,1]- 11 “(,1 s.) 1) 131‘ 1111‘“ u M" .15.; ‘ HQ“ 151:1, 13%;- ‘ ‘1 315,331 ‘1 ~ ‘ "l: 1. ‘ 33.3%”, .L Cm“ .. 3 1C1“ ”15:213. vi“. .1511: ‘15“ {1:11. 31" a 315 1,38%“? m :1,l.:‘:l‘\‘ cm," u~§ ig‘gal‘i‘lx 3,; 51%;}, u . 1911,11 £19,, rfll‘l‘“ < t? 11"” W - r '%'. %:gd 3.1? “'11,“: ‘4‘. 1131““ w '12:, ‘1. :1: ,‘ :11}? ., xi: (““1“ 8%? )3 ‘1 H 19:: Egg; ‘1; 111% ‘31!“ “(I £15133? 3111311“: 4313,“, Hagfiég‘fil‘qu,:l 1,31 2 I “ " ,- ;,(, 21,313?! ”11‘ ,( “£13!ng . 31,11; 1111111131 '. 1:1111‘1‘113 (1131:;1111" ‘1“ 1 .III? ‘ "1‘1‘:;S\ ‘h‘hfiw ' "1gx , 1'13: WM; 71:; If “ 771%: . ii . . 46': mg; ”4‘ ('9 ‘xfifl, . ~ ‘1}.11135‘13' 1-913». . 3:1; 2. “,4, \- L n. \ x .1 .. 1'! u. «A NV‘ ‘ RN“ “"311: is 1:1 11: gfiwmfifi} ': E35, , ‘3‘ 2 1‘1." W331... 1 ., $1,, 1.... xi; “1100 ~ -7 —s ~m§5u 1,1591 1,52%... , 131,-, 5%,, w «111;, .1 {111,11 111,}.11111 1,11, 2; l; ,c,‘.‘- , 3131,, , l“‘1 V '1 , L‘ 1 I q ‘ ‘ 1 1‘ 1 ' “d?! ' ', Q‘y ‘ ‘ ' V ', .', ~ {‘Lpfisfiif: ~ X‘Lfii‘ie 1W ( ' ‘ 1 1." ‘ ‘ “ M 1'11 “5 ‘ Hafiz, w «9,, . . ,1 .. 1 , 9??? ‘1}(1wl1‘. 7 l . . 1‘5" x »‘ Calf}? ‘i‘ . inc; ' - . - ’ J __ w . "Q" ' ”1&1. iii-m3 1:313. f m, . ,‘ . \ .1 " .". ' " (3; I‘ i'v “‘1 F." ‘ ‘ ’ ' ‘ “3 _ 1:1,: 1%..“ “3‘13““ «11- .' , ,, ' x ~ ‘ '~.~'. -( r a! " ; ' ’1 ‘ L»‘.§*‘ 1 . ‘1’1 1 »~ ~ '1. ~ . - 2- My; . 1 i - 1 1 V W. (“Ri‘qé‘w adjfiié ,. . 351115111121, Q5, “flux: .1": .. 3‘4? mg ‘1‘ 1' “1‘1. L ( «.5111 1. fig; L '. 50‘ 1 '12.? . 1;.” 11.. .v»;' @141 ‘ ‘f’e ”1,, 1,131 1 . 21 V 1 ,1 ..,,, 3 i.” 1- K’fi ;,“$a».z. 1 , . . ‘1 - '. .fg'”; 1" 11' ,- . .‘ W171 - 1; ‘1' ' - 1‘“, ~ ‘ 3%. N.” i - '. 1 , 4;”- _1I r‘é‘é‘fifi #131113 3%:‘1‘32'; flex , 1 v .7. - '10" “r- I". ‘Q: f‘B‘iék ‘ f 1%" A v, ' _ ‘ .1 a“; n... Aw 1 ~ ~ g . 3 - . ' q: . . ‘1 .(‘fifi ' > - , 1 1 L " 13““ a, A ’ 111,311»:le .r' ' .3. _‘ 3‘ ‘1 ‘. . ‘. ~‘ :1" . .. ‘.‘ 5? ' 1 f," 13.2. 1."va xhx saint.“ “m ,3, 'r 7. J" 1;" ,i :7) 71:: 17,, v’.‘ 1-1: I," an?" . 3‘, 93" . 9:» ~ 45231133 ‘ ‘1 V. 4 , 1,71, 11‘; 1 111 ;, fitg’riz. , grab." Mary f ‘34 :11.“ JAR . . 1'", If . 155:“ r».'_ . 2" _ 1 , ,5“ 44:- 4.51.. >mfi‘ijfi“ $29 at xfrzEfE—afit: . _ ff {.7 .4 .Ar )1." #1." ”gig 21‘ . is»: '17? ‘ '1‘: > 'ZWJ‘ - 11‘1“ "”’ 1, 111% M11“ " “‘1." sf? .‘ SEC 1 315:: m «A. 33:3: ’ .1 ”Fl" W556” Y '5; -. 3'. £13 “y. 73 . u ,I :5: J 1‘ fr:- {1:3 (I: .. 1119,; fig 1!, . . :13 _, 1’1 Li‘éfifij {ga‘xzh% ,5,” $395341 ‘Eflh 3,, a? L :3: i . r“_:. ‘ ‘5’? ‘kfi' ( . .1- 2111?? 3:11 2a).; 1119‘?“ five. “mm; 53’1" Y.“ THESIS lllllllll\llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllllll thwgzyaz-m/Immfih g 31293 000781793 5 W, f ,a ' a afflict? 31:? a £32.,» Sta 1.4.1 x769 4‘- 5:54 a.” 4:. 3 ’éagggug g: a" {r r, ,4 “'9? l i: y ”5’ ré'2J2/,5f l t..- v '95.", . _. I- .I' This is to certify that the dissertation entitled An Investigation of the Relationship Between Self-Concept and Adjustment of International High School Exchange Students presented by Suellen Ludwig Crano has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degree in Education fiéflfimf/z” 4” V/ Major professor _ Date 6/29/59, 0-12771 MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution )V1ESI_J RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to LlfiRARJES remove this checkout from Ala-zynglL. your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. “me?“ am my A33 5 u n can AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-CONCEPT AND ADJUSTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL EXCHANGE STUDENTS BY Suellen Ludwig Crano A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Curriculum 1984 AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF-CONCEPT AND ADJUSTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL EXCHANGE STUDENTS BY Suellen Ludwig Crano AN ABSTRACT OF A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Curriculum 1984 ABSTRACT AN INVESTIGATION OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SELF—CONCEPT AND ADJUSTMENT OF INTERNATIONAL HIGH SCHOOL EXCHANGE STUDENTS BY Suellen Ludwig Crano In attempting to interrelate the diverse group of social psychological variables that influence cross~cultural adjustment, this investigation focused on the relationship between the self-concept and the personal, social, and academic adjustment of South American high school exchange students in the United States. The hypothesis tested was that international exchange students, who prior to leaving their home countries have been shown to have high self-concepts, adjust better to personal, academic, and social life in the United States than their counterparts with low initial self-concepts. An attempt also was made to determine not only the relationship between self-concept and adjustment, but also the variations in the adjustment/self—concept relationship over time. Two hundred fifty-four students from five countries were given a measure of self-concept prior to their departure for the United States. Throughout their sojourn, self—concepts and levels of adjustment were monitored. Sociodemographic data were collected on each student. The results confirmed the relationship between predeparture self-concept and subsequent adjustment. In addition, significant correlations were found between later measures of self—concept and adjustment, and changes in self—concept over time and adjustment, independent of sex and age. Though significant correlations were found between the self-concept and adjustment variables, no causal statement could be made. The cross-lagged panel analysis employed to determine the variable that might be causally predominant showed that while both cross—lagged correlations were statistically significant, neither significantly exceeded the other. The implications of this study for the selection, orientation, and counseling of students participating in a cross—cultural exchange experience were discussed, and the need for further research to determine the causal structure of the adjustment/self—concept association was stressed. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS First, I wish to thank each of my committee members, Joel Aronoff, August Benson, Jeanne Gullahorn, Eldon Nonnamaker, and Kay White, for their guidance and support in the course of my work on this project. As this project was sponsored by AFS International/Intercultural Programs, I would like to express my appreciation and gratitude to Neal Grove and Bettina Hansel of the Research Department for their assistance in the development and administration of the instruments, for their encouragement and support (both financial and emotional), for being persistent enough to obtain such a high rate of returns, and for their patience in waiting for this final product. I also wish to thank all the members of the AFS staff with whom I have interacted over the course of the project for their cooperation and assistance. To the students themselves, and to their host families, I express my appreciation for the efforts and time they expended in behalf of this project. I wish to thank the individuals who performed translations: Jose Suarez, Rosa Maria Py Moreira Linck, Angela Moreira Linck, Juan and Vilma Tijiboy, Paulo Schutz, and Angela Maria Brasil Biaggio. Special thanks go to both Jack Condon and Rob Hymes for their continued assistance and support. ii Words cannot express the appreciation I feel for the assistance, love, understanding, guidance, and pure hard work of my husband "darling". If it weren't for his continued support, this project would not have been completed. Finally, a special acknowledgment is in order for my son, Brian, who in his first year of life did everything he could to keep me from completing this project. Table of Contents List of Tables .............................................. vii List of Figures ............................................. ix Overview .................................................... l The Problem ................................................. 2 Chapter 2 ................................................... 8 Literature Review ..................... . ................ 8 International Students in American Education ........... 8 The Adjustment and Adaptation of International Students ..... 10 The Self-Concept ....................................... 15 History of the Self-Concept ............................ 16 Major Characteristics of the Self ...................... 20 Measuring the Self-Concept ............................. 27 Self-Concept and Academic Success ...................... 31 Chapter 3 ................................................... 38 Instrument Development ................................. 38 Overview: The Measurement of Self—Concept .............. 38 The Revised Janis—Field Scale .......................... 38 Study 1: Reliability of the Portuguese Language Version ..... 40 Procedure .............................................. 41 Results ..................... . ..... . .................... 42 Study 2: Validity of the Portuguese Language Version ........ 43 Method ................................................. 44 Subjects ............................................... 44 Procedure ......................... - ..................... 44 Results .... ............................ . ............... 45 Study 3: Reliability of the Spanish Language Version ........ 47 iv Method .. ..... ...... .................................... 47 Instrument Translation ... ......... . .................... 47 Subjects and Procedure ................................. 48 Results ................................................ 49 Discussion ............................................. 49 The Measure of Student Adjustment (ADJ) ................. f... 52 Scoring the ADJ ........................................ 52 Preliminary Results .................................... 53 Chapter 4 ................................................... 57 Relationships Among Self—Concept, Adjustment and Host Family Evaluation Over the Course of the Educational Exchange .... 57 Method ................................................. 57 Overview ............................................... 57 Subjects ............................................... 58 Procedure .............................................. 59 Results ........................................... ' ..... 60 Initial Pre-Departure Self—Concept Results .................. 61 The First Measure of Students' Self—Concept in the U.S. ..... 62 The Second Measure of Students' Self-Concept in the U.S. .... 63 The First Measure of Students' Adjustment in the U.S. ....... 64 The Second Measure of Students' Adjustment in the U.S. ...... 65 The Relationship Between Self-Concept and Adjustment ........ 67 The Host Family Measure and Its Relationship to Self-Concept and Adjustment ...................... ............ . ........ 68 The General Information Questionnaire ..................... .. 70 Chapter 5 .......... ........ . ................................ 75 Discussion . ................................................. 75 Self-Concept and Adjustment .... ........................ 75 Self-Concept and Academic Adjustment ..... . ............. 81 The Self-Concept and Host Family Relationships ......... 82 The Relationship between Adjustment, Sex, and Age ...... 84 Religious Practice ........ ..... ... ........ ...... ....... 84 The Natural Family .............................. . ...... 85 Prior Experience .... ........................ . ...... .... 86 Implications for Application ................................ 87 Limitations ................................................. 89 Appendix A: Revised Janis—Field Scale ....................... 90 Appendix 8: Portuguese Translation of the Revised Janis-Field Scale ........................................... 92 Appendix C: Spanish Translation of the Revised Janis-Field Scale ........................................... 94 Appendix D: The Measure of Student Adjustment .............. . 96 Appendix E: Spanish-Language Directions for Administering Suellen Crano's Questionnaire . .................. 103 Appendix F: Specimen Letter from AFS International .......... 104 Appendix G: General Information Questionnaire ............... 105 Appendix H: Host Family Report .............................. 106 Appendix I: Follow-up Letter: AFS International ............. 108 List of References .......................................... 109 vi List of Tables Page Corrected Item—Total Correlations Over Three Independent Administrations of the Self-Concept Scale.. 43 Characteristics of the Spanish—Speaking Sample: Mean Age, Gender Distribution, Self-Concept Score, and Coefficient Alpha ..................................... 48 Factor Analysis of ADJ: Six Factor Solution ........... 54‘ Descriptive Statistics for the Subscales of ADJ and their Correlations with the Total ADJ and the 38-Item ADJ ........................................... 55 Intercorrelations Among the 6 Subscales of ADJlA ....... 56 Breakdown of Students by Country, Sex, and Age ...~ ..... 59 Correlations Among the Measures ....................... 61 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for Self by Country ................................... 61 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for Selfl ............................................. 62 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for Sele by Country .................................. 63 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for ADJl by Country . ...... ........... ......... ........ 64 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for the Six Subscales of ADJI ......................... 65 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for ADJZ by Country ................................... 66 vii 4.9 4. 4. 10 .ll 12 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for the Six Subscales of ADJZ ......... . ....... . ....... Correlations between ADJ Subscales and the Self, Selfl, and Sele Instruments .......................... Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for the Host Family Measure ........................... Self—Report of Language Ability ....................... viii 68 69 71 List of Figures Figure Page 5.1 Cross-lagged Panel Illustration of the Self-Concept/ Adjustment Relationship ................................. 80 ix Overview The focus of this investigation is the self-concept, and the relationship between this construct and the personal, social, and academic adjustment of international exchange students in the United States. Although previous research on international exchange students (a group that is increasing in size and importance at all levels of the American educational system) has investigated a diverse set of variables, including the lifestyles, attitudes, and differences in adjustment patterns of various nationality groups, it has not succeeded in building interdisciplinary theories or models. As a consequence, the significance of the results that have been obtained tends to be inflated and overemphasized, while potentially important underlying social psychological factors that might prove useful in the understanding of the educational process tend to be neglected (Spaulding & Flack, 1976). In addition, given the lack of coherent theory that characterizes the field, the relationship between various sets of findings remains nebulous, at best. Prior to the 1960's, the self-concept practically had been overlooked by educators (LaBenne & Greene, 1969; Purkey, 1970). Since the 1960's, the self-concept has come to be viewed as a dominant influence on academic and social success (Bledsoe, 1967; Brookover, 1964, 1967; Brookover, Patterson, & Thomas, 1962; Campbell, 1967; Fink, 1962, etc.). Research that has been performed on the relationship between self—concept and success, and the adaptation of international students to life in the United States, will be integrated in an attempt to provide a more complete picture of the relationship between self-concept and adjustment than that which already exists. The major hypothesis to be tested is that international students in the U.S. who, prior to leaving their home country have been shown to have high self-concepts, adjust better to personal, social, and academic life in the United States than their counterparts with low initial self—concepts. Prior to beginning their one—year exchange visit to the United States, 254 South American, American Field Service students from Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela were given a measure of self-concept. The adjustment and adaptation of these students during their sojourn in the United States were monitored throughout the year, as were their self—concepts. The Problem Being a tourist in a foreign land has its inherent difficulties. The troubles encountered by exchange students while living in another culture (with new families, attending new schools in which the language of instruction is not their native tongue, etc.) are even more severe. International students in the United States have disclosed many difficulties in adjusting to their new life: language, food, and climate differences; new social rules; alienation; anomie; rejection; change in social status; etc. (Gullahorn & Gullahorn, 1956; Lysgaard, 1953; Sewell & Davidsen, 1961; Smith, 1956). Aside from the difficulties attributable to ”culture shock" and unfamiliarity with American social and educational life, a potentially important aspect of the difficulties of exchange students may arise from within themselves; that is, fluctuations in self-concept due to the ambiguous status of "stranger in a strange land". These fluctuations may be exacerbated by feelings of inadequacy due to students' unfamiliarity with the culture and customs, their different physical attributes, their less-than-native ability to speak English, and so on. When leaving home for the first time, a person usually will experience and learn new social roles which not only provide opportunities for personal growth, but also challenge the self-concept (Astin, 1977; Coelho, Hamburg, & Murphy, 1963). Living in a new culture, encountering considerable ambiguity with regard to the things in life that usually are taken for granted (such as one's day-to-day routine), can threaten one's self—image. This type of uncertainty could prove more troublesome to individuals whose self—concepts already are low (whether or not they are acclimated to the structure and value systems of their own society), who may find it difficult to experience the lifestyle, culture, and beliefs of yet another society. When an individual is in a new situation (such as a cross-cultural exchange), he or she is self-consciously unsure of the environment and thus seeks to become familiar with that which is unfamiliar (Ittleson, 1974). The uncertainty and frustration that can develop as a result of the change of environment can prevent a person from adapting, and enjoying an effective personal, social, and academic life. Feldman and Newcomb (1973) concluded that when an individual is confronted with a new social system with new values, norms, and various social subsystems, "such an experience usually involves desocialization as well as socialization. The uncertainties of this learning period often are compounded by the frustrations involved in moving from a system where one is an established member...to a system where one is only a novice" (Feldman & Newcomb, 1973, p. 89). Coelho, Hamburg, and Murphy (1963), in their study of coping strategies in transition from one environment to another (e.g., high school to college) concluded that such strategies involved the maintenance of a sense of self worth through one's manipulation of beliefs and attitudes, as well as the use of cues in the interpersonal environment to heighten one’s self-esteem. They concluded that "mastery of a major developmental transition may build self-esteem that will support renewed efforts...moreover, the skills acquired in one transition, may be applied to the next" (1963, p.41). In addition, it is inevitable that individuals entering a new culture will be exposed to failure at times. The faux—pas and errors that occur during a cross-cultural experience arise mainly from a lack of knowledge of language and customs. The rules of the game and the skills required to play must be learned in time through practice. Hence, an individual who consistently has maintained a high self—concept may become frustrated and possibly distraught if the usual criteria used to judge the self in the home culture are employed in the new situation. Therefore, a person must be able to readjust these criteria to reflect the new circumstances brought about by the new role (that of exchange student). The ability to see routine problems in a larger context and to be objective about oneself and one's present circumstances is essential. With this in mind, it is possible that a negative self-concept will hinder a person if logic allows him or her to find proof for assumptions of failure, leading to focus only on those things that support negative beliefs, and ignore the contrary (LaBenne & Greene, 1969). Growth in self awareness is one of the objectives of an international exchange experience. Hawes and Kealey (1979) showed that self—perception variables and personal expectations were significant predictors of cross-cultural success. Thus, it is helpful if individuals begin their experience with an understanding and acceptance of their own strengths and weaknesses (AFS Selection Handbook, 1981). Entering into a culture other than their own, exchange students are not always aware of the expected and acceptable behavior patterns nor the means by which to meet their various needs, etc. Thus, international students tend to be handicapped to some degree by a limited field of cultural, social, personal, and academic knowledge. Hence, there are a number of students who participate in international exchange programs who, for one reason or another, experience many difficulties, accompanied by dissatisfaction with and/or Change of host family, academic failure, and/or early return to their home country. According to Ackermann (1976), people sojourning in other countries and cultures have a high rate of early return, which is both costly to the individual and to the sponsor. Over many years, better selection procedures, and orientation and counseling programs for internationals have been developed, implemented, and improved upon with the hope of facilitating adjustment to the other culture (See Hawes & Kealey, 1979; Hopkins, 1982). The cross-cultural adjustment of these individuals has improved somewhat, but more needs to be done along these lines (Klineberg, 1970). The need for improved methods and programs, coupled with the lack of research on the social psychological variables that could play an important role in the adjustment of foreign students (Spaulding & Flack, 1976), in part, were motivating factors in the conception of this project. The important role that self-concept has been shown to play in the educational process, and its relation to academic success (Bledsoe, 1967; Brookover, Patterson, & Thomas, 1962, 1964; Brookover, Erickson, & Joiner, 1967; Campbell, 1967; Fink, 1962, etc.) suggests that it might prove relevant to a study of cross-cultural adjustment. Accordingly, this research seeks to determine whether self-concept is associated with the ability of individuals in cross-cultural situations to adapt to their new environment, and if so, how can we capitalize on this relationship to enhance their experience. It is proposed here that self—concept, a factor within the individual, strongly influences his or her adaptation; that based on one's self—view, one judges how best to act and react to a situation, and further, that this social interaction in turn, produces increased self-awareness (Wegner & Vallacher, 1980). The research hypotheses to be tested in this regard are: 1. There will be a significant correlation between students' initial pre—departure self-concept, and self-concept measured during their one-year exchange visit in the U.S., and the number and severity of adjustment problems encountered by students, such that students with more positive self-concepts will experience fewer and less severe adjustment problems. 