize the findings of research relevant to this study. The third chapter will describe the method of investigation, and the fourth will be an analysis of the findings. The fifth and final chapter will summarize the conclusions drawn from the findings and will discuss the implications for further research. CHAPTER II A REVIEW OF LITERATURE Although institutional self'evaluation has been a concern of colleges and universities almost since their beginning, not until the 1950's did evaluation play so important a role in decision making. Many institutions have created offices of institutional research to conduct or coordinate studies and evaluations on almost all areas of the total operation on the institution. Funds are allocated from operating budgets but they are often supplemented by grants from governmental and private agencies. Findings from institutional research studies of which only a few are reported in professional literature and full length books, have had considerable impact on institutional operation. This study is typical of studies classified as institutional research since it evaluates impact of the freshmen year on the students' image of the institution and the students' role perceptions. This chapter reviews the research relevant to this study and both supports and refutes some of the findings. 18 ,‘_d._ I... . w—‘J~“ .‘--‘.v- ,l'f' W' 3.. , __... 19 Institutional Environmental Measures Those interested in studying institutional environ- ments have recognized the need to develop techniques and instruments which can be used for this purpose. The feasibility of developing instruments to measure the institutional environment has been demonstrated by Pace and Stern (101), Pace (100), Astin and Holland (A), Trow (128) and Deutschmann (25). Pace and Stern (102) have designed an instrument, "The College Characteristics Index," which attempts to assess the institutional environment. This instrument compares institutions of higher education in terms of a system of pressures, practices, and policies intended to influence the development of students toward the attain- ment of important goals of higher education. The "College Characteristics Index" is a measure of "press" which Pace and Stern define as the characteristic demand or features of an environment as perceived by those who live in that environment. Pace (100) has developed another institutional environment measure, the "College and University Environ- ment Scales" (CUES). CUES consists of 150 statements about college life including features and facilities of the campus, rules and regulations, faculty, curriculum, instruction and examinations, student life, and extra curricular organizations. It is designed to measure the Jl 20 total institutional environment.and is a measure of campus atmosphere as students perceive it. "Environmental Assessment Technique" is another measure of the institutional environment developed by Astin and Holland (A). This instrument assesses the institutional environment by examining eight attributes of the student body: size, intelligence level, and personal orientation of the students as indicated by the percentage of students in each of six classes of major fields (realistic, intellectual social-conversational enterprising, and artistic). The variables of this instrument were found to have substantial correlations with the scales of the "College Characteristics Index" (3). Trow (128) uses a classification of student sub— cultures to measure the institutional environment. He recognizes four identifiable student subcultures: the traditional, the academic, the consumer-vocational, and the non-conformist. The traditional culture is defined as collegiate and consists of a pleasure seeking group manifesting loyalty to the institution though not to the institutional purposes of the institution. The academic culture is characterized by emphasis on the intellectual concerns, the library, and the seminar. The consumer- vocational culture is college attendance for the sake of acquiring a degree and hence a claim to a job. The 21 non-conformist places a high value on ideas and on disesteem of the institution. Trow suggests that the atmosphere of a college is related to the proportion of its students falling into each of the four subcultures. Another method of assessing the institutional environment has been developed by Deutschmann (25). He utilizes the "semantic differential" developed by Osgood. Deutschmann conducted a study of institutional images by selecting such words as coaches, athletics, dates, degree, professor, dormitories, academic dean, President, Harvard, advisor, library, regulations, Dean of Students, and courses. Seven adjectives were used to describe each of these and the student was requested to select that adjec- tive which was most appropriate. He concludes that the study shows the results are almost too unambiguous. They pinpoint strengths and weaknesses in institutional images. He feels that the study shows that it is possible to evaluate images of institutions of higher education. Institutional Images The "College Characteristics Index," "CUES," "Envi- ronmental Assessment Technique," and the techniques of Trow and Deutschmann which have been utilized in studies of college and university environments, and the findings of these and other studies are discussed here because of their relevance to this dissertation. 22 Pace and Stern (101) using the "College Character— istics Index," have found significant differences in institutional environments. Similar differences have been discovered by Trow (127) and Pace (100). According to Pace these differences in institutional environments cannot be attributed to the size or complexity of the institutions alone. It has also been found in studies conducted by Riesman and Jencks (68) that institutions differ in the amount of image distinctiveness they project. Public colleges generally are not as sharply distinctive as private colleges in the image projected. Teachers col- leges and state colleges are likely to have the non—image or image of weak distinction (15). It has been demonstrated that students hold images of institutions, real or perceived, and these images determine institutional choices (55, 62, 68, 98, 106). Findings from these studies indicate students make them- selves available to a college according to their impres- sions of what it is like. These student impressions are in part public impressions and serve a character supporting function for an institution in attracting new members with orientations similar to those on the scene or already graduated. A study by Centra (13) using the "CUES" instrument reveals students' perceptions of the total university are 23 associated with the major field of study. His findings indicate that the perceptions of the total setting vary with the major field of study and that no one major field of study is representative of the entire university. The number of students attracted by the institu— tional image is determined to a large degree by the characteristics the students are seeking in a college. Several studies on students' bases for college choice indicate they do seek different characteristics in the institution they plan to attend. The primary basis for college choice of 7,500 National Merit Scholarship finalists was found to be an institution that has a good school or department in the area in which the student plans to major (62). Holland concluded from this study that the student appears to make his actual selection on vague notions about institu- tional reputations which he seldom can document meaning— fully. According to this group of National Merit Scholar- ship winners the image of the "ideal" college is a private coeducational institution with a national reputation, an outstanding faculty, and high scholastic standards (62). In a study of freshmen at the University of Oregon factors which were reported to have strongly influenced their decisions to attend an institution were reputation of the school, desire of parents, nearness to home, liberal arts program, and cost (36). Well established 2A alumni also create an image of the institution which attracts students who desire to become like those alumni (68). Students' information about institutions is often limited to a relatively few institutions in the immediate geographic area (106). Freshmen have reported that the most important sources of information about the institu- tions were visits to the campuses, parents, and high school teachers (36). Parental influences are also associated with the college selection process (68). In a study in Michigan of parents of college students it was revealed that factors of cost and location played a significant role in deter— mining where children would go to college (8A). Parents exert considerable influence and control in the choice of a college and Holland (62) suggests that parental beliefs about colleges may play a substantial role in concentrating high ability students in a limited number of institutions. Student Characteristics The attraction of students to colleges and univer- Sities has been shown to be related to various character- istics of the personality (33, 99, 118, 121). Studies by Pace and Stern (98) reveal the public image which a col- lege has makes it attractive to students who sense they could find such an environment congenial to them. Students 25 with strong needs in certain directions tend to be found at colleges which exert a strong "press" in these same directions. The relationship between characteristics of an institution and characteristics of students selecting the institution has been reported in several other studies (15, 36, 53, 55, 62, 68, 117). Heist (53) found "high ranking" institutions attract students more socially introverted, more complex in their outlook and perceptions, more original, and less authori- tarian than those found at an "average" institution. Selection of a private institution was correlated with high socio-economic status, parents with high incomes, advanced education, many books in the home, and a percep— tion of college as a way to develop higher personal stan- dards, intellectual abilities, and ways to enjoy life. A series of personality scales was administered to 921 National Merit Scholarship winners in 1956 (33). Some of these scales differentiated among groups of college students categorized by type of institution attended (pub- lic university, Ivy League university, private university, liberal arts college). Stern (117) found that colleges with a strong intel— lectual climate get students with strong, average, and weak intellectual needs, whereas the colleges and univer- sities with weak intellectual climates primarily attract 26 and enroll students with average and weak intellectual needs. The existence of a relationship between student characteristics and the character of the college has also been demonstrated in studies by McConnell (80), Riesman (107, 108), McConnell and Heist (55), Heist (5A), and Pace (98). McConnell and Heist (55) suggest that predomi- nant student characteristics and backgrounds may be counted on to produce a distinctive atmosphere, to lend a decided cast to a collegiate community. Furthermore, Knapp and Greenbaum (A7) and Holland (62) indicate that college productivity indices must be in part attributed to student characteristics. Role Perceptions As early as 1917 Martin (78) concluded from his investigation that one may obtain a fairly complete idea of an individual's manner of thinking and acting from images held by the individual. Sarbin (112) maintains the self is empirically derived, not transcendentally; it is the result of experiences, i.e., interactions with body-parts, things, persons, images, and so on. Hartman (51) and Sherif (115) have taken the positions that internal factors such as attitudes, subjective norms, and values can play the dominant role in the organization of a perceptual field. 27 The importance of the concept of student perceptions of their role is emphasized by Newcomb (95). He maintains that people respond to a situation not necessarily as it really is, but as it is perceived to be. Situations are perceived as the individual has learned to perceive through success and failure, rewards and punishments. Studies of self—concepts of students entering college reveal that college preparatory students tend to have more mature self-concepts and a greater drive to attain status long before attending college than the non- college preparatory student (129). Differences in sex affect student role perceptions. Males perceive college as vocational preparation more often than girls (27, 28). Differences in social role expectations for males and females is also reported by Hanson (50). Cartwright's (11) study of self—concept and adjust- ment to college life indicates that students holding self images which are not rewarded by the campus culture find difficulty in making a good adjustment. Findings reported by Centi (12) indicate that low grades in college affect the self perception of the student. The perception of student role is reported to vary considerably. Riesman (107) suggests from his findings that for many high school graduates there is no sharp break between high school and college and no expectation on their part that there will be change. Trow (127) 28 reports the "culturally sophisticated" students (those with a genuine interest in a liberal education) dif- ferentiate themselves in their orientation to the aca- demic community from the "less sophisticated" students (those who come to college for vocational training or advancement of economic position) by their seriousness of purpose and their anticipation that they will graduate from the college they are entering. Dornbush (26) from his observations of assimila- tion of cadets at the U. S. Coast Guard Academy reports that identification with a new role and changes in self concept are promoted by institutional objectives. Reduc- tion in discrepancies between self and ideal self were reported by Denmark and Guttentag (2A) in their study on the effect of college attendance on mature women. Impact of the Institution The impact of institutions of higher education on student development and change is a current concern of social scientists. The fact that students undergo change during the college years is reported in studies by Jacob (67), Eddy (31), Sanford (111), Lehmann (71), Dressel and Lehmann (30), and Lundsford (75) in the areas of person— ality, attitudes and values, adjustment to the institu— tion, critical thinking ability, stereotypic beliefs, and (dogmatism. 29 Jacob (67) in summarizing his findings reports that college experiences barely touch on students' standards of behavior, quality of judgment, sense of responsibility, perspicacity of understanding, and guiding beliefs, and that individual college and university courses have little affect on student attitudes and values. He feels that college experiences as a whole make some differences, but these are much less than we would anticipate. Eddy (31) tends to support this view with the conclusion that there is a strong potential impact of the institution, which in most cases is not being realized. He further states the college student may comprehend a different kind of value 5" 7" "’I- L‘ h. ’l-T'A" ‘ '. C 51”- ‘ ”‘7; l' :1 {The system but does not go to the next step of living it. f“"“‘JQ’ AAA Significant changes in personality occurring from the freshman to the senior years are reported by Sanford (111). In his research he focused on personality develop— ment from the freshman to the senior year. The nature of the change in personality which occurred he attributes in part to the nature and impact of the college experiences. Lehmann (71) and Dressel and Lehmann (30) investi- gated changes in critical thinking ability, stereotypic beliefs, dogmatism, and values of 1,051 students enrolled at Michigan State University. The findings indicate the changes which occur over the four years were a signifi- cant decrease in stereotypic beliefs and unreceptivity to new ideas, an increase in open mindedness and ' ., :2 I . 7x . -“. ’ .0:an s— A. .‘ . 3.9.2“ "1 :i- WW1. 12: ~\-.. ’1...- I I \. .7/ _l ' I ‘ I. ' ' n- \ -' 5 .' A 3‘ W%k{ ' ‘. A h‘ '- ‘ V, . . '; ' :;.,.-,_, 1 _ C J‘ ‘A’\0 .-‘“y. AX...“ 7. ‘ o ' ‘- t‘ — l' '7 f X? “ "A 03.. A . . 41‘. . *‘m 77" A 7 a: E '{ r“ f’A 0 J h.“ . ' ’ "’ "“u: '. .« 7 " Pu? " .' -./ \J' ‘7 ' u . ’ t.-.” ' . ‘ . ‘ “ ' “‘ ’ \.. v ' 3’ . _ ((1 s 1.2, ; I. " --' .-.._ -- ...- .. - ~ - , ~ -' ~ ~ 1 I x _____ ’{_}A'-E,..&~JE t' 54>. —V‘q— ( «is. ‘I I I. C .~| v 'v —‘ 30 "outer-directedness," and a significant improvement in critical thinking ability. They found most of the change took place during the freshman and sophomore years. Becker's (75) findings from interviews with fresh- men who came to the University of Kansas revealed their long range goals to be very hazy. However, as they moved through the freshman year these students sharpened their idea of the meaning of the college and their goals. A study by Columbia University (17) suggests a close connection between the image of the institution and the impact of the institution on the student. Thus col- leges with an identifiable and exciting educational objec- tive draw their students most effectively into an intel- lectual community and have the most telling influence upon them. The "press" of the environment, according to Pace (99), defines the situations with which the student must cope and clarifies the direction his behavior must take if he is to find satisfaction and reward within the domi- nant culture of the college. Attempts to project the image of the institution to the student population at Indiana University indicated that the degree of acceptance of the image projected is associated with such factors as college class standing, high school rank, social involvement on the campus, family social involvement in the home community, and sex (37). "" - ' " .r-.-.----. "a II.- 3"“- 31 Evidence that a students' perceptions and expecta— tions about the institution do change and that the change is observable during the first six months in college is reported by Berdie (8) in a study of 9,000 freshmen stu— dents enrolled at the University of Minnesota. These changes were not shown to be related to either students' place of residence during attendance at the University, college philosophy, academic achievement, or personality characteristics as measured by the Minnesota Counseling Inventory. Basis for Individual Change Factors causing student change during the college years have also been investigated. Goodstein (A3), McConnell (81), Heist and Yonge (57), Trow (127), and Jacob (67) report that the peer culture or subculture has a significant impact on students. This is given further support by Stern (117) in his analysis of the differences in the images held by various majors at a large complex institution. He reports that different sub- cultures within the same school may hold radically dif— ferent impressions of its character. Freedman (39) pro— vides further support for this position in a study revealing that the foremost concern of most new students is assimilation into the student society. Freedman con- cludes that the student culture provides the basic context 32 in which the individual learns characteristic ways of behaving, learns to interact socially, and learns of values and beliefs. Thus passed from one generation of students to another the student culture is a prime educa- tional force at work in the college. This concept is also emphasized by Newcomb (95) who states that the stu— dent peer group experiences are certain to influence both the actual and the perceived nature of the college. Newcomb believes it is quite possible for students' ini- tial images of the institution and their role to be changed as they become oriented into the campus community and its subgroups. Studies by Gottlieb and Hodgkins (A5), Heist (53), Heist and Webster (56), and Gottlieb (AA) indicate that change in the student during the college years and the rate of this change is linked to both the social origins of the student and his adjustment to the institution and is also associated with the university community in which he finds himself. This position is given further support by Pace (98) in commenting on the studies of Thistlewaite (122, 123). Pace states, "It seems quite clear from these studies that different college environments do have demon- stratable consequences on student behavior, over and above the student culture which is part of the total college culture." 33 Chickering (1A) attributes the changes in perception of the institution to the influence of the faculty's per- ceptions and the subsequent influences over the student perceptions. The findings of his research revealed as the student moves through college his perceptions of it approximate more and more closely those of the faculty. Deutschmann (25) maintains from his study of a uni- versity that the image of the university is constantly being reshaped for the individual. The change is the result of a combination of direct experiences by the individual with the total complex and communication about the total complex from other members of the community and from its mass media communication system. A dissertation by Fox (37) supports the concept of the influence of the mass media in changing the individuals' perceptions of the institution. The fact that college experiences can affect stu- dents' perceptions is reported by Centi (12). The con- cept of role expectation and reference group was demon— strated as prominent in the Merton Studies (88) of medical education in which the transition from student to physician was seen as the adoption of a perceived role. Summary The foregoing review of the literature has included research that is relevant to this study. ~ » a]. In ‘1 .- --( .V‘. - ~IJ . ‘9. l u.‘ ‘ I,.‘~ ‘. I, b. ‘-. — ‘3 , ._v“ u . V~y g“; ’r- ..v O r ‘s . ‘5. ‘n -. L . . ‘0 . ~ I \— 3A Instruments and a variety of techniques have been developed to describe the environments of institutions of higher education. Application of these instruments has revealed that differences in institutional environments exist and that these differences are measurable. It has also been shown that the student's image of an institution is a factor in the selection of the college he will attend. This image is based on limited informa- tion or vague notions about a college held by the students and their parents. It has also been demonstrated that a relationship exists between the characteristics of an institution and the personality of the students who choose it. Institu- tional images conveyed to prospective students enable institutions to attract an identifiable student group, one that has characteristics which differ from those at other institutions. The attraction of a student body with common characteristics in turn establishes a definite atmosphere for the institution and the character of the institution is affected by the characteristics of its student population. Studies of students' perceptions of their role reveal differences in these perceptions and these dif- ferences seem to be due to such variables as sex, academic success, and background factors. There is some evidence to indicate that the experiences of the student and other ad. .. ‘I-n. v'»~ r. i 3‘ u... 5.: -. . ... 35 institutional factors can also affect these perceptions. Certainly much further research is needed in this area. Student change in personality, values, attitudes, etc. during the college years is a topic on which much attention has been concentrated. The fact that some change occurs is generally agreed upon; however, the amount of change and the basis for this change results in considerable contradiction in different studies and by different researchers. The fact that the student's image of the institution changes has been demonstrated. Considerably more research on the reason for change needs to be undertaken. Communi- cations from the institution have been identified as one possible source, whereas place of residence, academic achievement, and college philoSOphy do not seem to be significant variables. It is suggested that such factors as peer culture, faculty, and total college experiences may be responsible for inducing such change in students. It is evident from a review of the literature that a need exists for much more extensive research in all of ‘these areas. The limited amount of research leaves most (yiestions in this broad area unanswered. Findings reported ‘unforwunately have come from isolated situations and the stnuiies have seldom been replicated. CHAPTER III METHOD OF INVESTIGATION \ The purpose of this study was to examine the rela- tionships between (1) personal characteristics and college experiences of the student and (2) student images of the institution and student role expectations. The personal characteristics of the student examined in this study were selected from three areas: family and home background, decision to attend college, and the goals established for college. The college experience of the student examined in this study includes place of residence, participation in campus activities and organizations, and selected student attitudes about the university. Design of the Study The design for this study involved: 1. selection of a population 2. administration of an initial measure to the population to determine the images of the institution, student role expectations, and the personal characteristics of the student 3. treatment which consisted of student attendance at the University for an academic year A. administration of a second measure to the popu— lation to determine the images of the institu— tion, student role expectations, and college experiences 36 Ouafs-t', t. t’i‘fisTE ' ‘ Q‘. .3!“- ..;.-‘. ‘ 9 p ‘ a 'V‘. j |Ib 37 Definition of Population The population selected for this study was the freshman class entering Michigan State University (M.S.U.) fall semester, 1961. An initial sample of 1,000 students from a total population of 5,000 students was chosen at random. A sample of this size was chosen to provide a sufficient number of students to permit the sample to be subdivided into multiple classifications for purposes of analysis. Of the original sample of approximately 1,000, 718 students make up the sample actually used in this study. These 718 students represent approximately 72% of the original sample. The reduction of the sample from approx- imately 1,000 to 718 resulted from the elimination of incomplete and inaccurately completed inventories. Preparation of the Instrument This study required a measure of the student's image of the institution and the student's image of his role expectations. The unavailability of a standardized instru- ment to measure the images of the institution and the images of the role expectations at the time this study was undertaken required that an instrument be developed for this purpose. This instrument is the "College Character- istics Inventory." The first step in the development of the instrument consisted of a series of structured interviews (see 38 Appendix A). The interviews consisted of broad questions eliciting responses from students about their perceptions of the institution and their role as students. These interviews were held with 12 students who had entered M.S.U. as new students during the summer of 1961. They were asked to respond orally to the questions presented to them from the structured interview form. Their re- sponses were recorded on the interview form and the data were used in developing the "College Characteristics Inventory." Items or ideas for items for the "College Character- istics Inventory" were also obtained from a variety of published and unpublished inventories in addition to the interviews (5, 72, 90, 91, 10A). "The College Characteristics Inventory" (Appendix B) was designed to obtain all data and information about the student to be used in the study with the exception of the student's continuation at the university and final grade point average. Items to provide a measure of the student's images of the university and his role expectations make up the major portion of the instrument. Items were also included to obtain data regarding personal characteristics of the student and his college experiences. The informa— tion obtained from these items was used in this research study. In addition, the instrument includes items designed to measure the student's images of the faculty and of 39 fraternal organizations, but these items have not been included in this study. These data were included in the instrument for future analyses. The items included in the inventory which measure the students' images of the university and their role expecta- tions were organized into four scales to facilitate analy- sis of the findings. The four scales measure the student's academic image of the institution, social image of the institution, academic student role expectations, and social student role expectations. Weights assigned to the various item responses used in the scales of the instru- ment were arbitrarily established. This procedure is sup— ported by the findings of Ryan (110), who concluded that the considerable labor usually involved in assigning weights to elements of a criterion measure by empirical systems was no more satisfactory than assigning arbitrary values. Two separate reliability tests using the Kuder- Richardson formula (86) to test inter—item consistency were made, one using 30 students and one using 50 students. The results are reported in Table 1. TABLE l.--Reliabilities of Image Scales. N/30 N/50 r r Academic Image of the Institution .86 .73 Social Image of the Institution .83 .5A Academic Student Role Expectation .A5 .5A Social Student Role Expectation .79 .72 A0 The reliabilities obtained were sufficiently high to satisfy the demand of homogenity of the scales. A cor— relation test was also made to ascertain the degree of relationship existing between the scales. A sample of 30 students was used for this analysis. The Pearson Product Moment (86) correlations obtained are indicated in Table 2 and are low enough to assure that the scales are rela— tively independent measures. TABLE 2.