lllflllllllllllllflllllll S l' “may #

HESS lllllllllllllll

- 3 1293 00696 9962
, Micmgan State
LL University

 

 

*—
fl

This is to certify that the

dissertation entitled

CHARACTERISTICS AND PREDICTION OF
SUCCESS OF MINORITY MATRICULANTS IN
THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEw YORK,
AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES,

presented by

BILLY C. HAWKINS

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

Ph. D. degree in Education

 

I

W/ ”(5%
Major profesSor .
John H. Suehr

Date January 15, 1985

MSU is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution O~12771

 

MSU

LIBRARIES
“

 

 

 

RETURNING MATERIALS:
Place in book drop to
remove this checkout from
your record. FINES will
be charged if book is
returned after the date
stamped below.

 

 

gm

H
(D ..'
ml t-
r
( R
t l
Lu“)

 

 

CHARACTERISTICS AND PREDICTION OF SUCCESS OF MINORITY MATRICULANTS
IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL
COLLEGES EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM,

1979, 1980, AND 1981 ENTERING CLASSES

By

Billy Carl Hawkins

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 Educational Administration

1985

©1985

BILLY CARL HANKI NS

All Rights Reserved

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Completion Of a doctoral program is a journey which requires
sacrifice, persistence, dedication, and a positive attitude.

These things are required Of many people who are involved in the
life Of the doctoral candidate, as well as the candidate himself.
Without those other peOple, attainment Of this goal would not have
been possible.

I owe Special thanks to my loving wife, Joyce, for her con-
stant encouragement, patience and support throughout this rigor-
ous, but important task that has been such a large part Of our
life together. My son, Billy, Jr., gave me the reason, the moti-
vation tO pursue and complete this study. I am grateful tO my
family for their support, and for providing the flexibility tO
devote myself to this work.

I thank my parents, William and Jessie Hawkins, who gave me
the breath Of life and who have always given me support and been
there when I needed them throughout my life. My mother, espe-
cially, is a living example for others and myself Of how not to
quit. She struggled raising six children, working hard to give us
all the best Of life. I must recognize my deceased brother, Danny
Ray, who I wish were here to share this important part Of my life.
Through his short life, I have learned that your life can be taken
at any time, and one must enjoy life today because tomorrow is not
promised.

ii

I must express my appreciation and thanks tO my committee
chairman, Dr. John H. Suehr, without his guidance, support and
commitment, none Of this would have been possible. I also want to
thank my other committee members, Dr. Louis G. Romano, Dr. Darnell
E. Cole, Dr. Richard L. Featherstone, and Dr. Eldon R. Nonnamaker
for their part in assisting me tO complete this project.

The time and help of the participating campuses is deeply
appreciated. I eSpecially thank the president Of each campus who
supported the study and the gathering of information from confi-
dential files.

There are many others, individuals who directly or indirectly
made a contribution to the study. Although unmentioned by name, I

am thankful for their assistance and cooperation.

ABSTRACT

CHARACTERISTICS AND PREDICTION OF SUCCESS OF MINORITY MATRICULANTS
IN THE STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK, AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL
COLLEGES EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM,

1979, 1980, AND 1981 ENTERING CLASSES

By
Billy Carl Hawkins

The purpose Of this study was to identify selected
characteristics which impact on the prediction Of performance Of
minority matriculants to the State Universty Of New York Agricul-
tural and Technical Colleges' Educational Opportunity Programs;
and to aid in the college's administrative oversight. The popu-
lation included 99 subjects admitted in 1979, 104 in 1980, and 84
in 1981. The ethnic breakdown of the population consisted Of 231
Blacks, 45 Spanish surname, and 11 Native Americans.

The data were collected by visits tO campuses and by receipt
of information from EOP directors and other Offices. Central
Administration for SUNY verified enrollment information. Yearly
reports and academic records were analyzed for predictor variables
and performance of the minority matriculants. The data were
analyzed by employing the chi-square test and t-test, to see if
the variables are related tO academic success of these students.
Also, selected variables were examined using multiple regression

analysis.

Billy Carl Hawkins

The analysis of the data resulted in the following findings:

1. There were very few successful minority disadvan-
taged students.

2. Spanish surname students experienced greater success
than other groups.

3. High school grade point average was a positive indi-
cator for academic success.

4. College major showed a positive relationship in
academic success.

5. Use Of EOP admissions interview showed a significant
relationship in academic success.

6. Geographical area, sex, age, units Of high school
mathematics and science, Scholastic Aptitude Test
mathematics/verbal, type of high school diploma, and
years between high school and college, were not
significant.

7. The best model that was found to predict college
grade point average from relevant variables was
still so poor as to be impractical.

Based on the findings Of the study, it was recommended that
the State University system review all of its special programs for
these students; that students in these programs receive academic
advisement from college personnel familiar with their backgrounds;
that there be increased remediation for students before they enter

college; that recruitment efforts identify students whO have the

Billy Carl Hawkins

best chance Of academic success, and that applicants participate
in a personal interview process; that Educational Opportunity
Programs be strengthened; that more should be done to retain and
graduate students in these programs; that the Central Administra-
tion hold individUal college programs more accountable; that
existing programs could be better managed; and that colleges con-
sider constructing specialized curriculums for students in these

programs.

LIST OF
Chapter
I.

II.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLES O O O O O 0 O O I O O O O O O C O O 0

INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM. .

Introduction and Background Of the
The Problem. . . . . . . . . .
Significance Of the Study. . .
Study Purpose and Methodology.
Limitations Of the Study . . .
Definition Of Terms. . . . . .
Outline Of the Study . . . . .

Problem

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND STATE
OF NEW YORK AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES'
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAMS . . . . . . . .

UNIVERSITY

IntPOduction O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

The Conceptual Framework and Development Of the
Agricultural and Technical Colleges in New York

State. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Development Of Agricultural Education in

New York State . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DevelOpment Of State University of New

Agricultural and Technical College .
Present Summary Description. . . . . .
State

Compensatory Education in New York
Recruitment and Admissions . . . .
Status Of Recruitment Efforts. .
Selection Process. . . . . . . .
Retention. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Priorities Of the Institution. .
Efforts to Control Attrition . .
Counseling and Advising. . . . .
Academic Supportive Services . .
The Dilemma Of Financial Aid . .

York

State University Of New York Agricultural and Tech

nical Colleges'

Educational Opportunity Program.

Student Identification and Selection Process . .
Financial Aid in Educational Opportunity Program

iv

PAGE

vi

17
17

19
19

20
24
24
28
28
31
37

4O
43
46
51
53

56

Program. 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0
Academic Advising and Course Selection . . . . . .

Personal and Social Counseling in the Educational

Chapter
Tutorial Services in Educational Opportunity
Opportunity Program. . . .
III. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . .

Study Design . . . . . . .
Hypothesis . . . . . . .
Description Of the Sample.

Data Collection. . . .
Data Analysis. . . . .
Chi-Square . . . . .
t-test

Multiple Regression Analysis

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . .

IV.

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS. . . . .

Introduction . . . . . . . . .
Testing Of the Hypotheses. . . . . . .
College Grade Point Average Prediction
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

V. SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS
AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER

Summary Discussion .
Conclusions. . . . .
Geographical Area.
Ethnicity. . . . .
Sex. . . . . . . .
Age. . . . . . . . .

RESEARCH. O O O O O 0

High School Grade Point Average.
Units Of High School Mathematics
Units Of High School Science . .
Scholastic Aptitude Test Mathematics
Type Of High School Diploma. . . . . . .
College Major. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Years Between High School and College. .
Educational Opportunity Program Admissions
Interview. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Predicting College Grade Point Average
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Implications for Further Research. . . .

and

BIBLIOGRAPHY O O O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

Ve

0001000000000

0000000000...

Page

57
58

11.

12.
13.
14.

15.

16.

LIST OF TABLES

The Sample by Ethnic Breakdown, 1979, 1980, 1981. .
Geographical Area by Academic Success . . . . . . .
Ethnicity by Academic Success . . . . . . . . . . .
Sex by Academic Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Age by Academic Success . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
High SchOOl Grade Point Average by Academic Success

Number Of Units Of High School Mathematics by
Academic Success. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Number Of Units Of High School Science by Academic
success I O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I

Scholastic Aptitude Test Count. . . . . . . . . . .

Scholastic Aptitude Test Mathematics by Academic
success 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O I O O O O O

Scholastic Aptitude Test Verbal by Academic
success 0 O O O O O I O O O O O O I O O O O O O 0

Type Of High School Diploma by Academic Success . .
College Major by Academic Success . . . . . . . . .

Years Between High School and College by Academic
success 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Educational Opportunity Program Admissions
Interview by Academic Success . . . . . . . . . .

College Grade Point Average Variance. . . . . . . .

vi

Page
63
69
71
72
72
73

74

74

75

76

76
77
79

8O

81

83

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION AND STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM

Introduction and Background of the Problem

 

This study investigated those selected characteristics which
impact on the prediction Of academic success and the performance
Of Black, Spanish surname, and Native American, matriculants in
the State University Of New York Agricultural and Technical Col-
leges' Educational Opportunity Programs, for the 1979, 1980, and
1981 entering classes. Scholastic achievement, as measured by
high school grades and standardized tests, traditionally have been
used as predictors of future academic success. Scholastic
achievement, as a predictor Of academic success, has been assumed
tO be the most accurate indicator Of inborn intellectual ability.
There has been constant dilemma as to whether compensatory educa-
tion programs have a positive effect on one's scholastic ability.
Green and Gifford (1980) indicate that the use Of standardized
tests can be unfair under certain conditions. Such tests may have
inherent bias, when in fact they should have none in order to be
fair. Many scholars have challenged the fact that IQ and scho—
lastic achievement can be increased with the help Of support pro-
grams. Jensen (1980) contends that minorities have not performed
well on standardized tests, when compared with their white coun-
terparts, and may be limited by genetic factors.

1

Contrary tO the findings Of Jensen and others, recent results
Of special programs at American colleges strongly challenge the
conclusion that scholastic achievement cannot be increased.