2. Over time, self—concept measures will fluctuate according to adjustment difficulties encountered such that the self-concept scores of students who report relatively good adjustment will increase, while the self—concept scores of those students who report relatively poor adjustment will remain essentially the same or decrease somewhat. 3. Those students who have high initial self-concepts will report better academic achievement while in the U.S. than their counterparts with lower self-concepts. 4. Those students who have high initial self-concepts will report better relationships with their host families than their counterparts with lower self-concepts. Chapter 2 Literature Review International Students in American Education An article in the Chronicle of Higher Education projected that the number of international students at American colleges and universities could increase from approximately 312,000 in 1980-81 to more than one million in the early 1990's (Scully, 1981). This growth in international student enrollment i accompanied by an increase in the number of international elementary and secondary school children in the U.S., as many students attending postsecondary institutions bring their families along with them. According to Scully (1981), international students could come to represent 10 percent of all students enrolled in postsecondary institutions, as compared to 2.7 percent in 1981. Should these projections prove correct, "the character of U.S. campus life will change dramatically over the next decade as foreign students come to represent a significant segment of the student body" (Scully, 1981, p. 1). This effect could be generalized to elementary and secondary schools, as well. At the beginning of this century, few international students were studying in the United States. This number inched its wayup until the 1940's, when the end of World War II ushered in a period of rapid growth. By 1976, developing countries employed the United States as a training place for more than 200,000 students (Pruitt, 1978). More and more, educators in the United States have recognized that international students are of great value to the American educational system, as well as to the communities in which they live. International students have contributed to the development of better relations between the United States and other countries of the world; they introduce people in the U.S. to new and different cultures; and, they provide economic support to our educational institutions (Pruitt, 1978). This last point is of particular value during a time of economic crisis, marked by declining U.S. student enrollments at all levels. Jacobson (1980) reported that colleges are being encouraged to seek students from abroad to offset the expected decline in U.S. college and university enrollments over the next ten years. Some major institutions already ' have enrolled large percentages of international students, for example, M.I.T. (>18%); Harvard (>12%); Stanford (>11%); and Columbia University, the University of Michigan, the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Wisconsin (between 6—10%). In addition, the International Educational Exchange Liaison Group has issued a statement urging the United States to halt "a serious decline" in aid and assistance for foreign exchange programs. For the last 15 years, these programs have been hurt by inflation and budget cuts, and the number of such exchanges has decreased by 40% since 1965 (Scully, 1981). Richard Berendzen, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Students and International Policy, stated that "By the 1990's, the presence of foreign students could be one of the most powerful themes in American higher education." Further, he said that few colleges and universities 10 are prepared to cope with such an influx of international students. He called on postsecondary institutions to establish "international student task forces" to review their policies toward international students. "The educators need to be educated. Before we can teach foreign students, there is a great deal that we need to learn" (in Scully, 1981, p.1). As yet, the complex effects of international students on the quality of the American educational system, and of the American educational system on the adaptation of international students, are not comprehended, nor do they appear to be receiving much attention. The Adjustment and Adaptation of International Students Throughout the years, considerable research has been performed on the adaptation and social adjustment of international students studying in the United States (Bailyn & Kelman, 1962; Cook, Havel, & Christ, 1957; Dunnett, 1977; Grove & Hansel, 1981; Gullahorn g Gullahorn, 1963, 1966; Hendricks & Skinner, 1977; Jammaz, 1972; Pruitt, 1978; Rising & Copp, 1968; Selltiz, Hopson, & Cook, 1956; Selltiz & Cook, 1962; Shattuck, 1964; Spaulding & Flack, 1976; Tucker, 1980). Adaptation has been defined as the satisfaction of needs related to survival (Honigmann, 1954), or a process by which a living organism accommodated to the environment (Cuenot, 1951). Grasha and Kirshenbaum (1980, p. 57) define adaptation as the ability to cope successfully with the problems and demands of our environment." They believe that in trying to adapt, people typically pursue two goals: the first is "to handle or otherwise just meet the demands of various situations. The other is to go beyond 11 this and engage in behaviors that enhance our skills and the quality of our lives" (Grasha & Kirchenbaum, 1980, p.5). According to Pruitt (1978), adaptation has two components, adjustment and assimilation. ‘V/‘_Adjp§tmentlisfldgfineg/aS‘coping with one's environment sufficiently well to be happy, comfortable, and fairly free of problems. Assimilation means interacting freely with people from the host country and accepting their culture. For the purposes of this study, this two—fold definition will be employed. In the 1950's, Lysgaard (1955) first proposed a model of adjustment, the U-Curve hypothesis, while studying the adaptation process of Norwegian Fulbright fellows in the United States. The basis of his hypothesis is that internationals undergo a common sequence of stages or types of experiences during their stay in another culture. Immediately upon arrival, international visitors undergo a period that is marked by a friendly reception, high expectations of their experience, and the wonder of discovering new things for the first time. During the second phase, the visitors are faced with increasing difficulties, as new problems emerge. The novelty of the situation fades and the rigor of everyday routines prevails. This low period is followed by a more positive period in which the visitors learn how to function better in the host culture and, therefore, have a more positive attitude toward themselves and their experience in the host culture. Gullahorn and Gullahorn (1963) have extended Lysgaard's work and looked at what occurs on and after return to the home country. The research in the areas of cross-cultural adjustment has focused 12 mainly on international students' attitudes toward themselves, their careers, the United States and Americans, and their home country; their social behavior; and, their adjustment to life in the United States (Spaulding & Flack, 1976). For example, Hendricks and Skinner (1977) performed an ethnographic study of the social and economic coping strategies of foreign students at the University of Minnesota. They concluded that the behavior of foreign students should be viewed as a rational attempt to adapt socially, in response to the constraints inflicted upon them by virtue of their social and legal status in the U.S. Pruitt (1978), in a study of African student adaptation at nine colleges and universities across the U.S., concluded that the major problems faced by these students are climate, communication with Americans, discrimination, homesickness, and physical ailments, e.g., weariness and depression. Only a minority felt comfortable with the basic elements of U.S. culture, e.g., food, climate, social patterns, and values. Several correlates of adjustment were found: males reported better adjustment than females; those supported by their governments were better adjusted than those supporting themselves; predeparture knowledge about the U.S. helped, as did having intimate friendships with Americans, the maintenance of religious commitment, age, home family status, etc. Hansel (1980) compared the adjustment and intercultural experiences of high school sophomores from the U.S. participating in an American Field Service summer program, with that of older students on the same 13 program, believing that the former would experience a greater degree of difficulty during the experience itself and when returning home, and would benefit less than the latter. For the most part, she found few significant differences between sophomores and older students. The major difference, which was surprising, was that sophomores appeared to participate less in the activities of their host families. Grove and Hansel (1981) looked at the role of social status in the success of exchange student placements, comparing the status of the students' natural families with that of their host families. They concluded that differences between the social status of students and their host families are not necessarily related to success of placement, nor is there reason to believe that a student's social status alone, or a host family's status alone, are related to success. Hawes and Kealey (1979) performed an empirical study of the adaptation and effectiveness of male Canadian professionals on overseas assignments. They developed a profile of the individual who is effective while overseas by using multiple regression and extreme group analyses on the characteristics found in those who were shown to be (or not to be) effective. They characterized the effective cross—cultural person as one who, aside from being effective professionally, was one who was satisfied with his new environment; participated in enjoyable activities; did not stereotype nationals; interacted with nationals; were facile with the language; had no fascination with "back home"; had few complaints about conditions, nationals, or the host culture; had a good knowledge of the culture; and were tolerant and Open. The adjusted 14 individual copes well with problems and frustrations that arise, including housing, security, climate, entertainment, goods and services, etc. . Hopkins extended the work of Hawes and Kealey and attempted to define overseas effectiveness and the personality characteristics that predict overseas effectiveness for adolescents participating in a year-long, cross—cultural exchange program. Five significant predictors were found: Self—confidence/Initiative; Natural family communication; Interpersonal interest; Interpersonal harmony; and Non-ethnocentrism and background for host school. These results parallel those of Hawes and Kealey. According to Spaulding and Flack (1976), the studies of the adjustment and social attitudes of international students enlighten us regarding the lives of many groups of students while in the United States, but do not integrate "the various disciplinary perspectives in order to design better academic programs and host relationships with the students" (p.33). They believe that few research efforts have succeeded in the development of interdisciplinary theories or models. For example, the only research effort they could identify that took a non-standard approach, was a study of social adaptation performed by Klein, Alexander, and Tseng (1971). Klein et al. suggest that role conflict and self-esteem are essential factors in determining social adaptation of Asian students, and further, that the pattern of adaptation is determined over time, by situational factors. They note a need to take apart the wholistic concept of adaptation to get at the 15 heart of the matter. In light of the need espoused by Spaulding and Flack (1976) and by Klineberg (1970) to build a more integrated theory of international student education (specifically involving adaptation and adjustment), this study will make use of a body of research whose results have proven quite useful in the field of education. The research performed on the self-concept and success in school will be interpolated, and its potential benefits to international student education proposed. First, however, an overview of the self—concept in psychology and education will be useful. The Self—Concept "What is it that consists of concepts that are hierarchically organized and internally consistent; that assimilates knowledge, yet, itself, is an object of knowledge; that is dynamic, but must maintain a degree of stability; that is unified and differentiated at the same time; that is necessary for solving problems in the real world; that is subject to sudden collapse, producing total disorganization when this occurs?" ((Epstein, 1973, p.407). The answer to this riddle is the self-concept, a riddle in its own right. The self-concept is a complex aspect of personality with an interesting history in social science, most specifically in psychology and education. To review this riddle, a brief history of the concept of the self will be presented. This history will be followed by a description of some of the characteristics of the self-concept, l6 detailing some of the research performed in this area. This description will lead to a definition of the construct, which will be followed by a discussion of the means employed to measure the self-concept. Finally, a discussion of the implications of the self—concept for education and adjustment will be presented. History of the Self—Concept In the 17th century, Descartes reasoned, "cogito, ergo sum," that if he was thinking, then he must exist. Other great thinkers (e.g., Spinoza, Liebnitz, etc.) presented ideas about psychological factors of people, but due to a lack of experimental rigor at that time, no generally accepted theories of self existed. There did exist, however, a general state of confusion regarding the concept, even into the 20th century. In the late 1800's, an increased interest in the self arose. William James wrote about the consciousness of the self in his book, Principles 9: Psychology (1890), looking at the self as an object of knowledge - a mental construct. In 1910, James described two different views of the self: the self as knower and the self as the object of what is known. He believed that in order to understand an individual, one must understand the self as an object of knowledge, consisting of whatever the individual believes belongs to him or her. This included the individual's body, family, possessions, emotions and desires, all capable of being heightened or lowered. James regarded the self as having a sense of unity, as well as being differentiated, and as being 1? highly associated with emotions. Cooley (1902) defined the self as "that which is designated in common speech by the pronouns of the first person singular, '1', 'me', 'my', 'mine', and 'myself'" p.136). He believed that what a person recognizes as being part of his or her self would yield more of an emotional reaction in that individual than that which is not. According to Cooley, the self can only be identified through subjective feelings. This feeling state evolves either through one's belief that he or she has control over occurrences or by cognitive discrimination. In the 1920's, the behaviorists helped turn the focus of psychology toward observable actions and reactions. Though the self as a construct was not considered a central factor in psychological theory during the first half of this century in the United States, some continued on with their work. George Herbert. Mead (1934) expanded on Cooley's work, noting that the self-concept arises in social interaction as a result of a person's concern about how others will react to him or her. People learn to view the world as do those around them in order to act appropriately. Thus, in the absence of external pressures, people develop internal controls that guide their everyday behavior. Mead argued that personality is determined by social psychological factors, rather than biological ones; thus, an individual has as many selves as he or she has social roles. Kurt Lewin (1935) viewed the self as a central, fairly permanent, and stable organization that provided consistency to personality. Prescott Lecky (1945) proposed that self—consistency is a basic 18 motivating force in all human behavior. He believed that the self-concept was the core of personality and defined it as an "organization of values that are consistent with one another" (p.160). Lecky stated that the self-concept involved a dynamic process of continuous assimilation of new beliefs, and the change and/or rejection of old ones. Bertocci (1945) emphasized two aspects of the self (as did James, 1890); the self as subject and the self as object. Murphy (1947) discussed self-enhancement, and the relationship between the self and the social group; Raimy (1948) introduced various measures of self-concept in counseling interviews and stated that the heart of psychotherapy is altering the self-concept. Gordon Allport (1937, 1943, 1955, 1961) emphasized the importance of the self in modern psychology and argued that man should be aware of himself and control his future through his own aspirations. The writing of Combs and Snygg insisted that much attention should be focused on the ways in which people see themselves and their world. In their book, Individual Behavior (1949/1959), they proposed that the basic motivating force of individuals is the maintenance and enhancement of the self. They defined the self—concept as "those parts of the phenomenal field which the individual has differentiated as definite and fairly stable characteristics of himself" (1949, p.112). The self-concept was seen as the core of a larger organization that encompasses both changeable and stable personality characteristics. Further, they declared that behavior is determined by the totality of l9 experiences of which an individual is conscious at a given point in time. Sarbin (1952) also wrote about the structure of the self; the self structure being both organized and dynamic (susceptible to change, generally in the direction from lower order to higher order constructs). Sullivan (1953), like Mead (1934), believed that the self arises out of social interaction. He identified the self—system as "an organization of educative experience called into being by the necessity to avoid or to minimize incidents of anxiety" (1953, p.165). Carl Rogers (1947, 1951, 1959a, 1959b, 1965, 1969), a clinical psychologist, presented a system of "non-directive" psychotherapy built around the importance of the self in adjustment. In his theory, the self is the central aspect of personality, viewed as an "organized, fluid, but consistent conceptual pattern of perceptions of characteristics and relationships of the 'I' or the 'me' together with values attached to these concepts" (1951, p.498), of central importance to the behavior and adjustment of individuals. Rogers, too, described the self as a social product, developing out of interpersonal relationships, and striving for consistency. The self-concept, according to Rogers (like Cooley, 1902) includes only those individual characteristics of which a person is aware and over which the person believes he or she exercises control. The need to maintain and enhance the self is a key issue in Rogers' thinking too, and thus, he believed that there is a need for positive regard both frdm others and from oneself. 20 In the late 1950's, interest developed in intrinsic motivating forces. Research by Brookover (1959, 1962, 1964, 1965, 1967), Combs (1965, 1969), Coopersmith (1967), Crano and Schroder (1967), Diggory (1966), Heider (1958), and Patterson (1959, 1961), among others, depicts the importance of the self in determining behavior. Today, the self-concept has a more prominent place in personality psychology. According to Hall and Lindzey (1970), the self is used in one of two ways: either as a group of psychological processes serving as determinants of behavior, or as a cluster of attitudes, beliefs, and feelings that individuals have about themselves. Thus, in one form or another, current theories of personality focus on the self as a theoretical element. Major Characteristics of the Self The self—concept is all the ways in which an individual sees him or herself, considering only those perceptions that seem highly important to the given individual at the given time. The self-concept "is the person's total appraisal of his appearance, background and origins, abilities and resources, attitudes and feelings which culminate as a directing force in behavior" (La Benne & Greene, 1969, p.10). Thus, the self-concept is a means through which individuals can symbolize and reduce their own lives and experiences into workable terms, in order to function effectively. Raimy (1943) defined self—concept as the map individuals consult in order to understand themselves in moments of crisis and change. In order to fulfill this mission, two important 21 characteristics of the self—concept are crucial: its organization and its dynamism. From the literature, one can see that there is agreement that the self has a generally stable quality, characterized by organization. "The most constant factor in the individual's experience...is himself and the interpretation of his own meaning; the kind of person he is, the place which he occupies in the world, appear to represent the center or nucleus of the personality..." (Moustakas, 1956, p.92). Self—concept is created by a process of impression formation, much like the process of forming impressions about others (Brown, 1965). Individuals hold numerous beliefs about themselves, not all of which are of equal significance. Some beliefs are central, while others are less important - but of all beliefs, those involving the self are the most central (Aronson, 1968; Crano and Messe, 1982; Rokeach, 1960). Lecky (1945) noted that people have a problem of trying to balance the maintenance of inner harmony with the maintenance of harmony with the environment. He wrote that in Order to understand the environment, individuals must keep their interpretations consistent with their experiences, but to maintain their individuality, they must organize these interpretations into a subjective system that is internally consistent on an individual basis. According to Kuhn (1960), the self is open to many classifications, each for depicting a distinct social role which is altered as a person moves from situation to situation. In a specific instance, the self—concept really amounts to a specific set of identities that are salient to the circumstances. Thus, the 22 self—concept varies across situations, and as such, an individual's identity will be determined at least in part by the social context. Since things that an individual sees and believes about his or her self—concept are determined, to an extent, by what others believe about him or her, the knowledge of these identities is culturally determined and is learned. According to Manis (1955), the self—concept should be regarded as similar to any other set of attitudes, beliefs, or opinions collected by an individual regarding other people or objects. A final feature of the "organized" self is that each concept within the self system has its own negative or positive values which relate to the ways in which individuals deal with success and failure (Purkey, 1970). Diggory (1966) discovered that when an ability is salient to an individual, failure of that ability will lower one's self—evaluation of other (even unrelated) abilities. The converse of this phenomenon is also true. A similar finding is reported by Ludwig and Maehr (1967). Although the self is considered