--Intercorre1ations of Image Scales AII SII ASR SSR AII .28 .11 .17 SII .25 .A6 ASR .10 SSR Description of Scales The four image scales, Academic Image of the Insti- tution, Social Image of the Institution, Academic Student Role Expectations, and Social Student Role Expectations consist of 28, 26, 19, and 28 items respectively. The total score for each scale is obtained by adding quantita- tive values of 1 to A assigned to each item on the scale. The Academic Image of the Institution scale is a measure of the student's perceptions of the institution's academic program. The items contained in the scale include A1 university functions, characteristics of the institution, and institutional values related to the academic program. The Social Image of the Institution scale is a mea— sure of the student's perceptions of the social climate at the institution. This scale contains items about social and co-curricular functions of the university, social and co-curricular characteristics of the institu- tion, and values placed on these aspects of college life. The Academic Student Role Expectation Scale is a measure of the student's perceptions of his involvement in academic pursuits. This scale includes academic interest areas, personal characteristics associated with academic life, academic motivations, and academic habits. The Social Student Role Expectation scale is a measure of the student's perceptions of his involvement in social activities. This scale contains items associated with social and co-curricular interests and activities, values placed on social and co-curricular life, and social motivations. A complete listing of all items contained in each scale, the weights assigned to each item, and the total possible points for each scale is provided in Appendix C. Procedure for Collection of Data It was important that the data be obtained from the student as early as possible in order to obtain a measure of his perceptions and images prior to any class A2 attendance or participation in university activities at the beginning of the academic year and thus permit a measure of change at the end of the year influenced by actual experiences on the campus. The initial measure thus remains more a measure of student images based on personal characteristics of home and family background and information obtained through other than institutional experiences. The difference, then, between the pre— and post-tests is a measure of change in images, which is associated with actual college experiences. Two—thirds of the sample population selected for this study consisted of freshmen that attended the summer counseling clinic and one-third of the sample consisted of those that attended the orientation week program in the fall. The Counseling Center reported approximately two—thirds of the freshmen class were scheduled for the summer counseling clinic program while the remaining one- third of the entering freshmen attended the orientation week just prior to the beginning of the academic year. The sample was selected so that this ratio could be main- tained. The post-test was administered to the students during late April and May. Thus permitting the students to experience university life for approximately one academic year between the two test administrations. A3 The pre-tests and post—tests were administered in a supervised testing situation in which the students were told they would not necessarily know factual responses to the items, but were instructed to give their opinion and perceptions of the various facets of university life at this time. The majority of the students completed their questionnaire in A5 minutes; however, there was no time limit established. Data Gathering and Recording The data used in this study were obtained from two sources, the "College Characteristics Inventory" pre-test and post-test and the Registrar's Office. The pre-test provided a measure of the academic image of the institu- tion, social image of the institution, academic student role expectation, and social student role expectation for each student. The pre-test investory also provided the following information used in the analysis. sex of student father's occupation parents' income father's education mother's education home environment (rural-urban) in—state or out-of-state residence the individual most important in determining the decision to attend college primary reason for attending college main source of information about M.S.U. primary reason for selecting M.S.U. academic major amount of higher education anticipated definiteness of vocational plans anticipated college social position attendance at the summer counseling clinic AAA/\AAAA vvvvvvvv O\U1.LTUL)f\)l—'O\O CDNChU'I-BUUNI-J AAA/\AAA HFJFMAFJH+4r~ VVVVVVVV .__ J | AA A second measure of the academic image of the insti- tution, social image of the institution, academic student role expectation, and social student role expectation for each student was obtained from the "College Characteristics Inventory" post-test. The post-test inventory also pro- vided the following information used in the analysis. (1) most important function of the university (2) attribute necessary to possess in order to succeed at the University principal means of financial support place of residence type of residence hall the topic discussed most frequently outside of the classroom ) recognition desired ) Greek affiliation ) college social position ( ( ( ( KOle (“UT-1:110 vvvv ( ( ( The only information that was not obtained from the inventories was the final grade point average for the academic year and a list of students that withdrew from the University. This information was obtained from the Registrar's Office. The information on images and expectations was obtained from image scales which were scored by totaling the quantitative values assigned by the student in respond- ing to the items designated for each scale on the inven- tory. Image scores were obtained for both the pre-test given in the summer or fall and the post—test given in the spring for each student. These scores, the data obtained from the inventory indicated above, final grade pxaint average, and the factor of withdrawal or continuation A5 at the University were recorded for each student on IBM cards for processing. An analysis of the data and a discussion of findings will be found in the next chapter. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE DATA The preceding chapter described the procedure fol- lowed in obtaining the data for this study. The analysis of the data and inferences drawn from the analysis of the data will be presented in this chapter. The following problems were selected to be tested in this study. Is there a relationship between personal characteristics of the student and his images of the institution and his role? Is there a relationship between characteristics or college experiences of the student and the change his images of the institution and his role undergo during the first year of college? The analysis of variance technique was used to test the data for statistical significance. Data for men and women were analyzed separately because of the initial sex differences found to be associated with two image scales: academic student role expectation and social student role expectation. A description of the image scores for the sample population are presented in Table 3. This table contains the mean scores and the standard deviations obtained for each image scale. In later tables dealing with the A6 A7 analysis of the data pertaining to the problem the total group mean scores are the basis for determining higher and lower mean scores. The sample on which the means are based consists of 718 freshmen students, 380 men and 318 women, who entered Michigan State University, fall term, 1961. TABLE 3.--Means and standard deviations for image scores obtained from pre-enrollment testing. Men Women Scale Mean S.D. Mean S.D. AII 93.10 6.61 93.85 6.12 SII 78.13 5.18 78.85 5.86 ASR A9.17 7.11 51.83 6.37 SSR 68.67 6.28 69.67 6.A3 The personal characteristics selected to be tested in Problems 1 (What personal characteristics of students are associated with the academic and social images of the institution held by them prior to their registration as freshmen?) and 2 (What personal characteristics of students are associated with the academic and social student role expectations held by them prior to their registration as freshmen?) of this study are: (1) family and home back- ground variables-—sex of student, father's occupation, parents' income, father's education, mother's education, J | A8 home environment (rural—urban), in—state or out—of-state residence; (2) variables for students decision to attend college--individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college, main source of informa— tion about M.S.U., primary reason for selecting M.S.U.; and (3) variables for the goals established for college attendance—-academic major, amount of higher education anticipated, definiteness of vocational choice, antici- pated college social position. The mean image scores from the pre-test were obtained for each of the categories for each of the inde— pendent variables. For example, the mean image scores were obtained for each of the categories of the variable father's occupation. An analysis of variance test was used to test for statistical significance the differences between the means for each of the categories of the variable. The procedure was followed for each of the variables listed above for each of the four image scales: academic image of the institution, social image of the institution, academic student role eXpectation, and social student role expectation. The mean score for each image scale obtained from the pre-test was compared with the corresponding mean score obtained from the post—test to test Problems 3 (Do the students' academic and social images of the iruititution change during the first year?) and A (Do A9 the students' academic and social student role expecta- tions change during the first year?). The difference in the corresponding pre—test and post-test means for each of the four scales was tested by application of the t—test of means to determine if the differences in these means were significant. Problems 5 (Are changes in the academic and social images of the institution during the first year associated with personal characteristics and college experiences of the student?) and 6 (Are changes in the academic and social student role expectations during the first year associated with personal characteristics and college experiences of the student?) required the determination of the difference between the pre—test and predicted post-test scores for each image scale for each individual to obtain his change in score. The personal characteris— _ tics and college experiences selected to be tested in Problems 5 and 6 are: (1) family and home background variables-~sex of the student, father's occupation, parents' income, father's education, mother's education, home environment (urban-rural), in-state or out-of-state residence; (2) variables for student's decision to attend college--individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college, primary reason for attend- ing college, primary reason for selecting M.S.U.; (3) Variables for goals established for college attendance—- 50 academic major, amount of higher education anticipated, definiteness of vocational plans; and (A) college exper- ience variables-—attendance at the Summer Counseling Clinic, most important function of the university, attri— bute felt most necessary for success, principal means of financial support, place of residence, type of residence hall, topic discussed most frequently outside of class, area in which recognition is most desired, Greek affilia- tion, college social position, continuation at the Uni- versity, final grade point average. To eliminate contamination of the findings by regression of scores toward the mean, the Galton effect, a correlation and regression analysis was applied to the scores to obtain a predicted post test score. It is the differences between the initial scores and the predicted post test scores that were used to analyze the changes that take place in the images of individual students. Table A reports the mean change between the pre-test and predicted post—test scores for each of the four scales. TABLE A.——Mean differences in pre-test and predicted post- test image scores. Men Women Scale Mean Difference Mean Difference All —.03 .05 SII .30 -.AA ASR .31 -.3A SSR .29 —.36 51 Each of the variables was tested by obtaining the mean change in scores for each category of the variable. For example, the variable of academic major was tested by obtaining mean change in image scores for each of the categories of academic major. An analysis of variance test was used to test the differences between the means for statistical significance. This procedure was followed for each variable listed above for each of the four image scales. Confidence limits were established at the .05 level for the analysis of the data. The purpose of this study is description and not prediction; therefore, the .05 level provides sufficiently high limits without elimi- nating findings which are significant. Problem 1 What personal characteristics of students are associated with the academic and social images of the institution held by students prior to their registration as freshmen? To test problem 1 mean academic image of the insti- tution scores and mean social image of the institution Scores were obtained from the pre-test inventories for students in each of the categories of the variables in- cluded in this study. The analysis of variance test was used to test the differences between means of the categories established for each variable. The findings will be dis- cussed.in the following order: (l)family and home background 52 variables; (2) variables on decision to attend college; and (3) variables for goals established for college attend- ance . Home and Family Background Sex of the student.—-A comparison of the academic image of the institution and the social image of the institution scores for men and women is reported in Table 5. Differences are not statistically significant. The findings do not indicate an association between sex of the student and the academic and social images of the institution held by the student. TABLE 5.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women. N Men N Women F* AII 380 93.10 338 93.85 2.50 SII 380 78.13 338 78.09 .01 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 5.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 5 above. Father's occupation.--The following categories were esteflflished for father's occupation: business, skilled, prnafessional, laborer, white collar, farmer, clerk and 53 salesman, and retired and deceased. A comparison of the students' academic and social image of the institution scores grouped by father's occupation is reported in Table 6. Differences in All scores for father's occupation for men indicate father's occupation is a variable asso— ciated with the male student's image of the institution. Father's occupations associated with academic image of the institution scores abgyg the mean academic image of the institution score for all men are: skilled, laborer, white collar, farmer, and retired and deceased. Father's occupations associated with academic image of the insti- tution scores below the mean AII score are business, professional, clerk and salesman. With the exception of white collar and possibly retired and deceased, the higher AII scores on this variable are held by students whose fathers hold occupations involving manual labor. These fathers may emphasize to their sons the need for a college education and may pass on to them favorable attitudes about a university and the value of its academic program. It is not likely these fathers have a college education; therefore, they are not able to convey information based on personal experiences to their sons. Differences in men's social image of the Institution scores for father's occupations are not statistically significant. - "rm 5A TABLE 6.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Business 21 90.33 77.05 20 96.20 77.50 Skilled 66 93.20 77.50 55 93.36 76.36 Professional 60 93.10 77.A8 68 9A.l2 78.32 Laborer 31 9A.00 78.A5 19 95.63 76.53 White Collar 109 93.89 78.AO 107 93.29 79.06 Farmer 16 95.50 78.69 13 9A.5A 75.69 Clerk and Sales AA 91.27 78.30 30 9A.20 79.90 Retired and Deceased 33 9A.55 79.10 26 92.65 77.81 F 2.11* .52 1.03 2.11* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 6.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F~values listed in Table 6 above. Differences in women's academic image of the insti— tution scores for father's occupation are not statistically significant. A comparison of women's social image of the institu— tion scores for father's occupations indicate the differ- ences are statistically significant. Father's occupations 55 associated wtih the social image of the institution scores , above the mean SII score for all women are: white collar and clerk and salesman. Father's occupations associated with the social image of the institution scores below the mean are: professional, business, skilled, laborer, farmer, and retired or deceased. Women whose fathers are engaged in white collar and clerk and salesman occupations may have experienced frequent involvement in family social activities. This experience may contribute to their expec- tations of the social activities of a university. Parents' income.-—The sample population for this study was classified into the following income categories for parents' income: below $3,000; $3,000 to $5,000; $5,000 to $8,000; $8,000 to $12,000; and above $12,000. A comparison of institutional image scores for parents' income is reported in Table 7. The differences in means were not statistically significant. There is no evidence that parents' income is associated with the students' images of the institution. TABLE 7.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by parents' income. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Below $3,000 11 92.09 79.A5 7 95.A3 75.57 $3,000 to $5,000 52 93.92 77.58 53 9A.62 77.62 $5,000 to $8,000 116 92.00 77.87 93 93.8u 77.33 $8,000 to $12,000 109 93.95 78.28 106 93.7A 78.80 Above $12,000 85 93.A2 78.36 66 92.88 78.92 Did not respond 7 91.1A 77.00 13 95.83 76.A2 F* 1.A0 .35 .73 1.18 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 7.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 7 above. Parents' education.--The sample population was clas- sified into the following educational categories for the amount of education attained by their parents: eighth grade, high school, two years of college, Bachelor's degree, and a professional degree or a degree beyond the Bachelor's. The scores obtained by students classified according to father's education are reported in Table 8 amid according to mother's education in Table 9. iJlstitutional image scores for parents' staifistically significant. Mean education are not There is no evidence of a 57 relationship between the image scores and parents' educa- tion. TABLE 8.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by father's education. Men Women N All SII N All SII 8th Grade 66 92.89 77.AA AA 92.91 76.7A High School 160 93.13 78.1A 109 93.61 77.86 2 Years College A8 93.19 77.AA 68 93.76 77.91 Bachelor's 55 93.76 78.96 60 93.91 78.98 Professional A8 92.67 78.56 56 95.00 78.98 N. R. 3 93.00 76.33 1 102.00 7A.OO F* .16 .66 1.00 1.23 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 8.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 8 above. 58 TABLE 9.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by mother's education. Men Women N All SII N All SII 8th Grade 38 91.89 78.79 31 92.71 76.35 High School 207 93.1A 78.22 157 93.93 78.17 2 Years College 68 93.28 77.9A 81 93.10 77.98 Bachelor's 50 92.70 77.66 50 9A.1A 78.06 Professional 15 96.A7 76.67 18 97.28 81.11 N. R. 2 95.50 77.50 1 102.00 7A.00 F* 1.1A .38 2.00 1.63 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 9.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 9 above. Home environment (rural—urban).——A comparison of institutional image scores for those students who had lived most of their life in a city with those who had lived most of their life on a farm is reported in Table 10. The differences in academic and social institutional image scores for this classification are not statistically significant. There is no evidence that the background variable of living in a city or on a farm is associated with the student's images of the institution. 59 TABLE 10.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by home environment. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Urban 337 93.0A 78.21 320 93.83 78.16 Rural A3 93.53 77.A7 18 9A.33 76.78 F* .21 .63 .12 .95 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 10.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 10 above. In-state or out-of-state residence.--Mean image scores were compared for students entering M.S.U. from the state of Michigan and from states other than Michigan. The findings are reported in Table 11. The differences in mean scores of the image scales are not statistically significant for men. Differences in means for women residing in Michigan and those residing in other states are statistically significant for both scales. Women from Michigan have higher academic images of the institution scores and higher social image of the institution scores than women from out— of-state. Women from Michigan perceive M.S.U. as a more 60 academic institution and as a more social institution than the women enrolled from other states. TABLE ll.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified as in-state residents and out-of—state residents. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII In-state 278 93.39 78.31 222 9A.AA 78.58 Out-of— state 102 92.30 77.6A 116 92.72 77.1A F 2.01 1.00 6.09* A.67* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 11.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 11 above. Variables Associated with Student's Decision to Attend College Individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college.--The students were requested to indicate the individual who was the most important in helping them decide to go to college. The categories for this variable are mother, father, teacher(s), guidance counselor, friend(s), clergy, relative(s), and no one (it was entirely my own decision). A comparison of student institutional image scores for this classification is 61 reported in Table 12. There is no evidence of a relation- ship between this variable and students' institutional image scores. Differences in means are not statistically significant. TABLE 12.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by the individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Mother 59 93.95 78.88 77 9A.00 78.A0 Father 1A0 93.07 77.98 9A 9A.63 79.18 Teacher(s) 30 92.23 77.50 A2 95.A0 76.02 Guidance Counselor 21 93.1A 76.57 13 9A.38 77.31 Friend(s) 15 93.26 79.07 18 91.72 77.06 Clergy 0 Relative(s) 7 96.29 77.1A 9 92.78 78.33 No one, own decision A2 92.52 76.2A A2 92.26 76.95 No response 66 92.9A 79.A2 A3 92.88 78.86 F* .50 1.63 1.55 1.72 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 12.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 12 above. - . ,-.._.. .3- r 62 Primary reason for coming to college.-—The students indicated their primary reason for coming to college by selecting one of the following categories: to obtain a broad general education, to prepare for a vocation, to make it possible for me to increase my total life income, to please my parents, to find a husband or wife, to have fun, to get a better understanding of the world and the people in it, it's the thing to do, for prestige purposes. The findings of this analysis are presented in Table 13. A comparison of student's institutional image scores clas— sified according to their primary reason for attending college reveals the differences are not statistically significant. There is no evidence of association between this variable and the institutional images held by stu- dents. The data do reveal that the students' primary rea— son for coming to college was "to prepare for a vocation.” This reason was checked more frequently than the sum of all other reasons. The reason for coming to college checked next in frequency of response was "to obtain a broad edu- cation." Main source of information about the institution.-— The students were classified according to the source from which they received the greatest amount of information about the institution. The following categories were established: parents, friends attending an institution other than this one, high school teachers, guidance 63 TABLE l3.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified according to primary reason for coming to college. Men Women N All SII N All .811 To obtain a broad general education. 7A 93.A7 78.32 95 9A.28 77.71 To prepare for a vocation. 177 93.30 77.93 156 93.6A 77.71 To make it possible for me to increase my total life income. 37 92.57 78.59 8 90.75 77.25 To please my parents. 0 3 91.00 79.67 To find a spouse. 0 0 To have fun. 1 95.00 73.00 1 88.00 7A.00 To get a better understanding of the world and the people in it. 13 93.85 79.00 27 9A.70 78.70 It's the thing to do. 1 9A.00 86.00 3 87.33 81.00 For prestige purposes. 0 0 No response 77 92.36 78.00 A5 9A.Al 79.57 F* .31 .58 1.11 1.01 *None of the above~F4Values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 13.1 in the Appendix for data regarding scnxrce of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 13 above. 6A counselor, clergy, college representatives from this institution, relatives, alumni of this institution, personal visit and observations, written materials received from this institution. A comparison of insti— tutional image scores for the categories of this vari— able are reported in Table 1A. The differences in institutional image scores are not statistically signi- ficant for this variable. There is no evidence that institutional image scores are affected by the source of information from which the student learns about the institution. The primary source of information about the institution mentioned most frequently by students was "written materials." The sources mentioned next in frequency were "personal visits" and "friends attending this institution." Primary reason for selecting M.S.U.——The students were asked to indicate their primary reason for select- ing M.S.U. instead of some other college or university. The following categories were provided: easier academi- cally, a more beautiful campus, a more friendly student body, a better academic program in general, more of a party school, my parents preferred this school, a better academic program in my specific field of interest, good housing facilities, better library (more books), Honors College Program, better recreational facilities, a bigger school, less expensive, was turned down by other schools "Lia‘s 65 TABLE lA.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by primary source of information about the institution. Men . Women N AII SII N AII SII Parents 8 93.63 77.63 11 93.55 76.27 Friends in high school 6 89.00 79.00 3 90.00 79.00 Friends at this institution A8 92.13 78.06 57 92.39 78.16 Friends at another institution 3 86.33 71.00 1 98.00 7A.00 High school teachers 11 90.55 7A.A5 11 9A.27 77.27 Guidance counselor 23 96.13 81.A8 21 92.86 78.67 Clergy 0 0 College Rep. 13 9A.5A 78.38 3 96.00 77.67 Relatives 13 92.62 79.69 20 91.80 77.85 Alumni 13 9A.38 79.31 11 9A.00 77.6A Personal visit and observations 55 93.00 78.11 50 95.A0 78.30 Written materials from institution 130 93.20 77.75 126 9A.2l 78.0A No response 52 93.27 78.06 2A 9A.65 78.57 F* 1.20 1.6A 1.0A .38 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of significance. See Table lA.l in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 1A above. 66 that I applied to, close to my home, because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this insti- tution, a more friendly faculty, offered a scholarship, better job opportunities after graduation, it has higher prestige. The findings are reported in Table 15. A comparison of academic image of the institution scores with the primary reason for selecting M.S.U. instead of some other college or university indicates an association between these image scores and the reason for selecting Michigan State University. The differences in All scores are statistically significant. There is no evidence of a similar association between the social image of the institution and this variable. The differences are not statistically significant for this scale. The reason given most frequently by students for selecting Michigan State University instead of some other college or university is "a better academic program in my field of interest" and "a better academic program in general." Both of these reasons are held by students whose academic image of the institution scores tend to be higher than the average AII scores for men and women. Table 16 provides a listing of the primary reasons for selecting M.S.U. in descending order of AII scores for that variable. Reasons which are associated with above mean AII scores for both men and women are indicated with 67 TABLE 15.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women for the primary reason for selecting M.S.U. =1 _. a“. Men Women N All SII N All 311 Easier academically. A 86.25 75.50 3 9A.00 75.67 A more beautiful campus. 2 9A.50 69.00 2 96.50 79.00 A more friendly student body. 6 01.60 78.00 8 96.13 80.75 A better academic program in general. 85 95.62 78.33 59 95.A6 77.16 More of a party school. 4) 0 My parents preferred _ this school. 6 89.00 78.17 6 9A.67 81.67 A better academic program in my field of interest. 86 93.71 77.90 91 9A.59 77.38 Good football and basketball teams. .1 9A.00 80.00 1 95.00 77.00 A better faculty 5 03.20 77.A0 l 83.00 86.00 Is one of the few institutions that has a program in my field _ of interest. 22 92.91 77.09 ll 93.09 76.36 Good housing . facilities. 2 88.50 76.00 0 Better library 7 (more books). 1 97.00 86.00 0 Honors college program. 2 80.50 76.00 11 92.18 78.6A Better recreational . facilities. 0 l 88.00 78.00 A bigger school 8 9A.38 79.00 6 96.33 81.33 Less expensive 19 89.A7 79.7A 17 91.2A 77.12 Was turned down by other schools I ‘ . applied to. 12 80.0’ £1.50 9 89.00 78.33 Close to my home 25 91.80 76.36 19 91.63 76.68 Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution. 8 97.13 80.13 16 95.06 80.56 A more friendly faculty. 2 100.50 89.00 2 102.00 8A.00 Offered a , scholarship. 2A 9A.63 . 77.A6 25 93.28 76.52 Better job oppor- tunities after graduation. 11 90.27 75.55 2 97.00 72.00 It has higher prestige. 8 92.50 78.13 3 95.67 82.33 No response 71 92.93 78.AO A5 92.27 79.A5 F 2.13* 1.30 1.62* 1.3A *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. I See Table 15.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 15 above. 