In the early 19605, institutions Of higher education began
admission programs directed toward the Objective of attracting
more diverse students. These students in previous years may have
been denied admission to college because of a variety Of factors
which may have included sociO-economic status, ethnicity, sub-
standard elementary and secondary educational preparation, low
academic achievement, or low standardized test scores (Gordon,
1975). This initiative was, at least in part, a consequence Of
the civil rights movement, and the emphasis on equality of educa—
tional Opportunity legislated by the government. For many col-
leges the need to recruit and increase their minority student
enrollments became a priority. The burgeoning federally funded
financial aid programs and the heightened awareness for ethnic
diversity on campuses may have contributed to this initiative. A
sense Of responsibility and humanitarian concerns may have been
catalysts for such action.

There were a variety Of social concerns which may have led to
a heightened awareness Of the need for greater access to education
for minority disadvantaged students. The assassination of civil
rights leader Martin Luther King, Jr. may have galvinized some
American institutions into giving greater consideration to the
need to actively recruit and admit high risk, and under-prepared

students. In fact, efforts by colleges in New York state followed

this event in the late 19605. More importantly, legislation was
approved in New York state establishing programs to provide nec-
essary educational Opportunities for students who had not been
able to gain admission to college in traditional fashion.

In the past, college admisson Officers had not accepted stu-
dents who earned low grades in high school and who Obtained low
scores on standardized achievement tests. It was assumed these
students would be unable to sufficiently increase and improve
their scholastic achievement so as to be competitive in the
collegiate environment (Allen, 1976). Historically, few disad-
vantaged students applied tO enter college. Professional and
graduate schools, therefore, also had, and still have, particu-
larly low ethnic representation. The birth Of Educational Oppor-
tunity Programs and similar programs in the middle 19605, helped
Open the doors Of higher education for a great many disadvantaged
students. Admission staffs, as a result, have been challenged to
identify and admit disadvantaged students who show potential for
college success. It is a fundamental contention and organizing
principle Of this study that the review Of students' high schOOl
transcripts and standardized test scores is not sufficient to
predict academic success of disadvantaged students. There is a
great need for improving and expanding the diversity and number Of
predictor variables. Colleges could do more harm than gOOd to
disadvantaged students if proper screening and predictor tools are
not identified and used. Several devices for this purpose are
currently used (i.e. interviews, recommendations, and basic skills

testing).

In spite Of conflicts which may exist within the general
college admissions community (i.e. special needs programs being
viewed as “quota filling“ MOhr, 1981) the need to identify effec-
tive variables that will predict academic success remains. These
variables may then be used to Offset the concern by many educators
that the level of enrollment by disadvantaged minority students be
improved.

In addition, the possible expansion Of the number Of predic-
tor variables used tO evaluate a student for admissions could also
have side benefits in illustrating other needs Of the student.
These needs could very well fall within the areas Of student
social and academic support, thus affecting the work Of other
college Offices.

Knowles (1976) indicates that in 1966 a goal Of colleges was
single focused, their quest was to increase the enrollment of
Blacks. There is evidence Of that attitude changing, but contin-
uing today. For example, most reports on programs providing edu-
cational Opportunities for disadvantaged minority students focus
on positive results in terms Of student access, while commenting
little on the academic success Of those students.

Harvard University has had a risk-gamble program for disad-
vantaged students for at least 20 years. Egerton (1968) writes,
that on the whole, the risk-gamble students have performed nearly
as well as Harvard's other undergraduates (80-85 percent have
graduated with their class). Ranked 400 to 500 points below many

Of their classmates on the Scholastic Apptitude Test, they have

generally remained competitive with their peers. Harvard's
experience indicates that such a prestigious college may have more
latitude in choosing students than most Of its sister institutions
have yet been willing tO exercise. Other colleges altered admis-
sion methods with success (i.e. Cornell University, Stanford Uni-
versity, University Of California, Morgan State College, Princeton
University, and University Of Michigan). Michigan State Univer-
sity, in 1963, altered admissions standards tO admit 64 students
in the "Detroit Project.” The students admitted were academically
marginal black students from the inner city of Detroit. The stu-
dents selected were severely disadvantaged academically and
financially. There were other colleges that tOOk steps to alter
high admissions criteria to admit greater numbers Of disadvantaged
students.

In New York state a Pre-baccalaureate Program was initiated
in 1965 at City College of the City University. This was the
precursor Of the publicly supported compensatory education pro-
grams in New York state. The Pre-baccalaureate Program placed
emphasis on the education of the disadvantaged student and focused
on those factors which hampered academic success. The program
marked a period Of philosophical change in higher education in New
York state. This program helped Open the admissions doors Of
public institutions to the disadvantaged student in New York

state.

The Problem

 

Compensatory education programs have been develOped for a
variety Of reasons tO meet the needs Of the disadvantaged student.
There also has been an increase in applications from minority
disadvantaged students because Of special admissions programs.
Admission increases alone may not be sufficient tO correct the
problem Of minority access to college. The dilemma is much more
complex. Attempts must be made to insure the admission Of the
disadvantaged students who show the greatest potential for suc-
cess. Once these students have been admitted tO a college, a
further commitment must be made to retain and graduate them.
Knowles (1976) mentions that managing an EOP is becoming a cen-
tralized issue. Administrators are being asked to substantiate
their budget requests, report on student performance, and to
evaluate the level of services provided tO students. If the dis-
advantaged student is tO be successful, it appears more must be
done. The challenge tO strengthen existing programs by managing
EOPs for performance must be met. The task is difficult and com-
plex.

Contributing to this complexity is the fact that the minority
disadvantaged applicants have been educationally and socio-
economically deprived before pursuing higher education. If ad-
mitted, most are generally not prepared for the rigorous curricu-
lum ahead.

This study will focus on the State University Of New York's

Agricultural and Technical Colleges' Educational Opportunity

Programs. The agricultural and technical colleges are located in
rural areas mainly in Upstate New York. The schools prepare in-
dividuals either for transfer tO four-year institutions or to find
employment as technicians, skilled workers and practitioners in a
variety Of applied areas. This study will investigate the success
Of minority disadvantaged matriculants who entered the agricul-
tural and technical colleges' Educational Opportunity Programs in
1979, 1980 and 1981. The purpose will be to:
Identify those selected characteristics which im-

pact On the prediction Of academic success and perfor-

mance of disadvantaged minority students, and to aid in

the possible improvement Of colleges' admissions,

administrative, and guidance practices.

Once a disadvantaged minority student is admitted to college,
there is evidence that the greatest challenge -- that Of success-
ful completion Of a chosen field Of study -- still lies ahead.
Miller (1976), writes that if the disadvantaged student is tO
succeed, changes must come from within the college. Further, the
institution must make some changes in curriculum and methods to
accomodate the non-traditional student.

Perry and Tucker (1981), note that there has been controversy
as to what tO do with the non-traditional student. They feel in-
stitutions that Offer admissions to disadvantaged students may
elect to let that student survive as best as he or she can, or
help that student make it through the system successfully.

“If we are to move beyond access for all, toward education

for each, we are going tO have to redesign education so that

individuals are Offered maximum Opportunities for growth and
learning (Cross, 1979)." In addition, Perry and Tucker (1981)
write that bringing about change in an educational institution can
effect the majority of individuals associated with the institu-
tion. Further, desire, dedication and flexibility must permeate

all corners, or else it becomes another form Of tokenism.

Significance Of the Study

 

The Educational Opportunity Programs Of the State University
Of New York have made a significant impact on the campuses across
the state. Opportunity programs in New York state have Opened
doors for both the disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged minority
students. They have played an important role in increasing the
representation of minority students in the colleges. In 1980-81
the number Of Black and Hispanic students served by Opportunity
programs was more than 26,000, reflecting an increase of six per-
cent during a seven:year period. The enrollment in Opportunity
programs has increased from more than 2,000 students served in
City University's SEEK and College Discovery Programs in 1966-67
to more than 35,000 students at public and independent colleges in
1981-82. Presently, approximately one—quarter of all full-time
undergraduate minority students in the state are in college be-
cause Of these programs.

Many Of these students are enrolled in the Agricultural and
Technical Colleges Of the State University Of New York, which are
predominatly white colleges located in very rural areas in Upstate

New York.

Dr. Clifton R. Wharton, Jr. (1984), Chancellor of the State
University Of New York, which is the largest university system in
the world, indicates:

"The programs Of the six agricultural and technical
colleges Of SUNY prepare individuals either for transfer

tO four-year institutions or tO enter the world Of work

as technicians, skilled workers and practitioners in a

variety Of applied areas. Special emphasis is placed on

technical studies leading tO careers in Agricultural,

Business, Industry and Human Service fields. The col-

leges Offer a variety Of two-year degrees--the Associate

in Arts (AA) and Associate in Science (AS) designed

primarily for transfer programs which lead respectively

to the Bachelor Of Arts and Bachelor Of Science, and the

Associate in Applied Science (AAS) for curricula which

prepare students for entrance into occupations after twO

years. A number Of one-year certificates are available,
as well as specially-designed short-term programs.

"The Agricultural and Technical Colleges also have

a vital role tO play in today's technological develop-

ment efforts and the war on hunger.”

The philosophy and the uniqueness Of the two-year agricul-
tural and technical colleges in SUNY is what attracts students
from many backgrounds tO these schools. The development of the
educational programs in SUNY has brought an increase in minority
student applicants, both disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged. The
disadvantaged minority students come to these campuses, in many
instances, from the inner city with little insight on how tO
adjust to their new environment. These students have a wide range
of abilities, educational desires, and differing potentials.
Therefore, with minority disadvantaged student enrollments
increasing, pressure is added to the college's responsibility to

help insure the success of these students. There are strong

implications that knowledge about ethnic minorities is Of major

10

concern to the nation's college and university leaders, and to
others doing research analyzing the college population.

There has been little research done on the Educational
Opportunity Program in SUNY. This researcher believes colleges
must accept those disadvantaged minority students who show the
greatest potential for success and have a responsibility to insure

the students' success.

Study Purpose and Methodology

 

The primary purpose Of this study is to investigate selected
characteristics which bear on the prediction of academic success
and the performance Of minority disadvantaged matriculants in the
SUNY Agricultural and Technical Colleges Educational Opportunity
Programs. It is a challenge tO determine academic success when
working with a student pOpulation that originates from diverse
backgrounds.

Osandar (1974), writes that it is advantageous for such
institutions to provide guidance and data to support the view that
a disadvantaged student can achieve and profit from his or her
experience. He adds that there is little doubt that if
nontraditional students are to be served by institutions Of higher
education, the onus is on the institution to adapt to meet the
needs. Educational institutions already are privy to certain
biographical and historical data about students. There is evi-
dence that more may be needed if disadvantaged minority students
are tO be successful. This is important in order for programs to

be developed to direct students toward successful college

11

completion, and to minimize the loss Of human resources through
failure. The institutional climate must have a priority Of stu-
dent first, and the institution second (Cross, 1974). As the mi-
nority disadvantaged student pOpulation increases at the agricul-
tural and technical colleges, better predictors should be identi-
fied because these colleges will be held accountable for the
"promise“ Of success with these students.