to be quite organized, it has been shown to possess a dynamic quality as well. According to Lowe (1961), some parts of the self-concept are central to the self and are therefore, highly resistant to change, while other parts are peripheral to the core of the self and are therefore, less stable. Though a person's self-image appears to shift (e.g. when one changes social status), the self tends to resist change (Lecky, 1945). The general tendency of the self to resist change and strive for consistency was illustrated by both Balester (1956) and Roth (1959) who, using the Q—sort method, found that most individuals possess a significant degree 23 of consistency in self—concept. A similar finding was reported by Engle (1959). Coopersmith (1967) studied elementary schoolchildren during a 3—year study and concluded that one has a fairly stable idea regarding one's self-concept by mid—childhood, and though it is open to change, great resistance to such change exists. According to Rogers (1947), the self-concept remains constant over time and across situations. Equivocal evidence, however, has been provided by Akeret (1959) who showed that individuals may value the self in some areas but not in others, and thus, not have a unified Gestalt of self. This dynamic feature of the self-concept will be discussed in the following section. An important assumption regarding the self-concept is that the motive behind all behavior is the maintenance and enhancement of the self (Combs & Snygg, 1959; Rogers, 1951; Snygg & Combs, 1949). Then it follows that experience is perceived in terms of self-relevance, and that behavior is determined accordingly. "Because the self—concept shapes new experiences to conform to its already established pattern, much behavior can be understood as a person's attempt to maintain the consistency of his self-concept, a kind of homeostasis at a higher psychological level" (Shaffer & Shoben, 1956, p. 594). The phenomenal self, according to Combs and Snygg, is "both the product of the individual's experience and a producer of whatever new experience he is capable of” (1959, p.146). La Benne and Greene (1969) believe that behavior is guided by the same process for everyone, but the quality of individual experiences distinguishes those with a good self-concept from those with a low 24 self-concept. Hence, if a potentially new concept of self appears to be suited to the concepts already present within the organized perception of the self, it will be readily accepted and assimilated. If the concept appears to have little or no relevance to an individual'S‘ self-perception, generally, it is ignored. If it is inconsistent with, or contrary to, the system, it is likely to be rejected or distorted. Vallacher (in Wegner & Vallacher, 1980) made a connection between this view and social judgment theory (Sherif & Hovland, 1961). Others (Aronson & Mills, 1959; Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962; Jones, 1973; Miller & Ross, 1975; Shrauger, 1975) have shown that information that is consistent with oneself is assimilated, while inconsistent information is rejected. For example, Aronson and others (Aronson & Mills, 1959; Aronson & Carlsmith, 1962) have shown that students who did not perform well but who did not expect to do well were more satisfied with themselves than were those who did well but did not expect to do so. Generally, individuals are unwilling to accept evidence that is contrary to their self-perceptions. Therefore, the students who were doing well contrary to their expectations experienced considerable discomfort, and later tended to lower their performance level in accordance with their low expectations. Jersild suggests that an individual is active "in the maintenance of the self picture, even if by misfortune the picture is a false and unhealthy one" (1952, p.14). Hence, it has been shown that the self will change if conditions are favorable. For example, a person will grow in self-esteem and in 25 academic achievement, if the threat provided by school is not overpowering, and if the experience is seen by the individual to be meaningful and self-enhancing (Brookover, 1959, 1962, 1964, 1969). In addition, Rudin and Stagner (1958) demonstrated that field dependent subjects show greater changes in their self-concepts across situations than do field independent subjects. The final dynamic quality to be discussed is the role of the self in motivation. Combs, Snygg, and Rogers believed that the maintenance and enhancement of the self is the motive behind all behavior. "People are always motivated; in fact, they are never unmotivated. They may not be motivated to do what we prefer they do, but it can never be truly said that they are unmotivated" (Combs, 1962b, p. 85f). Combs (1965) said further that people have an insatiable need for maintaining and enhancing their phenomenal selves - their self-concepts. The important assumption here is that individuals are striving to behave in.ways that are consistent with their self-interpretations. People can evaluate their desires and goals because they can reflect on their selves (Taylor, 1977). However, it has been shown that an individual, often, is only vaguely aware of the rules underlying his or her evaluations and inferences (Nisbett & Wilson, 1977a; Wegner & Vallacher, 1977). Reitzes and Murtran (1980), using a sample of college sophomores, juniors, and seniors, concluded that "individuals may use self-concepts to interpret behavior, and these concepts may serve as motivational forces towards behaviors and plans consistent with their self—meaning" (1980, p.31). Festinger (1962, 1967) maintains that 26 "dissonance" results when one takes an action that is incompatible with the beliefs that a person held about him or herself. People try to behave in a manner that is consistent with the beliefs held about the self. Before discussing the various means employed to measure the self-concept, a summary that integrates the various research efforts on the self-concept will prove useful. Seymour Epstein (1973) provided such an integration of these theories. According to his view, the self-concept is a subsystem of hierarchically organized concepts contained within a much broader conceptual system. The self-concept is composed of various empirical selves, e.g., a physical self, a social self, etc., whose dynamic organization is based upon individual experience. The most important type of experience is that of social interaction with significant others, which provides increasing amounts of information that the self-concept must assimilate. The two basic functions of the self—concept are: 1. organizing the data of experience into predictable sequences of action and reaction; and 2. facilitating an individual's attempts to fulfill his or her needs, while avoiding disapproval and anxiety. The maintenance of the organization of the self-concept is necessary for the well-being of the individual; when this organization is stressed and threatened, anxiety will occur within the individual who will set up defenses against the threat. If the defenses are unsuccessful, the stress will mount until total disorganization and collapse occur. The basic need for self-esteem is superordinate and is the element that unites all the 27 others contained within the self-system. Measuring the Self—Concept Unfortunately, the self-concept is intangible and cannot be weighed or measured as can be a tangible object. However, the self-concept has been inferred by self-report techniques and behavioral observations, in order to provide such measures. By far, the most widely employed means to measure the self—concept is through self-report techniques, in which the self-concept is inferred from individuals' replies (verbal and/or written) to questions of an introspective nature; observations, on the other hand, make inferences about peoples"behavior to infer their self—concepts. Behavioral observations have been employed successfully in the measurement of the self-concept, but they are time-consuming and costly in terms of measurement operations and they generally are noncumulative. It has been noted, however, that since the self is exceptionally complex and multidimensional, caution need be taken in assessing an individual's self—concept. Of the numerous means employed to obtain introspective self-reports of the self-concept, the standardized scaling approach provides researchers with the most optimal means of developing reliable and valid measures. Wylie (1974) has provided a detailed analysis of a great many of the standardized measures that have been developed in this area. Eveh though there is evidence to support the fact that the self-concept has some stability and can be measured reliably, assessment hazards do exist (Wylie, 1974). Through the years, there has been controversy regarding the 28 reliability and validity of self-report inventories in measuring the self—concept. Rogers (1951) believed that self-reports provide valuable information about individuals. Allport (1955, 1961) stated that individuals have the right to be believed when they report their inner feelings. Sarbin and Rosenberg (1955) concluded that their self-report instrument was useful in obtaining meaningful self—attributes. Strong and Feder summarize this view nicely, "Every evaluative statement that a person makes concerning himself can be considered a sample of his self—concept, from which inferences may be made about the various properties of that self-concept" (1961, p.170). Numerous other studies have been performed with the assumption that an individual's evaluative statements about him or herself are reliable and valid data (Wylie, 1974). The opponents of self—reports believe that the self—report is only that which an individual is willing and able to disclose to another person, not that which he or she necessarily believes about him or herself (Purkey, 1970). Combs, Courson, and Soper (1963) argue that these two concepts are rarely identical. According to Combs and Soper (1957), the degree to which the self-report can be employed as an accurate indicator of self-concept depends upon factors such as the clarity of an individual's awareness, his or her command of the language or other symbols for expression, social expectancy, the cooperation of the individual, and his or her freedom from threat. There are additional variables that can (and do) influence self—reports; they are: familiarity with the item, response set, and 29 social desirability (Wylie, 1961). For example, Milgram and Helper (1961) and Pervin and Lilly (1967) have questioned whether subjects are capable and willing to provide a researcher with an honest report of themselves or whether they really just provide socially desirable responses. Wylie (1961) concluded that researchers "would like to assume that a subject's self-report responses are determined by his phenomenal field. However, we know that it would be naive to take this for granted, since it is obvious that such responses may also be influenced by the: (a) subject's intent to select what he wishes to reveal to the examiner, (b) subject's intent to say that he has attitudes or perceptions which he doesn't have, (c) subject's response habits, particularly those involving introspection and the use of language, and (d) a host of situational and methodological factors which may not only induce variations of (a), (b), and (c), but may exert other more superficial influences on the responses obtained" (1961, p.24). Clearly, there may be many confounding factors in self-reports. However, these are the same objections as were made by the old critics of attitude research, and these observations have been shown generally to have been wrong (Sivacek & Crano, 1982; Zanna, Higgins, & Herman, 1982). However, in spite of their limitations, self—reports have been shown to reveal characteristics of the self important to learning about individuals, if used carefully. In addition to self-reports, behavioral observations have been used to measure self—concept. An observer tries to obtain an "objective” 30 view of an individual and his or her behavior (Carbonara (1961). Traditionally, observers were encouraged to be passive and detached in order to learn as much as they can about the individual, without disrupting the person or the event being observed. In fact, the more uninvolved and detached the observer became, the better (Purkey, 1970). A different approach to observation has developed (Combs, 1965a). Because it is almost an impossibility that observations about oneself and others be made with complete objectivity, Combs believed that observations are very frustrating because of "a mistaken belief that observations must be made objectively" (1965a, p.64). This is due in part to the influence of past experience and self—perception processes (Bem, 1972). Combs believed that an observer should be looking for reasons for behavior rather than at the behavior itself. His approach encourages sensitivity to the individual under observation, exploration, and involvement. Often, observations have been structured to improve their validity and reliability (Crano & Brewer, 1973). Many times, individuals are asked to respond to stimuli such as those in a structured interview or through quasi-projective techniques (Wylie, 1961). The quasi—projective technique allows practitioners to draw inferences from an individual's creations (Wylie, 1961). Many such techniques are used to assess the self—concept (e.g., the T.A.T., the drawings of young children, and sentence completion tests) (Harris, 1963;-Purkey, 1970). Projective techniques and other indirect self—report measures have been employed widely, but have not withstood critical study of their reliability and 31 validity (Kidder & Campbell, 1970). Although such inference has proven a valuable tool in measuring the self-concept (Courson, 1965), as with most measures of self-concept, it must be used with caution (Wylie, 1961). While the impressive variety of scales of self-concept attests to the importance that researchers have attached to this issue, the proliferation of these measures also suggests the unfortunate fact that many of them have been used only once or twice, without any attempt at validation. As Wylie (1974) notes, this leads to a situation in which "interpretation of individual studies and meaningful syntheses are...precluded" (p.5). To this point, the term self—concept has been defined explicitly, its history in, and importance to, psychology and education presented, and means of measuring it discussed. As can be inferred, the self-concept has been studied and explored thoroughly, and volumes have been written throughout the years (See Wylie, 1961, 1974). In the pages "that follow, a review of many of the studies on the relationship between self-concept and academic success are presented. Self-Concept and Academic Success A trend in education in the United States recently has emphasized students' self-concepts and the relation of self-concept to, and its influence on, academic success. Significant benefits have been obtained for students with this new philosophy and teaching practice. Throughout the years, educators have believed that a positive 32 relationship existed between students' self—concepts and their academic performance. Their contention was, and still is, that students who are confident in themselves and especially their abilities are more likely to experience success than those who perceive themselves negatively. Brookover (1967) concluded that students' attitudes affected their achievement to a great degree, and hence, that ability may not be the most important factor in achievement. Though the extensive research on the self-concept does indicate that a relationship between self-concept and academic achievement does exist, the history of self-theory demonstrates that it is far from univocal. It has been shown that some students who have high self—Concepts do not achieve as well as they should (Brookover, 1967). In addition, some researchers (Schwarz, 1967; Peters, 1968) have not found a significant relationship between positive self-concept and success in school. Since 1960, much research on the relationship between self—concept and academic achievement has been performed. A review of this research follows. The evidence indicates that a relationship between the self—concept and academic achievement does exist, though this relationship has been shown to be stronger for boys than girls (Bledsoe, 1967; Campbell, 1965). It also has been shown that male underachievers have a tendency to possess more negative self—concepts than female underachievers (Baum, 1969). Shaw, Edson, and Bell (1960) studied the differences that exist between achievers' and underachievers' perceptions of themselves. Comparing groups of high school students on the Sarbin Adjective Checklist (Sarbin, 1955), they showed that male achievers were 33 relatively more positive about themselves than male underachievers. They could draw no conclusions about the female groups. Fink (1962) also concluded that there exists a significant relationship between self-concept and academic underachievement, which again, was stronger for boys. Brookover, Thomas, and Patterson (1964) tried to determine whether students' concepts of their ability in school were positively correlated with academic performance, and whether self-concept is positively correlated with how students view others' perceptions of their ability. When I.Q. was held constant, students' grade point averages were positively correlated to their concepts of their own ability. Brookover et a1. concluded that the relationship between self-concept of ability and academic performance is substantial even when measured I.Q. is controlled. Many studies have demonstrated a significant relationship between self—concept and achievement in school (Campbell, 1967; Caplin, 1966; Gill, 1969; Irwin, 1967; etc.). It also has been concluded in a number- of studies that successful students have positive self—concepts (Davidson & Greenberg, 1967; Farquhar, 1968; Gowan, 1960; Williams & Cole, 1968). Brookover (1968) found that self—concept of ability is related significantly to achievement in school, and that this relationship exists, over time, even if intelligence is held constant. He concluded that self-concept of academic ability is better than global self-concept as a predictor of success in school. The research in this area has concluded that successful students 34 are those with a high opinion of themselves, are optimistic about future performance, and have confidence in their general and academic abilities (Brookover, 1969; Ringness, 1961; Taylor, 1964). Based on this research, one can assume that successful students can be characterized as having positive self-concepts. This has proven quite the opposite for unsuccessful students. Most studies of unsuccessful students have focused on underachievers, while fewer studies have looked at nonachievers (Purkey, 1970). However, evidence supports the conclusion that either type of unsuccessful student perceives him or herself differently than do successful students (Goldberg, 1960; Shaw, 1961; Taylor, 1964). Studies supporting the fact that underachievers tend to have negative self-concepts abound. Goldberg (1960) showed that underachievers perceived themselves less able to complete required tasks, less enthusiastic to learn, less self-confident, and less hardworking. Shaw (1961) concluded that underachievers are more negative about themselves than are achievers and behave less maturely as well. Similarly, Bruck and Bodwin (1962) found a positive relationship between learning disability, underdeveloped self-concept, and immature behavior. Combs (1963) looked at the relationship of self-perceptions and underachievement and determined that underachievers view themselves as less able and not as acceptable to others. Similar findings have been reported for nonachievers (Carlton & Moore, 1966, 1968; Harding, 1966; Purkey, 1970; Zimmerman and Allebrand, 1965). From this evidence, it is reasonable to assume that unsuccessful students are plagued by _ 35 negative feelings about themselves and their abilities. Additionally, students with negative self-concepts, especially regarding their ability, do not perform as well in school (Brookover, Erickson, & Joiner, 1967). An individual with a negative self-concept "...can be described as one who lacks confidence in abilities, who despairs because he cannot find a solution to his problems, and who believes that most of his attempts will result in failure. His expectations in terms of behavior and performance are very low because he believes that he can do few things well" (La Benne & Greene, 1969, p. 122). Whether individuals perceive of themselves in a negative manner due to their poor academic performance, or whether they perform poorly due to their poor self-concepts, however, appears to be a question with no answer (Purkey, 1970). Numerous studies have been performed both to determine the influence of self—concept on performance and of performance on self-concept (Benjamins, 1950; Harding, 1966; Lamy, 1965). Brookover et a1. (1962, 1965) concluded that changes in self-concept of academic ability are accompanied by changes in scholastic achievement. Gibby and Gibby (1967) looked at the effects of academic failure on seventh—graders and concluded that when the academic success of students was in jeopardy, students with promising ability performed more poorly than expected. These students also began to think less highly of themselves and showed a decline in scholastic productivity. Centi (1965) reported similar results for low-achieving freshman college students before their first term commenced and after they received their 36 first grade report. Students who received bad grades began to rationalize their low achievement level by lowering their concepts of self. . The evidence cited supports the contention that the way in which an individual views him or herself is influenced, at least in part, by success and failure; those who experience success are more likely to develop positive feelings about themselves and their abilities, while the opposite is true for those who experience failure. "A person with a weak self—concept and who is unsure of himself is more likely to have a narrowed perceptual field. This shrinking effect limits the data required for intelligent decision and action. The threatened person's perceptions tend to be limited to the objects or events of the threat. This becomes the very antithesis to efficient behavior. Instead of broadening his fund of knowledge and skills, such a person is kept busy defending his already existing perceptual organizations. In contrast, the individual with a positive self-concept is free to devote his energies to the explorations and discoveries of the personal meanings of events for him and his world. The positive self has a backlog of actual experiences of acceptances and success. He approaches people expecting to be liked; he engages in activity, expecting to succeed. He feels loved and able as a result of real encounters...Strong self-concepts are the result of actual positive experience. The dynamics of a positive expectation tend to produce the appropriate behavior and bring about the expectation. Whether the person with a weak or strong self-concept is always correct in his expectations is almost irrelevant." (LaBenne & 37 Greene, 1969, p. 19). The data presented do not provide unequivocal evidence as to a positive causal relationship between self—concept and achievement, but they do support the belief that a relationship does exist between positive self-concept and achievement. The results tend to indicate that the self-concept is important for education and more emphasis should be given it. It is with this evidence as a basis that this research seeks to determine the relationship between self—concept and successful personal, social, and academic adjustment of international exchange students. CHAPTER 3 Instrument Development Overview: The