68 an asterisk. Reasons which are associated with below mean AII scores for both men and women are indicated with the number sign. Reasons for selecting M.S.U. associated with above the mean AII scores are related to the concept of "pride" in the institution (friendly faculty, better academic program, beautiful campus, better athletic teams). Reasons for selecting M.S.U. associated with below the mean AII scores form a pattern which can be classified as circumstances which left the student no other alternative than to attend M.S.U. (close to home, less expensive, one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest, was turned down by other schools I applied to). There is evidence of a relation- ship between the student's academic image of the institu— tion and the student's reason for selecting the institu- tion. Goals Established for College Attendance Academic major.——Differences in academic image of the institution scores are not significantly associated with the variable academic major for neither women nor men. The differences in men's social image of the insti- tution scores are also not significantly related to academic majors. There is a difference in women's social image of the institution scores classified by academic 69 TABLE 16.—-Reasons for selecting M.S.U. associated with the academic image of the institution listed in descending order of All scores. Men Women IMore friendly faculty. *Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution. Better library. *Better academic program in general. Offered a scholarship. 'A more beautiful campus. *A bigger school. *Good football and basketball teams. *A better academic program in my field of interest. A better faculty. above mean 93.10 below mean #No response. #Is one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest. It has higher prestige. #Close to my home. A more friendly student body. Better Job opportunities after graduation. #Was turned down by other schools I applied to. #Less expensive. My parents preferred this school. Good housing facilities. Easier academically. Honors College program *More friendly faculty. Better job opportunities after graduation. *A more beautiful campus. *A bigger school. A more friendly student body. It has higher prestige. *A better academic program in general. *Eecause a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution. *GOOd football and basketball teams. My parents preferred this school. *A Letter academic program in my field of interest. Easier academically. 93.85 above mean below mean Offered a scholarship. the few institutions that have in my field of interest. #15 one of a program #Ho response. Honors College program. #Close to my home. #Less expensive. Ahas turned down by the other schools I applied to. Better recreational facilities. A better faculty. *Reasons which are associated with ”Reasons which are associated with above below mean AII scores for both men and women. mean AII scores for both men and women. 70 major that is statistically significant. The findings are reported in Table 17. Academic majors that are associated with $2212 the mean social image of the institution scores for women are: social science, art and music, engineering (only one stu— dent), and agriculture ( only one student). Students not selecting a major also had SII scores above the mean. Adademic majors that are associated with 62193 mean SII scores are: biological science, education, home econom— ics, business and public service, communication and language, math and physical science, education, communi- cation and language, and pre-professional. Women major- ing in the sciences, home economics and business and public service have lower scores indicating they perceive the university environment as less social than women majoring in the other areas. The academic major is asso- ciated with women's social image of the institution. Amount of higher education anticipated.—-The student was requested to indicate how much college education he planned to obtain: 1 year, 2 years, 3 years, A years, Master's Degree, Doctorate, or professional degree (law, veterinary medicine, medicine, dentistry, etc.). A com- parison of the image scores on the basis of the amount of education the student anticipated is reported in Table 18. The differences in the academic image of the TABLE 17.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by academic major. Men Women N AII SII N All SII Pre-Professional 6A 92.97 79.00 9 91.11 73.78 Education 13 90.23 76.92 98 99.22 78.15 Engineering 79 93.30 78.36 1 90.00 85.00 Math and Physical Science 27 93.22 77.78 13 91.00 7A.85 Biological Science 9 93.22 77.11 24 94.17 77.0A Agriculture 27 92.99 77.26 1 95.00 85.00 Social Sciences 18 93.50 77.89 26 93.50 79.69 Business and Public Service A6 92.06 76.93 15 93.40 75.87 Communication and Language 16 93.25 79.06 33 92.91 78.15 Home Economics 1 102.00 86.00 8 94.13 76.25 Art and Music A 93.25 80.25 25 95.08 78.92 No-Preference 81 93.91 78.59 85 99.26 78.89 F .67 .87 .71 1.81* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 17.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 17 above. 72 institution scores for men and women, for amount of higher education anticipated are not statistically significant. TABLE 18. Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by the amount of higher education anticipated. Men Women‘ N AII SII N AII SII 1 year 0 1 85.00 68.00 2 years 1 79.00 58.00 3 87.00 71.67 3 years 1 91.00 80.00 0 4 years 144 92.81 77.76 224 93.74 78.53 Master's 106 93.57 78.36 84 94.56 77.67 Doctorate 42 92.83 77.81 12 95.67 77.67 Professional Degree 86 93.47 78.65 14 91.93 76.00 F 1.17 2.81* 1.92 2.05 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 18.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—Values listed in Table 18 above. The differences in the social image of the institu— 1:ion scores for women for the amount of higher education anticipated are not statistically significant. However, the differences in the social image of the institution scores classified according to the amount of higher 73 education anticipated by men are statistically significant. The amount of higher education anticipated by men asso— ciated with the SII scores apex: the mean is Master's Degree, professional degree, and the one student antici— pating three years. The amount of higher education anti- cipated by men associated with bglgw the mean SII scores is four years, doctorate, and the one student anticipating only two years of college. A relationship between social image of the institution scores and the amount of higher education anticipated is demonstrated, although the basis for this relationship cannot be easily concluded from the findings. Definiteness of vocational choice;--The students in this study were asked to indicate on the College Charac- teristics Inventory how definite their vocational plans were when they entered Michigan State University. The responses provided for this variable are: I know exactly what I am going to do, I am fairly sure about what I will do, I am not too certain as to what I want to do, and I have no idea. A comparison of institutional image scores for this classification is reported in Table 19. The differences in students' scores classified by the defi- niteness of vocational choice are not statistically significant. 74 TABLE l9.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational plans. Men Women N AII SII N All SII Know exactly what I am going to do. 41 93.07 77.63 40 93.73 77.13 Fairly sure about what I will do. 243 93.30 78.33 209 94.21 78.08 Not too certain as to what I want. 80 92.75 77.48 79 93.14 78.61 No idea. 16 92.63 78.69 10 92.50 77.90 F* .17 .58 .76 .57 *None of the above F values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 19.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 19 above. Anticipated social position.—-Differences in academic image of the institution scores are not statistically sig— nificant for men or women classified according to their anticipated social position at the university. Table 20 reports the findings for this analysis in which students were asked to estimate the degree of involvement they anticipated in the social and non—academic activities of the university. They estimated their involvement on a 75 scale ranging from 1 to 7, with 1 being the greatest amount of involvement and 7 the minimum amount of involve- ment. TABLE 20.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean scores for men and women classified by anticipated social position. Men Women N All SII N All SII l 7 97.71 81.29 1 91.00 86.00 2 30 93.63 78.03 28 94.21 80.57 3 83 93.53 80.55 103 94.29 78.98 4 127 92.57 77.48 102 93.91 78.72 5 91 93.62 77.16 68 93.75 76.94 6 34 91.68 77.03 24 91.00 72.42 7 4 90.75 68.00 2 100.50 72.00 No response 4 96.25 81.25 6 96.20 77.00 F 1.01 5.45* 1.30 5.58* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 20.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 20 above. The differences in social image of the institution scores are statistically significant for both men and women classified according to their anticipated social 76 position at the university. Those students anticipating a high degree of involvement in the social and non- academic activities of the university received the higher scores on the SII scale while those anticipating minimum of involvement received the lower SII scores. The amount of involvement in the social and non-academic activities anticipated by students is related to their social image of the institution. Conclusions Regarding Problem 1 Institutional image scores of students were tested to determine if a relationship exists between student's images of the university and personal characteristics of the student, namely family and home background, vari— ables on the student's decision to attend college, and variables on the goals established for college attendance. Of the 60 tests run on the data 10 were statistically significant. The findings provide evidence of a relationship between men's academic image of the institution and father's occupation and primary reason for selecting M.S.U. Relationships between men's social image of the institution and the amount of higher education antici— pated and their anticipated social position were also identified. Two relationships, state of residency and reason for Selecting M.S.U., were associated with women's AII scores. 77 This study also provides evidence of a relationship between women's social image of the institution and aca- demic major, father's occupation, state of residency, and anticipated social position. There was no evidence to support other relationships between student images of the institution and personal characteristics of the student identified for examination in this study. These characteristics which were not asso- ciated with students' images and role expectations are: sex of the student, parents' income, parents' education, home environment, individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college, primary reason for coming to college, main source of information about the institution, amount of higher education anticipated, and definiteness of vocational choice. Problem 2 What personal characteristics of students are asso- ciated with the academic and social student role expectations held by students prior to their regis- tration as freshmen? To test the data for Problem 2 mean academic student role expectation and mean social student role expectation scores were obtained from the pre—test inventories for students in each of the categories of the variables included in this study. The analysis of variance test was used to test for statistical significance the differ- ences between the means of each category. The findings 78 will be discussed in the following order: family and home background variables, variables concerning the student's decision to attend college, and variables concerning the goals established for college attendance. The same vari- ables tested in Problem 1 are tested in Problem 2. Home and Family Background Sex of the student.-—A comparison of the mean image scores on both the ASR and SSR scales indicate differ- ences which are statistically significant. Women score higher than men on these scales indicating they antici- pate a greater amount of participation in the academic and social programs of the university than men. Sex is a variable associated with students' academic and social role expectations. The data reported in Table 21 indi- cates the differences are statistically significant. TABLE 21.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women. N Men N Women F ASR 380 “9.17 338 51.83 27.49* SSR 380 68.67 338 69.67 u.u3* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 21.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 21 above. 79 Father's occupation.-—A comparison of ASR and SSR scores for students classified by father‘s occupation pro- vides evidence of a relationship between the SSR scores of women and their father's occupation. Women who scored above the mean SSR scores have fathers in the occupations of white collar, professional, clerk and salesman, or fathers who are deceased or retired. Father's occupation of students with SSR scores below the mean SSR score are business, skilled, laborer, and farmer. The findings for this analysis are reported in Table 22. TABLE 22.—~Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women clas- sified by father's occupation. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Business 21 “9.81 68.86 20 “1.“0 69.55 Skilled 66 “9.33 67.73 55 52.13 68.31 Professional 60 “8.08 68.25 68 “2.9“ 70.56 Laborer 31 “9.87 66.32 19 52.32 67.05 White Collar 109 “9.39 69.03 107 50.33 70.61 Farmer 16 51.00 69.25 13 55.15 66.00 Clerk and salesman ““ “9.95 69.39 30 51.80 70.03 Deceased and retired 33 “7.88 70.6“ 26 52.77 70.12 F .67 1.51 1.81 2.10* *Significant at the .05 level of confidence. See Table 22.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 22 above. 80 The differences in scores for the ASR scale and the SSR scale for men are not statistically significant for the variable of father's occupation. Parents' income.-—There is no evidence that student role expectations are associated with family income. Table 23 reports the findings for this analysis. The differences in ASR and SSR means for the categories of parents' income are not statistically significant. TABLE 23.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by parents' income. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Below $3,000 11 “9.91 70.73 7 53.71 69.1“ $3,000 to $5,000 52 50.21 68.1“ 53 52.00 68.13 $5,000 to $8,000 116 “9.“7 68.15 93 52.00 69.55 $8,000 to $12,000 109 “9.1“ 68.78 106 51.53 69.72 AbOVe $12,000 85 “8.“6 69.16 66 51.89 71.39 No response 7 “8.1“ 68.6“ 13 50.67 68.33 F* .“9 .59 .2“ 1.““ *None of the above F-Values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 23.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 23 above. 81 Parents' education.--The data for parents' education reveals an association between mother's education and the social student role expectations for women. The student social role expectation score for women whose mothers only completed the eighth grade are considerably below the mean SSR score for women. The student role expectation scores for women whose mothers have professional degrees are con- siderably above the mean SSR score. It appears that women whose mothers have professional degrees have very dif- ferent outlooks on their involvement in the social program of the university than the women whose mothers received only an eighth grade education. There is no evidence to indicate the existence of other relationships between parents' education and student role expectations. The differences in means of the other scales are not statistically significant. The findings for parents' education are reported in Tables 2“ and 25. Home environment (rural—urban).—-A relationship between student expectation scores for women and their rural or city background is reported in Table 26. Women who have lived most of their life on a farm perceive that they will be more involved in the academic life of the institution than those women who have lived most of their life in the city. Although the differences in SSR scores are not sig- nificant, there is a tendency for the women with a rural Wage. .13 ... x u H ...... Q... g 2.....- 8&4... 82 TABLE 2“.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by father's education. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Eighth grade 66 “9.11 68.82 7 51.75 67.30 High school 160 “9.21 68.66 109 50.88 69.38 Two years college “8 “8.83 68.0“ 68 51.8“ 70.5“ Bachelor's ‘ 55 “9.15 68.6“ 60 52.52 70.8“ Professional “8 “9.56 68.63 56 53.00 70.21 No response 3 56.33 73.67 1 50.00 76.00 F* .66 .“8 1.02 2.01 *None of the above F values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. ‘See Table 2“.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 2“ above. TABLE 25.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by mother's education. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Eighth grade 38 “8.03 68.“2 31 50.39 67.13 High school 207 “9.23 68.83 157 51.28 69.86 Two years college 68 “8.“7 68.62 81 51.65 69.70 Bachelor's 50 50.62 68.10 50 53.90 69.3“ Professional 15 50.27 68.“0 l8 5“.l7 73.28 No response 2 56.50 69.50 1 50.00 76.00 F 1.26 .13 2.15 2.“2* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 25.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 25 above. 83 background to perceive less social involvement than women living in a city. A comparison of men's scores reveals the differences are not statistically significant. TABLE 26.—-Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by home environment. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Rural “3 “8.02 69.23 18 5“.83 66.9“ Urban 337 “9.31 68.59 320 51.67 69.82 F 1.26 .39 “.28* 3.“2 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 26.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 26 above. In—state or out-of-state residence.——A comparison of student role expectations for students from Michigan with those from other states reveals differences in mean scores for women on both the ASR and SSR scales. Women from Michigan anticipate themselves being more involved in both the academic and social programs of the university than women from other states. The differences in means of the ... €411 ~ .01 a. .. ‘40..) n1 it i. lam. fl _ a: ., a a ' 1f— 8“ categories for each of these scales for men are not sta- tistically significant. The findings are reported in Table 27. TABLE 27.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by in—state and out-of-state. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR In—state 278 “9.21 69.00 222 52.53 70.53 Out—of— state 102 “9.07 67.75 116 50.“8 68.02 F .03 2.95 8.01* 11.98* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 27.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 27 above. Variables for Students Decision to Attend College Individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college.--Table 28 reports the findings for the analysis of student role expectation scores for the individual most important in helping him decide to go to college. An association between the academic student role expectation scores and the individual who helped the student decide to go to college is indicated from these 85 findings. A comparison of student role expectation scores and the person who helped the individual decide to go to college is illustrated in Table 28. TABLE 28.-~Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by the individual who was most important in determining the decision to go to college. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Mother 59 “9.17 69.25 77 52.65 70.30 Father 1“0 “8.“7 69.03 9“ 52.78 70.13 Teacher(s) 30 51.73 66.93 “2 53.57 69.26 Guidance Counselor 21 “6.57 68.86 13 “8.92 70.00 Friend(s) 15 “7.13 69.80 18 “9.11 69.56 Clergy 0 0 Relatives 7 53.00 69.57 9 53.22 69.67 No one, own decision “2 51.62 67.95 “2 “9.71 69.31 No response 66 “9.20 68.06 “3 50.35 68.““ F 2.“3* .73 2.95* .““ *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 28.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 28 above. .. .4;- ’;‘¢‘“‘;.,';_. g' 5.1.: .. 4—- . 86 Students who were influenced to go to college by relatives who attended the institution or by teachers have the highest ASR scores. The lowest scores for both men and women were held by those who had been influenced by friends and guidance counselors. Only a small number of students reported the guid— ance counselor as the individual most important in influ- encing them to attend college. Perhaps the guidance counselor plays a significant role in influencing students who receive little encouragement from sources such as teachers or parents. These students may come from homes in which educational values are not emphasized and they may not have good academic records. The majority of the students indicated their mother or father was the most important individual in helping them make the decision to attend college. The differences in SSR scores for this variable are not statistically significant for either sex. Primary reason for attending college.--The students' primary reason for attending college is associated with academic student role expectations, but not with social student role expectations. The findings for this analysis are reported in Table 29. Higher ASE scores were found for students who gave the following reasons for attending college: "to get a ‘I 87 TABLE 29.-~Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR To obtain a broad general education. 7“ 50.88 69.05 95 53.63 68.62 To prepare for a vocation. 177 “8.58 69.05 156 50.93 70.15 To make it pos- sible for me to increase my total life income. 37 “8.62 68.05 8 “9.00 70.50 To please my parents. 0 3 ““.67 70.33 To find a spouse. 0 0 To have fun. 1 59.00 73.00 1 39.00 71.00 To get a better understanding of the world and the people in it. 13 5“.38 65.31 27 5“.““ 69.07 It's the thing to do. 1 69.00 59.00 3 37.00 72.33 For prestige purposes. 0 0 No response. 77 “7.88 68.35 “5 51.91 70.09 F “.37* 1.35 5.78* .59 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 29.1 in the Appendix for data regarding the source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 29 above. “'4 "" ‘. s.» - 0,-‘_ a: 88 better understanding of the world and the people in it" and "to attain a broad general education." Lower ASE scores are related to these reasons: "preparing for a vocation" and "increasing life income." The number of individuals responding to other choices is too small to permit drawing conclusions. Main source of information about the institution.-—A comparison of student role expectation scores for students classified according to the main source from which they received information about the university reveals differ— ences too small to be statistically significant. This is consistent with the findings for this variable and the institutional image scores. It appears that students' perception of the university and their role are not asso- ciated with the source from which they receive information about the university. The findings are reported in Table 30. Primary reason for selecting M.S.U.—-A relationship was found between the students' primary reason for select— ing this university instead of some other university and the academic student role expectations of the student. Table 31 reports the findings for this analysis and Table 32 lists the reasons in descending order of ASR scores for selecting M.S.U. For both men and women high ASR scores are associated with reasons such as "friendly faculty," "honors college program," and "a better academic program ‘I 89 TABLE 30.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by the main source of information about the institution. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Parents 8 “9.00 69.13 11 50.5“ 69.“5 Friends in high school 6 “9.33 65.17 3 51.67 69.00 Friends at this institution “8 “6.69 69.65 57 50.72 70.51 Friends at another institution 3 “7.67 69.67 1 56.00 6“.00 High school teachers 11 “8.“5 68.09 11 5“.00 67.36 Guidance Counselor 23 “9.30 69.17 21 “9.86 72.52 Clergy 0 0 College representatives 13 “7.5“ 68.92 3 5“.67 71.33 Relatives 13 “8.15 68.15 20 “8.80 71.25 Alumni 13 51.38 69.69 11 “8.09 72.27 Personal visit and observation 55 “9.22 70.09 50 53.00 69.26 Written materials from institution 135 50.21 68.06 126 52.“8 68.77 No response 52 “8.09 67.71 2“ 53.91 69.30 F* .98 .80 1.78 1.1“ *None of the above F values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 30.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 30 above. 90 in my field of interest." Reasons men and women gave for selecting M.S.U. associated with low ASR scores are: "a more friendly student body," "is one of the few institu- tions that has a program in my field of interest," "good football and basketball teams,” "less expensive," "a bigger school," "my parents preferred this school," and "better job opportunities after graduation." There is no evidence of a relationship between SSR scores and the primary reason for selecting this univer— sity. The differences in means for the categories of this variable were not statistically significant. Goals Established for College Attendance Academic major.-—A comparison of student role expec- tation scores for the variable academic major reveals an association on both scales for men. The differences in mean scores of the categories for this variable are sta- tistically significant. Men selecting the following majors have ASR scores above the mean ASR score: social science, biological science, math and physical science, communication and language, art and music, and home economics (only one student). Also those students selecting no major have ASR scores above the mean. Men selecting the following majors have ASR scores below the mean ASR score: engineering, pre-professional, agriculture, business and ’w": _" - 7 " "I", ,y. -. — 91 TABLE 31.——Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by primary reason for selecting this institution. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Easier academically. “ “5.00 65.50 3 53.00 70.67 A more beautiful campus. 2 “2.50 67.00 2 57.00 75.00 A more friendly student be 6 ““ 83 7O 67 8 51 50 70 88 A better academic pro— gram in general. 55 “9.85 69.55 59 51.66 70.“l More of a party school. 0 0 My parents preferred this school. 6 “6.53 70.50 6 50.33 72.00 A better academic pro— gram in my field of interest. 86 “0.5: 68.17 91 52.89 69.30 Good football and basketball teams. . l “9.00 69.00 1 “6.00 72.00 A better faculty. 5 55.00 62.20 1 “0.00 8“.OO Is one of the few insti— tutions that has a pro— gram in my field of interest. 22 “9.03 69.6“ 11 “8.67 68.27 Good housing facilities. 2 “8.60 70.00 0 Better library. 1 ““.00 {7.00 0 Honors College program. 2 50.00 66.50 11 58.27 66.“5 Better recreational facilities 0 l “1.00 75.00 A bigger school. 8 “7.35 72.63 6 “8.83 71.67 Less expensive 19 “7.80 69.00 17 50.“l 69.06 Was turned down by others 7 I applied to. 12 “3.33 63.182 9 52.78 66.67 Close to my home. 25 52.53 65.92 19 50.58 67.8“ Because a relative or close friend attended r is now attending , this institution. 8 52.25 68.63 16 51.9“ 70.00 A more friendly faculty. 2 5“.00 7 .50 2 59.50 67.50 Offered a scholarship. 2“ 51.63 68.67 35 51.2“ 69.08 Better job opportunities after graduation. ll ““.91 68.82 2 51.00 69.50 Higher prestige. 8 50.75 69 50 3 “8.33 73 00 No response. 71 “8.66 68.33 “5 51.25 70.8“ F 1.79* 1.22 1.67“ .95 ‘Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 31.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom,'mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 31 above. TABLE 32---Reasons for selecting M.S.U. in descending order of academic student role expectation scores for men and women. Men Women A better faculty. *A more friendly faculty. Close to my home. Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution. Offered a scholarship. Higher prestige. *Honors college program. A better academic program in general. *A better academic program in my field of interest. MEAN SCORE #Is one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest. #Good football and basketball teams. No response. Good housing facilities. #Less expensive. #A bigger school. #My parents preferred this school. Easier'academically. #Better job opportunities after graduation. Better library. Was turned down by other schools I applied to. A more beautiful campus. #A more friendly student body. *A more friendly faculty. *Honors College program. A more beautiful campus. Easier academically. O *A better academic program in my field of interest. Was turned down by other schools I applied to. MEAN SCORE Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this university. A better academic program in general. #A more friendly student body. No response. Offered a scholarship. #Better job Opportunities after graduation. Close to my home. #Less expensive. #My parents preferred this school. #A bigger school. #18 one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest. Higher prestige. #Good football and basketball teams. Better recreational facilities. A better faculty. *Reasons which are associated with above the mean ASR scores for both men and women. #Reasons which are associated with below the mean ASR scores for both men and women. 93 public service, and education. The majors with lower ASR scores have a definite orientation toward vocational pre— paration, whereas those areas which are characterized by higher ASR scores are majors less oriented toward voca- tional preparation. Students selecting majors associated with vocational preparation perceive themselves being less involved in the academic program of the institution than students majoring in the arts and sciences. Men's expectations of their social role at the uni- versity are also related to the academic major. Men majoring in the pre—professional curriculums and educa— tion and those men selecting no—preference have SSR scores above the mean SSR score. Those majoring in business and public service, agriculture, engineering, communication and language, math and physical science, social science, biological science, home economics, and art and music have below mean SSR scores. The differences in means for women on these scales are not statistically significant. The findings are reported in Table 33. Amount of higher education anticipated.-—The amount of higher education anticipated is related to academic student role expectations. There is no evidence of a relationship with the social student role expectations, however. Differences in mean ASR scores for this variable are statistically significant. Differences in mean SSR 9“ TABLE 33.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified according to academic major. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Pre-professional 6“ “8.31 70.08 9 51.56 65.33 Education 13 “5.92 69.31 98 51.55 70.38 Engineering 7“ “8.86 68.