The population for this study consists Of minority disadvan-
taged students from the agricultural and technical colleges at
Alfred, Canton, CObleskill, Delhi, and Morrisville. This study
examines the following variables: geographic area, ethnicity,
sex, age, high school grade point average (GPA), units Of high
school mathematics and science, Scholastic Aptitude Test scores
(mathematics and verbal), type Of diploma, college major, years
between high school completion and college admission, and student
interview. All students were in the colleges' Educational Oppor-
tunity Programs during the years of 1979, 1980, and 1981.

The population -- 287 students total -- included 99 from
1979, 104 from 1980, 84 from 1981. Each member of the population
will be evaluated and placed into one Of two groups. The groups
are successful minorities or unsuccessful minorities.

The Objective and subjective variables described earlier will
be used to take cognizance Of the students Of each group in an
effort to arrive at ascertained predictors for academic success.

This study will employ three research techniques. Chi-square

and t-test will be used to analyze the variables as they pertain

tO each group.
termine which variables best predict college grade point average.

The following hypotheses will be used tO address the concerns

12

Of the success of the minority disadvantaged student:

1a

1b

There will be no relationship between geographic
area and academic success of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

There will be a relationship between geographic
area and academic success Of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

There will be no relationship between ethnicity and
academic success Of minority disadvantaged students
in the program.
There will be a relationship between ethnicity and
academic success Of minority disadvantaged students
in the program.

There will be no relationship between sex and aca-
demic success Of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

There will be a relationship between sex and aca-
demic success Of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

There will be no relationship between age and aca-
demic success of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

There will be a relationship between age and aca-
demic success of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

There will be no relationship between high school
grade point average and academic success of minor-
ity disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between high school
grade point average and academic success Of minor-
ity disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between the number Of
units of high school mathematics and academic suc-
cess of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

There will be a relationship between the number of
units of high school mathematics and academic suc-
cess of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

Multiple regression analysis will be used tO de-

10

10b

11

11b

12

12b

13

13b

13

There will be nO relationship between the number of
units Of high school science and academic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.
There will be a relationship between the number of
units Of high schOOl science and academic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be nO relationship between Scholastic
Aptitude Test mathematics scores and academic suc-
cess of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

There will be a relationship between Scholastic
Aptitude Test mathematics scores and academic suc-
cess Of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

There will be no relationship between Scholastic
Aptitude Test verbal scores and academic success Of
minority disadvantaged students in the program.
There will be a relationship between Scholastic
Aptitude Test verbal scores and academic success Of
minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be nO relationship between type Of high
school diploma and academic success of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between type Of high
school diploma and academic success Of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between college major
and academic success Of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

There will be a relationship between college major
and academic success of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

There will be no relationship between years between
high school and college and academic success Of
minority disadvantaged students in the program.
There will be a relationship between years between
high school and college and academic success of
minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between students in-
terviewed and academic success Of minority disad-

vantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between students in-

terviewed and academic success Of minority disad-

vantaged students in the program.

14

Limitations Of the Study

 

While this study focuses on the academic circumstances of
three minority disadvantaged groups (Blacks, Spanish surname, and
Native Americans) with regard tO success and performance, the ma-
jority Of the study subjects are Black. There is limited research
literature available on the other two groups, hence, literature on
Black Americans will serve as the reference point for general
statements made in regard tO minority disadvantaged students.

The State University Of New York has six Agricultural and
Technical Colleges (Alfred, Canton, CObleskill, Delhi,
Farmingdale, and Morrisville) all Of which are two-year residen-
tial colleges. Five Of these colleges have definite similarities
in enrollment, geographical area, environment, and curriculum.
Farmingdale Agricultural and Technical College is located down-
state On Long Island 30 miles from New York City. Farmingdale
enrolls over 6,000 full-time and 8,000 part-time students. These
data double the combined size of the other five colleges. Being
located close to New York City, which has a pOpulation Of approx-
imately eight million people has a significant impact on the col-
lege's enrollment and operation. In its beginning, the college
Offered four-year degrees, then in the 1930's the philOSOphy
changed and two-year degrees were granted. Presently, the uni-
versity is reconsidering granting four-year degrees in certain
curricula. Farmingdale's Educational Opportunity Program is twice
the size Of the other five institutions' programs. Its program

size is most apprOpriately compared tO the fourfiyear colleges.

15

For the three years being investigated in this study, Farming-
dales' minority disadvantaged student population was larger than
the study sample. For these reasons Of disproportionate compari-
son, Farmingdale Agricultural and Technical College will be
excluded from this study.

The recommendations and conclusions reached by this
researcher can serve only as guidelines for future recruitment,
admission, educational support programs, and counseling of disad-

vantaged minority students.

Definition Of Terms

 

The following are definitions Of the terms used in this study.

Academic Success: This defines a student who has completed at

 

least one semester with a minimum Of 12 hours with a GPA of 2.0
(C) or better.

Minority Disadvantaged Student: This is used to refer to Black,

 

Spanish surname, and Native Americans who are financially and
educationally deprived.

Educational Opportunity Program (EOE): The State University of

 

New York describes this as a way for capable students from New
York state who have not reached their academic potential because
of limited financial resources and inadequate academic preparation
to receive a college education.

Compensatory EduCation: This refers to efforts tO reduce or

 

eliminate the adverse effects social and economic conditions have

on applicants who are not fully qualified to enter college.

16

Agricultural and Technical College: These are the agricultural

 

and technical colleges in SUNY. These residential institutions
Offer a variety Of career oriented associate degree programs in
liberal arts, agriculture, and the technologies, and some one-year
occupational programs.

State University of New York (SUNY): A network of 64 individual

 

institutions located in every region of the state and recognized
as the largest university system in the world.

College: This is used in a generic sense to represent all types
Of institutions of higher education, and is not meant to represent

only a college gf_a university.

Outline of the Study

 

Chapter II will review related research to the conceptual
framework and development of the agricultural and technical col-
leges in New York state, and compensatory education in New York
state. Recruitment, admissions practices and studies, and reten-
tion Of minority disadvantaged students are also reviewed.

Chapter 111 contains a discussion Of the study design and
methodology employed in this study.

Chapter IV presents and analyzes study findings.

Chapter V Offers conclusions and recommendations based on

these findings and suggests possible further research.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE AND
STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK
AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES'
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAMS

Introduction

 

Movements toward equal Opportunity in higher education date
back to the Morrill Act of 1862, which laid the foundation for the
development of land grant colleges. Prior to the civil rights
movement and President Lyndon B. Johnson's War on Poverty in the
early 1960's, political groups and educators paid little attention
and interest to the development and growth of the disadvantaged
(Ornstein, 1983). In Brown vs. Board of Education, the
U.S. Supreme Court declared that "the Opportunity Of education is
a right which must be made available to all on equal terms." Cole
(1983), indicates this right is unclear in the 1980's at the fed-
eral level. He further states that confusion is manifested by
antibusing legislation, severe budget cuts in education and stu-
dent assistance, tuition tax credit proposals, granting tax-exempt
status to schools which discriminate, exemption of schools from
civil rights regulations, revision of affirmative action require-
ments, and the diminuation Of enforcement Of equal access to
quality education. Yet, a review of research on the topic shows

17

18

that today, most members of America's most visible minorities
(Blacks, Spanish surname, Native Americans) struggle to succeed
and survive within the educational system.

Colleges are apprehensive about admitting disadvantaged stu-
dents. However, as programs tO increase disadvantaged minority
enrollment evolve, there appears to be a need to make additional
assistance, in many forms, available to these students, who have
academic deficiencies. The increase Of disadvantaged minority
students in higher education highlights the need to move institu-
tional adjustment from minimal to maximal established routine,
with the belief that all students will succeed, regardless Of how
long it takes or the degree Of effort expended by the institution
to insure the students success (Perry and Tucker, 1981). Further,
study done on the predictions of college success for low-income
students, points to some important factors. Rovezzi and Thompson
(1980), state that the Scholastic Aptitude Test, verbal and
mathematics sections, rank in high school class and income were
not effective predictors Of college graduation. The authors con-
cluded that future research should investigate the interaction of
both preparatory and intervening variables.

This chapter addresses the conceptual framework and develop-
ment of the agricultural and technical colleges in New York state,
compensatory education in New York state, recruitment, admissions
practices and studies, retention, State University Of New York
Agricultural and Technical Colleges' Educational Opportunity Pro-

grams, and the prediction of academic performance and success,

19

by reviewing literature related to the minority disadvantaged

students in higher education.

The Conceptual Framework and Development
Of the Agricultural and Technical Colleges

in New York State

 

Development of Agricultural Education
in New York State

 

In 1864, New York state became the only state to designate a
private college as the recipient of its Federal Land Grant. Peo-
ple's College was the recipient, but due to its closing the grant
was transfered to Cornell University.

"The organizational framework Of Cornell University

was a combination Of the influences represented in the

long effort Of the State Agricultural Society to estab-

lish an agricultural college. The university was re-

quired to annually accept one student from each Of the

128 Assembly Districts in the state who were free from

all tuition, fees or incidental charges. Later this

number was increased to four students from each Of the

150 districts (True, 1969).”

True adds that the agricultural societies helped foster a
positive public and political attitude toward agricultural educa-
tion, nationally and in New York state. Passage of the Morrill
Act and Hatch Act illustrate the favorable attitude that emerged
and was carried into the 20th Century.

Barlow (1967), indicates, "that the leading Object shall be
without excluding other scientific and classical studies ... to

teach such branches of learning as are related to agriculture and

the mechanic arts ... in order to promote the liberal and

2O

practical education Of the industrial classes in the several pur-
suits and professions in life.“
Development Of State University

Of New York Agricultural
and Technical Colleges

 

 

 

The period 1906 to 1916 saw the establishment Of the six
two-year agricultural and technical colleges in New York state:
Canton in 1906, Alfred and Morrisville in 1908, Delhi in 1913, and
CObleskill and Farmingdale in 1916. These institutions were es-
tablished for a variety Of reasons. These include:
1. The desirability Of a practical education:
"Of more immediate concern to the citizens Of Delhi was
the fact that beyond the elementary grade, the schools of
that day were not meeting the needs Of many Of the young
peOple, or were educating them away from the farm. High
schools Offered traditional college preparatory courses,
but nothing Of a practical nature,“ (Smith, 1970).