Measure of Self—Concept Measures of self-conCept are not common in Latin America, thus Spanish and Portuguese measures were almost non—existent. To help offset this problem, a series of studies is presented here that were undertaken to construct Portuguese and Spanish-language versions of a well-established English language measure of self-concept. In the first, a Portuguese—language version of Eagly's modification of the Janis—Field self-concept measure was translated, and administered to 276 Brazilian secondary school students. The findings indicated that the translation resulted in a scale of high reliability. In study 2, the known groups technique was employed to determine the criterion validity of this instrument. The results disclosed that the measure successfully discriminated among students (N=192) whose teachers had ranked as being of high, medium, or low self-concept. In Study 3, 154 respondents from 4 South American countries completed a Spanish translation of the scale. Results indicated that the Spanish version, too, was a reliable measure . The Revised Janis—Field Scale Some exceptions to Wylie's criticisms of self-report measures are provided in the scales of self-concept developed by Eagly (1967), 38 39 Coopersmith (1967), Rosenberg (1965), Janis and Field (1959), and Berger (1952), among others. The Eagly revision of the Janis-Field scale was chosen for translation into Portuguese and Spanish because of its positive psychometric qualities (Crano & Brewer, 1973; Robinson & Shaver, 1973), its wide use with school-aged respondents, its ease of administration and scoring, and the ease with which its items could be translated meaningfully into both languages. The revised Janis-Field scale, which employs a Likert-type format, was developed by Eagly (1967) to measure self—concept (Appendix A). Ten items from the original Janis-Field (1959) "Feelings of Inadequacy" scale were used as the basis of the revision. These items were all worded so that the positive response (e.g., very often, very much) indicated low self-concept. Eagly added another 10 items to the original group of 10. These new items were written to be the reverse of the originals; that is, a positive response on the new items indicated positive selféconcept. The added items were not exact reversals of the originals, but were very similar in content to the items on the Janis-Field inventory. On Eagly's scale, all items are scored so that a high score indicates high self-concept. Thus, negatively worded items are reverse-scored. In the original application of the inventory, Eagly (1967) administered the measure to 144 male college undergraduate students. The split—half reliability of the 20 item scale was .72; when corrected according to the Spearman-Brown formula, the coefficient of reliability was .84. Given these results, and the other positive 40 qualities of the revised Janis-Field measure, noted above, it was decided to attempt to translate and validate this scale on samples of Portuguese and Spanish-speaking students. The studies that follow describe the ways in which the translation and validation processes were undertaken. Study 1: Reliability of the Portuguese Language Version Method Instrument translation The revised Janis-Field scale was translated into the Portuguese language (See Appendix B) by a group of native Brazilians, who also were fluent in English. The instrument then was back—translated into English and any discrepancies disclosed in the back—translation process were resolved before the instrument was finalized and administered. As noted, the measure consists of 20 items, 10 of which are worded positively, 10 negatively. The items are presented in a Likert—type format, with five possible response options for each item. Ten of the items are concerned with the frequency with which certain behaviors related to the self-concept are expressed by the subject. As such, the response options for these (frequency) items are "muitas vezes (very often), com frequencia (frequently), as vezes (sometimes), raramente (rarely), and quasi nunca (almost never)." The other 10 items measure the degree to which students experience various internal reactions to 41 self-concept related behavior. The response options for these items are "muitissimo (very much), muito (much), mais ou menos (so-so), um pouco (a little), and muito pouco (very little)," or, "muito bem (very well), bem (well), mais ou menos (so—so), mal (bad), and muito mal (very bad)." Items are scored on a scale of one to five, such that a high score indicates a more positive self—concept (the negative items were reversed scored). Thus, scores can range from a low of 20 to a high of 100. Subjects A total of 286 respondents completed the Portuguese version of the Janis-Field scale. The respondents were enrolled in a large public secondary school in Porto Alegre, Brazil. Almost all of these students came from the lower middle—class, from Porto Alegre, or from the diverse municipalities within or surrounding the state of Rio Grande do Sul. The average age of the respondents was 15.7 years; ages ranged from 13 to 19 years. Forty percent of the respondents were males, 60% were females. Procedure In their orientation class, students were asked to complete the measure, responding as honestly as possible, and thinking in terms of the way they felt about themselves in general. Other information - sex and age - also was gathered at this time. After the scales were collected, they were scored by the researcher. 42 Results Over all of the subjects for whom data were complete (N=276), the average score over the 20 items was 67.2, with a standard deviation of 11.15. The scores ranged from a minimum of 32 to a maximum of 94. The distribution of scores approximated normality (skew = -.69, kurtosis = .52). Calculation of the degree of internal consistency of the item—set resulted in a standardized coefficient alpha of .86 for the total scale. This degree of internal consistency is indicative of a highly reliable instrument (Crano & Brewer, 1973). The corrected item-total correlations (Nunnally, 1967), along with the items that constitute the scale, are presented in the "Study 1" column of Table 3.1. As shown by the item—total correlations of Table 3.1, two of the items (5 and 15) were weakly correlated with the total score. Removing these two items from the reliability analysis, however, does not appreciably influence the coefficient of internal consistency (revised alpha = .87). As such, little is gained by discarding these items. The results of this analysis indicate that the translation of the Janis-Field scale from English to Portuguese was successful. A scale of high reliability was obtained, with little missing data and a reasonable distribution of scores. Thus, at least in terms of the reliability of the measure, the translation process appears to have successfully replicated the original English version. However, the question of the validity of the translated scale remains at issue, and it is to this question that Study 2 is addressed. 43 Table 3.1 Corrected Item-Total Correlations Over Three Independent Administrations of the Self-Concept Scale Corrected Item-Total Correlations Items Study 1 Study 2 Study 3 1 0.54 0.47 0.41 2 0.48 0.37 0.38 3 0.41 0.44 0.27 4 0.51 0.43 0.15 5 0.12 0.21 0.19 6 0.47 0.43 0.51 7 0.56 0.43 0.40 8 0.38 0.34 0.31 9 0.45 0.39 0.47 10 0.38 0.26 0.18 11 0.61 0.53 0.51 12 0.43 0.27 0.33 13 0.55 0.47 0.54 14 0.59 0.56 0.38 15 0.03 0.15 0.00 16 0.43 0.49 0.55 17 0.36 0.25 0.43 18 0.55 0.58 0.32 19 0.38 0.50 0.32 20 0.61 0.52 0.62 Study 2: Validity of the Portuguese Language Version This investigation extends and replicates the methodology of Study 1 to provide additional psychometric information on the reliability and validity of the Portuguese version of the scale. The "known groups" technique is used to infer the criterion validity of the instrument (Crano & Brewer, 1973). Details of this process follow. 44 Method Subjects In this administration, 195 subjects completed the Portuguese version of the revised Janis-Field self-concept scale. These respondents were enrolled in the secondary program of a small public laboratory school that is connected to the Federal University in Porto Alegre, Brazil. The students were primarily from middle-class families, and many were the children of the professors who were employed at the University. The respondents ranged in age from 12 to 17 years. The average age of the respondent sample was 14.4 years. 104 of the subjects were male, and 89 were female. Procedure As in Study 1, the translated version of the revised Janis—Field scale was employed. In their classroom, six groups of students (of 30-36 studénts each) were provided the self-concept scale, along with a set of self-explanatory instructions for completing the 20 Likert—type items that constitute the instrument. Respondents were asked to be as honest as possible, and to respond to all questions. Students were assigned identification numbers by their respective teachers so that confidentiality could be ensured. To enable the study of the criterion validity of the instrument, the six classroom teachers were asked to categorize their students into one of three levels of self-concept: high, average, or low. The 45 teachers were instructed to place approximately equal numbers of students in their classes into each of these three groupings. This instruction was given to help standardize the scoring procedure over all six teachers - i.e., to ensure that they all used the same "grading scale." This standardization process helps avoid some of the biasing influences that a less restrictive rating system might have introduced. (See the discussion of this issue by Messe, Crano, Messe, and Rice, 1979.) Thus, each group of 30-36 students was subdivided into three groups, each containing 10-12 students with the most positive self-concepts (according to teacher ratings), 10—12 with the least positive self-concepts, and the remaining 10-12 students with self-concepts between these extremes. Results Over all of the subjects for whom data were obtained (n=192), the average scale score over the 20 items was 71.3, with a standard deviation of 9.01. The scores ranged from a minimum of 39 to a maximum of 91. The distribution of scores again approximated the normal curve (skew = —.51, kurtosis = .75). Standard psychometric tests of the internal consistency of the item set were performed, and resulted in a coefficient of internal consistency of impressive strength (standardized alpha = .83). The corrected item-total correlations for this set of data are presented in the "Study 2" column of Table 3.1. As shown here, items 5 and 15 were weakly (but significantly) correlated with the total score, as in Study 46 1. By removing these two items, little is gained in terms of internal consistency (revised alpha = .84). Correlational analyses were performed to determine the relationship between teachers' estimates of students' self—concepts and the students' scores on the revised Janis-Field measure. A correlation coefficient of .32 (p < .001) was obtained in this analysis. This significant and . positive correlation indicates that the scale accurately reflected teachers' estimates of their students' self—concept scores. Comparing the average self-concept scores of students in each of the three teacher—defined self—concept groups reveals a result that is consistent with that of the correlational analysis. Over all six teachers, the average Janis-Field self-concept score of the students ranked in the lowest third of the class was 67.49; the average self-concept score of the (teacher-defined) middle group was 71.14; and the mean self-concept score of the students estimated to have the highest scores was 74.81. Planned contrasts between these means disclosed that the scale scores of the high self-concept group (as defined by the teachers) were significantly greater than those of the middle group (t = 2.37, df = 188, p < .02) which, in turn, significantly exceeded the average scores of the students thought by the teachers to possess low self-concepts (t = 2.48, df = 188, p < .02). On the basis of these findings, it seems apparent that the translation process of the revised Janis-Field scale from English to Portuguese was successful. A reliable test was developed, and the evidence provided in Study 2 indicates that the scale measures the construct with a high degree of 47 validity. The development of the Spanish version of the revised Janis-Field test of self—concept is addressed in the following study. Study 3: Reliability of the Spanish Language Version Method Instrument Translation Native Spanish speakers who also are fluent in English translated Eagly's (1967) 20-item adaptation of the Janis-Field inventory from English to Spanish (See Appendix C). The instrument then was back-translated into English, and any inconsistencies between the original and the back-translated version were resolved before the test was administered. As in the Portuguese version, the Spanish—language instrument consists of 20 items, 10 of which are worded positively, and 10 negatively. Ten of the Likert-type items are concerned with the frequency with which certain self—concept related behaviors are expressed by the respondent. The response options for these items are "Muy a menudo, con frequencia, a veces, raramente, and casi nunca". The remaining items measure the degree to which various internal reactions related to the self—concept are experienced. Their response options are "Muchisimo, mucho, mas o menos, un poco, and muy poco". Items are scored on a scale from 1—5. Negatively worded items are reverse scored, and thus, a high score reflects a more positive self—concept. As in the 48 Portuguese version of the scale, total scores on the Spanish language version can range from 20 to 100. Subjects and Procedure A total of 154 respondents from four South American countries constituted the subject sample. All of the respondents were enrolled in an international student exchange program (American Field Service), and all completed the Spanish language self-concept inventory before beginning their year-long visit to the United States. The tests were administered to the students in groups at their pre-departure orientation programs. Of the total group, 52 respondents were from Ecuador, 31 from Paraguay, 31 from Uruguay, and 40 from Venezuela. Information regarding the mean age and gender distribution of each of the four subsamples is provided in Table 3.2. Table 3.2. Characteristics of the Spanish-Speaking Sample: Mean Age, Gender Distribution, Self-Concept Score, and Coefficient Alpha Ecuador Paraguay Venezuela Uruguay Total Age 17.6 17.1 17.0 16.9 17.2 % Males 46.2 74.2 35.0 41.9 48.1 Self—concept 74.7 69.0 72.9 70.9 72.3 Alpha .77 .85 .70 .80 .80 N 52 31 31 40 154 49 Results Over all 154 Spanish-speaking respondents, the average score on the 20-item self-concept inventory was 72.3. As shown in Table 3.2, the scores of the subgroups were reasonably similar, as were their distributions, which in all cases approximated normality. Item—total correlations employing the total sample are presented in the final column of Table 3.1. As shown, the translated items appeared reasonably homogeneous in their relationship with the total score. This observation was reinforced in the reliability analysis. Calculating the coefficient of internal consistency within each group, and across all four nationality groupings, also revealed considerable consistency. As shown in Table 3.2, standardized alpha coefficients ranged from .70 to .85; over the total group, the reliability coefficient was of impressive magnitude (alpha = .80). These results suggest strongly that the translation of the revised Janis-Field measure of self-concept into Spanish was successful. A scale of high internal consistency was constructed, and this consistency was evident over of a number of different Spanish-speaking nationality groupings. Discussion The results of these three studies suggest that the translation of the revised Janis-Field scale into Portuguese and Spanish was successful and that a measUre that can provide a reasonable indication of the psychological status of individuals now is available to educators and 50 psychologists working with Spanish and Portuguese—speaking individuals. In the development of this instrument, care was taken to assure that the translation of items from English to Spanish or Portuguese was adequate, and that the reliability and validity of the translated scales were of acceptable magnitude. Studies 1 and 3 were focused on the first criterion, the adequacy of the translation. The results of these studies indicated that the translation was successful. First, students neither had trouble understanding the meaning of the items, nor in completing the scale. Those 10 respondents in Study 1 who failed to complete the scale inevitably skipped only one item, and this suggests carelessness rather than misunderstanding, especially since different items were skipped by the 10 respondents. None of the Spanish-speaking respondents in Study 3 skipped even a single item. In addition, and perhaps more importantly, in both the Spanish and the Portuguese-speaking samples, the interrelationships among the 20 items were strong and positive. The high index of internal consistency obtained in this study (alpha = .86 and .80 for the Portuguese and Spanish language scales, respectively) attests to this fact. This result suggests strongly that all of the items were tapping a common attitude. Study 2 was directed, in part, to the identification of this common attitude. That is, while the reliability of the instrument was .demonstrated in Studies 1 and 3, Study 2 was concerned, in addition, with the question of what was being measured reliably. Using a known groups technique to validate the instrument (cf. Crano & Brewer, 1973), 51 Study 2 asked teachers to provide estimates of the self—concept of each of the students in their classes who completed the inventory. It was assumed that having worked with the children for nearly an entire academic year, the teachers could provide a valid estimate of each student's self-concept. If the scale results mirrored the teacher ratings, then evidence of the validity of the instrument would be provided. Although conditions did not allow for a validation of the Spanish—language version of the scale, Study 2 indicates that the Portuguese language version of the instrument provided a very accurate indication of the teachers' ratings. Average selfeconcept scores of the students rated in the top third of each class (in terms of self-concept) were significantly greater than those of students ranked in the middle third, and the scores of the middle group significantly exceeded those of the students who were viewed by the teachers as being in the lowest third of the class in terms of self-concept. As might be expected on the basis of these results, the internal consistency reliability of the scale in Study 2 was strong (alpha = .83), thus replicating the outcomes of Studies 1 and 3. In total, the results of this research program suggest clearly that this series of studies has fostered the development of Portuguese and Spanish language versions of the revised Janis-Field self-concept scale. The versions of the scales reproduced in Appendices B and C appear to be both reliable and valid indicators of self—concept. 52 The Measure of Student Adjustment (ADJ) The Measure of Student Adjustment (See Appendix D) is an English language experimenter-made scale, based on items used in the Michigan International Student Problem Inventory (MISPI). The MISPI was developed by Porter (1962) to determine the problems experienced by international students studying at the postsecondary level. The items of Porter's scale were revised to be more appropriate for the current subject sample — international high school students on a one—year, host family exchange program. The ADJ is designed to determine how many of the problems and situations that occasionally trouble exchange students (e.g., language difficulties, relationships with others, academic difficulties, etc.) are being experienced by each student, and to what degree. To complete the measure, a student must read the 60 items and decide whether or not they represent situations that are troublesome. If the item does not represent a problem, the student puts an "X" next to the word "No”. If it does represent a troublesome situation, the student puts an "X" next to the word "Yes", and then estimates the degree to which he or she is bothered by the situation through the use of a five—point scale whose endpoints range from "Hardly at all" to "Very much". Scoring the ADJ To score the scale, 0 points are given to all "No" responses. On the "Yes" responses, one to five points are assigned depending upon the 53 degree to which the student estimates being troubled by the item. At one extreme, one point is given for the response option "Hardly at all", while at the other, five points are given for the response "Very much". Thus, a student could score a minimum of 0, meaning that he or she experienced no problems at all, to a maximum of 300, indicating that all of the items represented problems and that they were experienced to a great extent. Preliminary Results For all the students for whom data on the first administration of the ADJ (ADJl) were complete (N=227), the mean score was 47.45 with a standard deviation of 31.85, indicating that there was variation among the scores obtained by the students. A minimum score of O and a maximum score of 152 was obtained; the median score was 73. The standardized item coefficient alpha for the total scale was .92, indicating that the scale is one of high reliability. The scale was factor analyzed and yielded a six—factor solution. The number of the items constituting the six factors (see Appendix C for the specific item wording), along with the standardized internal consistency coefficient of each factor, are presented in Table 3.3. The items that comprised each of the factors formed psychologically meaningful clusters. The items of factor 1 (Educ) all were related to educational aspects of the student's experience (e.g., concerns with grades in school, being unable to concentrate on studies, etc.). Factor 2 (Host) included items relating to the student's relationship with the 54 host family (e.g., relationship with the host brothers and sisters, not feeling like a member of the family, etc.). The items included in factor 3 (Engl) all related to difficulties experienced with the English language (e.g., difficulties in speaking English, not being able to understand U.S. slang, etc.). The items of factor 4 (Prob) expressed problems of a more global type (e.g., dietary problems, concern that health is deteriorating, etc.). Factor 5 (Pers) included personal experiences that could pose problems, while factor 6 (Socl) was composed of social experiences that could be troublesome (e.g., the treatment received at social functions, relationship between men and women, etc.). Table 3.3. Factor Analysis of ADJ: Six Factor Solution Standardized item alphas Spanish Brazilian Total Factor Items Sample Sample Sample 1 (Educ) 15, 24, 28, 30, 45, 46, 48 .69 .79 .69 2 (Host) 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, .77 .78 .80 3 (Engl) 12, 21, 23, 42, 43, 56 .87 .87 .86 4 (Prob) 7, 40, 41, 52, 54 .74 .74 .69 5 (Pers) 4, 5, 6, 18, 19, 32, 51, 53, 58 .79 .83 .80 6 (Socl) 13, 14, 25, 31, 50, 55 .68 .69 .73 The items included in each factor were combined to form six subscales. Statistical analyses were performed on these subscales over the total sample. Means, standard deviations, and standardized item alphas for the six subscales were computed, as were the correlations between each of the subscales, the ADJ measure in its entirety, and the 55 38-item ADJ measure. The results of these analyses are presented in Table 3.4. Table 3.4. Descriptive Statistics for the Subscales of ADJ and their Correlations with the Total ADJ and the 38—Item ADJ r with r with Subscale (Factor) N Mean sd ADJl ADJlA Educ (l) 228 4.8 5.1 .69* .68* Host (2) 229 3.4 4.8 .70* .69* Engl (3) 229 9.9 7.2 .53* .60* Prob (4) 228 8.8 7.8 .79* .80? Pers (5) 229 4.5 4.9 .57* .59* Socl (6) 228 3.4 4.4 .68* .69* Total (ADJlA) 228 34.70 23.2 *p=.001 When the six subscales were combined into a 38—item scale (ADJlA), the mean over all subjects (n=228) was 34.70 and the standard deviation was 23.2. The minimum score was 0 and the maximum score was 112 (of a possible 190). On the following page, Table 3.5 presents the intercorrelations between each of the six subscales. 