“3 1 39.00 77.00 Math and Physical science 27 51.11 67.30 13 5“.62 68.00 Biological science 9 51.78 6“.33 2“ 53.29 69.88 Agriculture 27 “6.96 68.59 1 60.00 78.00 Social science 18 52.56 66.39 26 53.5“ 68.81 Business and public service “6 “6.00 68.50 15 50.80 67.20 Communication and language 16 51.00 68.38 33 52.30 69.6“ Home economics 1 62.00 61.00 8 51.63 67.13 Art and music “ “9.75 60.50 25 50.56 71.“0 No preference 81 50.9“ 69.63 85 51.25 69.75 F 2.8“* 2.26* 1.27 1.37 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 33.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 33 above. .3", 95 scores for this variable are not significant. Table 3“ reports the findings for this analysis. TABLE 3“.——Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR One year 0 l 58.00 62.00 Two years 1 53.00 65.00 3 “6.00 67.67 Three years 1 “2.00 75.00 0 Four years 1““ “7.71 68.58 22“ 50.71 70.0“ Master's Degree 106 “9.91 68.6“ 8“ 5“.10 69.52 Doctorate “2 53.57 66.36 12 56.58 68.92 Professional Degree 86 “8.90 69.83 1“ 52.86 66.79 F 5.32* 2.0“ 6.0“* 1.11 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 3“.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 3“ above. ASR scores of men above the mean ASR score are asso- ciated with students anticipating a Master's Degree or a doctorate. ASR scores below the mean ASR score are asso- ciated with those anticipating four years or a professional degree. )’ L,‘& V—. N 96 The Master's Degree, Doctorate, and professional degrees are associated with above the mean ASR scores for women. Only that group of women anticipating four years of college has a mean score below the ASR mean. Students planning on more than an undergraduate education perceive themselves as becoming more involved in the academic pro- gram of the institution than those students who only anti- cipate four years of college. Definiteness of vocational choice.-—Table 35 provides a comparison of ASR and SSR scores for students grouped according to the variable definiteness of vocational choice. TABLE 35.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational plans. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Know exactly “1 “8.22 66.“l “0 50.88 69.23 Fairly sure 2“3 “9.50 69.08 209 52.57 69.59 Not too certain 80 “9.25 68.68 79 50.75 70.78 No idea 16 “7.75 67.56 10 “8.60 65.20 F .6“ 2.31 2.90* 2.5“ *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 35.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 35 above. «k .""d“ T ,.:‘ 97 The only differences in the mean scores which are statistically significant are those for the ASR scale for women. Perhaps the most important relationship evident is women's academic student role expectation score for those indicating no idea about vocational choice. This group has the lowest ASR score indicating they perceive the least involvement in the academic program of the institution. Anticipated social position.--The differences in A§R_means for anticipated social position are not statis- tically significant, but the differences in SSR means for anticipated social position are statistically signi- ficant (see Table 36). Students anticipating a high social position perceive themselves being more involved in the social program of the university than those stu- dents who anticipate lower social positions. Conclusions Regarding Problem 2 Student expectations of their role in the academic program and the social program of the university were tested to identify relationships between these expecta- tions and personal characteristics of the student. 0f the 60 tests run on the data 22 were statistically sig- nificant. The sex of the student was found to be associated with the student role expectations. Women anticipated 98 TABLE 36.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean scores for men and women classified by anticipated social position. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR 1 7 52.86 7“.1“ 1 “0.00 67.00 2 30 51.13 72.67 28 53.32 73.32 3 83 “9.70 71.1“ 103 51.91 71.92 “ 127 “8.12 68.“2 102 51.“0 69.“3 5 91 “9.11 66.58 68 52.90 67.62 6 3“ 50.15 6“.““ 28 51.1“ 6“.“3 7 “ 50.50 62.00 2 56.50 60.50 No response “ “6.50 72.00 6 52.00 70.20 F 1.23 10.“1* .9“ 7.57* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 36.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 36 above. 99 greater involvement than men in both the academic program and the social prOgram of the university. Relationships were found for men between their academic student role expectations and academic major, the amount of education they anticipated, the individual most important in influencing them to attend college, pri- mary reason for attending college, and their primary reason for selecting M.S.U. Men's social student role expectations were found to be associated with their academic major and their anticipated social position. Relationships between student role expectations and personal characteristics were also found for women. Rela- tionships were found between their academic role expecta- tions and home environment, primary reason for attending college, state of residence, primary reason for selecting M.S.U., amount of education anticipated, definiteness of vocational choice, and the individual who influenced them to go to college. The personal characteristics associated with women's social student role expectations are father's occupation, mother's education, state of residence, and anticipated social position. There were no relationships found between student role expectations and the following personal character- istics: parents' income, father's education, and main source of information about the institution. These findings indicate students' role expectations are associated with personal characteristics of the 100 student. There are relationships existing between stu- dents' role expectations and their family and home back- ground, factors which influenced them to attend college, and the goals they have established for college attendance. Problem 3 Do the students' academic and social images of the institution change during the first year? The change in students' academic and social images of the institution during the first year was analyzed by a comparison of the pre-test mean scores and the actual post-test mean scores for both the academic image of the institution scale and the social image of the institution scale. A t—test of significance was used to test the differences between the means for statistical signifi- cance. The findings of this analysis are reported in Table 37. TABLE 37.—-Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean pre-test and mean post- test scores, differences in mean scores, correlation of pre—test and post—test scores, and t-values obtained from t-test of significance of differences in means. Men Women Pre— Post— Pre- Post- test test Diff r t test test Diff r t AII 93.10 8“.67 8.“3 .50 11.28* 93.85 85.02 8.83 .38 7.“7* SII 78.13 76.3“ 1.79 .38 7.89* 78.09 77.09 1.00 .37 7.27* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. 101 The differences between the pre-test scores and the post-test scores on both scales were statistically sig- nificant. The findings indicate the students' academic image of the institution and the students' social image of the institution decrease during their first year at Michigan State University. Problem-“ Do the students' academic and social student role expectations change during the first year? The change in students' academic and social student role expectations during the first year was analyzed by a comparison of the pre-test mean scores and the actual post-test mean scores for both the academic student role expectation scale and the social student role expectation scale. A t-test of significance was used to test the differences between the means for statistical significance. The findings of this analysis are reported in Table 38. The differences between the pre-test scores and the post-test scores on both scales were statistically significant. The findings indicate that students' academic and social student role expectations decrease during their first year at Michigan State University. 102 TABLE 38.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean pre-test and mean post- test scores, differences in mean scores, correlation of pre-test and post—test scores, and t-values obtained from t-test of significance of differences in means. Men Women Pre- Post- . Pre- Post- test test Diff r t test test Diff r t ASR “9.17 ““.03 5.1“ .52 11.92* 51.83 “6.02 5.81 .“9 10.18* SSR 68.67 63.59 5.08 .5“ 12.53* 69.67 6“.82 “.85 .“7 9.63* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. Problem 5 Are changes in the academic and social image of the institution during the first year associated with personal characteristics and college exper- iences of the student? The change in the individual student image scores between the pre—test administered in the summer or fall and the post—test administered in the spring was deter— mined. The analysis of the change in image scores between the pre—test and post-test data was undertaken to determine what personal characteristics and college experiences are associated with the change of students' images of the university and their student role expec- tations. The variables that have been selected for the analy— sis for Problem 5 are as follows: (1) family and home background—-sex of the student, father's occupation, 103 parents' income, father's education, mother's education, home environment, in-state or out-of-state residence; (2) variables on students' decision to attend college-- individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college, primary reason for attending college, primary reason for selecting M.S.U.; (3) vari- ables on goals established for college attendance-- academic major, amount of higher education anticipated, definiteness of vocational plans; and (“) college exper- iences--attendance at summer counseling clinic, most important function of the university, attribute felt most necessary for success, principal means of financial sup- port, place of residence, type of residence hall, topic discussed most frequently outside of class, recognition desired, Greek affiliation, college social position, con- tinuation at the university, and final grade point average. The findings for each of the variables indicated above are reported in this section. Home and Family Background Sex of the student.--The change in AII and SII scores is not associated with the sex of the student. Differences in mean change of All and SII scores classified according to the sex of the student are not statistically signifi- cant. The findings are reported in Table 39. * "' “"1: (“"7 I‘m -._— 10“ TABLE 39.-~Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women. N Men N Women F* All 380 -.03 338 .05 .02 SII 380 .30 338 -.““ 2.88 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 39.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 39 above. Father's occupation.--The findings for change in inétitutional image scores for the variable, father's occupation, are reported in Table “0. The differences in mean change for the occupations included in this variable are not statistically significant. There is no evidence that father's occupation is related to the change in students' institutional image scores. Parents' income.——The differences in means for change in All and SII scores are not statistically significant. The findings from the analysis of the data reported in Table “1 do not indicate an association between the change in institutional images of students and their parents' income. 105 TABLE “0.—-Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Business 21 l.“3 .67 20 .60 -2.70 Skilled 66 — .29 .33 55 .“9 .96 Professional 60 -l.“2 1.32 68 - .72 - .72 Laborer 31 -l.23 1.58 19 .68 - .“2 White Collar 109 1.20 .25 107 - .50 — .28 Farmer 16 — .31 -2.““ l3 —l.39 - .5“ Clerk and Salesman ““ - .68 — .59 30 1.33 —1.30 Deceased and . Retired 33 .15 - .33 26 1.73 - .58 F* 1.10 1.l6 .59 1.03 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “0.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table “0 above. TABLE “l.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by parents' income. Men Women N All SII N All SII below $3,000 11 —1.00 1.18 7 5.00 -1.29 $3,000 to $5,000 52 .12 1.15 53 — .15 -1.77 $5,000 to $8,000 116 -1.33 .23 93 .18 - .33 $8,000 to $12,000 109 .61 - .2“ 106 .26 .35 Above $12,000 85 .62 .““ 66 - .29 - .77 No response 7 “.1“ .57 13 —2.58 .08 F* 1.61 .“6 .8“ .89 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “1.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “1 above. '“'-—-r'.':" H 106 Parents' education.-—The results of the analysis of the data for change in All and SII for parents' educa- tion are reported in Tables “2 and “3. The findings from the analysis reveal the differences in mean change scores are not statistically significant. There is no evidence of an association between the changes in image scores and parents' education. Home environment.-—The variable of home environ- ment compares students from the farm with those who have lived in the city. Men who came from a farm had a decrease in their academic image of the institution score while those men from the city had a slight increase. The differences in All scores on the pre—test for these two groups were not statistically significant. The dif- ferences in the change in image scores for these two groups on the post-test is statistically significant. The variable of rural background is related to the stu- dents' change in academic image of the institution. After a year of residence at M.S.U. the men from farms have an image of M.S.U. that is less academic than when they entered. Changes in All scores were not statistically sig— nificant for women nor were the changes in SII scores for men or women. The findings are reported in Table ““. 107 TABLE “2.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by father's education. Men Women N All 811 N SII AII 8th grade 66 .03 .56 ““ .02 .09 High school 160 — .70 .38 109 - .22 — .28 2 yrs. college “8 2.5“ — .0“ 68 — .26 —1.““ Bachelor's 55 — .62 .69 60 .“5 .10 Professional “8 .10 —1.0“ 56 .70 - .32 No response 3 2.00 2.67 l —8.00 —6.00 F* 1.66 .61 .38 .88 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. ‘ See Table “2.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table “2 above. TABLE “3.—-Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by mother's education. Men Women N All SII N All SII 8th grade 38 -1.92 — .32 31 .39 — .“2 High School 207 .23 .06 157 .81 — .“0 2 yrs. college 68 .06 .80 81 —1.21 — .9“ Bachelor's 50 .“8 .58 50 .08 .32 Professional 15 —1.“7 .33 18 -l.ll - .“9 No response 2 “.00 2.50 l —8.00 —6.00 F* .88 .28 1.06 .“8 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “3.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table “3 above. .v— .14.! km” W‘... “REF‘I— w—V—r 108 TABLE ““.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by home environment. Men Women N All SII N All SII Rural “3 —2.53 .12 18 -l.56 .1“ Urban 337 .29 .33 320 - .““ -.““ F 6.02* .05 .83 .00 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table ““.l in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table ““ above. In—state and out-of-state residence.—-The analysis of change in image scores for state of residence is reported in Table “5. The differences in mean change scores in student's social image of the institution is statistically significant for men. The differences in SII scores for men on the pre—test were not statistically significant. An increase in SII scores is shown for men from the state of Michigan while a decrease in SII scores is shown for men from states other than Michigan. The differences for the other image scales tested on this variable are not statistically significant. 109 TABLE “5.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change scores for men and women classified by in-state or out-of-state residence. Men Women N All 811 N All SII In—state 278 —.19 .71 222 .20 -.23 Out-of-state 102 .“0 — .80 116 -.““ -.““ F .50 “.90* .2“ .00 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “5.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “5 above. Variables for Student's Decision to Attend College Individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college.--The findings for change in institutional image scores for the variable "individual most important in helping the student decide to go to college" are reported in Table “6. Differences in mean change in scores for the variable are not statistically significant. There is no evidence of a relationship between changes in institutional images and the identity of the individual who was most important in helping the student to decide to attend college. 110 TABLE “6.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by the individual most important in determining the decision to attend college. Men Women N All SII N AII SII Mother 59 -2.05 - .19 77 .27 - .65 Father l“0 .2“ .“6 9“ - .31 .“6 Teacher(s) 30 .60 .30 “2 - .38 .“5 Guidance counselor 21 -l.l9 2.52 13 -2.15 —2.15 Friend(s) 15 2.“O 2.80 18 3.61 - .28 Clergy 0 0 Relatives 7 -1.29 l.“3 9 — .78 .““ No one, own decision “2 1.17 - .12 “2 - .26 -l.83 No response 66 .11 - .71 “3 .“9 —l.28 F* 1.27 1.22 .81 1.16 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “6.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “6 above. Primary reason for attending college.-—The dif- ferences in mean change in All and SII scores for the variable, "primary reason for attending college," are not statistically significant. The findings for this analysis are reported in Table “7. The primary reason 111 TABLE “7.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college. Men Women N All SII N All SII To obtain a broad general education 7“ .3“ .“2 95 — .2“ — .8“ To prepare for a vocation 177 - .“3 .“6 156 — .03 — .“2 To make it pos— sible fo me to increase my total life income 37 .76 —l.57 8 —l.37 3.50 To please my parents 0 3 -3.33 1.33 To find a spouse 0 0 To have fun 1 -5.00 .00 1 7.00 -11.00 To get a better understanding of the world and the people in it 13 “.08 1.08 27 .70 - .56 It's the thing to do 1 —9.00 —l.00 3 6.33 5.00 For prestige purposes 0 0 No response 77 — .35 .61 “5 .68 - .6“ F* 1.28 .72 .“6 1.“0 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “7.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “7 above. 112 for coming to college is not associated with change in institutional image scores. Primary reason for selecting M.S.U.—~Table “8 reports the findings for the change in institutional images for the variable "primary reason for selecting M.S.U." The mean differences in change in scores are not statistically significant. Change in students' image of the institution is not associated with their primary rea- son for selecting the institution. Goals Established for College Attendance Academic major.——The academic major of the student is not associated with the change in institutional images. The data reported in Table “9 indicates the differences between means are not statistically significant. Amount of higher education anticipated.--Differences in means for change in academic institutional image scores for men on the variable "amount of higher education antic- .ipated" are statistically significant. This data is re- ported in Table 50. Students anticipating graduate study show an increase in their academic image of the institution whereas those students anticipating four years of college show a decrease in their academic image of the institution. The change in All scores for women and the change in SII scores for men and women are not statistically sig- nificant. 'I 113 TABLE “8.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the insti- tution mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for selecting this institution. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Easier academically “ —“.00 -1.00 3 - 1.67 -3.33 A more beautiful campus 2 -“.00 -6.50 2 -10.50 —5.50 A more friendly student body 6 -1.33 2.00 8 “.25 - .50 A better academic program in general 55 .65 1.00 59 .51 - .37 More of a party school 0 0 My parents preferred ' this school 6 -2.00 - .83 6 5.00 1.17 A better academic program in my field of interest 86 .20 .““ 91 - 1.73 - .65 Good football and basketball teams 1 “.00 .00 1 - 1.00 6.00 A better faculty 5 - .20 - .20 l - 8.00 -6.00 In one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest 22 .73 .“5 ll - 1.82 - .12 Good housing ‘ facilities 2 3.00 “.00 0 Better library 1 1.00 2.00 0 Honors College program 2 -5.50 2.01 11 6.00 -l.09 Better recreational facilities 0 1 - “.00 2.00 A bigger school 8 -3.12 -1.87 6 1.50 -2.33 Less expensive 19 3.21 2.11 17 .2“ - .“7 Was turned down by other schools I applied to 12 -2.58 -l.75 9 .““ .““ Close to my home 25 -1.0“ l.“8 19 - 1.16 -1.00 Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution 8 -“.62 -5.12 16 - .50 - .12 A more friendly . faculty 2 -3.00 -3.00 2 8.00 -9.00 Offered a scholarship 2“ .38 - .“2 25 1.20 .12 Better Job oppor- _ tunitiea after graduation 11 -2.27 2.27 2 “.00 8.50 Higher prestige 8 -1.50 - .12 3 .67 -2.00 No response 71 .8“ .09 “5 .66 - .02 F" . .85 .93 1.31 .80 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. ' See Table “8.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “8 above. 11“ TABLE “9.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by academic major. Men Women N All SII N All SII Pre-professional 6“ - .“5 - .“6 9 — .22 .11 Education 13 —2.62 — .92 98 - 1.09 —1.01 Engineering 7“ -l.03 — .03 l —ll.OO -6.00 Math and physical science 27 3.“8 - .11 13 — .69 1.77 Biological science 9 .33 1.67 2“ 1.2“ — .81 Agriculture 27 — .26 2.96 l —11.00 1.00 Social science 18 1.89 .56 26 .“6 .27 Business and public service “6 1.2“ .22 15 .93 1.67 Communication and language 16 2.““ .56 33 - 1.00 -2.55 Home Economics 1 .OO “.00 8 - 3.12 1.63 Art and Music “ —5.50 -3.75 25 .““ - .12 No preference 81 — .8“ .55 85 1.7“ - .12 F* 1.53 .89 1.2“ 1.10 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table “9.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table “9 above. 115 TABLE 50.—-Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII 1 year 0 1 .00 “.00 2 years 1 18.00 -12.00 3 3.00 2.33 3 years 1 5.00 - 7.00 O “ years 1““ - 1.03 .51 22“ - .33 — .10 Master's Degree 106 .35 .25 8“ .13 —l.l7 Doctorate “2 1.55 .57 12 3.25 -2.67 Professional degree 86 .16 .10 1“ 2.36 - .50 F 2.“6* 1.2“ .87 1.03 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 50.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 50 above. Definiteness of vocational choice.--The variable "definiteness of vocational choice" is not associated with the change in student images of the institution. The dif- ferences in means in change in images are reported in Table 51. These differences are not statistically signi- ficant. 116 TABLE 51.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational choice. Men Women N All SII N All SII Know exactly “1 —l.25 — .59 “0 1.35 —1.07 Fairly sure 2“3 .13 .““ 209 - .““ — .33 Not too certain 80 - .2“ .75 79 .“7 - .99 NO idea 16 1.81 —1.81 10 1.80 “.10 F* .18 1.18 .92 2.51 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 51.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 51 above. College Experiences The change in institutional image scores were ana- lyzed to identify relationships between the experiences of the student at the university and changes in his image scores. The variables selected to be tested are: attend- ance at the summer counseling clinic, most important func- tion of the university, attribute felt most necessary for success, principal means of financial support, place of residence, type of residence hall, topic discussed most frequently outside of class, recognition desired, Greek affiliation, college social position, continuation at the -21 Nomi-W" - _, w.— C-l. ‘ . . - 117 university, and final grade point average. All of the information for the variables included in this section was obtained at the end of the academic year from the "College Characteristics Inventory" post-test and the Registrar's Office with the exception of attendance at the summer counseling clinic. This was recorded on the pre-test inventory. The findings for each of the vari— ables indicated above are reported in this section. Attendance at the summer counseling clinic.-- Attendance at the summer counseling clinic and attend— ance at the fall orientation were recorded on the "College Characteristics Inventory" pre-test form. Change in institutional images was related to this variable and is reported in Table 52. Increases in academic image of the institution scores for men were related to their attendance at the fall orien- tation while decreases in their AII scores were found for those who attended the Summer Counseling Clinic. The differences on this scale for women were not statistically significant. The differences in mean change in scores on the SII scale for women are statistically significant. Women who attended the counseling clinic show no change in SII scores while those who came to fall orientation show a lower post SII score. 118 The differences on this scale tistically significant. for men are not sta— TABLE 52.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by attendance at the summer counsel— ing clinic. Men Women N AII SII N All SII Counseling clinic 251 — 1.10 - O“ 250 .0“ .00 Fall orientation 129 2.0“ .96 80 .08 —l.87 F 16.97* 2.“2 .00 6.““* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 52.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, listed in Table 52 above. and the criterion values of the F—values Most important function of the university.——Tab1e 53 reports a comparison of the change in institutional image scores of the students classified according to the function of the university they perceived as the end of the year the student was function of the university which he most important function. He was to from the following: most important. At asked to select the considered to be the make his selection Teach college students how to solve problems Provide the student with a well- Prepare students for a vocation rounded education 119 Promote the social development of the individual Help one find his marital partner Provide opportunities for broadening cultural interests Make one aware of community and world problems Prepare the individual to be a productive citizen in his community Promote intercollegiate athletics Teach the student to think for himself Teach the student how to get along with other people Changes in women's academic image of the institution scores are associated with the function of the university they perceive as most important. The following functions of the institution are associated with increases in academic image of the institution scores for women: pro— mote intercollegiate athletics, teach the student how to get along with people, promote the social development of the individual, make one aware of community and world problems, and prepare the student for a vocation. The women who indicate that the above functions are important view the primary purpose of the institution as one of per- forming functions other than those traditionally valued by a university and had a higher academic image of the institution at the end of the first year than they did at the beginning. A decrease in academic image of the institution scores during the year is associated with the following functions of the university selected by women as most important: provide opportunities for broadening cul- tural interests, teach students how to solve problems, 120 prepare the individual to be a productive citizen in the community, and provide the student with a well—rounded education. Differences in mean change scores on this variable are not statistically significant for men. The differences in change in SII scores are not statistically significant for men or women. The function most frequently selected by students as the most important function of the university was "provide the student with a well—rounded education." Most important attribute for success.—-Students selected the attribute they felt most important to possess in order to succeed at this institution from the follow- ing: intelligence, drive from within, ability to learn from experience, belief in self, understanding and being able to get along with people, and character. In comparing the differences in change in students' academic institutional image scores we find that the dif- ferences are not statistically significant for men or women. Nor are differences in change in men's social image of the institution statistically significant. However, the difference in change in women's social image of the institution scores are statistically signifi- cant. The data for this analysis is reported in Table 5“. Changes reflecting an increase in SII scores are asso- ciated with the attributes of: ability to learn from 121 TABLE 53.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by most important function of the university. Men Women N All SII N All SII Teach college students how to solve problems 16 — .12 1.38 l“ —2.07 1.00 Provide the student with a well rounded education. 15“ — .“7 .“9 1“2 — .37 — .“8 Prepare the student for a vocation. “8 1.29 .79 “3 1.“2 .12 Promote the social development of the individual 2 3.50 -1.50 l 6.00 —“.00 Help one find his marital partner. 0 0 Provide opportunities for broadening cul— tural interests. 2 - 5.50 -3.50 2 -3.50 2.00 Make one aware of community and world problems. 1 - 7.00 —7.00 3 3.67 .33 Prepare the individual to be a productive citizen in his community. “9 — .69 - .“5 “O - .87 1.“0 Promote intercol- legiate athletics. 1 18.00 5.00 10 9.80 2.50 Teach the student to think for himself. 53 — .3“ .92 “5 -l.76 — .18 Teach the student how to get along with other people. 5 - .20 —6.20 “ “.50 —l.75 No response. “9 .98 — .10 3“ .82 — .15 F 1.28 1.18 2.63* .“7 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 53.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 53 above. u.‘ .‘ «.. - 122 experience, drive from within, and belief in self. Women who indicated the most important attribute to succeed at the university was character, intelligence, understanding and being able to get along with people had lower social image of the institution scores at the end of the year than were recorded on their pre-test inventory. TABLE 5“.-—Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by attribute most necessary for success. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Intelligence 62 2.65 1.10 32 - .8“ -2.““ Drive from within. 18“ — .62 .5“ 15“ -1.0“ .27 Ability to learn from experience. “1 — .59 - .93 39 1.31 .38 Belief in self. “7 — .66 - .02 70 1.59 .27 Understanding and being able to get along with people. 20 —l.60 —2.20 21 .86 -5.33 Character. 9 1.11 1.32 8 .50 -2.00 No response. 17 .9“ 1.12 1“ 1.21 -1.00 F 2.03 1.25 1.36 “.27* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 5“.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 5“ above. 