2. That many students desiring an agricultural education
could not afford to attend Cornell:
"In the final showdown the idea Of the proposed schools
Of agriculture scattered throughout the state sounded
more practical as a means Of training young men how to
farm than the single college at Cornell. It was expected
that the yearly cost per pupil would be lower in a state
school such as Morrisville than at Cornell" (Houghton,

1967).

21

3. Farmland was being abandoned on the premise that New York
state land was exhausted:
Studies conducted by the United States Bureau of Soils
indicated that there is no justification in the belief
that soils of the eastern states are permanently or have
materially decreased in their productive possibilities
(Houghton, 1967).

4. Rising food costs and the ability Of the nation to feed
itself in the future:
First Steward promoted and stuck to his plan for a state
school Of agriculture at Morrisville, as a model to put
before the peOple Of New York state, and in fact the en-
tire United States. He proposed an educational plan to
increase agricultural production. One of the main rea-
sons the voters Of New York state backed the idea of more
and better agricultural education was the expectation Of
more food at lower prices (Houghton, 1967).

The early years of these schools were riddled with appropri-
ation problems, construction delays, legislative trouble and a
general shortage Of staff and materials, according to unpublished
research (Angerosa, 1982).

Angerosa further wrote that from 1906 to 1916 all Of the
schools grew. From 1917 tO 1929, the schools were affected by
World War 1. During this period, two federal acts helped maintain
the struggling state schools Of agriculture. The first was the

Smith Hughes Act of 1917, which provided aid for teachers Of

22

agriculture. The other was the Vocational Rehabilitation Act of
1918, which provided funds for disabled war veterans who wanted to
attend college.

From 1930 to 1940 a decline in enrollment occurred due to
post-war depression. "In 1931, the Governor's Agricultural Advi-
sory Commission appointed a special committee to study the func-
tions, services, and needs of the six state schools Of agricul-
ture. Miss Elizabeth MacDonald of Delhi, a member of that com-
mittee, made these comments in her report: 'In their respective
communities these schools are filling a need which no other
institutions are prepared to meet. Also, the schools could better
meet their Opportunities if they had more support. These schools
have passed the experimental stage and if given good equipment
with adequate staff, they can and should form a very important
link in the state's educational system,'" (Smith, 1970).

Also, at this time the schools Of agriculture were changing
entrance requirements. Gaffney (1966) writes, “In 1941, acting on
the 1937 ruling Of the Board Of Regents, the legislature placed
the colleges' programs on a post-secondary level. It was a logi-
cal move, the develOpment and implementation Of high school
instruction in vocational agriculture and home economics, which
began in the '205, had become so prevelant that the colleges'
function was clearly to move its students away from the general
training it had been Offering and toward the higher degree Of

specialization demanded by an increasingly complex society."

23

The rapid addition Of technical courses reflected a shift in
educational philosophy and the general attitude in the state.

"New York's interest in vocational technical training On a post-
high school level was first reaffirmed in 1937, when two-year
technical courses were added to several schools that had origi-
nally been established some 40 years prior in rural areas for
training in agriculture and home economics“ (Kahler, 1967).

In 1948, 18 existing state colleges, and the six agricultural
and technical institutes became the State University of New York.
"As a unit Of the State University the Agricultural and Technical
Institutes were authorized to grant an Associate of Applied Sci-
ence Degree to students completing any Of the two courses Of
study,“ (Smith, 1970). The merger with the State University Of
New York raised the academic standards in the technical schools,
the existing general education courses were strengthened and new
ones created. Other changes brought about by the merger were the
development Of student services, (housing, counseling, admissions,
financial aids, etc.) and changing faculty titles to be consistent
with the four-year institutions (instructor, assistant professor,
associate professor, professor).

The span Of 1955 to 1964 saw diversification, including cur-
riculum changes Of new programs in food preparation and manage-
ment, and a two-year registered nusrse program were added. In
1964, the six Agricultural and Technical Institutes became the
State University Of New York Agricultural and Technical Colleges,

'the current title. The time from 1963 to 1972 was marked by

24

greater growth in facilities and enrollment than ever before.
From 1974 to 1983 the colleges experienced stable enrollments,
little or no change to facilities, declining resources, and mini-

mal expansion.

Present Summary Description

 

The six agricultural and technical colleges are an important
component of the State University Of New York. Current statistics
of the agricultural and technical colleges show approximate stu-
dent enrollments as follow: Morrisville (3,179), Delhi (2,713),
Alfred (4,265), CObleskill (2,762), Canton (2,593), and
Farmingdale (more than 13,000) full-time and part-time students.

The commitment of the agricultural and technical colleges is
outlined in the 1980 mission statement of Morrisville College:

1. "Individuals enter the world of work as technicians,
skilled workers, and practitioners.

2. "Opportunities for individuals to continue their prepa-
ration for more advanced levels Of employment.

3. "Individuals prepare for semi-professional careers
requiring some manual skill as well as involving consid-
erable technical knowledge and understanding.

4. "Programs for emerging technologies, particularly those
related to critical state manpower needs.

5. ”Special educational programing to meet the educational
and occupational needs of citizens Of all ages.“

Compensatory Education in New York State

 

Compensatory educational programs provide access to higher
education for high risk students, noted as disadvantaged. Fol-

lowing the 1954 Supreme Court decision, in Brown vs. Board Of

25

Education, and the admission Of a black man, James Meredith, to
the formerly segregated University of Mississippi, many other
colleges began to admit minorities and other traditionally
underrepresented persons.

In its 1969 Revised Master Plan, in the section on “Aid to
the Disadvantaged," according to Knoell, 1960, the State Univer-
sity Of New York Board Of Trustees stated:

One of the urgent domestic problems facing New York as

well as other states, is the plight Of the disadvan-

taged. Some Of the two-year colleges will establish

programs designed to help these students develop the

skills, study habits, and social behavior required for a

fuller and more productive life. It is hoped that more

Of the disadvantaged who undertake these programs will

eventually be trained as technicians. Others will be

encouraged tO continue their studies in four year col-

leges and graduate school.

Cornell University started the Committee on Special Educa-
tional Projects (COSEP) in 1965, which provided admissions Oppor-
tunities and support services for minority students who wanted to
enroll in one of the seven undergraduate units at Cornell. In
1969, two New York state programs were begun and administrated by
COSEP. The Educational Opportunity Program (EOP) in the statutory
schools and colleges, and the Higher Educational Opportunity Pro-
gram (HEOP) were added. In 1983, 70.4 percent Of all minority
students at Cornell were in the COSEP, HEOP, or EOP programs
(Cornell University Subcommittee on Minority Education, 1984).
Other private colleges that provided higher education opportuni-

ties for the disadvantaged were New York University and Hofstra

University.

26

The social atmosphere Of the 19605, stemming in part from the
death of Martin Luther King, Jr., helped sensitize college admin-
istrators to the need for change in higher education. This also
helped prompt legislation establishing Opportunity programs in New
York state. The existing law, passed in 1970, established com-
pensatory education programs in a coordinated manner at the city
and state universities and at private colleges (Nolan, 1983).

The City University of New York began the Search for Educa-
tion, Elevation and Knowledge (SEEK) program in 1965. It is
recognized as one Of the most comprehensive compensatory education
programs in the United States. The program was designed to take
students at an existing academic level in terms Of college prepa-
ration, and through a variety Of innovative, culturally sensitive
techniques and services, help them earn a college degree. New
York state sponsored other compensatory education programs in the
early 19605 before SEEK. The City University's Operation Second
Chance Program was founded by the Ford Foundation and the College
Discovery Program.

The SEEK Program was started in 1965 by Leslie Berger and
Bernard Levy at City College through the Pre-baccalaureate Pro-
gram. The Pre-baccalaureate Program's purpose was to provide
senior college educational Opportunity for the disadvantaged. The
philosophy of the program was pinned to modified admissions, spe-
cialized recruitment, financial assistance, individualized coun-
seling, remedial and developmental courses, tutorial assistance, a

one-tO-twofiyear preparatory program before entering the

27

mainstream Of college, and an extension of the required graduation
semesters (Wallace, 1980).

Compensatory education in New York state has been aided by
politicians in New York City and in the New York State Legisla-
ture. The Black and Puerto Rican Legislative Caucus has helped
assure the continued funding of compensatory programs. This group
has a membership which has lobbied for funding for the disadvan-
taged.

In 1964, Gov. Nelson Rockafeller and the Board Of Trustees of
SUNY authorized a study by Dorothy M. Knoell, to evaluate the
unmet post-secondary education needs Of state students. The
develOpment Of urban centers resulted from the study. The SEEK
Program at Buffalo State College in 1967, represented the first
effort on the part Of SUNY to provide higher educational Opportu-
nities to the disadvantaged. This first campus-based program in
Upstate New York stemmed from the New York State Joint Legislative
Committee on Higher Education which requested funds to start the
program. Upstate legislators, Arthur 0. Eve and Earl Brydy,
played important roles in starting the program at Buffalo State
College.

State University of New York Educational Opportunity Programs
were created after then Chancellor Samuel Gould established a Task
Force on Programs for the Disadvantaged. The panel recommended
establishment Of the new education challenge for SUNY.

The primary Objective Of EOP would be to help provide educa-

tionally related services to students whose educational and

28

sociO-economic circumstances have limited their post-secondary
educational Opportunities. The program was designed to seek out
disadvantaged, but talented, youngsters not only in the cities but
in the suburbs and rural areas. The establishment Of EOP brought
closer to realization the Trustee Policy statements that every
student capable Of completing a program Of higher education shall
have the Opportunity to do so.

In 1970 the Legislature approved funding for the university
system to implement Opportunity programs at all state-Operated
campuses and community colleges. The 1972 master plan called for
expanding the system's educational Opportunities and for serving a
larger and more diversified student population. The commitment to
help all qualified persons have access to programs is reflected by
the broadened range Of educational Options in new fields Of
knowledge.

In 1976 the master plan Of SUNY expressed the intent to ex-
tend services tO the educationally and economically disadvantaged,
to members of racial and ethnic minorities, and to the wards of
the state. It is to this extent that New York state, and SUNY in
particular, has survived with its compensatory education programs,

while similar programs elsewhere wither.