56 Table 3.5. Intercorrelations Among the 6 Subscales of ADJlA Educ Host Engl Pers Socl Prob Educ 1.00 Host .34** 1.00 Engl .35** .27** 1.00 Pers .35** .31** .11* 1.00 Socl .42** .41** .24** .38** 1.00 Prob .40** .56** .28** .39** .50** 1.00 **p=.001 *p<.05 n>227 Chapter 4 Relationships Among Self—Concept, Adjustment, and Host Family Evaluation Over the Course of the Educational Exchange To this point, discussion has focused on the means undertaken to develop reliable and valid measures of self—concept and adjustment. Having satisfied this aim, the research now moves to employ these measures to investigate the relationships that might exist between a student's self—concept and his or her adjustment over the course of the exchange experience. Given the information that was collected on each student's host family, we are also in a position to determine whether students' self and adjustment scores were related to the host family's evaluation of the student. Method Overview Two hundred fifty one (251) American Field Service (AFS) Intercultural Exchange students from five South American countries (Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Venezuela, and Uruguay) completed the translated version of the Revised Janis-Field Self Concept scale in their native language — Spanish or Portuguese — during their pre—departure orientation programs. These programs took place in their home countries during the summer of 1982 (with the exception of Uruguay, 57 58 in which the measure was administered in mid-May), just a day or two before departure for the United States and their one-year exchange visit. The students from Uruguay completed their measures in the first of a series of pre-departure orientation programs, and departed for the U.S. in the summer, as did the students from the other countries. In November, 1982, these same students received the same measure of self—concept (again in their native language), along with the Measure of Student Adjustment at their host family address in the United States. The final administration of measures took place in May, 1983, when the students received, for the third time (again at their host family address in the United States), the self-concept measure in their native language. At this same time, the students were asked to complete the Measure of Student Adjustment, and the General Information Questionnaire (GIQ). In addition, this time the respective host families received the Host Family Measure (HF). Subjects The sample of this study consisted of 119 male and 132 female high school students from Brazil, Ecuador, Paraguay, Venezuela, and Uruguay. They ranged from 15 to 19 years of age, and were all participants in the American Field Service Intercultural exchange program to live in the United States with a host family for a year. Table 4.1 presents a breakdown of students by country, sex, and age. 59 Table 4.1. Breakdown of Students by Country, Sex, and Age Country Sex Age Male(%) 15 16 17 18 19 Missing Mean Age Brazil 45(46.4) 0 12 44 4O 0 1 17.29 Ecuador 24(46.2) 1 1 18 31 l 1 17.58 Paraguay 23(74.2) 0 8 11 12 0 0 17.13 Venezuela 14(35.0) 0 10 21 9 0 0 16.98 Uruguay ' 13(41.9) O 7 21 3 O 0 16.87 Spanish- Speakers 74(48) 1 26 71 55 1 1 17.19 Total 119(47.4) 1 38 115 95 1 2 17.23 Procedure Prior to their one—year exchange visit in the United States, students completed the translated version of the Janis—Field Self-Concept Scale (Self) in their native language, Spanish or Portuguese. The researcher and her husband traveled to two of the five pre-departure programs (in Brazil and Uruguay) and administered the measures. The others were administered by AFS staff members at the orientation program and mailed to the researcher. Standardized instructions were provided to the administrators (See Appendix E). During their stay in the U.S., each student's adjustment was monitored. Approximately 4-5 months into their stay, students received a packet of materials from the AFS headquarters containing: 1. a letter of introduction from the researcher, including instructions needed to complete the measures, 2. the same measure of self-concept (Selfl) they completed 60 previously (again in their native tongue), 3. the Measure of Student Adjustment (ADJl), 4. a self-addressed, stamped envelope in which to return the completed forms. The measures were to be completed by the students and returned to AFS headquarters in New York. For students who did not return their completed measures promptly, a reminder was sent by the AFS research staff (See Appendix F). Once a majority of the measures were returned (94%), the researcher began to code and analyze the data. In May, 1983, this process was repeated, and students again completed the two measures (Sele and ADJ2). This time, however, students were asked to fill out a General Information Questionnaire (GIQ) which sought sociodemographic data and information about students' academic performance while in the U.S. (See Appendix G). In addition, the students' host families received a questionnaire (HF) inquiring about the student in general, the student's adjustment, and academic performance (See Appendix H). Results Intriguing results were obtained when the data collected throughout the study were analyzed. Table 4.2 presents the correlations among the various self-concept and adjustment measures, and the host family questionnaire. Table 4.2. Self Selfl Self2 Self Selfl .69** 1.00 Self2 .61** .70** 1.00 Adjl -.20** -.37*"r —.29** Ade —.15** —.27** —.31** HF .29* .13* .14* **p=.001 *p<.05 n>120 Table 4.3. Standard Country N Mean Deviation Brazil 93 72.26 6.7 Ecuador 51 74.71 6.8 Venezuela 40 72.90 6.2 Paraguay 31 69.00 10.1 Uruguay 31 70.90 7.7 Spanish- Speakers 153 72.34 7.8 Total 246 72.30 7.4 61 Adjl 1.00 .63** -.13 for Self by Country Correlations Among the Measures Adj2 HF —.10 1.00 Minimum 54 87 62 95 57 . 86 43 84 49 83 43 95 43 95 FInitial Pre—Departure Self—Concept Results Maximum Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas Alpha .74 .77 .70 .86 .80 .80 .78 On the initial measure of self—concept (Self), the mean score for all subjects for whom complete data were gathered (N=246) was 72.29 and the standard deviation was 7.4. A minimum score of 43 and a maximum score of 95 were obtained. The standardized item alpha for the scale 62 was .78, indicating that the measure was reliable. A summary of the descriptive statistics for the initial measure of self-concept for each by country is presented in Table 4.3. The First Measure of Students' Self—Concepts in the U.S. (Selfl) The measure of self-concept completed in the U.S. (Selfl) was significantly correlated to the pre-departure measure (r=.69, n=219, p=.001) for the total sample (See Table 4.2). The mean score was slightly higher (73.32), as was the standard deviation (8.8). The minimum and maximum scores were 48 and 93 respectively. A breakdown by country is presented in Table 4.4. Again, this measure proved reliable (Alpha = .83). Table 4.4. Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for Selfl Standard Country N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum Alpha Brazil 92 72.9 8.7 48 89 .84 Ecuador 44 74.1 7.4 59 93 .78 Venezuela 34 76.6 7.1 65 90 .77 Paraguay 28 70.0 7.0 52 86 .76 Uruguay 26 72.7 10.8 48 89 .89 Spanish- Speakers 132 73.6 8.2 48 93 .82 Total 224 73.3 8.4 48 93 .83 63 The Second Measure of Students' Self-Concepts in the U.S. (Self2) As would be expected and can be seen in Table 4.2, scores on the second measure of self-concept completed in the U.S. (Self2) were correlated significantly with both the pre-departure self-concept score (Self — r=.61, n=197, p=.001) and the first measure of self—concept in the U.S. (Selfl — r=.70, n=l89, p=.001). The mean score was slightly higher (76.8) and the standard deviation was 8.4. The minimum and maximum scores were 50 and 97 respectively. A standardized item coefficient alpha of .84 was obtained, indicating that the reliability of the measure persisted over time. A breakdown of these statistics by country is presented in Table 4.5. Table 4.5. Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for Self2, by Country Standard Country N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum Alpha Brazil 79 76.8 8.3 50 97 .85 Ecuador 41 77.7 7.3 56 92 .81 Venezuela 34 78.4 8.6 59 92 .85 Paraguay 23 71.7 8.5 52 85 .84 Uruguay 23 77.5 9.0 60 95 .86 Spanish- Speakers 121 76.7 8.5 52 95 .85 Total 200 76.8 8.4 50 97 .84 64 The First Measure of Student Adjustment in the U.S. The 60-item Measure of Student Adjustment (ADJl) proved to be a reliable measure as well (Alpha=.92, n=227) for the total sample. When the six subscales were combined into a 38—item adjustment scale (ADJlA), the coefficient alpha was .90 (n=228). The results obtained from ADJl are presented in Table 4.6, which summarizes the data for the entire sample, and also by country. Table 4.6. Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for ADJl, by Country Standard Country N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum Alpha Brazil 91 56.8 34.4 2 152 .91 Ecuador 47 42.3 28.6 5 143 .92 Venezuela 36 54.4 36.2 0 146 .92 Paraguay 28 37.9 28.9 2 145 .93 Uruguay 25 41.6 23.8 3 91 .87 Spanish- Speakers 136 41.2 28.4 0 146 .91 Total 227 47.5 31.8 0 152 .92 The individual subscales derived from the total adjustment measure proved reliable. Descriptive statistics and standardized item alphas for each of the subscales are presented in Table 4.7. 65 Table 4.7. Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for the Six Subscales of ADJl Sub- Standard Maximum/of scale N Mean Deviation Minimum a possible Alpha Educ 228 4.8 5.1 0 29/35 .69 Host 229 3.4 4.8 0 23/25 .80 Engl 229 9.9 7.2 0 28/30 .86 Pers 229 4.5 4.9 0 25/25 .69 Socl 228 3.4 4.4 0 28/30 .73 Prob 228 8.8 7.8 0 39/45 .80 ADJlA 228 .90 The Second Measure of Students' Adjustment in the U.S. (ADJ2) The second measure of student adjustment (ADJ2) revealed interesting results. The measure proved to be reliable for the total sample (Alpha = .91, n=154). The 38—item scale (ADJZA) yielded a coefficient alpha of .88 (n=154). As presented in Table 4.2, scores on ADJl and ADJ2 were highly correlated (r=.63, p=.001). The results obtained from ADJ2 and ADJ2A are presented in Table 4.8, which summarizes the data by country, as well as for the entire sample. Country Brazil Ecuador Venezuela Paraguay Uruguay Spanish- Speakers Total Table 4.8. N 59 28 28 22 17 95 154 Mean 62 62 54 54 48. NUT-hNJ: 55.6 58.2 Standard Deviation 41.0 32.0 36.2 43.3 34.4 36.3 33.2 66 Minimum ._- CDNO‘DA N Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for ADJ2, by Country Maximum 193 139 168 182 109 182 193 Alpha .91 .87 .91 .94 .89 .90 .91 The six subscales of ADJ2 also proved to be reliable measures. Table 4.9 presents a breakdown of the results obtained from the six subscales for the entire sample. Alphas for the Six Subscales of ADJ2 Table 4.9. Subscale N Mean Educ 206 5.9 Host 201 4.2 Engl 209 9.7 Pers 213 4.9 Socl 180 3.8 Prob 210 9.1 ADJ2A 160 38.0 Standard Deviation C‘QU‘hxlbO‘ . ...o. Luxn—‘qqmo N Minimum 0 O 0 0 O 0 0 Maximum/of a possible 28/35 21/25 29/30 21/25 24/30 33/45 150/190 Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alpha 67 The Relationship Between Self—Concept and Adjustment As indicated by Table 4.2, the scores on both measures of self-concept (Selfl and Self2) were correlated with the scores on both total adjustment scales (ADJl and ADJ2), and with the 38eitem scales (ADJlA and ADJ2A), such that those with high self-concepts disclosed fewer and less severe adjustment problems. Though significant correlations were found between scores on the measures of self-concept and adjustment measured at all intervals, stronger correlations existed between concurrent measures of self-concept and adjustment. The adjustment measure subscales (Educ, Host, Engl, Pers, Socl, Prob), all correlated significantly with the three measures of self—concept (Self, Selfl, Self2 - See Table 4.10). In general, as with the total adjustment measures, the correlations were stronger between the subscales and the concurrent self-concept measure. Analyses of variance were performed over the total sample to determine the relationship between sex and age on self—concept and adjustment. A 2(Sex) X 5(Age) analysis revealed no significant main effects or interactions on either the self—concept or the adjustment measures over the entire sample. This lack of effect suggests that the scales were not biased by sex differences or by variations in the age range employed in this study. 68 Table 4.10. Correlations between ADJ Subscales and the Self, Selfl, and Self2 Instruments ADJI Educl Hostl Engll Persl Socll Probl ADJlA Self —.14** —.13** -.12** —.05 —.16** -.21* -.20* Selfl -.20** -.25* —.27* -.13** —.30* —.35* -.38* Self2 —.22* -.18** -.l9** —.10 -.l7** -.27* —.29* ADJ2 Educ2 Host2 Enng PersZ Soc12 Prob2 ADJZA Self -.18** -.04 —.10 .11 —.10 -.13** —.12 Selfl —.25* -.10 —.19** .05 -.16** -.15** —.23** Self2 -.27* -.11 -.29* .008 -.20** —.26* —.30* *p=.001 **<.05 n>124 The Host Family Measure and its Relation to Self-Concept and Adjustment The seven-item Host Family Measure proved to be a highly reliable scale over the entire sample (Alpha=.87, n=185). The mean score on the scale was 28.1 and the standard deviation was 5.6. A minimum score of 8 and a maximum score of 35 were obtained. Table 4.11 presents a breakdown of the results obtained on the Host Family Measure. Table 4.11. Descriptive Statistics and Standardized Item Alphas for the Host Family Measure Standard Country N Mean Deviation Minimum Maximum Alpha Brazil 64 27.7 5.8 8 35 .89 Ecuador 39 27.8 5.5 9 35 .88 Venezuela 36 28.6 6.1 14 35 .88 Paraguay 22 27.1 5.4 16 35 .82 Uruguay 24 29.8 4.3 20 35 .86 Spanish- Speakers 121 28.3 5.5 9 35 .87 Total 185 28.1 5.6 8 35 .87 Scores on the measure did correlate significantly with scores on Selfl, Self2, and ADJl (r=.13, n=171, p=.05; r=.14, n=156, p=.04; and r=.13, n=174, p=.05, respectively). The scores did not correlate with either pre—departure self—concept (Self) or with the second measure of adjustment in the U.S. (ADJ2) The Host Family Measure correlated significantly with scores on the 38-item ADJs (ADJlA and ADJ2A — r=—.13, n=175, p=.04 and r=—.l4, n=125, p=.06, respectively). When each of the six subscales of ADJ were correlated with the Host Family Measure, highly significant results were obtained between the Host Family Measure and the Host subscale at both measurement intervals (r=-.17, n=176, p=.01 and r=-.26, n=155, p=.001, respectively). A significant correlation existed between scores on the Host Family Measure and scores on the Engl subscale (r=-.13, n=176, p=.04). 70 Correlations were performed between the individual items of the HF scale and all of the self-concept and adjustment measures. Significant correlations were found between the host family's overall impression of the exchange student and Self2 (r=.13, n=165, p=.05), the host family's report of how well the student adjusted to life in the U.S. and Self2 (r=.15, n=167, p=.02), and whether the host family would want to have the exchange student with them for a longer period of time and Self2 (R=.13, n=170, p=.05). ADJI was significantly correlated with the host family's impression of how well the student adjusted as a member of the family (r=.14, n=186, p=.03) and whether the host family would want to have the exchange student with them for a longer period of time (r=.12, n=187, p=.05). The General Information Questionnaire The General Information Questionnaire (GIQ) provided valuable information about the students in the sample, especially regarding their natural families. Of all the students for whom complete data were gathered, 82% had living mothers and 81% had fathers who were alive. Seventy—two percent lived with both natural parents, 4% lived with a natural parent and a step-parent, and 8% lived With a single parent. The average number of brothers was .93 (standard deviation = 1.1); the average number of sisters was 1.4 (standard deviation = 1.1). Sixteen percent of the sample were smokers, though 8% only smoked on rare occasions. Fifty—seven percent were Catholic, 7.2% Protestant, 6% practiced other religions, .8% did not practice any religion, and 29% 71 of the subjects did not report. Frequency of religious practice was as follows: 23% practiced frequently, 23% practiced occasionally, 15% practiced rarely, and 20% never practiced. The average student traveled outside the home country at least once prior to the exchange program; 30% actually lived outside the home country before. Twenty—four percent of the students' families had hosted AFS students before their sojourn, while 37% of the students had siblings who had participated in an AFS experience prior to theirs. The self-report of language ability revealed the results presented in Table 4.12. Table 4.12. Self-Report of Language Ability Number of Languages 1 2 3 >3 Read 19% 26% 5% 2% Write 43% 26% 4% 1% Speak 36% 28% 14% 1% Understand 22% 24% 8% 2% The self—report of grades while in the U.S. yielded the following results: 28% reported receiving grades of "mostly A," 36% received "mostly B," 12% received "mostly C," .4% reported "mostly D" grades, and .4% reported grades of "mostly F". Students' reports of grades did not correlate significantly with any of the self—concept or adjustment measures. This item did correlate significantly with the host family's 72 estimation of how well the student adjusted to school in the U.S. (r=.20, n=165, p=.005) and the host family's report of the student's success in school (r=.26, n=164, p=.001). When asked to rate their experience in the U.S., 39% rated it as excellent, 26% as very good, 13% as satisfactory or average, 1% as poor, .4% as very bad. If given the oppOrtunity to spend another year as an AFS student living abroad, 60% reported that they would, while 15% would not (25% did not report). A significant positive correlation existed between these two items (r=.54, n=201, p=.001). Correlations performed on the items of the GIQ with self—concept and adjustment measures yielded some intriguing findings. Self and Selfl were correlated with whether the natural mother was living, such that those students with living natural mothers exhibited lower initial self-concepts (r=.21, n=210, p=.001 and r=.18, n=198, p=.005, respectively). Scores on Self2 correlated with whether or not the natural father was alive (r=.16, n=191, p=.02) such that those with living natural fathers exhibited higher self—concepts. The number of brothers reported correlated significantly with the first measure of adjustment administered in the U.S. (and the 38—item ADJlA scale, as well) (r=.17, n=188, p=.01) such that those students with a greater number of natural brothers disclosed more, and more severe, adjustment problems. The frequency of religious practice was negatively correlated with self—concept (Self, Selfl, and Self2), i.e., the more frequently one practiced religion, the lower the self—concept (r=—.18, n=197, p=.005; 73 r=—.14, n=187, p=.03; and r=-.14, n=181, p=.03, respectively). In addition, the frequency of religious practice correlated negatively with the initial measure of adjustment (ADJl and ADJlA) such that those who practiced more frequently disclosed more and more severe adjustment problems (r=.17, n=190, p=.01 and r=.14, n=191, p=.03). The number of times that a student had lived outside the home country prior to the exchange experience correlated significantly with scores on the first measure of student adjustment (ADJl - r=.13, n=196, p=.03) such that those who had lived outside their country more times reported fewer and less severe adjustment problems. No significant correlations existed between adjustment scores and the extent to which students had traveled outside their country previously. The number of languages that students reported they could read and understand correlated significantly with ADJI and ADJIA (Read - r=.15, n=180, p=.02 and r=.12, n=181, p=.05, respectively; Understand — r=.14, n=180, p=.03 and r=.13, n=181, p=.04, respectively) such that the greater the number of languages, the more severe were the adjustment problems. The number of languages a student could write correlated significantly with Self and Selfl (r=.14, n=180, p=.02 and r=.13, n=181, p=.03, respectively). No significant correlations existed between the number of languages spoken and any of the self-concept or adjustment measures. The ratings that the students gave their AFS experience correlated significantly with scores on the adjustment measures. The correlations were stronger with the second measure of adjustment, which was 74 concurrently with the GIQ (ADJl - r=.15, n=192, p=.02; ADJlA - r=.11, n=193, p=.06; ADJ2 - r=.27, n=142, p=.001; ADJ2A - r=.25, n=148, p=.001). Those students who rated their experience as excellent disclosed fewer and less severe adjustment problems than those who rated their experience as very bad. A most interesting finding was that no significant correlation existed between whether a student, if given the opportunity, would want to spend another year as an AFS student living abroad, and the number and severity of adjustment problems. Chapter 5 Discussion Self—Concept and Adjustment The focus of this research was the relationship between the self-concept and the personal, social, and academic adjustment of international exchange students in the U.S. The major hypothesis tested was that international students who had been shown to have high self—concepts prior to leaving their home countries would adjust better to life in the U.S. than those students with low initial self-concepts. The results of this study confirmed this expectation, as indicated by the significant correlations between pre—departure self—concept (Self) and the measures of adjustment completed by the students during their sojourn (p=.001). Students whose initial self—concept measures were high expressed fewer, and less severe, adjustment problems than those whose initial self—concepts were not as high. Klein et al.'s (1971) hypothesis that self-esteem is an essential factor in determining the social adaptation of foreign students is supported by these results. Since the two measures of self~concept completed during the exchange visit (Selfl and Self2) correlated significantly with the pre—departure measure (r=.69, p=.001 and r=.61, p=.001, respectively), it is no surprise that these measures also correlated significantly with the measures of adjustment (p=.001). The high correlations among the measures of self-concept over time suggest that the self is a fairly 76 raermanent and stable organization. This is consistent with both Lewin's (1935) and Lecky's (1945) views that the self is a central, fairly 13ermanent, and stable organization that provides consistency to personality. Lecky's definition of the self-concept — "an organization of values that are consistent with one another," involving a dynamic process of continuous assimilation of new beliefs, and the change and/or rejection of old ones - helps explain these phenomena. Interestingly, the concurrent measures of self-concept and adjustment yielded stronger correlation coefficients than did measures of self—concept and adjustment at different times. The "stable" characteristic of the self (Epstein, 1973) is evident too when viewing the obtained results. The dispersion of the scores over time remained fairly consistent; the minimum scores ranged from 43 to 50, the maximum scores ranged