123 Financial support.--Students were requested to indi- cate their primary means of financial support while attend— ing college. The variable of primary means of financial support is not related to changes in students' images of the institution. None of the F values reported in Table 55 indicate the mean differences are statistically sig- nificant. The means by which the student meets his finan- cial obligation do not appear to have an effect on the change in his perception of the institution. TABLE 55.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary means of financial support. Men Women N AII SII N AII SII Parents 207 — .08 .29 236 - .21 - .07 Academic scholarship ll .00 - .07 15 “.67 -3.07 Personal savings 31 2.29 1.19 15 1.67 — .87 Athletic scholarship 9 -2.89 2.33 0 Money earned from summer employment 55 .25 — .96 16 -3.12 -2.87 Money to be earned from part time Jobs in college. 0 -l.OO “.56 7 .29 .57 Loans 15 2.87 - .27 11 .18 .09 No response “3 — .1“ .26 38 .“7 - .2“ F* .98 1.23 1.55 1.15 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 55 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 55 above. 12“ Place of residence.--A comparison of image scores for the commuting student and for the student who resides on campus in a residence hall is reported in Table 56. The difference in change in institutional image scores are not significantly related to the students' place of residence. The data do not indicate a relationship between the students' residence, on campus or at home, and his change in perception of the institution. Although most residence hall programs are concerned with producing an environment which will have an impact on the student, there is no evidence of an impact in the area of students' perception of the institution. TABLE 56.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by place of residence. Men Women N All SII N AII SII Commuting “7 —.“7 .27 36 -.81 -1.22 Residence Hall 333 .03 .31 302 .15 - .35 F* .20 .01 .50 .7“ *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 56.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 56 above. 125 Type of residence hall.--Case Hall, the first co- educational living-learning center, at Michigan State University was opened fall semester, 1961. A comparison of institutional scores was made between students resid— ing in the living—learning center and those students living in other residence halls and commuting. The data regarding student image changes for this variable are reported in Table 57. TABLE 57.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by living-learning center and other residence. Men Women N All SII N All SII Case Hall 81 —.“3 -l.09 53 -.7O -.98 Other 299 .08 .68 285 .19 —.3“ F .33 5.72* .60 .55 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 57.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 57 above. The differences in change in SII scores for men is statistically significant. Men residing in Case Hall perceived the environment of the university as less social at the end of the year. Men in other living arrangements mu. .2. 2'. .'.;.;$"I "21'; .53.-.. 126 indicated a slight increase in their perception of the institution as a social place over their initial image. No other differences in change of image scores are statistically significant for this variable. Topic discussed most frequently.--Table 58 reports a comparison of change in academic image of the institu- tion scores and social image of the institution scores grouped according to the topic discussed most frequently by students outside the classroom. Differences in change of academic institutional image scores are statistically significant for the AII scale for men. The discussion topics associated with increases in academic institutional image scores are: philosophy, girls, sex, dating, high school experiences, grades, politics, and books. A decrease in student academic image of the institution scores is associated with the following topics: course work, religion, sports, and travel. The topic which both men and women reported they discuss most frequently was course work. Girls, sports, grades, sex are topics men also discussed frequently . Topics checked by women are dating, boys, philosophy, grades, and religion. There is no evidence of other relations between institutional images and topics discussed. 127 TABLE 58.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by the topic discussed most fre- quently outside of class. Men Women N All SII N All SII Politics 8 .25 -“.62 3 — .67 1.33 Religion 1“ —1.6“ .“3 19 — .68 .05 National and international politics 7 .00 —1.86 “ 2.75 3.50 Sports 3“ -1.76 - .91 l — 6.00 .00 Boys 0 31 1.03 .32 Girls “3 2.12 - .56 “ — 3.00 — 1.25 Philosophy 20 “.70 .10 29 1.2“ - .62 Dating 1“ 1.86 —1.79 52 .58 - 1.35 Course work 127 —1.06 .87 130 - .88 — .0“ Movies 0 2 - 5.50 - 3.00 Teachers 0 1 -12.00 .00 Sex 26 1.06 .50 8 9.50 1.38 Travel “ —2.00 5.25 “ 2.75 - 6.25 High school experiences “ 1.75 .50 l 1.00 6.00 Family 0 0 Books 5 .20 3.00 1 — 1.00 -10.00 Grades 36 .35 - .22 21 - 1.33 .00 No response 38 .35 — .22 27 .70 — .96 F 1.77* 1.“9 1.“2 .86 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 58.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 58 above. V 2, _.—-"'!‘ ~- 128 Recognition desired.-—A comparison of differences in changes in the image of the institution scores for the area in which recognition is most desired by students reveals the differences are not statistically significant. The students were asked to select one of three areas of recog- nition: athletic, academic, social. The findings are reported in Table 59. There is no evidence of a relation- ship between the area of recognition desired by the stu— dents and changes in their institutional image scores. The majority of the students indicate they prefer recog- nition in the academic area. Eleven per cent of the men and one per cent of the women prefer recognition in the athletic area. Eight per cent of the men and twelve per cent of the women prefer recognition in the social area. TABLE 59.-~Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by recognition desired. Men Women N All SII N All SII Athletic “2 —l.69 — .“8 “ - .50 2.50 Academic 306 .05 .28 28“ - .02 - .53 Social 32 l.“1 1.53 “9 .“7 - .31 No response 1 2.00 6.00 F* 1.80 1.05 .08 .79 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 59.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 59 above. .. .. m__. 129 Greek affiliation.-sA comparison of the institu- tional image scores of the population divided into those affiliated with Greek organizations and those not affil- iated is reported in Table 60. During the first quarter of the academic year, university regulations prohibit freshmen students from membership in Greek organizations. At the beginning of the second quarter students are per- mitted to Join these organizations. Men who affiliated with Greek organizations show a decrease in social image of the institution scores whereas those who did not affiliate show an increase in the social image of the institution scores. The relationships here may be related to the social life of those affiliated with Greek organizations. Students in these organizations may be more involved with the social aspects of the organiza- tion and less involved with the university social program. On the other hand those students finding M.S.U. to have less of a social program than they had anticipated may have sought membership in Greek organizations to find more opportunities for social involvement. The data printed in Table 60 does not provide evi- dence of other relationships between institutional images and Greek affiliation. 130 TABLE 60.—-Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by Greek affiliation. Men Women N All SII N All SII Greek 7“ .“5 - 1.8“ “9 .1“ -.2O Non—Greek 306 -.l“ .82 289 .03 -.“8 F .“0 12.32* .00 .10 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 60.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 60 above. Social position.--Students were requested to esti— mate their social position on the campus at the end of the first year. This estimate is a reflection of the degree of involvement in the social and non-academic activities at the university. The students used a scale ranging from 1 to 7 to estimate their social position. The number one represented the greatest amount of involve- ment and the number 7 represented the minimum amount of involvement. The differences in change in student images of the institution associated with the social position the student feels he maintains at the university reveals a difference that is statistically significant for social image of the 131 institution scores for both men and women. The analysis is reported in Table 61. Although the relationship between social position and mean change in image scores is obvious for both men and women, the relationship is more pronounced for men. Students who perceive themselves being involved exten- sively in the social program of the institution show a decrease in images they hold of the institution as a social place, whereas those who perceive themselves as being uninvolved indicate increases in their social images of the institution. TABLE 61.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by social position. Men Women N All SII N All SII 1 3 —8.33 -1.67 1 —3.00 -8.00 2 13 .08 -2.5“ 11 3.55 -3.37 3 “5 - .6“ —2.02 29 1.66 .03 “ 87 — .08 .30 92 — .33 —1.85 5 110 .35 .97 99 - .35 — .“6 6 82 - .92 .56 85 .18 .32 7 “O 2.15 1.63 21 - .81 2.38 F 1.62 2.3“* .7“ 2.“O* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 61.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 61 above. 132 The differences in change in scores for the aca- demic image of the institution are not statistically significant for this variable. Table 62 shows a comparison of social positions anticipated by students at the beginning of the year and the social position they feel they hold at the end of the year. There is evidence of less actual involvement than was anticipated at the beginning of the year. TABLE 62.--Anticipated social position and actual social position frequency for men and women. Men Women Pigltl6n Fall Spring Fall Spring 1 7 3 l 1 2 30 13 28 11 3 83 “5 103 29 “ 127 87 102 92 5 91 110 68 99 5 3“ 82 28 85 7 “ “0 2 21 No response “ 6 Continuation at the university.—-This study involves a comparison of institutional image scores of students who withdrew from the university during the first year with 133 those who continued at the university throughout the first year. From the total population sample 30 men and 21 women left the university during the year. The post- test inventory was mailed to_the students who had left the university. These students were requested to complete the inventory and return it by mail. A comparison of institutional image scores for stu— dents who leave the university with those who remain re- veals the differences are not statistically significant. There is no evidence of a relationship between institu— tional image scores and a student's continuation or non— continuation at this university the first year. The find— ings are reported in Table 63. TABLE 63.——Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by continuation at the university. Men Women N All SII N All SII Withdrawals 3O -1.“3 .50 21 —.19 .29 Continuing student 350 .09 .29 317 .07 -.“5 F* 1.25 .0“ .02 .02 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 63.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 63 above. 13“ Grade point average.——The findings for the analysis of difference in change of student images of the institu— tion for the variable grade point average are reported in Table 6“. A statistically significant relationship exists between the students' grade point averages and their scores on the social image of the institution scale for men and the academic image of the institution scale for women. The differences on the other scales are not statistically significant. TABLE 6“.--Academic image of the institution and social image of the institution mean change in scores for men and women classified by grade point average. Men Women N All SII N All SII O to 1.00 78 - .38 2.33 62 — .8“ - .32 1.01 to 2.00 231 .“0 — .15 198 — .“3 — .1“ 2.01 to 3.00 “6 - .92 - .26 62 2.52 —l.l8 3.01 to “.00 25 —1.12 — .80 16 — .06 -1.81 F .80 “.02* 2.71* .83 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 6“.l in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 6“ above. With regard to the social image of the institution scores for men there is an increase in SII scores for 135 those receiving the lowest grade point average and a decrease for all other categories of grade point aver— ages. The decrease in social image scores becomes greater as the student's grade point average increases. There is an increase in AII scores for women with a 2.01 to 3.00 grade point average and a decrease in All scores for students in other categories. Conclusions Regarding Problem 5 The question to be answered by Problem 5 is what personal characteristics and college experiences of the student are associated with the change in institutional image scores after the student has completed one academic year at the university. The analysis of the data reveals the change in All scores for men is related to the student's home environ- ment, amount of higher education anticipated, attendance at the summer counseling clinic, and the topic discussed most frequently outside of class. The change in All scores for women is associated with the primary function they perceive of the university and the final grade point average at the end of the first year. No other associations between the personal charac— teristics or college experiences and change in All scores were reported in the findings. 136 A greater number of relationships were found between change in SII scores and the variables tested. Changes in 811 scores of men are associated with state of resi- dence and the college experiences of social position, Greek affiliation, residing in the living-learning center, and the final grade point average at the end of the year. There is an association between the change in SII scores of women with college experiences of attendance at the summer counseling clinic, the attribute they feel most necessary to succeed at the institution, and their social position. Changes in image scores were not found to be asso- ciated with the personal characteristics of: sex of student, father's occupation, parents' income, parents' education, individual who helped student decide to go to college, primary reason for attending college, primary reason for selecting M.S.U., academic major, and definite- ness of vocational plans. Changes in academic and social image scores were not associated with the college exper— iences of primary means of financial support, place of residence, recognition desired, and continuation at the university. Of the 100 tests run on the data 1“ were statisti- cally significant. College experiences accounted for 11 of these variables while personal characteristics accounted for only 3 of these variables. 137 Problem 6 Are changes in the academic and social student role expectations during the first year asso— ciated with personal characteristics and college experiences of the student? The procedure followed to test Problem 6 is the same as the procedure for testing Problem 5. Problem 6 is concerned with identifying relationships.between change in student role expectations and the personal characteristics and college experiences of the student. The format used to discuss this problem is the same as that used throughout this chapter. Home and Family Background Sex of the student.--Changes in ASR and SSR scores are not associated with the sex of the student. Dif- ferences in mean change in ASR and SSR scores grouped according to the sex of the student are not statistically significant. The findings are reported in Table 65. Father's occupation.-—There is no evidence that change in student role expectations is associated with father's occupation. Table 66 reports the findings for this analysis. The differences in ASR and SSR means for father's occupation are not statiStically significant. Parents' income.-—A comparison of ASR and SSR scores for students classified by parents' income provides no evidence of a relationship between the change in student . awn ~-—..———- 138 TABLE 65.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women. N Men N Women F* ASR 380 .31 338 -.3“ 2.01 SSR 380 .29 338 -.36 2.36 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of significance. See Table 65.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 65 above. TABLE 66.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by father's occupation. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Business 21 1.81 .“8 2O - .50 -3.00 Skilled 66 1.35 1.26 55 - .“O -2.02 Professional 60 - .88 .12 68 - .03 - .13 Laborer 31 - .26 1.52 19 - .“7 1.79 White Collar 109 .23 — .3“ 107 - .28 - .36 Farmer 16 .19 -1.““ l3 - .77 1.00 Clerk and Salesman ““ .50 - .91 3O .03 —l.3O Deceased and retired 33 .66 1.97 26 -1.23 1.27 F* .81 1.“7 .15 1.79 *None of the above F values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 66.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 66 above. 139 role expectation and parents' income. The differences in mean change in scores reported in Table 67 are not statistically significant. TABLE 67.—-Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by parents' income. Men Women N AII SII N All SII Below $3,000 11 1.“5 - .09 7 -1.00 1.86 $3,000 to $5,000 52 .92 .18 53 — .26 - .81 $5,000 to $8,000 116 .52 .“1 93 - .26 — .89 $8,000 to $12,000 109 .70 .35 106 - .60 — .“u Above $12,000 85 -1.21 - .29 66 .06 .2“ No response 7 2.71 1.17 13 -1.17 1.58 F* 1.51 .33 .28 .78 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 67.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 67 above. Parents' education.—-The results of the analysis of parents' education and change in student role expectation scores are reported in Tables 68 and 69. The findings for this analysis reveal differences in mean change scores for this variable are not statistically significant. 1“O TABLE 68.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women clas- sified by fatherkseducation. Men Women N ASR SSR N ‘ ASR SSR 8th grade 66 .“2 .71 “ -1.20 .91 High school 160 .5“ .““ 109 - .57 - .57 2 yrs. college “8 .88 - .35 68 .35 -1.3“ Bachelor's 55 .35 . .11 6O .03 .12 Professional “8 -l.3l - .“O 56 - .37 - .21 No response 3 1.33 8.33 1 -“.00 -5.00 F* .79 1.“5 .5“ 1.17 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 68.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 68 above. TABLE 69.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women clas— sified by mother's education. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR 8th grade 38 -1.33 - .05 31 .81 .61 High school 207 1.00 .“2 157 — .56 - .“6 2 yrs. college 68 .35 .25 81 .6“ - .78 Bachelor's 50 —l.36 .00 50 - .88 .36 Professional 15 - .“0 — .73 18 -3.06 —l.O6 No response 2 2.50 11.00 1 -“.00 -5.00 F* 1.80 1.“7 1.71 .66 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 69.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 69 above. l“l There is no evidence of an association between change in student role expectations and parents' education. Home environment.-—The findings reported in Table 70 for home background are not statistically significant. The change in students' role expectations are not asso— ciated with the rural or city background. TABLE 70.——Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by home environment. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Rural “3 1.79 .67 18 -.83 1.72 Urban 337 .12 .25 320 -.31 - .“8 F* 2.76 .20 .1“ 2.73 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 70.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 70 above. In-state and out-of-state residence.—-The findings for change in student role expectations for the variable in-state and out-of-state residence reveals the differ- ences in means for men on the SSR scale and the differ- ences for women on the ASR scale are statistically sig- nificant. Men from out-of—state had an increase in their 1“2 perception of personal involvement in the social program of the university while men from Michigan show a slight decrease. Women from out—of—state show a decrease in their involvement in the academic program of the univer- sity while women from Michigan show a slight increase. The differences in means on the ASR scale for men and the SSR scale for women are not statistically significant. The findings are reported in Table 71. TABLE 71.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by in—state and out-of-state residence. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR In-state 278 .59 - .10 222 .28 - .38 Out-of—state 102 — .“6 1.37 116 -l.53 - .“8 F 2.10 “.66* 7.“7* .07 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 71.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 71 above. Variables on Student's Decision to Attend College The individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college.-—The individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend 1“3 college is not associated with the changes in student role expectation scores. The data in Table 72 indicates the differences between means are not statistically sig— nificant. TABLE 72.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by the individual most important in determining the decision to attend college. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Mother 59 - .76 - .59 77 -l.l8 - .58 Father 1“0 .08 - .10 9“ .39 .0“ Teacher(s) 3O — .“7 1.“3 “2 - .20 - .“0 Guidance Counselor 21 1.10 1.1“ 13 - .93 .77 Friend(s) 15 1.“0 1.13 18 l.““ .11 Clergy 0 0 Relatives 7 “.71 2.“3 9 -l.67 2.33 No one, own decision “2 — .33 .7“ “2 —1.57 —1.19 No response 66 1.53 .“5 “3 .35 —l.12 F* 1.39 .71 1.13 .7“ *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 72.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 72 above. 1““ Primary reason for attending college.—-The differ- ences in mean change in ASR and SSR scores for the variable "primary reason for attending college" are not statis— tically significant. The findings for this analysis are reported in Table 73. The primary reason for coming to college is not associated with changes in students' role expectations. Primary reason for selecting M.S.U.--Tab1e 7“ re- ports the findings for the change in student role expec- tation scores for the variable "primary reason for select- ing M.S.U." The differences in mean change in scores are not statistically significant for the ASR and SSR scale for men nor for the SSR scale for women. The differences on the ASR scale for women are sta- tistically significant. Increase in women's academic student role expectation scores is associated with the following reasons for selecting M.S.U.: my parents pre- ferred this school, a better academic program in my field of interest, good football and basketball teams, a better faculty, less expensive, close to my home, better Job opportunities after graduation. Decrease in women's academic student role expectation scores is associated with the following reasons for selecting M.S.U.: a more beautiful campus, a more friendly student body, a better academic program in general, is one of the few 1“5 TABLE 73.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for attending college. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR To obtain a broad general education 7“ — .O“ 1.23 95 —l.6l - .“0 To prepare for a vocation 177 .82 .05 156 .60 - .29 To make it pos- sible for me to increase my total life income 37 .1“ - .1“ 8 1.63 .63 To please my parents 0 3 -l.33 —l.33 To find a spouse 0 0 To have fun 1 2.00 -3.00 l -7.00 —7.00 To get a better understanding of the world and the people in it 13 .69 .23 27 - .70 -l.26 It's the thing to do 1 -l0.00 1.00 3 - .67 .33 For prestige purposes 0 0 No response 77 — .“3 .21 “5 — .66 - .07 F* .90 .““ 1.6“ .“1 *None of the above F-values are significant at the .05 level of confidence. See Table 73.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 73 above. 1“6 institutions that has a program in my field of interest, Honors College program, better recreational facilities, a bigger school, was turned down by other schools I applied to, because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution, a more friendly faculty, offered a scholarship, and higher prestige. The logical basis for the relationship between the reasons for selecting the institution and association with an increase or decrease in ASR scores is not apparent. Goals Established for College Attendance Academic major.--The academic major of the student is not associated with the changes in student role expec- tation scores. The data reported in Table 75 indicates the differences between means are not statistically sig- nificant. Amount of higher education anticipated.--Differences in means for change in academic student role expectation scores for both men and women on the variable, "amount of higher education anticipated," are statistically sig— nificant. Although the differences are statistically significant there is no apparent pattern to the scores that permits drawing conclusions. This data is reported in Table 76. Differences in means for change in social student role expectation are not statistically significant. 1“7 TABLE 7“.--Acadcmic student role expectation and social student role expec— tation mean change in scores for men and women classified by primary reason for selecting M S U. SSH H ASR SSH Easier academically “ —3.75 A more beautiful campus 2 -;.00 A more friendly student body 6 — .17 A better academic program in general ‘5 .1M More of a party school 0 My parents pre— ferred this school 6 ..T A better academic program in my field of interest “A .f’ Good foottall and basketball teams 1 7.1x A better faculty ‘ 1.00 Is one of the few institutions that has a program in my field of interest SD 1.8! Good housing facilities 9 2.5v Better library 1 -u.ng Honors College program 3 2.00 Better recreational facilities 0 A bigger school 5 1.00 Less expensive 19 Was turned down by other schools I applied to If .00 Close to my home L. - .7; Because a relative or close friend attended or is now attending this institution 8 .75 A more friendly faculty 2 7.00 Offered a scholarship D“ l.“{ Better job opportun- ities after grad— uation ll -l.27 Higher prestige 8 .50 No response 71 - .iO F .5“ -“.00 3 .00 —l.33 — .00 l P.00 5.n0 _ .94 w 4.2:" 2.1:“ 2.08 19 .7“ 1.95 .3 C. r.) O J .AJ In (3 2.75 3 -2.67 - .07 'Significant beyond the .05 leve See Table 7“.l in the Appendix sums of squares, degrees of freedom, 1 of confidence. for data regarding source of variation, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in T3110 7“ above l“8 TABLE 75.--Academic student role expectations and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by academic major. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Pre-professional 6“ .06 - .87 9 -2.56 .33 Education 13 - .23 -2.00 98 - .16 —1.15 Engineering 7“ 1.53 .92 l -5.00 2.00 Math and physical science- 27 2.52 2.00 13 -l.“6 2.08 Biblogical science 9 - .89 - .67 2“ .71 .“6 Agriculture 27 .52 1.78 l -l.OO 6.00 Social science 18 - 1.67 .17 26 - .38 - .15 Business and public service “6 - .22 — .20 15 .13 .27 Communication and language 16 - 1.75 .38 33 -2.18 - .52 Home Economics 1 -11.00 .00 8 -l.“8 - .62 Art and Music “ — 2.50 .50 25 .75 - .32 No preference 81 .06 .55 85 - .3“ - .3“ F* 1.56 1.“8 1.01 .63 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 75.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 75 above. 1“9 TABLE 76.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by amount of higher education anticipated. N ASR SSR N ASR SSR 1 year 0 1 11.00 1.00 2 years 1 1.00 10.00 3 — .67 1.67 3 years 1 15.00 - 3.00 0 “ years 1““ .88 .69 22“ .23 - .50 Master's degree 106 .“6 - .50 8“ - 1.“8 - .6“ Doctorate “2 - 1.93 2.12 12 - .92 2.08 Professional degree 86 .06 - .35 1“ - 2.79 .79 F 2.52* 2.1“ 2.38* .75 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 76.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 76 above. Definiteness of vocational choice.--The variable, "definiteness of vocational choice," is not associated with the change in student role expectations. The dif— ferences in means reported in Table 77 are not statis- tically significant. 150 TABLE 77.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by definiteness of vocational plans. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Know exactly “1 1.67 — .““ “O — .“7 —l.15 Fairly sure 2“3 .23 .17 209 - .5“ — .39 Not too certain 80 .15 .91 7O .“2 .37 No idea 16 —1.09 1.00 10 -1.60 —2.50 F* .95 .61 .68 1.2“ *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 77.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 77 above. College Experiences Summer counseling clinic.--The data reported in Table 78 indicate a relationship between the change in academic student role expectation of women and attendance at the summer counseling clinic. The differences in change scores are statistically significant. The academic student role expectation scores decreased for women who did not attend the summer counseling clinic while scores increased for those women who did attend. The analysis reveals no other differences that are statistically sig— nificant. 151 TABLE 78.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by attendance at summer counseling clinic and fall orientation. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Counseling clinic 251 .ll .28 250 .01 — .53 Fall orientation 129 .67 .32 80 -1.“6 .18 F .65 .00 3.93* 1.00 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 78.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 78 above. Most important function of the university.——Table 79 reports the findings for change in student role expec- tations for the variable, "most important function of the university." None of the differences are statis- tically significant. There is no evidence of a relation— ship between change in students' role expectations and the most important function they perceive the university performing. Most important attribute for success.--A comparison of the differences in change in student role expectation scores for the variable, "most important attribute for success," reveals none of the differences are statistically significant. The data is reported in Table 80. There 152 TABLE 79.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by most important function of the university. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Teach college students how to solve problems. 16 —l.75 .19 l“ -3.6“ .07 Provide the student with a well rounded education. 15“ .03 .27 1“2 .“5 — .36 Prepare the student for a vocation. “8 1.5“ - .5“ “3 — .