RECRUITMENT AND ADMISSIONS

 

Status Of Recruitment Efforts

 

It is important that college and university presidents
understand the immediate and future effects before deciding to

increase enrollment of minority students on their campuses. Each

29

institution should review its commitment to disadvantaged stu-
dents. Are disadvantaged students simply being recruited to the
predominately white colleges because special programs exist to
admit them? Or, are those institutions actually committed to
equal educational Opportunity for all students who show potential
for success?

Colleges must commit fully tO the success Of disadvantaged
students. This commitment should include: minimizing academic
attrition, providing adequate financial aid, counseling, and
ensuring the support of faculty and staff. Schools that recruit
and accept disadvantaged students have the Obligation to create a
supportive environment which aids the student in overcoming both
personal and academic problems that may occur.

Recruitment must go beyond narrow institutional need if it is
to serve the broader purpose of helping disadvantaged youth.

Recruitment business cannot continue as usual. Traditional
practices, such as visitation of college representatives to high
schools have not always been effective. Colleges have to create
specific practices to attract disadvantaged students (Morris and
Ferrante, 1971). Such federally sponsored programs as Upward
Bound, the College Discovery Program, and Talent Search Programs
identify students who want to enter college. These can be most
beneficial, as can be the use of minority students and staff to
assist in recruitment efforts. This researcher, following con-
versations with colleagues in similar positions in the last three

years, has Observed that improvements can be made. These include:

3O

1. Making financial aid packages more attractive.

2. Sponsoring campus visits for high school counselors.

3. Utilizing matriculating minority disadvantaged students
in the recruitment process.

4. Work with blue-collar adults, and community groups to
identify qualified minority students for its Special
program.

5. Advertisements in newspapers and on the radio.

6. Develop lists Of people who have direct contact with
disadvantaged students who might be potential college
students.

7. Participation in college career day programs sponsored by
public school districts and other agencies.

8. Visitations to other educational Opportunity programs.

9. Sponsor high school visits to campus. This has been
quite effective at Morrisville College.

10. Make sure recruitment literature on minorities is rele-
vant.

Recruitment practices such as these, essentially seek out
potential students who Often have academic and economic problems
and who would not generally apply to institutions Of higher edu-
cation. Disadvantaged students who must be persuaded to consider
higher education, must be recruited in an aggressive and system-
atic way. Recruiters must be organized. Written and oral pre-
sentations must give clear explanations of how a program will

serve the needs and interests Of the participants. Recruiters

31

must get community representatives and agencies involved, and also
involve successful students and alumni, to assist in formulating
and writing recruitment literature and in planning strategies

(Astin, Astin, Biscanti, Frankel, 1972).

Selection Process

 

In the past, admissions requirements essentially screened out
students who demonstrated a low probability Of success in college.
Astin, Astin, Bisconti and Frankel (1972), indicate with the
emergence of Open admissions policies, colleges must still main-
tain admission and recruitment procedures in line with the quality
Of supportive services available to such students. It is also
important to mention that institutions have not fully involved
faculty in this admissions process. This could hinder students
because faculty may not be completely prepared for those students.

Before the middle 19605, the admission of minority students
to colleges was basically the responsibility of historically Black
colleges in the South. In the 1960's, when -- spurred by legis-
lation -- predominantly white colleges began recruiting minority
students, the admissions process was based on students' academic
backgrounds. This was, for many students, a major Obstacle to
overcome. Minority students' negative educational experience was
the major cause Of frustration for admissions staffs trying tO
decide what steps to take in dealing with the academically
underprepared.

Today, colleges face the dilemma Of assessing which minority

students can best achieve in spite of predicted failure Often

32

shown when traditional admissions criteria are applied (Brew-
ington, Daniels, Eavers, Gooden, and Williams, 1983). Although
the number Of minority students applying to college is increasing,
there remain few good devices with which to predict minority stu-
dents' potential for success. Morrison and Terrante (1971) report
there are some traits Of the disadvantaged student which can help
determine their potential for academic success. These include:

I. ability tO handle academic work e.g., showing

improvement in high school grades, acceptable
achievement test results.

2. willingness to accept responsbility.

3. perception Of self-worth.

4. ability to cope with frustrating circumstances.

5. motivation to improve one's life.

6. leadership potential.

7. ability to think and plan constructively.

8. realistic decision making ability.

9. special talent.

10. achievements that required substantial effort.

There is a range Of personal characteristics that have been
associated with the disadvantaged student. The number of defi-
ciencies outweigh the few positive characteristics that colleges
use in identifying and selecting students who show potential for
success. Certain characteristics seem to unquestionably distin-

guish the disadvantaged student: cultural and social differences

33

when compared to the other student; inclusion in minority groups;
lack of parental or self-support to attend college; attitude
toward entering a new experience in which there is a high chance
Of failure.

The disadvantaged student usually comes to college with a
deficient academic record. Other characteristics may signifi-
cantly differ from the regularly accepted student body. Disad-
vantaged students require special assistance to be successful.

According to Heath (1970), the Educational Opportunity Pro-
gram Of the University Of California at Berkeley has begun meeting
the challenge of disadvantaged minority and low-income students.
Heath lists the selection process as follows:

1. Applicants must submit three to five letters of

recommendation from teachers and counselors;
2. A biographical statement, including future plans,
must be submitted;

3. Educational Opportunity Program admissions commit-
tees review the applicant's grades and request a
personal interview if needed;

4. And finally the EOP director, admissions Officer,

and chairman Of the Faculty Committee on Admissions
reviews each application and makes a recommendation.

The admissions standards used at California Berkeley clearly
indicate that high school performance is not the lone bellweather
Of a student's college potential. If admissions Offices continue

to use high school achievement as the sole predictor of success,

34

they run the risk Of excluding many minority and disadvantaged
students, because disadvantaged students do not have academic
backgrounds generally viewed as acceptable.

College admissions test score criteria tend to be correlated
with sociO-economic status and therefore Often are biased against
racial and ethnic minorities. Admissions guidelines should also
use personality traits as indicators when reviewing minority stu-
dents for admission (Grant and Singleton, 1983). Creighton (1974)
conducted a study on predicting the academic achievement Of dis-
advantaged college-bound students. He explored the effectiveness
Of traditional methods of evaluations (high school grade point
average and Scholastic Aptitude Test scores) and subjective meth-
ods Of evaluation (self, peer, parent, counselor, and teacher
perceptions) in predicting the academic performance Of 47 disad-
vantaged college freshmen. It was found that traditional methods
proved inadequate. Among subjective methods, peer prediction was
found to be significantly related to the disadvantaged students'
academic performance. Counselors had the poorest record Of esti-
mating student performance. The study results also suggested that
the more hours disadvantaged students attempt, the higher their
grade point average. Hammond and Rosick (1972) conducted a study
which explored possible predictors of College Education Achieve-
ment Project students' success in college at Allen University.
The research was based on standardized test scores and teacher
recommendations. A multiple regression correlation was run with

grade point average Of the first 15 hours of regular college work.

35

It was discovered that standardized tests are not valid predic-
tions of college success for disadvantaged students. Munn (1972)
further examines predictor variables of success in college by
conducting a study of selected characteristics which impacted on
the prediction Of academic success of ethnic minority students
enrolled in community colleges in Arizona. Also, the character-
istics were described as they pertain to each group to assist in
more effective guidance practices and admissions policies. The
sample consisted Of 713 students. The data collected on the stu-
dents was analyzed, and recorded as frequenoy summations and as
means. A regression analysis was used to statistically analyze
selected variables. The criterion variable was the college grade
point average. The variables for this study were age, ethnic
minority group, high school grade point average and rank, cur-
riculum choice, marital status, sex, years between high school and
college, and educational test scores.

The findings from this study revealed the following:

1. There was a three to two ratio between men and women.

2. Six percent of the students were married.

3. Eighty-seven percent Of the students were zero, one,

or two years removed from high school graduation.
4. Approximately 80 percent Of the students were 18,
19, or 20 years of age.
5. The average number Of hours completed was 29.
6. Seven percent Of the students possessed the status

of a veteran.

36

7. Oriental students had the highest means on the
American College Tests.

8. Fifty-seven percent graduated in the upper half of

their graduating class.

9. The college grade point averages were 2.5 (Blacks

and Indians), 2.7 (Mexicans), 2.9 (Orientals).

10. The variables that had the highest correlation in

the prediction equations for each group were high
school rank and American College Test scores.

A study conducted by DiCesare, Sedlacek and Brooks (1972), at
the University Of Maryland, reviewed non-intellectual correlates
of Black student attrition. This study investigated ways, if any,
in which Black returning students at the university were different
from those not returning, by looking at demographic and attitudi-
nal variables. The results Of the study indicated that the Black
students who returned to continue their academic career had more
self-confidence and higher expectations.

In most cases, traditional admissions standards must be mod-
ified or used with other determiners Of probable success, rather
than be the sole basis for acceptance or rejection Of disadvan-
taged students.

Brewington, Daniels, Ewers, Gooden, and Williams (1983),
indicate:

“Minority students will continue not to do as well

on the traditional measures, at least in the immediate

future. Colleges must accept this reality to seek

alternate ways to measure academic potential as well as
to provide support to the students when they arrive on

37

campus. Some suggestions for doing so are the use and
develOpment Of interest, personality, creativity, and
cognitive-style measures in the admissions process that
are sensitive to minority students' experiences and
competencies. Predominantly white institutuions have to
seek ancillary assistance in their efforts to attract,
enroll, and graduate more minority students. One avenue~
is to seek the assistance Of Black colleges in identi-
fying problem areas within their present admissions
processes that may be affecting their admissions pro-
grams. Black colleges have been the vanguard in this
movement by taking students who were deemed inadmissible
to predominantly white colleges (based on the tradi-
tional measures) and developing them through supportive
efforts into highly competitive college graduates. The
experiences of Black colleges could be most helpful."

In the future, admissions for minority students will likely
become crucial. There may well be an increase in the number Of
students applying for college admissions, but who possess academic
credentials that colleges may have traditionally considered sub-
standard. Colleges must become attuned to the disparities that
exist between their requirements and minority students' prepara-
tion. Until this happens, changes in student programming and

admissions cannot begin.