from 93 to 97, and the standard deviations ranged from 7.4 to 8.4. This concurs with the findings of Balester (1956), Roth (1959), and Coopersmith (1967), all of whom theorized that though the self is open to change, there is a resistance to such change and a striving for consistency. The balance of the maintenance of inner harmony with the maintenance of harmony with the environment, discussed by Lecky (1945), comes to mind: individuals must keep their interpretations consistent with their experiences, but to maintain their individuality, they must organize these interpretations into a subjective system that is internally consistent. Hence, successful adjustment might raise an individual's self—concept, but not so much as to be inconsistent with the individual's preconceptions of 77 Iiim or herself. Looking at the self—concept measure over time, it can be seen that 'the self-concept does display a "dynamic" characteristic as well — the mean score rose from 72.29 (pre—departure) to 73.32 (Selfl), and ultimately to 76.8 (Self2) for the entire sample. It can be inferred that in terms of self—concept the exchange experience was a valuable one. The question arises, however, was the increase in self—concept associated with successful adjustment? If so, this research could be viewed as supporting the contention of LaBenne and Greene (1969) that the way in which an individual views the self is influenced by success and failure; those with fewer and less severe adjustment problems would be more likely to develop positive attitudes about themselves. The correlations obtained between the change in the self-concept score and the adjustment measure at both measurement periods (within U. S.) can be interpreted as supporting this hypothesis. The correlations of the difference between Selfl and Self with ADJl (r=.25, p<.001) and between Self2-Selfl and ADJ2 (r=.27, p<.001) were both statistically significant, and suggest that changes in the self—concept over time are clearly related to adjustment status. It is important to note that these relationships are not merely a reflection of the initial self-concept score. A correlational analysis holding Self constant revealed that the partial Selfl-ADJI correlation (r'=.33, p<.001) and the partial Self2-ADJ2 correlation (r'=.28, p<.001) were both statistically significant. Thus, changes occurring in one or another of these (self-concept or adjustment) variables were associated 78 vvith changes in the other, and this occurred independently of the :initial level of self—concept. According to La Benne and Greene, "A person with a weak self-concept...is more likely to have a narrowed perceptual field" that, in effect, limits the data available for intelligent, efficient decision—making and action — "...Instead of broadening his fund of knowledge and skills, such a person is kept busy defending his already existing perceptual organizations." The individual with a positive self-concept has experienced acceptance and success quite regularly, and therefore, approaches situations with the expectation of success. "The dynamics of a positive expectation tend to produce the apprOpriate behavior and bring about the expectation" (1969, p.19). The adjustment measure scores were intriguing as well. The minimum and maximum scores on the 60-item measure rose over time, as did the means (47.5 vs. 58.2) indicating that students experienced more, and more severe, adjustment problems over time. This finding can be explained in terms of Lysgaard's U—Curve Hypothesis in which, immediately upon arrival, students participating in an international exchange program such as the AFS program would be undergoing a "high" period - characterized by a friendly reception by host family members and classmates, and the wonder of all that is new. Then, when the novelty fades and the rigor of everyday routine prevails, new problems emerge (or possibly - existing ones may become more preponderant). The rise in the number and severity of adjustment problems reported later on in the sojourn could be due to the fact that the energy the 79 sstudent expended early in the experience in the new and foreign (environment is no longer necessary. Thus, the student whose immediate :survival needs are met would have the time and the ability to dwell on liigher order needs (i.e., social relations, academic achievement, etc.). This finding is curious since positive self—concept correlated significantly with the report of fewer and less severe adjustment problems, and self-concept scores became more positive over time; thus, it would be expected that fewer and less severe adjustment problems would be experienced later in the stay. Hawes and Kealey (1979) described the effective cross-cultural individual as one who was satisfied with the new environment, participated in enjoyable activities, interacted with nationals, had few complaints about conditibns, nationals, or the host culture, etc. This was found to be true in this research too. Scores on the subscales containing items relevant to Hawes' and Kealey's definition (Prob and Socl) correlated highly with the overall adjustment scores of the students (r=.79, p=.001 and r=.68, p=.001, respectively), indicating that these types of interactions played a major role in the overall adjustment of the students. Though there were significant correlations between self—concept and adjustment, it has yet to be determined unequivocally whether self-concept influences adjustment or if the reverse is true. However, the longitudinal nature of the self-concept and adjustment measures lends itself to cross-lagged panel analysis, and this technique was employed in the attempt to determine, at least in a preliminary sense, 80 ishe variable that might be causally predominant. Accordingly, the self-concept and adjustment data were arranged in a cross-lagged panel design, as illustrated in Figure 5.1. The logic of this design is relatively straightforward (see Crano, Kenny, & Campbell, 1972; Crano, 1974): If self-concept operates as a cause of later adjustment, but the opposite is not the case, then early self-concept should "predict" later adjustment, but the early adjustment—-later self—concept measure should not be large. On the other hand, if adjustment "causes" self-concept, then the early adjustment-—1ater self—concept correlation should significantly exceed the early self-concept—-later adjustment measure. As shown in Figure 5.1, however, while both cross-lagged correlations were statistically significant (p<.001), neither significantly exceeded the other. Thus, this analysis does not support a hypothesis of the causal preponderance of one of these variables over the other. Figure 5.1 Cross-lagged Panel Illustration of the Self—Concept/Adjustment Relationship .29 ADJl .63 —————————— ADJ2 80 the variable that might be causally predominant. Accordingly, the self—concept and adjustment data were arranged in a cross—lagged panel design, as illustrated in Figure 5.1. The logic of this design is relatively straightforward (see Crano, Kenny, & Campbell, 1972; Crano, 1974): If self-concept operates as a cause of later adjustment, but the opposite is not the case, then early self—concept should "predict" later adjustment, but the early adjustment——later self—concept measure should not be large. On the other hand, if adjustment "causes" self—concept, then the early adjustment——later self—concept correlation should significantly exceed the early self-concept——later adjustment measure. As shown in Figure 5.1, however, while both cross-lagged correlations were statistically significant (p<.001), neither significantly exceeded the other. Thus, this analysis does not support a hypothesis of the causal preponderance of one of these variables over the other. Figure 5.1 Cross-lagged Panel Illustration of the Self—Concept/Adjustment Relationship Selfl .70 Self2 .27 .37 .31 .29 ADJl .63 ADJ2 81 Self-Concept and Academic Adjustment A subsidiary hypothesis that those students with high initial self-concepts would report better academic achievement while in the U.S. than their counterparts with lower self-concepts was tested. The relationship between self-concept and academic success so prevalent in the literature (see Purkey, 1970, Brookover, 1967, Sarbin, 1955, etc.) did not occur in this instance. Students' reports of their grades did not correlate significantly with pre-departure self—concept, nor with self-concept measured later on. Additionally, correlations performed Ibetween the host family's appraisals of the students' grades and adjustment to school in the U.S. did not correlate significantly with any of the self—concept measures. However, the host family appraisals correlated significantly with the students' reports of their own grades (r=.26, p=.001 and r=.20, p=.005, respectively). These correlations provide some evidence for the validity of students' self-reports of grades. Since access to school records was not obtained, a more direct check of these reports could not be made. Interestingly, the measures of self-concept did correlate significantly with the score on the Educ subscale of both ADJl and ADJ2 (p<.05). Students with high self-concepts expressed fewer and less severe adjustment problems relevant to academics in the U.S. These results reflected the students' perceptions of academic success, whereas their reported grades reflected their actual achievement. The lack of correlation between good grades (success) in school and self-concept, in 82 light of the significant correlation between and self—concept and the number and severity of academic adjustment problems reported, could be due to the fact that these students were studying outside their home countries, using a language of instruction other than their native Spanish or Portuguese. Many of the students were older (17 and 18) and, if they had not already completed high school in their own countries, were close to doing so. This potential "apathy" about school could explain this result. In addition, the academic aspect of the exchange program might have been a less salient component for these students than the host family or cultural experience, and this attitude, too, could have influenced the observed relationships. The Self-Concept and Host Family Relationships As predicted, those students with high initial self-concepts did report fewer and less severe adjustment problems regarding interactions with their host families, as measured by the correlation between Self and the Hostl subscale (r=-.13, p<.05). The self-concept measure completed concurrently with Hostl yielded a stronger correlation coefficient (r=—.25, p=.001). No significant relationship existed between pre—departure self-concept scores and scores on Host2. In addition, no significant results were obtained when any of the self—concept measures were correlated with the host family's impression of how well the student adjusted as a member of the family, though the family's impression correlated significantly with ADJl. This fact that a significant correlation exists between the 83 self—concept measures and the Host subscale completed early in the student's sojourn leads one to believe that perhaps, the host family relationship is established, and if necessary reconciled, early in the year. If an adjustment problem with the family were to occur, it is hoped that the problem would arise early on and be remedied soon thereafter to allow for a fulfilling experience for both the student and the host family. According to Epstein (1973), the self—concept is composed of various empirical selves whose dynamic organization is based upon individual experience, the most important type of which is social interaction with significant others, which provides increasing amounts of information that the self-concept must assimilate. Relevant to Epstein's definition are the correlations between the host families' overall impressions of their exchange students and students' scores on Self, Selfl, and Self2. No significant correlations were found between predeparture (Pre-host family) self-concept scores (Self) and the families' overall impressions. However, at the two measurement intervals during the host family stay, significant correlations were discovered (r=.12, p=.06 and r=.13, p=.05). The significant correlations between scores on the HF scale and the self-concept measures completed in the U.S. (p<.05) also suggest that a person's self-impression is at least partially determined by what others believe about him or her. Is the self—concept learned as Manis (1955) reports, as is any other set of attitudes, beliefs, or opinions regarding other people and objects? If so, then perhaps interactions 84 with a host family (both favorable and unfavorable) influenced to some degree the way in which a student ultimately perceived the self. The Relationship Between Adjustment, Sex, and Age Pruitt (1978), performing research on a sample of postsecondary African students, demonstrated that males adjusted better than females. Age also was a significant factor contributing to adjustment. In this research effort, no significant relationships existed between sex, age, and self-concept. The finding regarding age supports Hansel (1980), who found no significant differences between sophomores and older students in the number of difficulties encountered during a summer program. As neither the measure of self-concept nor the measure of adjustment were shown to be biased by sex and age differences, other explanations for the differences in the level of adjustments must be sought. Religious Practice Pruitt (1978) also observed that the maintenance of religious commitment seemed to help students adjust. The results presented above indicate that students who practiced their religion more frequently had lower self-concept scores, and reported more, and more severe, adjustment problems on the first measure of adjustment. This suggests that those who are less sure of themselves and are threatened by that which is new and unfamiliar would seek outside support from a "familiar" organization. In a sample in which 60% of the subjects reported that they actively practiced their religion, the church would be a natural 85 place to seek help for problems. In addition, given the lack of a strong social support system, especially at the time of the ADJl measure, the church might have represented not only the institution of choice (for those seeking help), but perhaps the only viable option available to the students. The Natural Family The GIQ provided valuable information about the family status of the students, some of which correlated significantly with the measures of student adjustment. Grove and Hansel (1981) looked at the role of social status in the success of exchange student placements, and found no evidence to suggest that a student's social status alone was related to success. The findings presented above support this conclusion by demonstrating that neither mother's nor father's occupational status correlated significantly with students' general adjustment, or to adjustment within the host family. However, the correlation between the number of brothers and adjustment revealed that the students having more natural brothers experienced more, and more severe, adjustment problems. The correlation between the number of sisters and adjustment was not statistically significant. No other significant relationships between any of the other natural family variables and adjustment were found. The brother/adjustment relationship is difficult to explain given the limited information available about these siblings. It could be that students with many brothers were placed in host families that were quite 86 dissimilar to their natural families, or that the lack of an extended sibling family structure posed adjustment problems for those accustomed to such arrangements. Unfortunately, speculations of this sort cannot be tested since data relevant to the number of host family siblings were not collected. An interesting set of relationships between family members and self-concept did exist, but these too are difficult to explain given the limited amount of information available. Those students whose mothers were alive scored lower on both the pre—departure measure of self—concept and the first measure of self-concept completed in the U.S. than those whose mothers were deceased. This was contrary to the relationship between father status and self—concept: those students whose fathers were alive scored higher on the second measure of self-concept. Prior Experience Those students who actually had lived outside their own country prior to participating in the exchange experience reported experiencing fewer, and less severe, adjustment problems than those who had not. In addition, those whose foreign living experiences were more frequent adjusted better. No significant correlations were found between adjustment and mere travel outside one's home country, no matter how frequent. This suggests that the AFS international exchange experience, in which a student lives with a host family in a foreign country for a lengthy period of time, is unique —- at least in terms of how one 87 adjusts to the demands of the experience. The final set of results to be discussed relates to how students rated their experience in the U.S. Students who rated their experience as excellent reported fewer, and less severe, adjustment problems at both measurement intervals -~ the correlation between students' ratings of their experience and adjustment was statistically significant at both ADJI and ADJ2 measurement periods (r=.15, p<.02, r=.27, p<.001, respectively). In addition, students' ratings of their experience, correlated highly (r=.54, p<.001) with their attitudes regarding whether or not they would like to spend another year abroad as an AFS student. Sixty percent of the reporting sample reported a willingness to. participate again, while only 15% declined. More than 98% of all those responding to the GIQ rated their AFS experience as "satisfactory" or better. It is conceivable that a more even distribution of "satisfaction" scores would have resulted in an even stronger adjustment/experience relationship. Implications for Application The major implication of this study is that measuring students' self—concepts prior to their participation in an international exchange experience such as AFS could provide valuable information regarding the likelihood that they will adjust to the personal, social, and academic aspects of the foreign living experience. This is not to say that students with lower self-concepts should not be considered for such programs, but rather that measures should be taken to help enhance the 88 self—concepts of these students prior to their departure, and to provide them with special assistance during their international sojourn. Thus, an organization sponsoring such cross-cultural programs could consider the self-concept variable when formulating student selection criteria, when planning and implementing orientation programs (both pre—departure and post-arrival), and when providing necessary counseling to students experiencing adjustment problems. In addition, host families could be made aware of the importance of the self-concept variable to the adjustment of their exchange students. They could be exposed to means (e.g., exercises and behaviors) by which they could help enhance the student's self-concept, and thereby maximize the chances of a successful interaction. Cross-cultural counselors could be instructed about of the nature of the relationship between self-concept and adjustment, a relationship that potentially could be overlooked in the counseling situation. Many counselors tend to dwell on the traditional, non—integrated variables that have been implicated so often as influencing cross-cultural -— language differences, unfamiliarity with social cues, "culture shock," homesickness, etc. Problems such as these, however, may represent only the tip of the iceberg, while underlying social psychological variables that have a massive influence on adjustment may be lurking beneath the surface. With this knowledge, counselors could evaluate referred students along the self-concept dimension to gain better insight into their problems. Perhaps less global measures of self—concept than the Revised Janis-Field Scale could be employed — ones that measure specific 89 components of the self-concept - to pinpoint exactly wherein lie the problems. In this way, specific strategies could be developed to ameliorate specific adjustment problems that the exchange student might be expected to experience. Limitations The major limitation of this study is that the design is correlational, hence, no causal statements may be made with regard to the variables in question. We know that the measures of self-concept and adjustment are related such that those Who score high on the self-concept measure report fewer, and less severe, adjustment problems, but we cannot state specifically that because an individual's pre-departure self—concept is high, he or she will adjust better than an individual with a low self-concept measure. In addition, we cannot make a causal statement regarding the changes in an individual's self—concept over time, based upon the adjustment problems encountered, though we know that these two variables are related. Nevertheless, the establishment of a significant association between these variables is valuable in and of itself (a) to the extent that it helps us to understand the complicated factors that influence cross—cultural adjustment, and (b) if it stimulates further empirical research into these important adjustment processes. If this work has accomplished either of these desiderata, the goals of this research effort have been achieved. APPENDI CES .5 90 Appendix A REVISED JANIS-FIELD SCALE (Eagly, 1967) How often do you have the feeling that there is nothing you can do well? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 How often do you feel that you have handled yourself well at a social gathering? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 3 4 5 When you have to talk in front of a class or a group of people your own age, how worried do you usually feel? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never worried worried worried worried worried I 2 3 4 5 How often do you have the feeling that you can do everything well? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 How often do you worry about whether other people like to be with you? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 3 4 5 How often do you feel that you are a successful person? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 How often do you feel self—conscious? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 When you talk in front of a class or group of people your own age, how pleased are you with your performance? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never pleased pleased pleased pleased pleased 1 2 3 4 5 How often are you troubled with shyness? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. l8. 19. 20. 91 How comfortable are you when starting a conversation with people whom you do not know? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never 1 2 3 4 5 How often do you feel inferior to most of the people you know? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 How confident are you that your success in your future career is assured? ’ Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never 1 2 3 4 5 Do you ever think that you are a worthless individual? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 When you speak in a class discussion, how sure of yourself do you feel? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never sure sure sure sure sure 1 2 3 4 5 How much do you worry about how well you get along with other people? Very Fairly Somewhat little Not at much much much bit all 1 2 3 ' 4 5 How sure of yourself do you feel when among strangers? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never sure sure sure sure sure 1 2 3 4 5 How often do you feel that you dislike yourself? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 How confident do you feel that some day the people you know will look up to you and respect you? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never 1 2 3 4 5 Do you ever feel so discouraged with yourself that you wonder whether anything is worthwhile? Very Fairly Sometimes Once in a Practically often often great while never 1 2 3 4 5 In general, how confident do you feel about your abilities? Very Fairly Somewhat Rarely Never 1 2 3 4 5 10. ll. 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 92 Appendix B Portuguese Translation of the Revised Janis-Field Scale Quantas vezes voce tem a sensacao que nao pode fazer nada direito? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Quantas vezes voce se sentiu bem sucedido numa reuniao social? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Quando tem que falar diante de uma aula ou diante de um grupo de pessoas de sua mesma idade, em geral, o quanto fica preocupado? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Quantas vezes voce tem a sensacao que pode fazer bem qualquer coisa? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca O quanto voce se preocupa das pessoas gostarem de estar com voce? Muitissimo Muito .Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Quantas vezes voce se sente uma pessoa de sucesso? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Quantas vezes voce se sente encabulado? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Quando fala diante de uma aula ou diante de um grupo de pessoas de sua mesma idade, o quanto satisfeito fica com a sua apresentacao? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Quantas vezes voce se incomioa por causa de sua propria timidez? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As—vezes Raramente Quase nunca Como voce se sente quando comeca a falar com um desconhecido? Muito bem Bem Mais ou menos Mal Muito mal Quantas vezes voce se sente inferior a maioria das pessoas que conhece? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Que confianca vice tem de que voce vai ter sucesso na sua futura carreira? Voce alguma vez pensou que nao valia nada? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Quando esta numa discussao de aula, que confianca tem em 51 mesmo? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco O quanto voce se preocupa em dar-se bem com as outras pessoas? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Quanta confianca voce sente em si proprio quando esta entre desconhecidos? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco 17. 18. 19. 20. 93 Que confianca voce tem em voce mesmo de que algum dia, as pessoas que o conhecem irao admire-lo e respeita-lo? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco Quantas vezes voce sente que nao gosta de 51 mesmo? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Voce alguma vez se sentiu tao desiludido consigo mesmo que se perguntou se existe alguma coisa na vida que vale a pena? Muitas vezes Com frequencia As vezes Raramente Quase nunca Em geral, quanto voce confia em suas proprias capacidades? Muitissimo Muito Mais ou menos Um pouco Muito pouco 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. 94 Appendix C Spanish Translation of the Revised Janis—Field Scale Cuantas veces se siente Ud. como si no pudiera hacer nada bien? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuantas veces se siente Ud. que se ha desenvuelto correctamente en una reunion social? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuando tiene que hablar ante una clase o ante un grupo de personas de su misma edad, por 10 general, cuanta se preocupa Ud.? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuantas veces se siente Ud. como si pudiera hacer bien cualquier cosa? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuantas veces se preocupa por si la gente le agrada estar con Ud. o no? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuantas veces siente que es Ud. un individuo que ha triunfado? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuantas veces se siente Ud. cohibido? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuando habla ante una clase o ante un grupo de personas de su misma edad, cuan satisfecho queda Ud. con su presentacion? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuantas veces 1e incomoda su propria timidez? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuan a gusto se siente Ud. al conversar con un desconocido? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuantas veces se siente Ud. inferior a la mayoria de la gente que conoce? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Cuan seguro esta Ud. de que tiene el exito asegurado en su futura carrera? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Ha pensado Ud. alguna vez que no vale nada? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Al hablar en una discussion de clase, cuan seguro de si mismo se encuentra Ud.? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuanto le preocupa a Ud. el llevarse bien con la gente? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 95 Cuan seguro de si mismo se siente Ud. entre desconocidos? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuan seguro se siente Ud. de que la gente que lo conoce lo admirara y lo respetara algun dia? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Cuantas veces siente Ud. que no gusta de 51 mismo? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca Se ha sentido alguna vez tan desilusionado consigo mismo que se haya preguntado si hay algo en la vida que valga la pena? Muy a menudo Con frecuencia A veces Raramente Casi nunca En general, cuanto confia Ud. en sus proprias aptitudes? Muchisimo Mucho Mas o menos Un poco Muy poco Pl. APPENDIX D INSTRUCTIONS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE QUESTIONNAIRE The questions that follow describe situations that may be troubling or worrying you. As you read each question, you must decide if the situ- ation described there is one that troubles you at all (even just a little bitl). If it is a situation that troubles you, put an "X" next to the word "Yes." If it does not trouble you at all, put an "X" next to the word "No." If you answered "No,' go on to the next question. If you answered "Yes” to the first part of a question, then circle the word or phrase that best describes how much you are troubled by the situation described (Very much, Much, Some, A little bit, Hardly at all). For example: If a question were: I am troubled because my parents in my home country do not write to me often: Yes: No: If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all You would proceed in the following way: a. If your parents write often, you would put an "X" next to "No." b. If your parents do not write often, but this does not trouble you at all, you would also put an "X" next to "No." c. If your parents do not write often, and you wish they would, you would put an "X" next to "Yes," indicating that this troubles you. You would then circle the word or phrase that best describes how much you are bothered that yOur parents do not write often (Very much, Much, Some, A little bit, Hardly at all). Now, go to Question 1 on the English Language Questionnaire and answer it, following the instructions above. Complete each question in the same manner. PLEASE DO NOT LEAVE ANY QUESTION UNANSWERED! This is very important, since an unanswered question makes it impossible for AFS to fully use the other responses on the questionnaire. Select the response for each question that most closely reflects how you feel. Again THANKS! pr Fl —_———s_w_ ____, ”I“ M" _ l. 97 The Measure of Student Adjustment (ADJ) I am troubled because I hear unfavorable remarks about my home country: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all I am troubled by the concept of being a "foreigner": Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The idea that I may become too much like a North American troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling that I never should have participated in an AFS experience troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The lack of availability of personal—soc1al counseling troubles me; Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My inability to maintain good relationships with people in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The difference between the food of the U.S. and the food.of my home country troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Differences between housing and living conditions in the U.S. and in my home country trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all 10. ll. 12. 13. 14. 15. l6. 17. 18. 19. 98 Differences between my physical appearance and the appearance of people in the U.S. trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Differences between religious practices in the U.S. and religious practices in my home country trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Concern about my own religious practices in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My difficulties in speaking English trouble me: Yes _ No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The treatment I receive at social functions troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The relationship between men and women in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Being unable to concentrate on my studies troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The difference between leisure time activities of students in the U.S. and students in my home country troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Insufficient advice from my academic advisor troubles me: YeS' No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some ‘ A little bit Hardly at all Being lonely troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Difficulty in making new friends in the U.S. trOubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 99 Nervousness troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all I am troubled when I attend classes and lectures in English because I don't understand English very well: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling intellectually superior to high school students in the U.S. troubles me: ‘ Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit ' Hardly at all I am troubled when I read textbooks and novels written in English because I don't understand them well: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling uninterested in the high school I am attending in the U.S. troubles me: ' Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit . Hardly at all The dating practices of people in the U.S. trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all I am troubled by the changes that are occurring in my home country that I see on television or read about in the newspaper: Yes - No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The desire not to return to my home country troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My lack of knowledge about the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The emphasis on time and promptness in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My concerns with grades in school trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 100 Sexual customs in the U.S. trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feelings of homesickness trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling inferior of other people in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My relationship with my host parents troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My relationship with my host brothers and/or sisters troubles me: Yes No‘ Not applicable (No host brother or sister) If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Not feeling like a member of my host family troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The difficulties I have in getting along with the friends of my host brothers and/or sisters troubles me: Yes No Not applicable (No host brother or sister) If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling too shy to come out of my room to join my host family troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much - Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The way my host family treats me troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Dietary problems trouble me: ' Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Rapidly gaining or losing weight since I arrived in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. SO. 51. 101 Not being able to understand slang phrases used in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all My limited English vocabulary troubles me: Yes No . If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Problems I have when I go shopping in the U.S. trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The fact that education in the U.S. is not what I expected troubles me: Yes 1 No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much . Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Differences between the education system of the U.S. and the education system of my home country trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all The attitudes of some people in the U.S. toward foreigners trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Relationships between teachers and students in the U.S. trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Differences between personal habits and cleanliness in the U.S. and in my home country trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Not feeling at ease among groups of people troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? n Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Frequently crying or feeling depressed troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 102 The differences between weather conditions of the U.S. and my home country trouble me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling that I am under stress and tension troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Concern that my health is deteriorating troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Confusion that I have about morals in the U.S. troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Knowing that I need help with my English troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Concern about receiving assistance from AFS troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling that I would prefer to go home immediately troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Concern about readjusting to my natural family in my home country troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all Feeling very dependent upon other people troubles me: Yes No If yes, how troubled are you? Very much Much Some A little bit Hardly at all APPENDIX E SP NISH-LANGUAGE DIRECTIONS FOR ADMINISTERING SUELLEN CRANO'S QUESTIONNAIRE Primeramente, deseo manifesto a Ud. mis agradecimientos por su disposicion en colaborar con la presente investigation, aplicando e1 cuestionario. Debo manifestarle que, por motivos de la methodologia empliada en la presente pesquisa, 1a participacion de Ud. deve reducirse a entregar a cada aluno el cuestionario indicando a ellos que las instruciones necesarias para responderlo se encuentran en las primeras paginas del mismo. En el case de que alguno de las alunos pregunte el por que tienen que responder e1 cuestionario, puede responderle diciendo que es para poder ayudar en el futuro, con mayor eficiencia, a los estudiantes de los prOgramas de intercambio. 4 u . a . Rogariale indicar a los alunos que se Sientan en libertad para responder a cada pregunta, cuidando de hacerlo con la mayor sinceridad posible. Por experiencias que hemos tenido al pasar este mismo cuestionario en otros paises, queremos prevenir a Ud. que posiblemente los alunos 1e haran preguntas en 105 items 3, 4, 7, y 18; como posiblemente en cualquier de los otros items. For la formulacion de estas items, 1a respuesta mas aconsejable es que los alunos respondan como "ellos se sienten por lo general," 0 "como ellos se sienten generalmente frente a una situacion asi." Estoy remitiendo especialmente para Ud. una copia del cuestionario en el que cada item tiene su traducion al ingles. Espero que este material pueda serle util en su mision importante de aplicar e1 cuestionario. Suellen L. Crano ADDITIONAL DIRECTIONS FROM NEAL GROVE The questionnaire itself includes directions in Spanish. These appear on the front and back of the page that includes the "Consentimiento," which the students also must sign. The students should be encouraged to read the Spanish-language directions as well as to listen to your verbal directions. The questionnaire should be administered only to Year Program students who are going to the United States. It should be administered during the pre- departure orientation session for these students. If you do not understand anything about administering the questionnaire, you should contact Suellen Crano directly well before the day you plan to administer the questionnaire. Her address and telephone number are as follows: ADDRESS PHONE NUMBER Suellen L. Crano (0512) 41-84-24 Alameda Vicente de Carvalho 20 She is usually home between Ap. 302 0900 - 0930 and 1600 - 1900. 90.000 Porto Alegre, RS, Brasil If she is not home, no one Q will answer the phone. THIS is the address to which you should return the completed questionnaires. 103 APPENDIX F Intcmational’lnmltuml [hymns Mmmnws Intcmarionuu: lnttrrulturrls lflmfiftiikflim Bop-uma: lntrmdonah/Inmukumh December 3, 1982 Dear By now you should have received a packet from Suellen Crano con— taining two questionnaires and a stamped, return envelope. If you have already mailed in your response to these questionnaires, thank you. We appreciate your prompt cooperation. If you have not yet completed these questionnaires, please take a few moments to complete and return them soon. This project is part of an effort to improve our programs; your responses are confidential and will be used only for this purpose. There are only 264 students who have been asked to participate in this research, and we need complete responses from every one of you for this research to be fully success- ful. If, for some reason, you did not receive the questionnaires, or have misplaced them, please call me collect, at (212) 661-4550, exten- sion 219. I will be happy to send you another set. Your response is very important. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, W24 //1/tdz(/ Betsy Hansel, for Suellen Crano Research Department 313L215! 43rd Stnw. New York. N. Y. mun-(21.2) 661-4550- (.'uhl(': AFSWURLD. .\'.Y. 104 APPENDIX G GENERAL INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE Instructions: Please place an "X” or a check ( ) in the appropriate boxes and print brief answers to the other questions. Responses are confidential; they will be used, under the auspices of AFS International, only for Suellen Crano‘s research. 1. My name is family name first name middle name 2. My natural mother is E] living [:1 deceased. (If deceased, skip question 4.) 3. My natural father is [:1 living E] deceased. '(If deceased, skip question 4.) A . My natural parents [1 are living together [3 are separated E] are divorced. Ul 'In my home country, I live with . [:3 both natural parents [:ltwo adoptive or step—parents [:1 my natural mother and a step-father [:1 an adoptive or step- mother only [:1 my natural father and a step-mother [:1 an adoptive or step- father only [1 my natural mother only [:1 one or more adults who are not related to me either as natural m e . [:1 y natural fath r only parents or adoptive or step—parents 6. My father's occupation is 7. My mother's occupation is 8. I have natural or step— brothers: their ages are \ 9. I have natural or step~ sisters: their ages are 10. I smoke E] frequently E] occasionally [:lrarely E] never. ll 11. My religious faith is (If "none, skip question 12.) 12: I practice my religion [3 frequently E] occasionally [:1rarely [3 never. 13. Prior to becoming an AFS student, I had lived outside of my home country . [:1twice or more [3 one time [1 never. List year(s) and locations of these foreign living experiences: 14. Prior to becoming an AFS student, I had traveled outside of my home country . . [] twice or more [:3 one time E] never. List year and destination of these foreign travel experiences: 15. My natural family has hosted an AFS student [:1 twice or more [:1 once [:1 never. 16. I have natural family members who participated in an AFS program before me. 11. Besides my native language, I speak languages, read languages, under— stand languages, and/or write languages. 18. If the chance were offered to me, I [:1 would [:lwould not spend another year as an AFS student living in a country other than my own. 19. I would rate my AFS experience in the United States as . D excellent 1:] very good D satisfactory or average [:1 poor (:1 very bad. 20. I would describe by grades in my U.S. high school as [j mostly "A" [j mostly "73" D mostly "C" I: mostly "D" D mostly "I?" 105 APPENDIX H Host Family Report Host Family Name Name of Exchange Student Instructions: Please answer each of the following questions as honestly as possible. Responses are confidential; they will be used, under the auspices of AFS International, only for Suellen Crano's research. In answering the seven questions that follow, you are given a range of possible responses. PleaSe circle the response, on each question, that most accurately reflects your feelings or opinions. EXAMPLE: Suppose you were answering the following question: Would you permit your natural son/daughter to participate in an AFS program? Definitely not Probably not Maybe Probably yes Definitely yes 1 2 3 A 5 If you were certain that you would like your child to participate, you would circle the "S" on the scale provided below the question. On the other hand, if you definitely would not want your child to participate, you would circle the "1". If you were unsure. you would circle the "3". Etc. Now, with this example in mind. please answer the following questions. 1. In general, what is your family's overall impression of your exchange student? Very negative Negative So-So Positive Very positive 1 2 3 u 5 2. In general, how well did the student adjust as a member of your family? Very poorly Poorly So-So Well Very well 1 2 3 u S 3. How well did your exchange student adjust to life in the U.S.? Very poorly Poorly So—So Well Very well 1 2 3 u 5 4. How well did the student adjust to school in the U.S.? Very poorly Poorly So-So Well Very well 1 2 3 A 5 106 Describe the student's grades in school. Very Poor Poor So—So Good Very good 1 2 3 4 5 If you were offered the opportunity to keep the student as an exchange visitor for a longer period of time, would you? Definitely not Probably not Maybe Probably yes Definitely yes 1 2 3 ’4 5 Based on your experience with this exchange student, would you consider hosting another exchange student in the future? Definitely not Probably not Maybe Probably yes Definitely yes 1 2 3 4 5 107 APPENDIX I InmationaL’lmer-umuml Programs names Inmfionaur/Intemuhurels lflfliiltfifififltm Program mwmdomla/Inlemdtumks November 1982 Hi again! This is Suellen Crano. Remember me? At your pre-departure orientation program you filled out a questionnaire in your own lan- guage, to help AFS in a research project. You agreed to participate in this study and fill out similar questionnaires two more times during your stay in the U.S. _Now is the first of those times. Enclosed you will find two (2) questionnaires: l. The same one you completed before in your home country, and 2. A new one (in English) asking about the problems you may be having (if any) in the United States. Please follow the directions for each questionnaire, and answer Ell questions as honestly as possible. Please complete both questionnaires as soon as you can, and return them to the AFS Research Department in the enclosed, stamped envelope. I know you may be busy now with family, school, and friends, but I need to hear from every one of you for this research project. Research of this type is one of the important ways we learn how to improve our programs. We are depending on your response.. Thank you very much for your prompt cooperation. I am looking forward to your response. Sincerely, . _ Jag/flat L. Chart!) Suellen L. Crano ‘AFS Research Department 313 Ens! 43rd Sll‘l'l’f. New York. .