“2 — .“2 Promote the social development of the individual. 2 .50 — .50 1 “.00 5.00 Help one find his marital partner. 0 0 Provide opportunities for broadening cultural interests. 2 10.50 —l.50 2 — .50 —3.50 Make one aware 01 community and world problems. 1 .00 —9.00 3 —3.00 -l.67 Prepare the individual to be a productive citizen in his community. “9 .65 — .53 “0 -1.“5 —1.05 Promote intercol— legiate athletics. l 9.00 8.00 10 .10 —l.7O Teach the student to think for himself. 53 .“2 .85 “5 —l.39 .11 Teach the student how to get along with other people. 5 —2.80 .60 “ —3.00 .25 No response “9 .87 1.55 3“ .70 1.15 F* 1.36 .89 1.30 .37 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 79.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 79 above. 153 is no evidence of a relationship between student percep- tions of their role and the attribute they need to succeed at the university. TABLE 80.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by attribute most necessary for success. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Intelligence 62 .2“ 1.55 32 .03 -2.56 Drive from within 18“ .“6 .“7 15“ - .26 — .59 Ability to learn from experience “1 - .63 - .56 39 - .05 .38 Belief in self “7 1.57 - .60 70 - .71 .71 Understanding and being able to get along with people 20 —1.20 -l.80 21 -1.1“ -1.33 Character 9 - .78 .““ 8 .38 - .62 No response 17 .00 .76 1“ - .1“ 1.29 F* .7“ 1.25 .18 1.80 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 80.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 80 above. 15“ Financial support.--A comparison of differences in change in students'expectations of their role for the variable, "principal means of financial support," reveals a difference which is statistically significant for men on the SSR scale. An increase in SSR scores indicates the student perceives his role as being more social than he did at the first of the year. This is noted for those students whose primary means of financial support are academic scholarships, personal savings, loans, and money earned from summer employment. A decrease in SSR scores is associated with the income sources of parents, athletic scholarships, and money to be earned from part time jobs in college. No other associations between changes in student role expectation scores and primary means of financial support were found in the analysis for this variable. The findings are reported in Table 81. Place of residence.--A relationship between the change in academic student role expectations of women and their place of residence was found in the analysis which is reported in Table 82. An increase in women's expecta— tion of their academic role is associated with the commut- ing student. A decrease in women's expectation of their academic role is associated with the women residing in the residence halls. 155 TABLE 81.-—Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women for principal means of financial support. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Parents 207 .1“ - .20 236 - .05 — .“2 .Academic scholarship ll .“5 5.00 15 -2.73 -l.3“ Personal savings 31 .13 2.13 15 2.53 -1.“7 Athletic scholarship 9 - .22 —3.““ 0 Money earned from - summer employment 55 .“2 .““ 16 -l.50 -1.3l Money to be earned from part time jobs in college 9 -1.78 — .78 7 -3.57 2.00 Loans 15 —1.07 1.33 11 -l.36 - .91 No response “3 1.“5 .67 38 — .91 .89 F .68 2.03* 1.73 .82 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 81.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 81 above. TABLE 82.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by place of residence. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Commuting “7 -.50 ’ 1.“9 36 1.69 1.03 Residence Hall 333 .“l .13 302 - .58 - .53 F .69 2.19 “.95* 2.58 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 82.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 82 above. 156 The difference in change in SSR scores is not statis- tically significant. There is no evidence of association between change in students' expectation of their role and place of resi- dence for men. Type of residence hall.--Changes in student role expectation scores are reported in Table 83 for the vari- able, "living-learning center" (Case Hall). The differ- ences in change in student role expectation scores are not statistically significant. There is no evidence of an association between change in student role expecta- tions and the living—learning center. TABLE 83.--Academic student role expectations and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by type of residence hall. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Case Hall 81 .“l .21 53 -.“9 .25 Other 299 .28 .32 285 -.31 -.“8 F* .03 .02 .0“ .77 *None of the above F—values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 83.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 83 above. 157 Topic discussed most frequently outside of c1ass.—- Table 8“ reports the findings of the analysis of change in student role expectation scores for the topic the stu- dent indicated he discussed most frequently outside of class. Differences in the change in scores are statis- tically significant for the SSR scale for men and women. The differences on the ASR scale for men and women are not statistically significant. Increase in men's SSR scores are associated with the following topics discussed: dating, travel, books, national and international politics, philosophy, high school experiences, politics, course work, grades. Decrease in men's SSR scores from the initial score are associated with the following topics discussed: religion, girls, sex, sports. Increase in women's SSR score are associated with the following topics discussed: movies, national and international politics, books, sports, politics, high school experiences, boys, course work. Decrease in women's SSR score from the initial score are associated with the following topics discussed: grades, religion, philosophy, girls, teachers, travel, dating, sex. More topics are associated with an increase in scores for men than women. For men the more academic topics are associated with greater social involvement by 158 TABLE 8“.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by the topic discussed most fre- quently outside of class. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Politics 8 - .62 1.75 3 -9.33 3.00 Religion 19 -1.6“ - .36 19 -2.53 - .32 National and international politics 7 -5.00 3.71 “ -3.75 6.50 Sports 3“ 1.35 -3.21 1 1.00 “.00 Boys 0 31 1.90 .39 Girls “3 2.60 - .72 “ 2.25 -l.OO Philosophy 20 - .90 2.“5 29 -l.66 - .“1 Dating 1“ 1.50 8.78 52 .23_ -3.08 Course work 127 - .02 .92 130 - .53 .15 Movies 0 2 5.00 7.00 Teachers 0 l -7.00 —2.00 Sex 26 .69 -l.65 8 1.50 -“.12 Travel “ 2.25 5.25 “ —“.50 —2.25 High school experiences “ 6.75 2.00 l .00 3.00 Family Books 5 —“.“O 5.20 1 -5.00 5.00 Grades 36 - .22 .36 21 — .10 - .2“ No response 38 — .19 1.81 27 .85 .59 F 1.70 2.86* 1.70 2.12* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 8“.l in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 8“ above. 159 the student in the university. This pattern is not appar- ent from the findings for women. Recognition desired.--The area in which the students indicated they desired recognition is associated with changes in role expectation scores for men and women on both scales. The findings for this analysis are reported in Table 85. TABLE 85.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by recognition desired. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Athletic “2 3.71 — “.69 “ 5.75 -“.75 Academic 306 - .57 1.28 28“ - 1.16 .19 Social 32 “.22 — 2.59 “9 3.9“ -3.2“ No response 0 1 .00 2.00 F 16.86* 25.9“* 13.47* 6.62* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 85.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 85 above. The relationship between the changes in scores and the recognition desired is the same for both men and women. Students selecting the academic area for recog- nition show a decrease in academic role expectations. 160 Students selecting athletic and social recognition show an increase in academic role expectations. Students selecting the academic area for recogni- tion have an increase in social student role expectation scores while those selecting the social and athletic areas for recognition have a decrease in social student role expectation scores. Greek affiliation.--Students affiliated with Greek organizations reveal a decrease in their social role expectations from their initial score. Those students not affiliated show an increase in their expectations of their social role at the university. The differences in the changes are statistically significant. The find— ings are reported in Table 86. TABLE 86.--Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by Greek affiliation and non-Greek affiliation. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Greek 7“ -.l6 - 1.77 “9 .33 - 2.76 Non-Greek 306 .“2 .79 289 -.“5 .0“ F .51 11.“8* .7“ 11.09* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 86.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-values listed in Table 86 above. 161 The differences in change in ASR scores for Greek affiliation are not statistically significant. Social position.--A comparison of differences in change in ASR and SSR scores for students grouped accord— ing to their perceived social position on the campus at the end of the first year reveals differences which are statistically significant for men and women on the SSR scale. The differences on the ASR scale are not statis- tically significant. The findings are reported in Table 87. TABLE 87.——Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by social position. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR 1 3 —3.00 —2.00 l —2.00 —6.00 2 13 2.5“ —3.31 11 .18 -6.55 3 “5 —1.“7 —1.18 29 - .79 - .“8 “ 87 .“l -1.30 92 — .21 — .67 5 110 .58 .2“ 99 — .“0 — .1“ 6 82 - .27 1.27 85 — .52 .02 7 “0 2.00 “.93 21 .62 .05 F 1.69 7.5“* .17 3.““* *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 87.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 87 above. 162 Increase in social role expectations is associated with students who indicate a low degree of social involve— ment. Decreases in social student role expectations are associated with students who indicate they hold above average and higher social positions on the campus. Those students with higher SSR scores at the time they entered may be those who became involved in campus social life and may also have had some decrease in their initial social expectations. Those students with low SSR scores at the beginning of the year may have become more involved in social life at the university than was initially antici— pated and as a result had increases in social student role expectations. Continuation at the university.—-There is no evi- dence of a relationship existing between changes in stu— dent role expectation scores and the student continuing or not continuing at the university through the first year. The findings are reported in Table 88. The dif- ferences in change in scores are not statistically sig- nificant. Grade point average.--Students' final grade point average at the end of the first year is associated with the change in the students' academic student role expec- tation scores. The association that exists for women reveals students with lower final grade point averages had an increase in their expectations of their academic 163 role; whereas, those with higher grade point averages had a decrease in ASR scores. The findings for men are not as apparent and do not lend themselves to interpretation. There is no evidence of association between grade point averages and change in SSR scores. The findings are reported in Table 89. Conclusions Regarding Problem 6 A greater number of relationships between the stu- dent role expectations and the variables tested were identified for change in student role expectations than were identified for change in images of the institution. In the analysis of the data for this problem an attempt was made to identify variables of personal characteristics and college experiences associated with the change in student expectations of their academic and social role. The data indicated that changes in students' aca— demic role expectations are associated with the personal characteristics of state of residency and primary reason for selecting M.S.U. for women, and amount of higher edu- cation anticipated for both men and women. Changes in student academic role expectations associated with col- leges' experiences are summer counseling clinic for women, place of residence for women, area in which recognition is desired and grade point average for both men and women. The college experience variables of social position, Greek affiliation, topics discussed most frequently, and 16“ TABLE 88.—~Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation.mean change in scores for stu- dents continuingem the university and those leaving the university during the first academic year. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR Withdrawals 3O .23 —l.03 21 .91 1.23 Continuing students 350 .31 .“l 317 — .“2 — .“8 F* .01 1.6“ 1.02 2.13 *None of the above F-values are significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 88.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F—values listed in Table 88 above. TABLE 89.——Academic student role expectation and social student role expectation mean change in scores for men and women classified by grade point average. Men Women N ASR SSR N ASR SSR O to 1.00 78 2.90 .0“ 62 1.02 .10 1.01 to 2.00 231 — .0“ .15 198 .20 —.73 2.01 to 3.00 “6 —2.85 1.80 62 -3.27 .16 3.01 to “.00 25 1.2“ .32 16 — .87 .31 F 9.“O* 1.18 7.36* .70 *Significant beyond the .05 level of confidence. See Table 89.1 in the Appendix for data regarding source of variation, sums of squares, degrees of freedom, mean squares, and the criterion values of the F-Values listed in Table 89 above. 165 recognition desired are associated with the change in student social role expectation scores for both men and women. In addition the change is also associated with the primary means of financial support for men. There is only one personal characteristic associated with change in social student role expectation, state of resi— dence for men. Changes in student role expectations were not found to be associated with sex of the student, father's occupa— tion, parents' income, parents' education, home environ— ment, individual who helped make the decision to attend college, primary reason for attending college, academic major, and definiteness of vocational choice. Changes in role expectation scores were found not to be associated with the college experiences of: most important function of the university, attribute felt most necessary for suc— cess, living—learning center, and continuation at the uni— versity. Of the 100 tests run on the data 20 were statistic- ally significant. College experiences accounted for 15 of the tests while personal characteristics accounted for only 5 of them. Summary The data and findings obtained in this study have been presented in this chapter. The personal character- istics and college experiences of the students associated 166 with their images of the institution, role expectations and changes in institutional images and role expecta— tions have been identified. These findings are summarized in Figure l. The findings reveal that eight of the fifteen vari- ables of personal characteristics of the freshmen Egg are associated with their initial institutional images and student role expectations. Twelve of the fifteen personal characteristics are associated with the initial institu- tional images and student role expectations of EQEEE- From a total of 120 tests on the data 32 relationships between the images and role expectations and the personal charac- teristics of the student were identified. Not more than 6 relationships would be expected by chance alone from this number of tests. Changes in students' images of the institution and role expectations during the first year are associated with only four personal characteristics. The personal characteristics of the student have a greater influence on the student's initial images and role expectations than they do on the changes in these images and role expecta- tions. One hundred and four tests were made on the data to identify relationships between the change in images and role expectations with personal characteristics of the students. Eight tests identified such relationships. 167 m\E m \ E m\E L\E L\E m\E EL. m\: E m E m\z Z [1. E ..CI« m\E E m\E ‘0 K~—e L\Z 5 EL. m\z m\E a\z h\E E ommao>m ucfioo compo .:.m.z pm coflpmscflpcoo coflufimoa Hmfioom cofipmfiflfimum xooco oohwmoo coflpwcwooom maucosvoag pmos oomwsomwo ofiooe Haw: mocmpfiwoa no ooze cocooflwos do oomfia pcoQQSm Hmflocmcfla mmoQQZm Lou mammmoom: oozpflcopq mofiuao>wcz one mo coflooczw spasms; oficfiao wcfiaomCSOo LoEEsm mmozmHmmuxm mcmqqoo coflpfimoq waoom oopmqflofioc< . nomad Hmcofiomoo> no mmmcopficficoo oopwdwoflocw coHumosoo cocwfiz do pcsoe< LOnME OHEmUMo< mmmafioo pom mamoo .:.m.z mewoomaom Low commom .:.m.z ozone :ofluweaomcfi co mocsom cfimz oonHOO on wcHEoo sou commom :onHooo mxme sodas: on: Hmsofi>fiocH mmeHoo vacuum 0» cofimfiomo cocoofimmn ho oumum Aamsss so consul pcoecoafi>cm oEom coHpmoseo m.socpoz coapmosoo m.nmcumm mEoocH .mpcoawm cofipmosooo m.pmcpmm unscrew can go xom oesopwxomm zfifiemm one 0E0: WQHBmHmmeost nearly correct. JHOM'much college education do you plan to I know exactly what I am going to do. get? I am pretty sure about what I will do. 1 year laster's Degree I am not too certain as to what I want 2 years Doctorate to do. 3 years Professional Degree I have no idea. (law, vet. medicine, 4 years medicine, dentistry, etc.) 4. How important is it for an individual to have chosen his future vocation before entering this institution? .Are you presently affiliated(pledging or a member) with a social fraternity or- very important sorority? -_——— fairly important Yes no not important at all _-——— _— Part II 5. Following are a series of statements describ- ing different functions a college or univer- sity might perform. Place the number 1 in front of the statement if you think this—institution regards this as one of its primary functions. Place the number 2 in front of the statement if you think this—institution regards this as one of its secondary functions. Place a 0 in front of the statement if you think thIs institution does not regard this to be one of its functions. Respond to every item. a. teach college students how to solve problems b. provide the student with a well rounded education c. prepare students for a vocation d. promote the social development of the individual e. help one find his marital partner f. provide opportunities for broadening cultural interests 3. make one aware of community and world problems h. prepare the individual to be a productive Citizen in his community 1. __—promote intercollegiate athletics J. teach the student how to think for himself k. teach the student how to get along with other people Which one of the functions listed above do you thIfiE this institution considers to be its most important function?(Indicate your response by placing the appropriate letter in the space) Part III 6. How frequently do you discuss each of the following topics in conversations with other students? the appropriate number from the following code in the space provided next to each item) Code 1. very frequently 2. frequently 3 very seldom 4: never a._____politics b._____religion c._____national & international problems d._____sports e._____boys f2_____girls 83_____philosophy (Indicate your response by placing -2- h. dating 1. course work J movies k._____teachers l._____sex m._____travel n._____high school experiences o._____family p._____books q2_____grades Which one of the topics listed above do you discuss—most frequently in conversations with other students? (Indicate your response by placing the appropriate letter in the space below) Part III Directions-Each of the questions in this part of the inventory can be responded to by means of the coded key below. Write the code number of the answer which seems most appropriate to you in the space provided next to each item. Please read each question carefully and make sure you are using the appropriate code. Answer all items. Code l. to a very high degree 2. to a moderate degree 3. to a limited degree 4. not at all 7. Using the code above indicate the degree to which you feel each of the following state- ments is true for this institution. a. a very big school b. a good school for obtaining a broad education c. a good school to prepare for a vocation d. a school where one can enjoy the social aspects of "college life" e._____high academic standards f._____beautiful campus g._____very friendly students h._____outstanding athletic teams i._____excellent library J._A___outstanding faculty k._____a wide variety of academic programs 1 _____beautiful buildings m._____excellent recreational facilities nr_____party school o._____rigid campus regulations _-.——‘ Part VIII This and the following sections of this inventory aSks questions about you. In this section use the following code 'fB—indicate your responses to the items listed below. Code l. a great deal of time . a moderate amount of time . very little time . no time own How much time do you spend in each of the following activities? 57. dating 58. "bull sessions" 59. taking part in clubs, organizations, and other student activities of this type 60. attending concerts and plays 61. attending intercollegiate athletic events 62. attending lectures given by visiting professors 63. taking part in the social activities of the campus 64. participating in theatrical productions 65. participating in music or choral groups 66. taking part in political organizations 67. taking part in organizations concerned with social reforms 68. serious reading other than course work 69. taking part in organizations concerned with national and international affairs 70. attending art exhibits 71. part time employment 72. going home on week-ends 73. course work 74. participating in athletics(inter- collegiate or intramural) Part Ix 75. wa do you think you are described by your college friends? Following is a list of statements. Place a check in the space next to each statement that you think your friends at college consider is descriptive of you. original and creative pleasant personality a scholar(dedicated to studies) a leader an athlete a socializer a politician very intelligent and one who knows what he is talking about -5- Part x To what degree do you think your college experiences(academic and non-academic) will change the following for you? (Using the following code mark your response in column A) Code A B l. to a large degree 2. to a moderate degree 76. morals 3. to a limited degree 4. not at all 77. knowledge 78. maturity 79. personal values 80. leadership ability 81. social awareness and poise 82. ability to get along with people 83. ability to understand people 84. more confidence in your abilities 85. more certain of your vocational goals 86. more certain of what you want from life 87. appreciation of cultural things: art; music; drama; etc. 88. religious convictions 89. overall personality 90. philosophy of life Please go back to those items above that you marked either 1, 2, or 3; that 19 you in- dicated change? ‘For thEse items, mark in column B the letter A if you think the academic part of coIIege will be primarily responsible for the change. lark the letter N in the space if you think that the non- Ecademic part of college will be primarily responsible for the change. (Academic here refers to that part of your college experience gained from the class- room, instructors, and texts. The non- academic refers to the experiences you have in associating with other college students, taking part in the activities and social life of the campus, and living in the college community in general.) Part XI 91. Rank the following from 1 to 7 in the order of Importance they are for you. Place a‘l in front of the item that is the most important. Place a 2 in front of the item that is next in importance, etc. having a lot of friends really learning something being socially accepted by the right group finding my future husband or wife making good grades holding an important position of leadership on the campus being a member of a fraternity or sorority Part V Directions-—Each of the questions in this section can be responded to by means of the following code. For each question write the code number of the answer you feel is probably most correct in the blank space. Please read each question carefully. lake sure that you are using the appropriate code. Answer all items. Code 1. strongly agree 2. agree 3. disagree 4. strongly disagree 13. The competition for grades is intensive. 14. It is easy to pass most courses without studying very much. 15. Considerably more time is required for the courses here than in high school. 16. Most students at this institution set high standards of achievement for themselves. 17. Most courses require intensive study and preparation outside of class. 18. This institution maintains high standards of achievement. 19. Host of the courses are stimulating and interesting. 20. Everyone has to study hard at this institution. 21. This institution is outstanding for the emphasis it gives scholarship and research. 22. A few students study quite hard; most really don't care. 23. It is easy to get admitted to this institution. 24. The fact that one goes to college means that he is going to become educated. 25. There are a lot of dances, parties, and social activities here. 26. Everyone has a lot of fun at this school. 27. There is a lot of informal dating during the week at the library, snack bar, etc. 28. Nearly everyone here has a date on the week-end. 29. It is not expensive to take part in the social life on this campus. 30. There is an opportunity to date many different students. 31. Fraternities and sororities play the leading role in providing the campus social life. 32. Dormitory raids, water fights, and other student pranks are an important part of the college life on this campus. 33. There is a high degree of school spirit. 34. Most of the students participate in the social activities on this campus. -4- 35. A car is necessary if you want to date very much on this campus. 36. There are students available of the type that I am interested in dating. 37. To succeed in life.one must go to college. 38. If one fails in college he will probably fail in life. 39. Most students morals become more liberal after they have been in this school for a while. 40. lany of the students give up some of their religious convictions soon after they come to this campus. Part VI Directions-—Using the following code, indicate the degree to which you feel the follow- ing statements are probably true of the fraternities and sororities 33‘this campus. Code 1. to a very high degree 2. to a moderate degree 3. to a limited degree 4. not at all 41. provide most of the students that are in leadership positions on the campus 42. control the non-academic life of the campus 43. represent the aims and purposes of this institution 44. encourage and promote conduct that is consistent with good morals and good taste 45. encourage its members to be loyal and responsible to the institution first and to the fraternity second 46. stimulate intellectual progress and intellectual achievement 47. provide safe and wholesome living conditions in the chapter house 48. inculcate principles of sound business practice 49. promote brotherhood 50. develop good character Part VII How important is each of the following for you? (Use the code below to indicate your response)Code 1. very important 2. fairly important 3. of very little importance 4. of no importance at all 51. attending college 52. having a large number of friends 53. holding a position of leadership on the campus 54. Joining a fraternity or sorority 55. making good grades 56. having a good reputation Part IV If you were to use only three of the state- ments listed in question 7 to describe this institutiongwhich three would you select as being the most appropriate? (Indicate your response by placing the letters in the spaces below) Directions—-Use the code given below to indicate your response to each of the :items in the following questions. Please read 'the question carefully and respond to every item. Code l. to a very high degree 2. to a moderate degree 3. to a limited degree 4. not at all To what degree do you think this institution provides the following? enables the student to achieve a broad cultural background helps the student to develop the ability for critical thinking provides opportunities for developing leadership skills encourages the student to understand human behavior prepares the student primarily for his future occupation emphasizes intellectual growth more than grades prepares the student to be a life long student stimulates through various means the exploration of areas outside the student's own field of study develops ones ability to get along with people helps one to understand community and world problems helps an individual to develop more fully his morals, ethical standards, and values provides for assistance with personal problems; investigates religious, philosophical, and moral problems develops those skills necessary for life outside the campus What degree of importance do you think the majority of the students at this institution give to the following characteristics? (Use the code to indicate your responses) being original and creative having a pleasing personality demonstrating scholarly capacity being active in campus activities dedicating themselves to their studies -3- being active in intercollegiate athletics coming from the right social background being a member of a fraternity or sorority 10. To what degree does this institution provide the opportunity for an individual to learn how to get along with and better understand people of: (Use the code to indicate your response) different races different religions different countries different nationalities different socio-economic backgrounds different standards of morals and values 11. Indicate for each of the following items the degree to which you think it is characteristic of the faculty members of this institution. (Indicate your response by using the code) active in civic affairs active in campus affairs will discuss students career plans will discuss students personal problems entertaining teachers "buddies" to students active in religious affairs know their academic field help students formulate religious and political opinions freely indicate their own religious and political views Judge students more on academic per- formance than any other criteria such as dress, personality, etc. make students work hard give students a break do not indoctrinate students 12. To what degree do you feel college professors in general are characterized by the following? TInaIEEte—your responses using the code) _____intelligence cultural sophistication maintains a close touch with reality conservative interesting prestige in the community sociable radical Part XII 92. Students come to college for many different reasons. Check all of the following which are reasons why you came to college. a._____to obtain a broad general education b._____to prepare for a vocation c._____to make it possible for me to increase my total life income d._____to please my parents e._____to find a husband or wife fn_____to have fun g._____to get a better understanding of the world and the people in it h._____it's the thing to do 12_____for prestige purposes J. Other(p1ease indicate) Which one of the above is your primary reason for coming to college? (Place the appropriate letter in this space) Part XIII 93. Which one of the following do you think best describes your academic life? (check one) I spend most of my out—of-class time studying I spend on the average about 30 hours per week on my homework I spend on the average about 20 hours per week on my homework I spend 10 or less hours per week on my homework 94. If you should receive outstanding recogni- tion while attending this institution, in which one of these areas would you prefer to receive it? (check one) athletic academic social 95. If you are not now a member of a social fraternity or sororityido you think you will Join one in the future? (check one) yes no 96. Which one of the following attributes do you think is the most important to possess in-order to succeed in this institution? (check one) a. intelligence b. drive from within c. ability to learn from experience d. belief in self e. understanding and being able to get along with people f. Character The circle below represents the social and non-academic activities that take place at this institution. The center of the circle represents being active and taking part in most of these activities. Part XIV <:::) 2 3 4 5 6 7 97. How far from the center of things at this institution would you like to be? (Place the number in this space) 98. Where do you think you are? (Place the number in this space) 99. Why do you think you are there? (check one) I want to be as much a part of the total campus life as possible. I don't want activities and social life to interfere with my academic work. I am not interested in the social aspects of college. I would like to be active, but I probably won't be accepted by the individuals in these organizations. Other(p1ease indicate) lOO.If you were entering college again as a freshman, would you choose this institution? yes no Why? (Do not make any marks in the spaces below) IU—A IU-NA IR-A IR-NA _._.r APPENDIX C COLLEGE CHARACTERISTICS INVENTORY IMAGE SCALES 222 APPENDIX C COLLEGE CHARACTERISTICS INVENTORY IMAGE SCALES The Academic Image of the Institution Scale University functions 14. (5)1 Following are a series of statements des- cribing different functions a university might perform. Place the number I in front of the statement if you think this is a primary func- tion of this institution. Place the number g in front of the statement if you think this is a secondary function of this institution. Place a g in front of the statement if you feel this is not a function of this institution. a teach college students how to solve problems b prepares students for a vocation f provides opportunities for broaden- ing cultural interests g makes one aware of community and world problems Values placed on each of these items is as follows: l - H points g - 3 points 9 - 1 point The total possible score on these items is 16 points. Characteristics of the institution 19. (7) Using the following code, indicate the degree to which you feel each of the following statements is true for this institution. 