RETENTION

Priorities of the Institution

 

A disadvantaged student who enters college is taking as great
a risk as the institution Of higher education that accepts him or
her. For disadvantaged students, the path to failure is well
marked. However, if strong motivation exists, the disadvantaged
student may achieve in his or her academic pursuits. Once it
admits these students, a college must assist them in the areas of

their academic choice. Morton (1982) indicates, with cutbacks in

38

higher education and moderate Opportunities for minorities at the
post-secondary level, predominantly white colleges must make a
concentrated effort to retain and increase minority students'
chances of success. Also, Morton contends that the lack Of sup-
port for minority college students is systematic and reinforced by
low faculty expectation for academic success among Blacks and
other minorities. Morton further adds that to remedy such racism
(1) those in leadership positions must recognize their responsi-
bility to address the needs Of minority students; (2) the college
president should examine existing programs, practices and policies
that effect minority students and take a strong stance Of support
for ethnic diversity; (3) and finally, programs should be evalu-
ated constantly in order to effectively retain students. These
suggestions point to some priorities which must be adopted if
minority students are to pursue their education.

Francisco (1983) maintains that if higher education's admin-
istrators are sincerely concerned with their image and equal edu-
cational Opportunities on their individual campuses, during this
time Of cuts in human services, efforts must be made on their part
to ensure educational Opportunities for minority students become a
top priority. Also, Francisco contends that existing special
programs for minority students may need to be reorganized, using
current funds, and seeking the participation Of minority students.

It appears that faculty and administrators lack understanding
and sensitivity to minority needs, as major academic, social and

environmental barriers continue to exist for minority students on

39

predominantly white campuses. Also, research indicates there is
strong justification for hiring more minority faculty and staff
particularly for academic advising, counseling and other suppor-
tive service functions (Burrell, 1981). Presently, and to no
surprise, minority students will seek out the assistance of family
members and minority faculty and administrators for counsel and
support, rather than use available resource persons. The minority
staff member's responsibilities Often grow as they work to meet
minority students' needs, even when these demands are not a func-
tion Of their office. This role has become expected by white
administrators and minority students because similarities in race
and cultural background exist.

The anxieties that exist in minority students as they move
from high school to a predominantly white college are different
than those Of their white counterparts. A study conducted by
Dawkins and Dawkins (1980), indicates that minority students'
problems on predominantly white campuses can be overcome by redi-
recting the campus environment to maximize the students' academic
success. The direction, environment and commitment of the insti-
tution can have an immediate affect on the minority students to
perform to their full potential. Institutions committing to ser-
vice disadvantaged students, must be willing to adjust educational
goals to serve the student. Also, the changes in administrative
attitudes, should continue in the academic community (Astin,

Astin, Bisconti, Frankel, 1972).

4O

Efforts to Reduce Attrition

 

Every college that accepts disadvantaged students has an
Obligation to help the student overcome personal and academic
problems. The disadvantaged student's learning environment is
important to his or her academic success. Minority students have
difficulty adjusting to environments that are much different from
what they are used to. At a predominantly white institution they
must face social adjustments, academic pressures, and the possible
feeling of minimal support from the institution.

Such difficulty can be insurmountable for an entering minor-
ity student. In fact, Hattenschivellur (1971) claims that when a
non-minority student is admitted to college, and his or her ini-
tial experience is negative, he or she can adjust due tO his or
her academic and social preparation. On the other hand, a minor-
ity student who, in many cases, is the product of inadequate pre-
paration, may find the adjustment process much more difficult to
cOpe with. It is essential that there be a sensitivity to this
fact among administrators and faculty. That sensitivity should
lead to the development Of an atmosphere which equalizes learning
resources and opportunity.

Cole (1978) states that one way to assist disadvantaged
minority students is through the establishment Of advisement and
assistance programs to meet the needs of these students. Such
programs could include tutoring and informal study groups. There
should also be a close and consistant monitoring system on the

academic progress Of these students. Counseling services, for

41

personal as well as academic problems could be readily available
to them. Of significance here, too, is the need for an increased
number Of minority role models at predominantly white institutions
for minority students to emulate.

Another way to improve retention Of students is to undo the
stereotypical systems, and put new programs into Operation.
Francisco (1983) indicates several alternative programs: Support
Grggp, where in this type of group, 10-12 students meet with a
counselor once or twice a week to discuss problems they are hav-
ing. In these sessions students help each other solve problems.
The institution may assign all first quarter or semester students

to this type of group; Peer Counseling, is another idea by using

 

upperclass students to counsel and advise new or freshman stu-
dents. The peer counselor serves as academic advisor and inspi-
rational mentor for a group of students; and finally, Out Reach

by Minority Professionals. Often so few minority faculty members

 

are employed at institutions Of higher education, and subsequently
they are over-extended with other responsibilities so as to be
unavailable to serve as role models. In this era Of shrinking
budgets, an increase Of minority staff may not happen. Because of
this, it becomes the administrator's responsibility to encourage
minority staff by Offering some type of merit incentives. This
would support minority faculty efforts for meeting with the stu-
dents Over and above the class time a student requires Of a pro-
fessor. If incentives are not viable Options, minority staff
members may have to take it upon themselves to assist minority

students.

42

This dilemma of so few owing so much to so many has not only
been part Of the organizational structure Of many colleges, it has
also had negative effects in the classroom.

Masters and Masters (1982) suggest teachers must make two
fundamental attitudinal changes in order to be successful with
disadvantaged students: (I) realize that being disadvantaged is
not a temporary phenomena and (2) believe that the disadvantaged
student is worth the effort. Also, Masters and Masters state
that in the 19805 the shallow attitude of some faculty toward
students must end and a more humanistic attitude be projected.
The disadvantaged students need to know they can make a positive
contribution to the institution and educators need to develOp an
attitude that these students are human resources, not human
rejects.

There has been a widespread and rapid increase in college
enrollments Of the academically disadvantaged. This pattern has
become even more pronounced in light of the decrease in enrollment
colleges now face. As a result, admissions standards are being
lowered by colleges to meet enrollments. Disadvantaged students
who qualify under special admissions programs, are not the only
academically weak students being accepted to college. With these
changes, attitudinal and curriculum changes that will assist the
student in becoming one Of the beneficiaries Of what American

higher education has to Offer must begin to take shape.

43

COUNSELING and ADVISING

 

Counseling for minority students is important. The task Of
counselors who work with disadvantaged students is challenging,
for there is no one style or method that works with all students.
Counselors should establish a trusting, Open relationship with
students in order to remove the negative image Of counseling.
Students should feel the counselor is there for support, encour-
agement, and advisement. It is important for counselors to pro-
vide the disadvantaged student with an explanation Of the univer-
sity system. Counselors/advisors may also function as a sounding
board for other staff and faculty members venting emotional frus-
trations about working with minority disadvantaged students. It
is important that counselors get to know the students as soon as
possible, for academic advisement, liaison with other aspects Of
the college community, and overcoming immediate Obstacles are
important to the students' success.

Gunnings (1982) indicates that minority students on predomi-
nantly white campuses are in a more stressful position than their
white counterparts. This creates a different view Of their envi-
ronment. He said unique problems confront minority students, and
that it becomes the responsibility Of the counselor to concep-
tualize, develop, and implement a valid approach to reducing the
stressors that confront the students. Gunnings also said coun-
selors of minority students on predominantly white campuses must
recognize that stress is built into the minority student's every-

day life. That stress alters performance, and prevention and

44

recognition are important elements in handling that stress.
Counselors must teach minority students to find ways to survive in
spite Of the barriers they face. The students must also be taught
to maneuver within the institutional system to find creative so-
lutions to their problems.

Educational Opportunity Programs have used a highly visible
counseling component, due to the needs Of the academically and
economically disadvantaged students in the program. It must be
understood that the traditional routine of appointments and Office
visits is not sufficient. Counselors must demonstrate emotional
involvement, and be creative in developing an interpersonal rela-
tionship with the student and the college environment. They must
also work with academic departments to ensure relevance and be
willing tO get personally involved and take risks in their support
Of students. Also counselors play an important role in reducing
the bureaucratic structure. Emphasis on the interpersonal nature
Of counseling -- encouraging drop-in visits, eating lunch with
students, participating in their extra-curricular activities -- is
important (Blustein, 1981). Educational Opportunity Programs Of-
fer a number Of challenges to counselors and student personnel
professionals. As counselors become more familiar with the be-
havior and attitudes Of disadvantaged students, their role ex-
pands. They cannot sit back and not get involved. When problems
arise, the counselor must respond.

Likewise, Hispanic students have experienced difficulties in

adjusting to college, because of social, ethnic, economic, and

45

academic disadvantages. It is not uncommon for all students to
encounter difficulty in leaving home, and adjusting to a new
environment. Clinicians, however, feel a combination Of weak
adjustment to college and some form Of subjective discomfort
occurs more commonly among Chicano students than others. Also
students who have difficulty in adjusting to college Often do not
realize the negative affect it will have on their academic per-
formance. Thus, when counselors identify this problem Of aliena-
tion from campus life, immediate attention must be given to the
student in order tO remedy the situation (Casas and Ruiz, 1981).
Also, Nieves and Valle (1979) indicate the importance in counsel-
ing Puerto Rican students, is to have an understanding of ethnic
differences and the structure Of the Puerto Rican family. Active
involvement and interaction with students is important, particu-
larly in order to break through the male tradition of self-help.
Puerto Rican students have a lot of pride and hesitate to admit
failure.

Morales (1984) indicates that Hispanic students need cultur-
ally effective counselors who can accept students on their own
terms. The counselor must be flexible and use an eclectic
approach. Morales also states that counselors must be sensitive to
the values of Hispanics, their world views, and utilize the
resources within the student's natural support system.

Counseling is integral to assisting minority disadvantaged
students through stressful situations they may face in higher

education. Minority students will Often separate themselves from

46

situations they feel uncomfortable dealing with. Counselors can
assist and advise students in dealing with such situations by
helping the students understand the logic and normality Of their
feelings and actions. Many minority students fear meeting with
faculty, because Of the fear of failure syndrome and lack Of sup-
port from them. This, too, can be better understood by the stu-

dent with the assistance Of an advisor or counselor.