\'.Y. 10017- (212) 6614550-(.‘ablc:AFSW()RL1). .\'.Y. 4AA LIST OF REFERENCES 109 List of References Ackermann, J.M. Skill training for foreign assignment: The reluctant U.S. case. In L.A. Samovar & R.E. Porter (Eds.) "Intercultural communication: A reader." 2nd. edition. California: Wadsworth Publishing Co., 1976. Allport, G. W. "Personality: A psychological interpretation." New York: Holt, 1937. Allport, G. W. The ego in contemporary psychology. "Psychological Review," 1943, 50, 451—478. Allport, G. W. "Becoming." New Haven, CN: Yale University Press, 1955. Allport, G. W. "Pattern and growth in personality." New York: Holt Rinehart, and Winston, 1961. American Field Service International. "1982-1983 Student Selection Handbook” New York: AFS Internetional/Intercultural Programs, Inc., 1981. Aronson, E., & Carlsmith, J. M. Performance expectancy as a determinant of actual performance. "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology," 1962, 65, 178—182. Aronson, E., & Mills, J. The effects of severity of initiation on liking for a group. "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology," 1959, 59, 177-181. Astin, A.W. "Four critical years." Washington, D.C.: Jossey—Bass, 1977. Bailyn, L. & Kelman, H.C. The effects of a year's experience in America ° on the self—image of Scandinavians. "Journal of Social Issues," 1962, 18, 30—40. Balester, R. J. The self concept and juvenile delinquency. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Vanderbilt University, 1956. Baum, M., et al. "Unified effort of a junior high school faculty to encourage success for sevventh-graders," Oregon Board of Education, October, 1968. Bem, D. J. Self-perception theory. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), "Advances in experimental social psychology." Vol. 6. New York: Academic Press, 1972. 110 Benjamins, J. Changes in performance in relation to influences upon self—conceptualization, "Journal of Abnormal Psychology," 1953, 47, 473-480. Benson, A.G., & Kovach, J.W. (eds.) "Guide for the education of foreign students: Human resources development." Washington, D.C.: National Association for Foreign Student Affairs, 1974. Berger, E. The relations between expressed acceptance of self and expressed acceptance of others. "Journal of Abnormal & Social Psychology," 1952, 47, 778-782. Bertocci, P. A. The psychological self, the ego and personality. "Psychological Review," 1945, 52, 91-99. Bledsoe, J. Self—concept of children and their intelligence, achievement, interests, and anxiety. "Childhood Education," 1967, 43, 436—438. Brookover, W. B. Self-concept and achievement. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Annual Convention, Los Angeles, 1969. Brookover, W.‘B., Patterson, A., & Thomas, S. Self—concept of ability and school achievement. U. S. Office of Education Project #845, 1962. Brookover, W. B., Patterson, A., & Thomas, S. Self-concept of ability and school achievement. "Sociology of Education," 1964, 37, 271—278. Brookover, W. B., et al. Self—concept of ability and school achievement II: Improving academic achievement through students' self—concept enhancement. U. S. O. E. Project #1636, 1965. Brookover, W. B., Erickson, E. E., & Joiner, L. M. Self-concept of ability and school achievement III: Relationship of self—concept to achievement in high school. U. S. O. E. Project #2831, 1967. Brown, R. "Social psychology." New York: Free Press, 1965. Bruck, M., & Bodwin, R. F. The relationship between self-concept and the presence and absence of scholastic achievement. "Journal of Clinical Psychology," 1962, 18, 181-182. Calsyn, R. J., & Kenny, D. A. Self—concept of ability and perceived evaluation of others: Cause or effect of academic achievement? "Journal of Educational Psychology," 1977, 69, 136-145. 111 Campbell, P. B. School and self-concept. "Educational Leadership," 1967, 24, 510-515. Canfield, J., & Wells, H. C. "100 ways to enhance self-concept in the classroom: A handbook for teachers and parents." Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1976. Caplin, M. D. The relationship between self-concept and academic achievement and between level of aspiration and academic achievement. "Dissertation Abstracts," 1966, 27, 979-A. Carbonara, N. T. "Techniques for observing normal child behavior." Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1961. Carlton, L. & Moore, R.H. The effects of self-directive dramatization on reading achievement and self-concept of culturally disadvantaged children. "Reading Teacher," 1966, 20, 125-130. Carlton, L. & Moore, R.H. "Reading, self-directive dramatization, and self-concept." Columbus, Ohio: Charles E. Merrill Books, Inc., 1968. Cattell, R.B. "Personality: A systematic, theoretical, and factual study." New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.," 1950. Centi, P. Self-perception of students and motivation. "Catholic Education Review," 1965, 63, 307-319. Coelho, G. V. "Changing images of America: A study of Indian students' perceptions." Glencoe, Ill.: Free Press, 1958. Coelho, G.V., Hamburg, D. A., & Murphy, E. Coping strategies in a new learning environment. "AMA Archives of General Psychiatry," 1963, 9, 433-443. Combs, A. W., & Soper, D. W. The self, its derivative terms, and research. "Journal of Individual Psychology," 1957, 13, 135-145. Combs, A. W., & Snygg, D. "Individual behavior." 2nd ed. New York: Harper and Row, 1959. Cook, S.W., Havel, J., & Christ, J.R. "The effects of an orientation program for foreign students." New York: Research Center for Human Relations, New York University, 1957. Cooley, C. H. "Human nature and the social order." New York: Scribner's, 1902. Coopersmith, S. "The antecedents of self-esteem." San Francisco: W.H. Freeman & Co., 1967. 112 Courson, C. C. The use of inference as a research tool. "Educational and Psychological Measurement," 1965, 25, 1029-1038. Crano, W. D. Causal analyses of the effects of socioeconomic status and initial intellectual endowment on patterns of cognitive development and academic achievement. In H. R. Green (Ed.), "The aptitude-achievement distinction." Monterey, CA: CTB/McGraw-Hill, 1974. Crano, W.D. & Brewer, M. "Principles of research in social psychology." New York: McGraw-Hill, 1973. Crano, W. D., Kenny, D., & Campbell, D. T. Does intelligence cause achievement? A cross-lagged panel analysis. "Journal of Educational Psychology," 1972, 63, 258-275. Crano, W.D. & and Messe, L.A. "Social psychology: Principles and themes of interpersonal behavior." ‘Homewood, Illinois: The Dorsey Press, 1982. Crano, W. D., & Schroder, H. M. Complexity of attitude structure and processes of conflict reduction. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology," 1967, 5, 110-114. Cuenot, I. "L'evolution biologiques." Paris, 1951. Davidson, H. H. & Greenberg, J. W. School achievers from a deprived background. U.S.O.E. Project #2805, 1967. Deutsch, S. E. & Won G. Y. M. Some factors in the adjustment of foreign nationals in the United States. "Journal of Social Issues," 1963, 19, 115—122. Diggory, J. C. "Self-evaluation: Concepts and studies." New York: Wiley, 1966. Dunnett, S. "The effects of an English language training and orientation program on foreign student adaptation at the State University of New York at Buffalo." Unpublished doctoral dissertation, SUY at Buffalo, 1977. Durr, W.K. & Schmatz, R.R. Personality differences between high-achieving and low-achieving gifted children. "Reading Teacher," 1964, 17, 251-254. Eagly, A.H. Involvement as a determinant of response to favorable and unfavorable information. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Monograph," Vol. 7, No. 3, November, 1967 (Whole No. 643) 1-15. 113 Engel, M. The stability of the self-concept in adolescence. "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology," 1959, 58, 211-215. Epstein, S. The self-concept revisited: Or a theory of a theory. "American Psychologist," 1973, 28, 404-416. Farquhar, W.W. "A comprehensive study of the motivational factors underlying achievement of eleventh grade high school students." U.S.O. E. Report #846, 1968. Feldman, K.A. & Newcomb, T.M. "The impact of college on students." San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1973. Festinger, L. "A theory of cognitive dissonance." Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1957. Fink, M.B. Self-concept as it relates to academic achievement. "California Journal of Educational Research," 1962, 13, 57-62. Gibby, R. G., Sr., & Gibby, R. G., Jr. The effects of stress resulting from academic failure. "Journal of Clinical Psychology," 1967, 23, 35-37. Gill, M.P. Pattern of achievement as related to the perceived self. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the A.E.R.A., 1969. Goldberg, M.L. Studies in underachievement among the academically talented. In A. Frazier, (Ed.), "Freeing capacity to learn." Washington, D.C.: A.S.C.D., 1960. Gowan, J.C. Factors of achievement in high school and college. "Journal of Counseling Psychology," 1960, 7, 91—95. Grasha, A.F., & Kirshenbaum, D.S. "Psychology of adjustment and competence: An applied approach." Massachussetts: Winthrop, 1980. Grove, C.L., & Hansel, B. "The role of social status in placement success." New York: AFS Internetional/Intercultural Programs, Inc., July, 1981. Gullahorn, J.E., & Gullahorn, J.T. American students abroad: Professional versus personal development. "The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science," 1956, 368, 43-59. Gullahorn, J.T., & Gullahorn, J.E. An extension of the u-curve hypothesis. "Journal of Social Issues," 1963, 19, 33-47. Hall, C., S., & Lindzey, G. "Theories of personality. 2nd Ed." New York: Wiley, 1970. 114 Hansel, B. "A study of sophomores on the 1980 summer program." New York: AFS Internetional/Intercultural Programs, Inc., 1980. Harding, K.L. "A Comparative Study of Caucasian Male High School Students Who Stay in School and Those Who Drop Out." Ph.D. Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1966. Harris, D. B. "Children's drawings as measures of intellectual maturity." New York: Harcourt, Brace, & World, 1963. Hawes, F. & Kealey, D.J. "Canadians in Development: An Empirical Study of Adaptation and Effectiveness on Overseas Assignment." Technical Report, Communications Branch, Briefing Centre, September, 1979. Heider, F. "The psychology of interpersonal relations." New York: Wiley, 1958. Hendricks, C.L., & Skinner, K.A. Adaptive social patterns of foreign students. "Journal of College Student Personnel," March, 1977, 124-127. Honigmann, J.J. "Culture and personality." New York: Harper, 1954. Hopkins, R. 8. Defining and predicting overseas effectiveness for adolescent exchange students. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, 1982. Irwin, F.S. Sentence completion responses and scholastic success or failure. "Journal of Counseling Psychology," 1967, 14, 269-271. Ittleson, W.H. et. al. "An introduction to environmental psychology." New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, Inc., 1974. Jacobson, R.L. Seek students from abroad, colleges told. "Chronicle of Higher Education," September 15, 1980, p.5. James, W. "Principles of psychology." Magnolia, Mass.: Peter Smith, 1890. James, W. "Psychology: The briefer course." New York: Holt, 1910. Jammaz, A.I.D. "Saudi Students in the United States: A Study of Their Adjustment Problems." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972. Janis, I. L., & Field, P. B. The Janis-Field feelings of inadequacy scale. In I. L. Janis & C. I. Hovland (Eds.), "Personality and persuasibility." New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1959. 115 Kidder, L. H., & Campbell, D. T. The indirect testing of social attitudes. In G. Summers (Ed.), "Attitude measurement." Chicago: Rand Mc-Nally, 1970. Klein,-M.H., Alexander, A.A., & Tseng, R.H. The foreign student adaptation program: Social experiences of asian student exchange. "Foreign Student," 1971, 6, 77-90. Kleinberg, 0. "International educational exchange." The Hague: Mouton, 1976. LaBenne, W.D., & Greene, B.I. "Educational implications of self-concept theory." California: Goodyear Publishing Co., 1969. Lamy, M.W. Relationship of self-perceptions of early primary children to achievement in reading. In I.J. Gordon, (Ed.), "Human development: readings in research." Chicago: Scott, Foresman, and Company, 1965. Lecky, P. "Self-consistency: A theory of personality." New York: Island Press, 1945. Lewin, K. "A dynamic theory of personality." New York: McGraw—Hill, 1935. Longest, J.W. "Evaluating orientation for foreign students." Ithaca, New York: International Agricultural Development, 1969. Lowe, C. M. The self-concept: Fact or artifact? "Psychological Bulletin," 1961, 58, 325-336. Ludwig, D. J., & Maehr, M. L. Changes in self—concept and stated behavioral preferences. "Child Development," 1967, 38, 453-467. Lynch, M.D., Norem-Hebeisen, A.A., & Gergen, K. "Self-concept: Advances in theory and research." Boston, Mass.: Ballinger, 1981. Lysgaard, S. Adjustment in a foreign society: Norwegian Fulbright grantees visiting the United States. "International Social Science Bulletin," 1955, 10, 45-51. Manis, M. Personal adjustment, assumed similarity to parents, and . inferred parental evaluations of the self. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1958, 22, 481-485. Martire, J.C. Relationship between the self-concept and differences in the strength and generality of achievement motivation. "Journal of Personality," 1956, 24, 364-375. 116 Mead, G. H. "Mind, self, and society." Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Messe, L. A., Crano, W. D., Messe, S. R., & Rice, W. Evaluation of the predictive validity of tests of mental ability for classroom performance in elementary grades. "Journal of Educational Psychology," 1979, 71, 233-241. Milgram, N. A., & Helper, M. M. The social desirability set in individual and grouped self-ratings. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1961, 25, 91. Moustakas, C.E. "The self: Explorations in personal growth." New York: Harper and Row, 1956. Murphy, G. "Personality: A biosocial approach to origins and structures." New York: Harper and Row, 1947. Nelson, D. "Crucial issues in foreign student education." Washington, D.C.: National Association for Foreign Student Affairs, 1975. Nunnally, J. C. "Psychometric theory." New York: McGraw-Hill, 1967. Omwake, K. The relation between acceptance of self and acceptance of others shown by three personality inventories. "Journal of Counseling Psychology," 1954, 18, 443—446. Patterson, C. H. "Counseling and psychotherapy: Theory and practice." New York: Harper & Row, 1959. Patterson, C. H. the self in recent Rogerian theory. "Journal of Individual Psychology," 1961, 17, 5-11. Pervin, L. A., & Lilly, R. S. Social desirability and self—ideal self ratings on the semantic differential. "Educational and Psychological Measurement," 1967, 27, 845-853. Peters, D.M. The self-concept as a factor in over and underachievement. "Dissertation Abstracts," 1968, 29, 1972f. Phillips, E.L. Attitudes toward self and others: A brief questionnaire report. "Journal of Counseling Psychology," 1951, 15, 79-81. Porter, J.W. "The Development of an Inventory to Determine the Problems of Foreign Students." Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1962. Pruitt, F.J. The adaptation of foreign students on American campuses. "Journal of NAWDAC," Summer, 1978, 144-147. .... 117 Purkey, W.H. "Self-concept and school achievement." New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, 1970. Raimy, V. C. Self-reference in counseling interviews. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1948, 12, 153-163. Raines, M. R. Personality functions and the adaptation to new environments. Unpublished paper, Michigan State University, 1977. Reitzes, D. C., & Murtran, E. Significant others and self conceptions: Factors influencing educational expectations and academic performance. "Sociology of Education," 1980, 53, 21-32. Ringness, T. A. Self-concept of children of low, average and high intelligence. "American Journal of Mental Deficiency," 1961, 63, 453-461. Rising, M., & Copp, B. "Adjustment experiences of non-immigrant foreign_ students at the University of Rochester." Rochester, N.Y.: Univeristy of Rochester Press, 1968. Robinson, J. P., & Shaver, P. R. "Measures of social psychological attitudes." Ann Arbor, MI.: Institute for Social Science Research, 1973. Rogers, C. R. Some observations on the organization of personality. "American Psychologist," 1947, 2, 358—368. Rogers, C. R. "Counseling and psychotherapy: Theory and practice." New York: Harper & Row, 1959a. - Rogers, C. R. A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships, as developed in the client-centered framework. In S. Koch, (Ed.), "Psychology: The study of a science." New York: McGraw-Hill, 1959b. Rogers, C. R. The therapeutic relationship: Recent theory and research. reprinted in G. Babladelis & S. Adams (Eds.), "The shaping of personality." Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1967. Rogers, C. R. "Freedom to learn." Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1969. Roth, R. M. The role of self-concept in achievement. "Journal of Experimental Education," 1959, 27, 265-281. Rudin, S. A., & Stagner, R. Figure-ground phenomena in the perception of physical and social stimuli. "Journal of Psychology," 1958, 45, 213-225. 118 Sarbin, T. R. A preface to a psychological analysis of the self. "Psychological Review," 1952, 59, 11-22. Sarbin, T. R., & Rosenberg, B. G. Contributions to role-taking theory: IV. Method for obtaining a quantitative estimate of the self. "Journal of Social Psychology," 1955, 42, 71-81. Schwarz, M. E. The effect of teacher approval on the self-concept and achievement of fourth, fifth, and sixth grade children: Case studies of seven children and seven teachers. "Disseration Abstracts," 1967, 28, 523f. Scully, M. G. 1 million foreign students at U. S. colleges, triple present number, seen likely by 1990. "The Chronicle of Higher EdUcation," 1981, 23, October, 23. Selltiz, C., & Cook, 8. W. Factors influencing attitudes of foreign students toward the host country. "Journal of Social Issues," 1962, 18, 723. Selltiz, C., Hopson, A., & Cook, 8. W. the effects of situational factors on personal interactions between foreign students and Americans. "Journal of Social Issues," 1956, 12, 33-44. Sewell, W., & Davidsen, O. "Scandinavian students on an American campus." Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1961. Shaffer, L. F., & Shoben, E. J., Jr. "The psychology of adjustment." Boston, Mass.: Houghton-Mifflin, 1956. Shattuck, G. Trans-cultural adaptation: A study of graduate students at Cornell University. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Cornell University, 1964. Shaw, M. C. Definition and identification of academic underachievers. In L. M. Miller (Ed.), "Guidance for the underachiever with superior ability." Washington, D. C.: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1961. Shaw, M. C., Edson, K., & Bell, H. The self-concept of bright underachieving high school students as revealed by an adjective checklist. "Personnel and Guidance Journal," 1960, 39, 193-196. Sheerer, E. J. An analysis of the relationship between acceptance and respect for self and acceptance and respect for others in counselling cases. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1949, 13, 169-175. Sherif, M., & Hovland, C. I. "Social judgment." New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1961. 119 Shrauger, J. 8., & Rosenberg, S. E. Self-esteem and the effects of success and failure feedback on performance. "Journal of Personality," 1970, 38, 404-417. Sigall, H., & Gould, R. The effects of self-esteem and evaluator demandingness on effort expenditure. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology," 1977, 35, 12-20. Silverman, I. Self-esteem and differential responsiveness to success and failure. "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology," 1964, 69, 115-119. Sivacek, J., & Crano, W. D. Vested interest as a moderator of attitude-behavior consistency. "Journal of Personality and Social Psychology," 1982, 43, 210-221. Smith, M. B. (Ed.) Attitudes and adjustment in cross-cultural contact: Recent studies of foreign students. "Journal of Social Issues," 1956, 12, Whole No. 1. Snygg, D., & Combs, A. W. "Individual behavior." New York: Harper & Row, 1949. Spaulding, 8., & Flack, M. "The world's students in the United States: A review and evaluation of research on foreign students." New York: Preger, 1976. Steiner, I. J. Self-perception and goal setting behavior. "Journal of Personality," 1957, 30, 344-355. Stock, D. An investigation the interrelations between the self-concept and feelings directed toward other persons and groups. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1949, 13, 176-180. Stotland, E., Thorley, S., Thomas, E., Cohen, A. R., & Zander, A. The effects of group expectations and self-esteem upon self—evaluation. "Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology," 1957, 54, 55-63. Strong, D., & Feder, D. Measurement of the self-concept: A critique of the literature. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1961, 8, 170. Sullivan, H. S. "The interpersonal theory of psychiatry." New York: Norton, 1953. Taylor, R. G. Personality traits and discrepant achievement: A review. "Journal of Consulting Psychology," 1964, 11, 76-81. Tucker, M. F. "Satisfaction, learning, and change through intercultural experience: Studies of critical variables among AFS students and 120 host families." Denver, CO.:Michael F. Tucker & Assocs., 1980. Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R. "Implicit psychology: An introduction to social cognition." New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R., (Eds.), "The self in social psychology." New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Williams, R. L., & Cole, S. The self-concept and school adjustment. "Personnel and Guidance Journal," 1968, 46, 478—481. Wylie, R. C. "The self-concept: A review of methodological considerations and measuring instruments." Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1961, 1974 (second edition). Zanna, M. P., Higgins, E. T., & Herman, C. P. "Consistency in social behavior: The Ontario Symposium." Vol. 2. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1982. Zimmerman, I. L., & Allebrand, G. N. Personality characteristics and attitudes toward achievement of good and poor readers. "Journal of Educational Research," 1965, 59, 28-30. 120 host families." Denver, CO.:Michael F. Tucker & Assocs., 1980. Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R. "Implicit psychology: An introduction to social cognition." New York: Oxford University Press, 1977. Wegner, D. M., & Vallacher, R. R., (Eds.), "The self in social psychology." New York: Oxford University Press, 1980. Williams, R. L., & Cole, 8. The self-concept and school adjustment. "Personnel and Guidance Journal," 1968, 46, 478-481. Wylie, R. C. "The self-concept: A review of methodological considerations and measuring instruments." Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press, 1961, 1974 (second edition). Zanna, M. P., Higgins, E. T., & Herman, C. P. "Consistency in social behavior: The Ontario Symposium." Vol. 2. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1982. Zimmerman, I. L., & Allebrand, G. N. Personality characteristics and attitudes toward achievement of good and poor readers. "Journal of Educational Research," 1965, 59, 28-30. ti = :-.§<-€:‘{::::<.‘ ‘ W "11111 ll 11' 2 1111111171111 11111111115