1. to a very high degree - 4 points 2. to a moderate degree - 3 points 3. to a limited degree - 2 points A. not at all - 1 point 1The number preceding an item or a group of items corresponds to the number for that item on the pre-test. The number in parentheses corresponds to the number for that item on the post-test. The pre-test and post-test instruments are presented in appendix B. 223 O‘ sumo 224 a good school for obtaining a broad education high academic standards excellent library outstanding faculty a wide variety of academic programs Total possible score on these items is 20 points. 21. (8) To what degree do you think this institution provides the following? (Use the code given below to indicate your responses.) 41'me to a very high degree - 4 points to a moderate degree — 3 points to a limited degree - 2 points not at all - 1 point enables the student to achieve a broad cultural background helps the student to develop the ability for critical thinking encourages the student to understand human behavior prepares the student primarily for his future occupation emphasizes intellectual growth more than grades prepares the student to be a life- long student stimulates through various means the exploration of areas outside the student‘s own field of study helps one to understand community and world problems investigates religious, philosophical, and moral problems Total possible score on these items is 36_points. 225 Institutional values 22. Part IV. (9) What degree of importance do you think the majority of the students at this institution give to the following characteristics? (Use the code to indicate your responses.) 1. 2. 3. A (D0 to a very high degree - A points to a moderate degree - 3 points to a limited degree - 2 points not at all - 1 point demonstrating scholarly capacity dedicating themselves to their studies Total possible score on these items is 8 points. Each of the questions in this section can be responded to by means of the following code. For each question write the code number of the answer you feel is probably most correct in the blank space. 27. (13) 29. (15) 3o. (16) 31. (17) 32. (18) 33. (19) 314. (20) 35. (21) .1:me strongly agree - A points agree - 3 points disagree - 2 points strongly disagree - 1 point The competition for grades is intensive Considerably more time is required for the courses here than in high school. Most students at this institution set high standards of achievement for themselves. Most courses require intensive study and preparation outside of class. The institution maintains high standards of achievement. Most of the courses are stimulating and interesting. Everyone has to study hard at this institution. This institution is outstanding for the emphasis it gives scholarship and research. Total possible score on these items is 32 points. The total number of points possible on the Academic Image of the Institution scale is 112 points. 226 Social Image of the Institution Scale Social and co—curricular functions 1“ (5) Following are a series of statements des- cribing different functions a university might perform. Place the number I in front of the statement if you think this is a primary func- tion of this institution. Place the number 2 in front of the statement if you think this is secondary function of this institution. Place a Q in front of the statement if you feel this is not a function of this institution. d promotes the social development of the individual e helps one find his marital partner promotes intercollegiate athletics l k with other people Values placed on each of these items is as follows: I — A points 2 - 3 points 9 — 1 point Total possible score on these items is 16 points. Social and co-curricular characteristics of the institution 19. (7) Using the following code indicate the degree to which you feel each of the following state— ments is true for this institution. to a very high degree — 4 points to a moderate degree — 3 points to a limited degree - 2 points not at all — 1 point .1:me Q. a school where one can enjoy the social aspects of college life beautiful campus very friendly students outstanding athletic teams beautiful buildings excellent recreational facilities party school Will 3 SIACTW W Total possible score on these items is 28 points. teaches the student how to get along 21. (8) To what provides the 227 degree do you think this institution following? (Use the code given below to indicate your responses.) 4::me not 0 to a very high degree - A points to a moderate degree - 3 points to a limited degree — 2 points at all - 1 point provides opportunities for develop— ing leadership skills develops one's ability to get along with people helps an individual to develop more fully his morals, ethical standards, and values provides for assistance with personal problems Total possible score on these items is 16 points. Values placed on co—curricular life 22. (9) What degree of importance do you think the majority of students at this institution give to the following characteristics? (Use the code to indicate your responses.) 1. to a very high degree — A points 2. to a moderate degree — 3 points E. to a limited degree — 2 points not HJQJO‘ at all — 1 point having a pleasing personality being active in campus activities being active in intercollegiate athletics coming from the right social back— ground being a member of a fraternity or sorority Total possible score on these items is 20 points. Part IV. Each of the questions in this section can be responded to by means of the following code. For each question write the code number of the answer you feel is probably more correct in the blank space. tUJMH strongly agree — H points agree — 3 points disagree — 2 points strongly disagree — 1 point 37. 39. H0. 41. M2. A6. (23) (25) (26) (27) (28) (32) 228 It is easy to get admitted to this institution. There are a lot of dances, parties, and social activities here. Everyone has a lot of fun at this school. There is a lot of informal dating during the week at the library, snackbar, etc. Nearly everyone here has a date on the weekend. Dormitory raids, water fights, and other student pranks are an import- ant part of the college life on this campus. Total possible score on these items is 2“ points. The total number of points possible on the Social Image of the Institution Scale is 94 points. Academic Student Role Expectation Scale; Academic habits What do you estimate your grade average will be at the end of your first term in college? A C ———B+ 4 points —_—D+ 2 points B D 0+ 3 points _—_F I point Total possible score on this item is A points. Academic interest areas How frequently do you think each of the fol- lowing topics will be discussed in conversations with other students? very frequently - A points frequently - 3 points very seldom - 2 points never - 1 point 16. (6) 'Ul-“OQOO‘QJ .1:me politics religion national and international problems philosophy» course work books Total possible score on these items is 2“ points. 229 'Part IX. (VIII) How much time do you think you will spend in each of the following activities? a great deal of time - U points a moderate amount of time - 3 points very little time - 2 points no time - 1 point .1?me 7A. (60) Attending concerts and plays. 76. (62) Attending lectures given by visiting professors. 81. (66) Taking part in political organiza— tions. 82. (68) Serious reading other than course work. 83. (69) Taking part in organizations con- cerned with national and inter— national affairs. 8“. (70) Attending art exhibits. Total possible score on these items is 24 points. Personal characteristics associated with academic life 89. (75) How do you think you will be described by your college friends? Place a check in the space next to each statement that you think your friends at college will consider is descriptive of you. c a scholar (dedicated to studies) h very intelligent and one who knows what he is talking about Four points for each item checked. Total possible score on these items is 8 points. Academic motivations 106. (92) Students come to college for many different reasons. Check all of the following which are reasons why you came to college. a to obtain a broad general education g to get a better understanding of the world and the people in it Four points for each item checked. Total possible score on these items is 8 points. ' J.‘ - s."-fi"f’_"_‘=_ "371.7'47.‘ '4’ ”Ti -.v— .___.v__ 230 Academic habits 107. (93) Which one of the following do you think will best describe your academic life? I will spend most of my out-of- class time studying (A points) I will spend on the average about 30 hours per week on my homework (3 points) I will spend on the average about 20 hours per week on my homework (2 points) I will spend 10 or less hours per week on my homework (1 point) Total possible score on this item is U points. Academic motivations 108. (94) If you should receive outstanding recogni- tion while attending this institution, in which oneoi‘these areas would you prefer to receive it? Four points. b academic Total possible points on this section is A points. The total number of points possible on the Academic Student Role Expectation Scale is 76 points. Social Student Role Expectation Scale Social and co-curricular interests and activities 16. (6) How frequently do you think each of the following topics will be discussed in conver— sations with other students? very frequently — A points frequently — 3 points very seldom - 2 points never — 1 point 42‘me sports boys girls dating movies teachers sex i—“X‘LPD'WFDQJ «a 4m — 231 travel high school experiences family grades .0033 Total possible score on these items is “A points. Part VIII. (VII) How important is each of the following Part for 67. 68. 690 70. you? 1. very important - 4 points 2. fairly important — 3 points 3. of very little importance - 2 points A. of no importance at all - 1 point Values placed on social and co-curricular life (53) Holding a position of leadership on the campus. (5“) Joining a fraternity or sorority. (55) Making good grades. (56) Having a good reputation. IX. in e 8001 71. 73. 75. 77. 78. 79. 80. 85. 86. 88. Total possible score on these items is 16 points. (VIII) How much time do you think you will spend ach of the following activities? 1. a great deal of time - 4 points 2. a moderate amount of time - 3 points 3. very little time - 2 points A. no time - 1 point al and co-curricular interests and activities (57) Dating. (59) Taking part in Clubs, organiza- tions, and other student activities of this type. (61) Attending intercollegiate athletic events. (63) Taking part in the social activi- ties of the campus. (64) Participating in theatrical produc- tions. (65) Participating in music or choral groups. (66) Taking part in political organiza- tions. (71) Part time employment. (72) Going home on weekends. (74) Participation in athletics (inter- collegiate or intramural). Total possible score for these items is NO points. 232 Social motivations 108. (94) If you should receive outstanding recogni— tion while attending this institution, in which one of these areas would you prefer to receive it? Four points. a athletic 0 social Total possible score for these items is A points. The total number of points possible on the Social Student Role Expectation Scale is 104 points. 233 TABLE 5.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women. 3:222:23? ss w v F Fe Academic Image of the Institution Among 101.89 1 101.89 2.50 3.84 Within 29,190.00 716 40.77 Total 29,291.89 717 Social Image of the Institution Among .33 l .33 .01 3.84 Within 24,363.19 716 34.03 Total 24,363.52 717 234 TABLE 6.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's occupation. 321332236? SS df V F Fe MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 627.88 7 89.70 2.11 2.02 Within 15,840.80 372 42.58 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 123.28 7 17.61 .52 2.02 Within 12,619.68 372 33.92 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 269.26 7 38.47 1.03 2.02 Within 12,353.34 330 37.43 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 495.99 7 70.86 2.11 2.02 lflithin 11,076.52 330 33.57 ‘Total 11,572.51 337 235 TABLE 7.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for parents' income. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 301.70 5 60.34 1.40 2.21 Within 16,166.98 374 43.23 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 58.60 5 11.72 .35 2.21 Within 12,684.36 374 33.92 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 137.10 5 27.43 .73 2.21 Within 12,458.04 332 37.64 Total 12,595.14 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 202.75 5 40.55 1.18 2.21 ‘Within 11,329.21 332 34.23 Total 11,531.96 337 236 TABLE 8.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's education. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 36.27 5 7.25 .16 2.21 Within 16,432.41 374 43.94 Total 16,468.69 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 110.79 5 22.16 .66 2.21 Within 12,632.17 374 33.76 Total 12,742 96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 186.88 5 37.38 1.00 2.21 Within 12,435.73 332 37.46 Total 12,622.61 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 209.96 5 41.99 1.23 2.21 Within 11,362.55 332 34.22 Total 11,572.51 337 1.: mam '. _r ew- “w W. TABLE 9.1: 237 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for mother's education. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Academic Image of thefInstitution Among 247.03 5 49.41 1.14 2.21 Within 16,221.66 374 43.37 Total 16,468.69 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 64.05 5 12.81 .38 2.21 Within 12,678.91 374 33.90 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 369.15 5 73.83 2.00 2.21 Within 12,253.46 332 36.91 Total 12,622.61 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 276.51 5 55.30 1.63 2.21 Within 11,296.00 332 34.02 Total 11,572.51 337 TABLE 10.1: 238 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for home environment. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 9.28 l 9.28 .21 3.84 Within 16,558.12 378 43.80 Total 16,567.40 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 21.37 1 21.37 .63 3.84 Within 12,769.31 378 33.78 Total 12,790.68 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 4.40 l 4.40 .12 3.84 Within 12,618.20 336 37.55 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution .Among 32.53 1 32.53 .95 3.84 lVithin 11,539.98 336 34.36 'Total 11,572.50 337 TABLE 11.1: 239 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for in—state and out—of—state residents. Component of Variability SS df V F Fe MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 87.78 1 87.78 2.01 3.84 Within 16,479.62 378 43.59 Total 16,567.40 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 33.71 1 33.71 1.00 3.84 Within 12,756.97 378 33.75 Total 12,790.68 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 224.69 1 224.69 6.09 3.84 Within 12,397.91 336 36.89 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 158.68 1 158.68 4.67 3.84 Within 11,413.83 336 33.97 Total 11,572.51 337 TABLE 12.1: 240 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for the individual who was most important in deter- mining the decision to attend college. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 152.01 7 21.72 .50 1.94 Within 16,316.67 372 43.86 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 379.68 7 54.24 1.63 1.94 Within 12,363.28 372 33.23 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 401.74 7 57.39 1.55 1-94 Within 12,220.87 330 37.03 Total 12,622.61 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 406.31 7 58.04 1.72 1.94 Within 11,166.20 330 33.84 Total 11,572.51 337 TABLE 13.1: 241 Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary reason for coming to college. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 81.23 6 13.54 .31 2.21 Within 16,486.17 373 44.20 Total 16,567.40 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 117.50 6 19.58 .58 2.21 Within 12,673.18 373 33.97 Total 12,790.68 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 330.95 7 41.37 1.11 1.94 Within 12,291.66 330 37.36 Total 12,622.61 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 276.58 7 34.57 1.01 1.94 Within 11,295.93 330 34.33 Total 11,572.51 337 242 TABLE 14.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary source of information about the institution. $232238? 88 df V F Fe MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 625.13 12 52.09 1.20 1.80 Within 15,942.27 367 43.44 Total 16,567.40 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 651.31 12 54.28 1.64 1.80 Within 12,139.38 367 33.08 Total 12,790.68 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 466.56 12 38.88 1.04 1.80 Within 12,156.04 325 37.40 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 161.19 12 13.43 .38 1.80 Within 11,411.33 325 35.11 Total 11,572.51 337 243 TABLE 15.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary reason for selecting M.S.U. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,914.25 22 87.01 2.13 1.54 Within 14,554.44 357 40.77 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 946.26 22 43.01 1.30 1.54 Within 11,796.70 357 33.04 Total 12,742 96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,224.57 21 58.31 1.62 1.55 Within 11,398.04 316 36.07 Total 12,622.61 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 947.39 21 45.11 1.34 1.55 Within 10,625.12 316 33.62 Total 11,572.51 337 244 TABLE 17.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for academic major. $§?§§2i$§.§f ss ar v F F. MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 355.36 11 29.61 67 1.80 Within 16,213.04 368 44.17 'Total 16,567.40 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 353.21 11 29.43 .87 1.80 Within 12,437.47 368 33.89 Total 12,790.68 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 293.47 11 26.68 .71 1.80 Withifl 12,329.13 326 37.82 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 666.70 JJ. 60.61 1d81 1.80 Within 10,905.81 326 33.45 Total 11,572.51 337 * 245 'BABLE 18.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for the amount of higher education anticipated. 32:82:58.?“ FF FF v F Fe MEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 252.86 5 50.57 1.17 2.21 Within 16,215.82 374 43.36 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 460.60 5 92.12 2.81 2.21 Within 12,282.36 374 32.84 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 355.32 5 71.06 1.92 2.21 Within 12,267.28 332 36.95 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 346.67 5 69.33 2.05 2.21 Within 11,225.84 332 33.81 'Total 11,572.51 337 k TABLE 19 . 1: 246 Analysis of variance data for of the institution and social institution for men and women ness of vocational plans. academic image image of the for definite- Component of Variability SS df V Fc MEmJ Academic Image of the Institution Among 22.48 3 7.49 .17 2.60 Within 16,446.20 376 43.74 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 58.40 3 19.47 .58 2.60 Within 12,684.56 376 33.74 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN Academic Image of the Institution Among 85.92 3 28.64 .76 2.60 Within 12,536.68 334 37.53 Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 58.78 3 19.59 .57 2.60 Within 11,513.73 334 34.47 Total 11,572.51 337 ¥ 247 TABLE 20.1: Analysis of variance data for academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for anticipated social position. 32:12:81.? FF FF v F Fe MEN’ Academic Image of the Institution Among 305.95 7 43.71 1d01 2.02 ‘Within 16,162.73 372 43.45 Total 16,468.68 379 Social Image of the Institution Among 1,186.11 7 169.44 5.45 2.02 Within 11,556.85 372 31.07 Total 12,742.96 379 WOMEN’ Academic Image of the Institution .Among 386.37 7 48.30 1.30 2.02 Withifl 12,236.23 330 37.19 'Total 12,622.60 337 Social Image of the Institution Among 1,383.06 7 172.88 5.58 2.02 Within 10,189.45 330 30.97 Total 11,572.51 337 k I n I “ 1 ~ ~ ‘ i E .\ TABLE 2L1: V I . I 7’ 7 1: ' I?“ " u» ’ .- o A | . - u. . f; .- / ‘III> 3, as; fix 248 . u. I .. . -- I..- .. . , . -,.. .. - . . Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,260.39 1 1260.39 27.49 3.84 Within 32,832.58 716 45.86 (Total. 34,092.97 717 Social Student Role Expectation Among 178.85 1 178.85 4.43 3.84 Within 28,879.78 716 40.33 Total 29,058.63 717 ‘III** 249 TAEJI22.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's occupation. 333128312? 88 df V F Fe MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 235.47 7 33.64 .67 2.02 Within 18,567.21 372 49.91 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 410.72 7 58.67 1.51 2.02 Within. 14,428.61 372 38.79 Total. 14,839.33 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 505.26 7 72.18 1.81 2.02 Within 13,173.44 330 39.92 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 564.07 7 80.58 2.10 2.02 Within 13,227.54 330 40.08 Total 13,791.61 337 TABLE 23.1: Component of 250 Variability SS df V F0 MEN Apademic Student Role Expectation Among 121.34 5 24.27 .49 21 Within 18,681.34 374 49.95 Total 18,802.68 379 §pcial Student Role Expectation Among 115.31 5 23.06 .59 .21 Within 14,724.01 374 39.37 Total 14,839.33 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 49.95 5 9.99 .24 .21 Within 13,618.77 332 41.14 Total 13,668.72 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 293.10 5 58.62 1.44 .21 Within 13,439.90 332 40.60 Total 13,733.00 337 ¥ I I '\ TABLE 24.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's education. 32152232.?“ 88 df V F F0 MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 165.67 5 33.13 .66 2.21 Within 18,637.01 374 49.83 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 95.17 5 19.03 .48 2.21 Within 14,744.15 374 39.42 Total 14,839.32 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 206.80 5 41.36 1.02 2.21 Within 13,471.90 332 40.58 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 405.59 5 81.12 2.01 2.21 Within 13,386.01 332 40.32 Total 13,791.60 337 252 Analysis of variance data for academic stu— TABLE 25.1: dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for mother's education. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 312.69 5 62.54 1.26 2.21 Within 18,489.99 374 49.44 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 26.32 5 5.26 .13 2.21 Within 14,813.00 374 39.61 Total 14,839.32 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 430.36 5 86.07 2.15 2.21 Witfliin 13,248.34 332 39.90 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 485.49 5 97.09 2.42 2.21 Within 13,306.12 332 40.08 Total 13,791.61 337 253 Analysis of variance data for academic stu- Total TABLE 26.1: dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for home environment. 2222222222“ FF FF v F FF MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 63.88 1 63.88 1.26 3.84 Within 19,090.00 378 50.50 Total 19,153.88 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 15.58 1 15.58 .39 3.84 Within 14,918.98 378 39.47 Total 14,934.56 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 172.01 1 172.01 4.28 3.84 Within 13,506.69 336 40.20 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 140.79 1 140.79 3.42 3.84 Within 13,804.43 336 41.08 13,945.22 337 ' 1 ‘ V 3.. f ‘ / _ ‘ \ 8 ‘ .—. 3 fl_' 7. 8 1 ‘ _ “a x ‘ — ' E ' ll .- H ,. ' "w' _ e ‘- ~ .4 -- ‘i' " 1 . h;&.-A.f$ncl¢"'” ~ - U - 254 Analysis of variance data for academic stu- TABLE 27.1: dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for in—state and out—of-state residents. 2222222222" FF FF v F FF MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1.46 1 1.46 .03 3.84 Within 19,152.42 378 50.67 Total 19,153.88 379 Social Student Role Expectation .Among 115.68 1 115.68 2.95 3.84 Within. 14,818.87 378 39.20 Total 14,934.55 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 318.40 1 318.40 8.01 3.84 Within 13,360.30 336 39.76 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 479.92 1 479.92 11.98 3.84 htttluiii 13,465.30 336 40.08 Total 13,945.22 337 TABLE 28.1: Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Apademic Student Role Expectation Among 822.40 7 117.49 2.43 1.94 Within 17,980.28 372 48.33 Total 18,802.68 379 Sgpial Student Role Expectation Among 200.04 7 28.58 .73 1.94 Within 14,639.29 372 39.35 Total 14,839.33 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 805.98 7 115.14 2.95 1.94 Within 12,872.72 330 39.00 Total 13,678.70 337 Spcial Student Role Expectation Among 128.87 7 18.41 .44 1.94 Within 13,662.74 330 41.40 Total 13,791.61 337 g 256 TABLE 29.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for attending college. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,259.19 6 209.86 4.37 2.21 Within 17,894.70 373 47.98 Total 19,153.89 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 316.94 6 52.82 1.35 2.21 Within 14,617.62 373 39.19 Total 14,934.56 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,685.40 7 210.68 5.78 1.94 Within 11,993.30 330 36.45 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 198.43 7 24.80 .59 1.94 Within 13,746.79 330 41.78 Total 13,945.22 337 .. 257 Analysis of variance data for academic stu- TABLE 30.1: dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary source of information about the institution. 32322228.? SS df V F FF MEN’ Academic Student Role Expectation Among 595.31 12 46.61 .98 1.80 Wittflil 18,558.57 367 50.57 (Total 19,153.88 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 378.94 12 31.58 .80 1.80 Within 14,555.61 367 39.66 Total 14,934.55 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 845.20 12 70.43 1.78 1.80 Within 12,833.50 325 39.49 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 561.05 12 46.75 1.14 1.80 Within 13,384.17 325 41.18 Total 13,945.22 337 258 TABLE 31.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for selecting this institution. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,864.07 22 84.73 1.79 1.54 Within 16,938.61 357 47.45 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,035.66 22 47.08 1.22 1.54 Within 13,803.66 357 38.67 Total 14,839.32 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,364.47 21 64.97 1.67 1.55 Within 12,314.23 316 38.97 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Anuong 822.41 21 39.16 .95 1.55 Wittfixl 12,969.20 316 41.04 Total 13,791.61 337 259 TABLE 33.1: Analysis of variance data for academic student role expectation and social stu- dent role expectation scores for men and women for academic major. 3232223331” 88 FF" V F FF MEN’ Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,631.49 11 135.96 2.84 1.80 Within 17,522.39 368 47.74 Total 19,153.88 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,029.59 11 85.80 2.26 1.80 Within 13,904.97 368 37.89 Total 14,934.56 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 560.52 11 50.96 1.27 1.80 Within 13,118.18 326 40.24 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 616.80 11 56.07 1.37 1.80 ‘Within 13,328.41 326 40.88 Total 13,945.22 337 TABLE 34.1: 260 Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for the amount of higher education antici- pated. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,249.53 5 249.90 5.32 2.21 Within 17,553.15 374 46.93 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 393.92 5 78.78 2.04 2.21 Within 14,445.40 374 38.62 Total 14,839.33 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,140.28 5 228.05 6.04 2.21 Within 12,538.42 332 37.77 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Among 227.17 5 45.43 1.11 2.21 Within 13,564.45 332 40.86 'Total 13,791.62 337 261 TABLE 35.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu- dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for definiteness of vocational plans. $S’Sififii’i‘it‘y’f SS df V F Fe MEN" Academic Student Role Expectation Among 94.91 3 31.64 .64 2.60 Within 18,707.77 376 49.75 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 268.37 3 89.46 2.31 2.60 Within 14,570.95 376 38.75 Total 14,839.32 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 347.75 3 115.92 2.90 2.60 Within 13,330.96 334 39.91 Total 13.678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation Ihnong 307.83 3 102.36 2.54 2.60 ‘Within 13,484.53 334 40.37 'Total 13,791.61 337 262 TABLE 36.1: Analysis of variance data for academic stu— dent role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for anticipated social position. 321332222123“ SS SS V S SS MEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 424.89 7 60.69 1.23 2.02 Within 18,377.79 372 49.40 Total 18,802.68 379 Social Student Role Expectation Among 2,429.51 7 347.07 10.41 2.02 Within 12,409.81 372 33.36 Total 14,839.33 379 WOMEN Academic Student Role Expectation Among 306.46 7 38.31 .94 2.02 Within 13,372.24 330 40.65 Total 13,678.70 337 Social Student Role Expectation lhnong 2,144.89 7 268.11 7.57 2.02 Within 11,646.72 330 35.40 Total 13,791.61 337 263 TABLE 39.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 Among Within Total Among Within Total Change in Academic Image of the Institution 1.12 1 1.12 .02 3.84 39,288.82 716 54.87 39,289.94 717 Change in Social Image of the Institution 98.87 1 98.88 2.88 3.84 24,591.51 716 34.35 24,690.38 717 264 TABLE 40.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's occupation. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 395.22 7 56.46 1.10 2.02 Within 19,039.46 372 51.18 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 284.11 7 40.59 1.16 2.02 Within 13,050.08 372 35.08 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 246.20 7 35.17 .59 2.02 Within 19,607.95 330 59.42 Total 19,854.15 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 241.40 7 34.49 1.03 2.02 Within 11,015.92 330 33.38 Total 11,257.32 337 265 TABLE 41.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for parents' income. 3232231212? SS Sf V S SS MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 408.98 5 81.80 1.61 2.21 Within 19,025.71 374 50.87 Total 19,434.69 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 80.67 5 16.13 .46 2.21 Within 13,253.53 374 35.44 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN’ Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 247.00 5 49.40 .84 2.21 Within 19,557.74 332 59.09 'Total 19,804.74 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Innong 149.50 5 29.89 .89 2.21 IMithin 11,077.97 332 33.47 Trotal 11,227.47 337 266 TABLE 42.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for father's education. 222222222221" FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 421.76 5 84.35 1.66 2.21 Within 19,012.92 374 50.84 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 108.19 5 21.64 .61 2.21 Within 13,226.00 374 35.36 Total 13,334.19 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 112.53 5 22.51 .38 2.21 Within 19,741.62 332 59.46 Total 19,854.15 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution lhnong 147.46 5 29.49 .88 2.21 Ilithin 11,109.86 332 33.46 Total 11,257.32 337 267 TABLE 43.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for mother's education. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 227.07 5 45.41 .88 2.21 Within 19,207.61 374 51.36 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 49.72 5 9.94 .28 2.21 Within 13,284.48 374 35.52 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 311.63 5 62.33 1.06 2.21 Within 19,542.51 332 58.86 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 80.19 5 16.04 .48 2.21 Within 11,177.11 332 33.67 Total 11,257.30 337 268 TABLE 44.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for home environment. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 304.48 1 304.48 6.02 3.84 Within 19,130.20 378 50.60 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 1.68 1 1.68 .05 3.84 Within 13,332.51 378 35.27 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 49.02 1 49.03 .83 3.84 Within 19,805.12 336 58.94 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among .00 1 .00 .00 3.84 Within 11,257.32 336 33.50 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 45.1: 269 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for in-state and out-of-state resi- dents. Si’fiiifiifitiif SS SS V V SS MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 25.89 1 25.89 .50 3.84 Within 19,408.79 378 51.35 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 170.72 1 170.72 4.90 3.84 Within 13,163.47 378 34.82 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 14.15 1 14.15 .24 3.84 Within 19,839.99 336 59.05 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among .00 1 .00 .00 3.84 Within 11,257.31 336 33.50 Total 11,257.31 337 270 TABLE 46.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for the individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college. Component of Variability SS df V F FC 1 , MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 452.53 7 64.65 1.27 1.94 L Within 18,982.15 372 51.03 _ Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 298.92 7 42.70 1.22 1.94 Within 13,035.28 272 35.04 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 334.53 7 47.79 .81 1.94 Within 19,519.62 330 59.15 Total 19,854.15 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 270.04 7 38.58 1.16 1.94 Within 10,987.28 330 33.29 Total 11,257.32 337 3 — 271 TABLE 47.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary reason for attending college. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 393.49 6 65.58 1.28 2.21 Within 19,041.19 373 51.05 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 151.86 6 25.31 .72 2.21 Within 13,182.34 373 35.34 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 217.49 7 27.19 .46 1.94 Within 19,636.65 330 59.69 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 371.09 7 46.39 1.40 1.94 Within 10,886.22 330 33.09 Total 11,257.32 337 272 TABLE 48.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary reason for selecting this institution. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution _ Among 966.75 22 43.94 .85 1.54 E— Within 18,467.94 357 51.73 ’ 7 Total 19,434.69 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 720.99 22 32.77 .93 1.54 Within 12,613.20 357 35.33 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,585.10 21 75.48 1.31 1.55 Within 18,269.04 316 57.81 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 566.57 21 26.98 .80 1.55 Within 10,690.75 316 33.83 Total 11,257.32 337 273 TABLE 49.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for academic major. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 925.90 11 77.16 1.53 1.80 Within 18,508.78 368 50.43 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 377.08 11 31.42 .89 1.80 Within 12,957.12 368 35.31 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 794.41 11 72.22 1.24 1.80 Within 19,059.73 326 58.47 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 404.20 11 36.75 1.10 1.80 Within 10,853.11 326 33.29 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 50.1: 274 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for the amount of higher education anticipated. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 617.96 5 123.60 2.46 2.21 Within 18,816.73 374 50.31 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 217.76 5 43.55 1.24 2.21 Within 13,116.44 374 35.07 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 257.23 5 51.45 .87 2.21 Within 19,596.91 332 59.03 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 172.18 5 34.44 1.03 2.21 Within 11,085.14 332 33.39 Total 11,257.32 337 4‘ . 32'9"" ‘9‘an _ 275 TABLE 51.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for definiteness of vocational plans. 2222222222“ FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 124.64 3 41.55 .18 2.60 Within 19,310.04 376 51.36 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 124.81 3 41.60 1.18 2.60 Within 13,209.39 376 35.13 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 162.27 3 54.09 .92 2.60 Within 19,691.87 334 58.96 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 248.43 3 82.81 2.51~ 2.60 Within 11,008.88 334 32.96 Total 11,257.31. 337 276 TABLE 52.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for summer counseling clinic. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 834.98 1 834.98 16.97 3.84 Within 18,599.70 378 49.21 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 84.71 1 84.71 2.42 3.84 Within 13,249.48 378 35.05 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among .06 1 .06 .00 3.84 Within 19,854.08 336 59.09 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 211.83 1 211.83 6.44 3.84 Within 11,045.49 336 32.87 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 53.1: 277 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for most important function of the university. 3212222111.?“ SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 649.54 10 64.95 1.28 1.85 Within 18,785.14 369 50.91 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 413.93 10 41.39 1.18 1.85 Within 12,920.27 369 35.01 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,480.14 10 148.01 2.63 1.85 Within 18,374.00 327 56.19 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 161.10 10 16.11 .47 1.85 Within 11,096.21 327 33.93 Total 11,257.32 337 278 TABLE 54.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for attribute most necessary for success. 2222222222" FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 615.98 6 102.66 2.03 2.09 Within 18,818.70 373 50.45 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 262.32 6 43.72 1.25 2.09 Within 13,071.88 373 35.05 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 477.01 6 79.50 1.36 2.09 Within 19,377.13 331 58.54 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 809.62 6 134.94 4.27 2.09 Within 10,447.70 331 31.56 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 55.1: 279 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for primary means of financial support. Component of Variability SS df V F FC MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 400.49 8 50.06 .98 1.94 Within 19,034.19 371 51.31 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 343.37 8 42.92 1.23 1.94 Within 12,990.83 371 35.02 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 543.78 6 90.63 1.55 2.09 Within 19,310.36 331 58.34 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 230.19 6 38.36 1.15 2.09 Within 11,027.13 331 33.31 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 56.1: fl 280 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for place of residence. Component of Variability SS dF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 10.34 1 10.34 .20 3.84 Within 19,424.33 378 51.39 Total 19,434.67 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among .25- 1 .25 .01 3.84 Within 13,333.94 378 35.27 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 29.51 1 29.51 .50 3.84 Within 19,824.63 336 59.00 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 24.60 1 24.60 .74 3.84 Within 11,232.72 336 33.43 Total 11,257.32 337 281 TABLE 57.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for type of residence hall. Component of Variability SS df V F F0 MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 16.73 1 16.73 .33 3.84 Within 19,417.95 378 51.37 ‘ Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 198.63 1 198.63 5.72 3.84 Within 13,135.57 378 34.75 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 35.21 1 35.21, .60 3.85 Within 19,818.93 336 58.98 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 18.35 1 18.35 .55 3.85 Within 11,238.97 336 33.45 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 58.1: 282 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for tOpic discussed most frequently outside of class. Component of Variability SS dF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,237.21 14 88.37 1.77 1.71 Within 18,197.47 365 49.86 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 720.48 14 51.46 1.49 1.71 Within 12,613.72 365 34.56 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 1,316.08 16 82.25 1.42 1.71~ Within 18,538.07 321 57.75 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 460.19 16 28.76 .86 1.71 Within 10,797.13 321 33.64 Total 11,257.32 337 283 TABLE 59.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for recognition desired. 3212222112? SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic-Image of the Institution Among 183.72 2 91.86 1.80 2.99 Within 19,250.96 377 51.06 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 73.92 2 36.96 1.05 2.99 Within 13,260.27 377 35.17 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 15.07 3 5.02 .08 2.60 Within 19,839.08 334 59.40 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 79.13 3 26.38 .79 2.60 Within 11,178.18 334 33.47 Total 11,257.32 337 284 TABLE 60.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for greek affiliation. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 20.72 1 20.72 .40 3.84 Within 19,413.96 378 51.36 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 421.03 1 421.03 12.32 3.84 Within 12,913.17 378 34.16 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among .49 1 .49 .00 3.84 Within 19,853.65 336 59.08 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 3.21 1 3.21 .10 3.84 Within 11,254.10 336 33.49 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 61.1: 285 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for social position. Component of Variability SS dF V F FC MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 493.97 6 82.33 1.62 2.09 Within 18,940.71 373 50.78 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 484.60 6 80.77 2.34 2.09 Within 12,849.59 373 34.45 Total 13,334.19 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 264.43 6 44.07 .74 2.09 Within 19,589.71 331 59.18 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 469.18 6 78.19 2.40 2.09 Within 10,788.14 331 32.59 Total 11,257.32 337 TABLE 63.1: 286 Analysis of variance data for change in academic image_of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for continuation at the university. Component of Variability 33 9F V F F0 MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 64.24 1 64.24 1.25 3.84 Within 19,370.44 378 51.24 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 1.27 l 1.27 .04 3.84 Within 13,332.93 378 . 35.27 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 1.30 1 1.30 .02 3.84 Within 19,852.84 336 59.08 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among .53 1 .53 .02 3.84 Within 11,256.77 336 33.50 Total 11,257.30 337 287 TABLE 64.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic image of the institution and social image of the institution scores for men and women for grade point average. Component of Variability 33 FF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 123.24 3 41.08 .80 2.60 Within 19,311.44 376 51.36 Total 19,434.68 379 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 414.30 3 138.09 4.02 2.60 Within 12,919.90 376 34.36 Total 13,334.20 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Image of the Institution Among 472.69 3 157.56 2.71 2.60 Within 19,381.45 334 58.02 Total 19,854.14 337 Change in Social Image of the Institution Among 82.96 3 27.65 .83 2.60 Within 11,174.35 334 33.46 Total 11,257.31 337 "1.. 1 ‘ _ 288 TABLE 65.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women. Component of Variability SS df V F FC Among Within Total Among Within Total Change in Academic Student Role Expectation 73.85 1 73.85 2.01 3.84 26,246.14 716 36.66 26,319.99 717 Change in Social Student Role Expectation 77.60 1 77.60 2.36 3.84 23,551.23 716 32.89 23,628.83 717 289 TABLE 66.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's occupation. 3232222121.? SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 220.76 7 31.54 .81 2.02 Within 14,559.83 372 39.14 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 358.22 7 51.17 1.47 2.02 Within 12,940.77 372 34.79 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 35.19 7 5.03 .15 2.02 Within 11,430.36 330 34.64 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 374.09 7 53.44 1.79 2.02 Within 9,878.15 330 29.93 Total 10,252.24 337 .. I“ ‘7 Hg? .1 IV 290 TABLE 67.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for parents' income. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation F‘ Among 292.58 5 58.52' 1.51 2.21* Within 14,488.01 374 38.74 2 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 57.93 5 11.59 .33F 2.21 Within 13,241.06 374 35.40 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 48.90 5 9.78 .28 2.21 Within 11,406.89 332 34.46 Total 11,455.79 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation. Among 118.65 5 23.73 .78 2.21 Within 10,109.87 332 30.54 Total 10,228.52 337 TABLE 68.1: 291 Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for father's education. Component of Variability SS dF V F FC MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 154.02 5 30.81 .79 2.21 Within 14,626.56 374 39.11 Total 14,780.58 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 253.61 5 50.72 1.u5. 2.21 Within 13,045.38 374 34.88 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 93.07 5 18.61 .54 2.21 Within 11,372.48 332 34.25 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 177.03 5 35.41 1.17 2.21 Within 10,075.20 332 30.35 Total 10,252.23 337 292 TABLE 69.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for mother's education. Component of Variability 53 FF V F FC MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 347.58 5 69.52 1.80 2.21 Within 14,433.01 374 38.59 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 257.14 5 51.43 1.47. 2.21 Within 13.041.85 374 34.87 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 287.19 5 57.44 1.71 2.21 Within 11,178.36 332 33.67 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 101.36 5 20.27 .66 2.21 Within 10,150.88 332 30.57 Total 10,252.24 337 TABLE 70.1: 293 Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for home environment. Component of Variability SS dF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 106.99 1 106.98 2.76 3.84 Within 14,673.60 378 38.82 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 6.99 1 6.99 .20 3.84 Within 13,291.99 378 35.16 Total 13,298.98 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 4.68 1 4.68 .14 3.84 Within 11,460.87 336 34.11 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 82.74 1 82.74 2.73 3.84 Within 10,169.50 336 30.27 Total 10,252.24 337 TABLE 71.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for in—state and out-of—state resi- dents. SE‘SESSEE‘EQF SS FF” V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 81.82 1 81.82 2.10 3.84 Within 14,698.77 378 38.89 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 161.97 1 161.97 4.66 3.84 Within 13,137.02 387 34.75 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 249.51 1 249.51 7.47~ 3.84 Within 11,216.04 336 33.38 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 2.15 1 2.15 .07 3.84 Within 10,250.09 336 30.51 Total 10,252.24 337 [Flgf’vvafiu' ,F-_21$flfifiiffvm T?Tf**.!”' a._. lg 295 TABLE 72.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for the individual who was most important in determining the decision to attend college. 3212222133“ SS SS V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 375.69 7 53.67 1.39 1.94 Within 14,404.89 372 38.72 Total 14,780.58 779 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 175.49 7 25.07 .71 1.94 Within 13,123.50 372 35.28 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 267.76 7 38.25 1.13 1.94 Within 11,197.79 330 33.93 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among, 158.61 7 22.66 .74 1.94 Within 10,093.63 330 30.59 Total 10,252.24 337 296 TABLE 73.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for attending college. 3233222212.? SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 210.19 6 35.03 .90 2.21 Within 14,570.40 373 39.06 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 94.05 6 15.67 .44 2.21 Within 13,204.94 373 35.40 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation. Among 439.09 7 54.89 1.64 1.94 Within 11,026.46 330 33.52 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 100.23 7 12.53 .41 1.94 Within 10,152.00 330 30.86 Total 10,252.24 337 1.40 I. '14.: 4 .rl .. )‘il‘ltV‘M'lblfd . 297 TABLE 74.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary reason for selecting M.S.U. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 475.21 22 21.60 .54 1.54 Within 14,305.38 357 40.07 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,049.34 22 47.70 1.39 1.54 Within 12,249.65 357 34.31 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,095.13 21 52.15 1.59 1.55 Within 10,370.42 316 32.82 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 724.67 21 34.51 1.14 1.55 Within 9,527.57 316 30.15 Total 10,252.24 337 298 TABLE 75.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for academic major. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 715.20 11 59.60 1.56 1.80 Within 14,065.39 368 38.33 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 613.52 11 51.13 1.48 1.80 Within 12,685.47 368 34.57 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 377.40 11 34.31 1.01 1.80 Within 11,088.15 326 34.01 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 213.67 11 19.42- .63 1.80 Within 10,038.57 326 30.79 Total 10,252.24 337 299 TABLE 76.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for the amount of higher education' anticipated. Component of Variability 33 FF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 481.75 5 96.35 2.52 2.21 Within 14,298.84 374 38.23 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 369.61 5 73.92 2.14 2.21 Within 12,929.38 374 34.57 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 397.27 5 79.45 2.38 2.21 Within 11,068.28 332 33.34 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 115.01 5 23.00 .75 2.21 Within 10,137.22 332 30.53 Total 10,252.23 337 TABLE 77.1: 300 Analysis of varianpe data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for definiteness of vocational‘plans. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 111.35 3 37.12 .95 2.60 Within 14,669.24 376 39.01 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 64.42 3 21.47 .61 2.60 Within 13,234.57 376 35.20 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 69.98 3 23.33 .68 2.60 Within 11,395.57 334 34.12 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 112.68 3 37.56 1.24 2.60 Within 10,139.56 334 30.36 Total 10,252.24 337 4" Vikhl"-.‘|§..l. .717 II. . \u‘.’. o I. . I!‘|»...¢ F IV . C a... ..\ . . , . . . TABLE 78.1: 301 Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for summer counseling clinic and fall orientation. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 25.51 1 25.51 .65 3.84 Within 14,755.08 378 39.04 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among .10 1 .10 .00 3.84 Within 13,298.88 378 35.18 Total 13,299.98 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 132.69 1 132.69 3.93 3.84 Within 11,332.85 336 33.73 Total 11,465.54 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 30.44 1 30.44 1.00 3.84 Within 10,221.80 336 30.42 Total 10,252.24 337 302 TABLE 79.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for most important function of the university. 222222222122“ SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 526.95 10 52.69 1.36 1.85 Within 14,253.64 369 38.63 Total 14,253.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 314.77 10 31.48 .89 1.85 Within 12,984.21 369 35.19 Total 13,298.98 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 439.11 10 43.91 1.30 1.85 Within 11,026.44 327 33.72 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 113.54 10 11.35 .37 1.85 Within 10,138.70 327 31.01 Total 10,252.24 337 r-- .r.'. 303 TABLE 80.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for attribute most necessary for success. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 173.81 6 28.97F .74 2.09 Within 14,606.78 373 39.16 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 261.93 6 43.66 1.25 2.09 Within 13,037.05 373 34.95 Total 13,298.98 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 36.63 6 6.10 .18 2.09 Within 11,428.92 331 34.53 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 324.22 6 54.04 1.80 2.09 Within 9,928.02 331 29.99 Total 10,252.24 337 TABLE 81.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for primary means of financial sup- port. Component of Variability SS df V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 213.16 8 26.64 .68 1.94 Within 14,567.43 371 39.27 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 557.70 8 69.71 2.03 1.94 Within 12,741.29 371 34.34 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 348.47 6 58.08 1.73 2.09 Within 11,117.08 331 33.59 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 149.94 6 24.99 .82 2.09 Within 10,102.30 331 30.52 Total 10,252.24 337 305 TABLE 82.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women-for place of residence. Component of SS df V F Fc Variability MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 27.00 1 27.00 .69 3.84 Within 14,753.59 378 39.04 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 76.54 1 76.54 2.19- 3.85 Within 13,222.45 378 34.98 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 166.31 1 166.31 4.95 3.85 Within 11,299.23 336 33.67 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 78.04 1 78.04 2.58 3.85 Within 10,174.20 336 30.28 Total 10,252.24 337 fit“..- 7 Fl. 8...... . '. Vulflw .\ .- lulril 4 II In." .I...I.. Q \(- r. 1...).-.‘g. 306 TABLE 83.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role perception and social student role perception scores for men and women for type of residence hall. 322222222221“ SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1.07 1 1.07 .03 3.84 Within 14,779.52 378 39.09 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among .74 l .74 .02 3.84 Within 13,298.25 378 35.18 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1.48 l 1.48 .04 3.85 Within 11,464.07 336 34.12 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 23.33 1 23.33 .77 3.85 Within 10,228.91 336 30.44 Total 10,252.24 337 ‘\ ~_- ___ ‘— ‘ ‘__‘— TABLE 84.1: 307 Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for t0pic discussed most frequently outside of class. Component of Variability SS dF V F F° MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 906.05 14 64.72 1.70 1.71 Within 13,874.54 365 38.01 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,316.70 14 9,.05 2.86 1.71 Within 11,982.29 365 32.83 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 895.56 16 55.97 1.70 1.71 Within 10,569.99 321 32.93 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 980.88 16 61.30 2.12 1.71 Within 9,271.36 321 28.88 Total 10,252.24 337 308 TABLE 85.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for recognition desired. 3222222222 SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,213.63 2 606.82 16.86 2.99 Within 13,566.96 377 35.99 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,608.46 2 804.23 25.94 2.99 Within 11,690.53 377 31.01 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,237.43 3 412.48 13.47 2.60 Within 10,228.12 334 30.62 Total 11,465.55 337 ' Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 575.32 3 191.77 6.62 2.60 Within 9,676.92 334 28.97 Total 10,252.24 337 5‘ ~‘ ‘ ‘— 309 TABLE 86.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for greek affiliation. Component of Variability SS dF V F Fc MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 20.08 1 20.08 .51 3.84 Within 14,760.51 378 39.05 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 391.87 1 391.87 11.48 3.84 Within 12,907.12 378 34.15 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 25.25 1 25.25 .74 3.84 Within 11,440.30 336 34.04 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 327.68 1 327.68 11.09 3.84 Within 9,924.56 336 29.54 Total 10,252.24 337 ma———~— '7 7 310 TABLE 87.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for social position. 2222222222 FF FF v F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 390.19 6 65.03 1.69 2.09 Within 14,390.40 373 38.58 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 1,438.69 6 239.78 7.54 2.09 Within 11,860.30 373 31.80 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 35.49 6 5.91 .17 2.09 Within 11,430.06 331 34.53 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 601.13 6 100.18 3.44 2.09 Within 9,651.11 331 29.16 Total 10,252.24 337 l."\l(i|il.i'l'|l 1.4.4-‘ 311 TABLE 88.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for continuation at the university. 3221222222.? SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among .16 1 .16 .01 3.85 Within 14,780.42 378 39.10 Total 14,780.58 379 Change in Social Stduent Role Expectation Among 57.45 1 57.45 1.64 3.85 Within 13,241.54 378 35.03 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectatipn Among 34.54 1 34.54 1.02 3.85 Within 11,431.00 336 34.02 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 64.50 1 64.50 2.13 3.85 Within 10,187.74 336 30.32 Total 10,252.24 337 312 TABLE 89.1: Analysis of variance data for change in academic student role expectation and social student role expectation scores for men and women for grade point average. 322222222221" SS FF V F FF MEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 1,031.35 3 343.78 . 9.40 2.60 Within 13,749.24 376 36.57 Total 14,780.59 379 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 124.43 3 41.48 1.18 2.60 Within 13,174.56 376 35.04 Total 13,298.99 379 WOMEN Change in Academic Student Role Expectation Among 710.56 3 236.85 7.36 2.60 Within 10,754.99 334 32.20 Total 11,465.55 337 Change in Social Student Role Expectation Among 63.72 4 21.24 .70 2.60 Within 10,188.52 334 30.50 Total 10,252.23 337