Academic Supportive Services

 

Students who are admitted to college under special educa-
tional Opportunity programs are deficient in basic academic
skills, and require assistance to overcome this. To meet the
disadvantaged student's academic needs, administrators have
developed and implemented support services in tutoring, counsel-
ing, teaching, and study skills. Developmental learning centers
have been and are being develOped by institutions throughout the
nation. They assist the admission of a greater number Of disad-
vantaged students who do not otherwise qualify for educational
Opportunity programs. This has developed because of the decline
in enrollment. However, this movement, in many ways, has begun to
water down supportive services to the disadvantaged student who
needs one-on-One support to succeed. Spaights and Hudson in
(1971) suggest that too little thought and planning has gone into
the formulation Of special services to the disadvantaged student,
particularly as institutions develop special programs to increase
the admission Of disadvantaged students. Spaights and Hudson also

indicate the availability Of tutorial and developmental programs

47

quite Often determines the success or failure Of special programs'
ability to help disadvantaged students. The purpose of remedial
and develOpmental course work is tO provide necessary remediation
to enhance success Of the student.

TO increase the disadvantaged student's chances Of success,
New York University developed a special five-year program instead
Of the traditional four-year degree program. The students spent
the first two years in the School Of Education, taking remedial
courses designed to improve academic skills (Gordon and Wilkerson,
1966). This helped students make up academic deficiencies, and
enhance success in college. Landward and Hepworth (1984) con-
ducted a study Of the Academic Enrichment Program they designed as
a support course for entering freshmen. The program included
individual counseling sessions and group discussions. The find-
ings from this experimental program indicate that with academic
support, high-risk students, as a group, have the potential for
academic performance beyond the predicted levels. Anderson, Dale,
Morris and Powell (1980) write that Kentucky State University and
the University Of California at Los Angeles have established pro-
grams which aid in the retention Of minority and disadvantaged
students.

Kentucky State's Developmental Education Program follows:

1. Special programs, which provide services for disad-

vantaged students at the university level, Upward
Bound Program students and high school students.
2. Basic Skills Program in mathematics, English, com-

position, reading, speech and study skills.

48

3. Freshman Studies Program.
4. Entry level skills programs which give support ser-
vices to entering students identified as economi-

cally, culturally, or academically disadvantaged.

UCLA's program is as follows:
A. Analysis of student retention
1. Forces influencing the desire to attend college
2. Obstacles to be overcome in attaining the degree
3. Negative external forces to student persistence
and achievement
4. Internal forces which cause students not to
achieve

8. Additive factors affecting minority and low income

student persistence

C. Advantages and disadvantages Of special programs to

promote minority student persistence and
achievement.

Designing a curriculum appropriate to the needs Of the dis-
advantaged also involves taking into account the student's cul-
tural background and deciding whether the student should adapt to
the institution or whether the institution should adapt to the
student.

Astin, Astin, Bisconti and Frankel (1972) indicate that one
of the most pressing needs in special programs for the disadvan-
taged student is the development and testing Of curriculum mate-

rials tO help the student improve their academic abilities. They

49

go on to say that incoming disadvantaged students should be Of-
fered a preplanned interdisciplinary curriculum. Also, Astin,
Astin, Bisconti and Frankel indicate in reviewing experimental use
Of time-frames that (1) scheduling should be flexible so that
course work is not bound to the existing time schedules Of the
regular college, (2) more time should be allowed for some courses,
and less time for others, (3) the period necessary to accomplish
individual remediation does not always coincide with the usual
school term or day, (4) an experimental program should have a
commitment Of at least one year, and finally (5) grades should be
given little weight except as feedback information to the student,
particularly with the adjustment period that will take longer for
the special student. These authors feel that only after a year's
time can a student's commitment to such a program and ability to
succeed in college be adequately and fairly evaluated.

"Promoting Retention Among American Indian Students," by
Aitken and Falk (1984), indicates several factors in the retention
Of Native American students by (1) encouraging the parents and the
Indian community to support these students in their higher educa-
tion efforts; (2) assisting students by Offering development
courses in mathematics, study skills, budgeting skills and career
development; (3) encouraging institutions' commitments to the ed-
ucational needs Of Native Americans; (4) providing solid, complete
financial aid packages; and (5) encouraging and reminding students
of the importance Of personal motivation.

The final and an important segment Of direct support to the

disadvantaged student supportive service is tutorial assistance.

50

This becomes interchangable with other remediation components Of-
fered by support programs. The purpose Of tutorial assistance is
to provide academic support, and help in certain skill areas for
enhancement of college performance. However, this does not remove
the need for assistance in remedial courses as well. Tutoring is
available at most colleges, most unrelated to special programs.
Because Of budget support to these programs, many times students
will be tutored in group settings on individual subjects instead
of receiving individual tutorial assistance. The group approach
is a problem for disadvantaged students who require individual
assistance. New develOpments combining tutoring programs must be
carefully reviewed, so disadvantaged students receive one-on-One
tutoring. As in many cases in higher education, tutoring is the
ladder to success for many minority students.

Since the inception Of compensatory education programs, tu-
toring support has been an important component in assisting the
disadvantaged student. Some programs employ undergraduate and
graduate student tutors while others utilize teaching faculty,
specialized professionals in developmental education and advanced
disadvantaged students. Disadvantaged students have been found to
be effective tutors, particularly because Of similar backgrounds.
Several institutions have reported there is a motivational effect
in relating to a successful peer which might be a more powerful
learning tool than contact with a middle class adult in a remedi-
ation classroom (Bynum, Gordon and Garrahan, 1972). Tutoring is

used to accentuate the strengths and compensate for weaknesses

51

Of disadvantaged students. Solid tutorial programs build confi-
dence, and aid disadvantaged students in their adjustment to cOl-
lege. Research on the disadvantagesd student, conducted by
Morrison and Terrante (1971) insists that tutoring provides
Opportunities for disadvantaged students to receive assistance and
feedback when they need it. Many times, disadvantaged students
who are in large classrooms will hesitate to ask questions because

they feel insecure.

The Dilemma Of Financial Aid

 

One of the major barriers confronting all students is secur-
ing financial support for higher education. Indeed, with the
increased cost of college, institutions are forced to raise
tuition. Financial aid should then increase accordingly. Spe-
cifically, for minority and disadvantaged students, it is becoming
a critical issue. As federal government financial assistance
programs for students are reduced, the dilemma for minority stu-
dents becomes greater.

Special financial assistance programs for disadvantaged stu-
dents through federal, state, and local governments have existed
since the early 19605. Since that time, particularly in the late
19705 and 19805, these funds have been reduced each year. The
situation is serious, and colleges should alleviate it if these
students are to be retained and be successful. Cole (1983)
clearly states that access to higher education could be diminished
if student financial assistance continues to decline. A 44 per-

cent reduction in the overall student assistance program was

52

prOposed. This would affect approximately 2 million disadvantaged
students. Also, with 80 percent Of all black students receiving
some form Of federal assistance, their progress stands to be
impeded. The drOpout rate in higher education for blacks who do
not receive any aid is 46 percent, as compared to 19 percent for
whites. Most disadvantaged college students in New York state
will receive a financial aid package with maximum federal and
state grants (PELL, SEOG, TAP, EOP and other private funds), but
will still need some other assistance to cover rising costs. In
most cases the student is left with taking a bank loan or taking a
college work study job to cover their balance. Several years ago
government grants would have covered the cost of the disadvantaged
student's education in New York state. But, costs increase every
year while grant funding is decreasing. This dilemma becomes
increasingly serious, adding more pressure to minority students
before they enter college and may even turn them away from col-
lege. New York state and its colleges should consider working
toward a philosophy that the disadvantaged student shouldn't carry
the burden of incurring debts or work study, but should be free
from financial aid cost so that they can give academics their
fullest attention. States Offering Special assistance programs
for disadvantaged students, particularly New York state, could
increase state aid and (2) the individual campuses with special
programs could be mandated by the state to assist the disadvan-
taged student through their own budgets. This could particularly
help make colleges more committed to the disadvantaged students'

success on their campuses.

53

STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK

 

AGRICULTURAL AND TECHNICAL COLLEGES'

 

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM

 

The Educational Opportunity Program is an academic and
financial support program Offered to New York state residents
attending SUNY campuses. It provides a college education for
students who demonstrate potential, but who have not had the same
Opportunities as other students to realize that potential. Also,
to aid these students, EOP provides tutoring, personal counseling,
academic advisement, career planning services and financial sup-
port.

The 1964 Master Plan for the State University Of New York as
declared by the Trustees states that "... every student capable of
completing a program of higher education Shall have an Opportunity
to do so." The 1966 Interim Revision confirmed this long range

commitment, in which the Trustees set forth an ... expanded goal
of giving each applicant what he needs to the limit Of his or her
capabilities, requiring only that he be adult and willing to be
tested and advised.“ The trustees also recommended "that the
unwritten policy Of Open door admissions to State University be
confirmed as the Obligation of the State University to find a
place in the right program, on one or more campuses for every
qualified applicant Of post-high school age.“

Educational Opportunity Programs at colleges in the state,

served to obtain the Objectives set forth by the trustees. The

appropriations established for Operation Of the programs were

54

provided for testing and screening potential students; remedial
courses and a pre-freshman summer program; separate tutoring prO-
gram; personal counseling and academic advising services; and full
financial support to cover attending the State University, from
books and stipend to room and board.

The eligibility process for admissions to the Educational
Opportunity Programs Of SUNY -- which enables a student to receive
personal, academic and financial support under Section 6542 Of the
Education Law -- was designed to assist campuses in establishing
general parameters within which campuses may Operate. The State
University Faculty Senate Committee on Expanding Educational Op-
portunity assisted in the development Of the EOP model as well as

the General Plan and Guidelines for the Organization, Development,

 

Coordination, and Operation Of the Educational Opportunity

 

Programs of the State University_9f New York (1981-84), which

 

points out that an applicant must meet all of the following cri-
teria:

The applicant must be a resident of New York state. He

 

or she must have graduated from an approved high school or
have Obtained a New York State High School Diploma, or its
equivalent, such as an Armed Forces Equivalency Diploma. In
the absence of a diploma, an applicant must demonstrate to
the campus a level Of knowledge and academic ability equal to
the level specified for entrance to the program and for
completion Of 24 credit hours held by the State Education
Department for the evidence that a general equivalency

diploma has been earned.

55

He or she must be economically disadvantaged as deter-

 

mined by the income guidelines that have been established by

the New York State Education Department. Applicants can

qualify economically for admission to EOP:

l.

3.

by membership in a household whose income does
not exceed the amount listed in income guide-
lines; or
by proof of family exceptional economic condi-
tions: or

through documentation Of special conditions.

The applicant must also be educationallyydisadvantaged

to qualify for EOP. The basic criteria for determining this

include:

1.

non-admissibility under the college's normally
applied admission standards for a degree pro-
gram, and

identified potential for completing an academic

program.

Student Identification and Selection

 

If an EOP applicant is economically eligible for EOP, and has

previous academic records that Show low grades, deficient academic

content, low test scores, as well as other indicators of academic

deficiencies, he or she is admissible to EOP.

To assess motivation and potential, many SUNY colleges have

approached the potential for successful completion Of a post-

secondary program in different ways. Institutions have used

56

review committees to examine a student's file to ascertain whether
the student can benefit from admission to the institution, or
whether the institution has the adequate resources to ensure the
student a reasonable chance for success. In the past, when
Objective predictors alone were used, they were Often not that
reliable. They reflected only the applicant's past experiences
with academic and social systems rather than their potential for
success. This resulted in the graduation of more than 30,000
disadvantaged students throughout New York state. Thus competent
reviewers lOOk for evidence of such traits as motivation, maturi-
ty, supportive family, combined with academic grades, test scores,
and the institutional ability to provide appropriate services to
make an adequate admissions decision. Many institutions include a
personal interview and recommendations along with the review of
academic records to further explore those qualities which insure
academic success. Also students admitted to an EOP program will
generally have a high school G.P.A. average below 80 and a rank in
the 65th or lower percentile in his or her class.

Financial Aid in
Educational Opportunity Program

 

 

Financial aid is provided to help the disadvantaged student
with the cost Of room, board, tuition, books and personal expen-
ses. Aid is based on need, according to guidelines which include
family income and size of the family. Funds from a variety of
sources are most Often used to meet student financial need. The

most commonly used funds at the agricultural and technical

57

colleges for an EOP student are the PELL grant, Tuition Assistant
Program (TAP), Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grant (SEOG),
Educational Opportunity Program (EOP) stipend, college work study
(CWS), guaranteed student loan (GSL) and other self-support income
may be included.

In the past it was not uncommon for an EOP student to receive
100 percent Of their financial aid package in the forms of grant
and scholarship. However, over the past five years, financial aid
packaging for the disadvantaged student has changed drastically.
A great percentage of an EOP student's financial aid award is now
in the form Of self-help. While grants are decreasing, work study
and loans are increasing. The affect is that the EOP student is
having to shoulder a larger part Of his or her personal financial
burdens. It is imperative that Directors of Financial Aid give
proper attention and counseling to EOP students when packaging,
and the burden of financial aid must not interfere with the stu-
dent's concentration On meeting academic challenges.

Tutorial Services in
EdUcatTonal Opportunity Program

 

 

Tutorial services are provided for students as a supplement
to course instruction and personal study time. This service can
Often determine the student's success. The EOP student may
receive one-on-One and group tutoring. In many cases tutoring
sessions are held in a location where there can be Open verbal
exchange. The focus of the tutorial assistance program is on

helping each student progress academically to the point where

58

there is no longer a need for tutorial help. Developmental

Learning Centers are used to supplement the tutorial support ser-
vices by providing services tO improve reading, writing, mathe-

matics and other problems associated with learning.

Academic Advisement and Course Selection

 

Academic advisement of EOP students is a vital part Of the
support system. The EOP is involved in scheduling and overseeing
students' academic advisement. It would be a mistake for an EOP
to rely solely on routine campus advising system, as that coun-
selor would not be totally familiar with the students' needs.

Students' transcripts and other high school records, along
with diagnostic placement tests results, in mathematics, reading
and writing are evaluated when selection of courses is done. This
helps make course placement recommendations and enrollment in de-
velopmental courses.

Curriculum development is a new and growing process for EOP
students. The develOpment Of specific courses to meet the aca-
demic needs Of those students will better assist in academic ad-
visement and course selection. The Agricultural and Technical
College at Delhi has a developmental program in reading, English,
mathematics, and science which students take for a minimum Of one
term and a maximum of a year. Curriculums designed to reflect
more realistically the concerns, interests, and past experiences
of students may improve the promise of the disadvantaged student.

If the disadvantaged student is to survive in higher education,

59

curriculum planners must give thought tO the student's learning

styles and experiences.

Personal and Social Counseling in
the Educational Opportunity Program

 

 

EOP counselors provide continuing personal, academic and ca-
reer counseling to EOP students, all aimed at helping students
work towards their degrees. The program counselor is responsible
for assisting students in making a smooth transition from high
school to college. The counselor is normally assigned students
and works directly with the group to assist them in developing
positive attitudes toward their classes, in the development Of
good study habits, and the development Of communication and human
relation skills. The EOP counselor is a planner, negotiator,
supporter, overseer, and the student's advocate. Counselors are

the primary link to the student's success at the college.

CHAPTER III

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

Study Design

 

The primary purpose of this study is to determine those
selected characteristics which best predict the academic success
and the performance of minority disadvantaged students enrolled in
the State University Of New York Agricultural and Technical Col-
leges' Educational Opportunity Program, to aid in the possible
improvement Of colleges' admission criteria and administrative
oversight Of the Educational Opportunity Program students. The
researcher Of this study examined the high school and college
transcripts to analyze, geographic area, ethnicity, sex, high
school grade point averages, and units of mathematics and science
completed. Also examined were the Scholastic Aptitude Test scores
(mathematics, verbal), type Of high school diploma received, col-
lege major, years between high school completion and college ad-
mission, students interviewed and age Of the 287 minority (Black,
Spanish surname, Native American) students serving as the study
population (the total number of entering students admitted in
1979, 1980, and 1981) and divided them into two groups: those who
were successful in college and those who were not. These minority
groups and their characteristics served as a basis from which to

6D

61

arrive at predictors for student success and failure in State

University Of New York Agricultural and Technical College Educa-

tional Opportunity Programs.

Hypothesis

 

The following hypothesis were used to address the previously

stated variables:

1a

There will be no relationship between geographic area and
academic success Of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

There will be a relationship between geographic area and ac-
ademic success Of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

There will be no relationship between ethnicity and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.
There will be a relationship between ethnicity and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between sex and academic suc-
cess Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between sex and academic success
of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between age and academic suc—
cess Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between age and academic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between high school grade point
average and academic success Of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents in the program.

There will be a relationship between high school grade point
average and academic success Of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents in the program.

There will be no relationship between the number of units of
high school mathematics and academic success of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between the number Of units Of
high school mathematics and academic success Of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between the number Of units Of
high school science and academic success Of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

7b

10,,

IO

11

11b

12

12b

13

13b

62

There will be a relationship between the number Of units Of
high school science and academic success Of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between Scholastic Aptitude
Test mathematics scores and academic success Of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between Scholastic Aptitude Test
mathematics scores and academic success Of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between Scholastic Aptitude
Test verbal scores and academic success of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between Scholastic Aptitude Test
verbal scores and academic success of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

There will be no relationship between type Of high school
diploma and academic success Of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents in the program.

There will be a relationship between type Of high school
diploma and academic success Of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents in the program.

There will be no relationship between college major and aca-
demic success Of minority disadvantaged students in the prO-
gram.
There will be a relationship between college major and aca-
demic success Of minority disadvantaged students in the pro-
gram.

There will be nO relationship between years between high
school and college and academic success Of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

There will be a relationship between years between high
school and college and academic success Of minority disad-
vantaged students in the program.

There will be no relationship between students interviewed
and academic success Of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

There will be a relationship between students interviewed and
academic success Of minority disadvantaged students in the
program.

Description of the Sample

 

The subjects for this study were selected from five Of the

six State University Of New York Agricultural and Technical

63

Colleges' Educational Opportunity Programs. These are located at
Alfred, Canton, CObleskill, Delhi, and Morrisville.

The population for this study included all minority disad-
vantaged matriculants who entered these Educational Opportunity
Programs during the 1979, 1980, and 1981 fall semesters. Table 1
illustrates the ethnic breakdown by year, and by the total number

of male and female matriculants selected for the study.

TABLE 1 -- THE SAMPLE BY ETHNIC BREAKDOWN, 1979, 1980, 1981

 

 

 

 

 

ETHNIC GROUP 1979 1980 1981

M F T M F T M F T
BLACK 45 36 81 42 41 83 4O 27 67
NATIVE AMERICAN 3 0 3 1 3 4 1 3 4
SPANISH SURNAME _1_1_ 4 lg l 19 1_7_ g g _1_3
TOTAL 59 40 99 50 54 104 50 34 84

 

All minority students who were admitted during the period Of
this study were included in the population in order to secure a
manageable sample (minority students admitted comprise less than 2
percent Of the total student body at each campus). In attempting
to divide the subjects into successful and unsuccessful students
in terms Of academic performance, this researcher has defined
academic success as completion of at least one semester with a
minimum of 12 hours, with a grade point average of 2.0 (C) or

better.

64

Data Collection

 

The 1979, 1980, and 1981 EOP fall enrollment reports, sub-
mitted to the State University Of New York Central Administra-
tion's Office Of Special Programs by each campus was used to
identify the number of entering minority disadvantaged students on
each campus. This researcher visited the Office Of Special Pro-
grams tO receive and confirm this information.

Endorsement Of this study was also given by the Deputy to the
Chancellor Of the Office Of Special Programs. With the support Of
the participating campus presidents the collection Of data was
gathered by the researcher during campus visits and by receipt Of
verified information from participating EOP directors and other
offices (i.e. registrar). High school and college records were

collected from the five college campuses involved in this study.

DATA ANALYSIS

 

This study employs three research techniques to analyze the
13 variables believed to be associated with college success.

Those techniques are described below, and the rationale for their
use in this study is included.

To test if there was a significant difference between the
successful group and the unsuccessful group in academic achieve-
ments, the chi-square test and t-test were utilized. The multiple
regression analysis technique was utilized to assist in the pre-

diction Of college grade point average.

65

CHI-SQUARE

 

The chi-Square technique tests the statistical significance
Of the relationships between independent variables and compares
the difference between the actual count in the individual cells
and the count which is expected purely on the basis Of chance.

If there is no relationship between the variables, these counts
should be almost equal, and the chi-square value in this case
would be small. However, if there is a relationship between the
variables, the count should differ and the chi-square value should
be large.

The researcher used chi-square to best determine the signif-
icance Of the variables tested. Kirk (1978) point out that the
use of the chi-Square test is for comparisons Of independent sam-
ples which may be of unequal size and have no pairing of Observa-

tions.

21.5.5.1.
The t-test statistical method is Often used when evaluating
the statistical significance Of a difference between two sample
means. Bounds, Cormier and Huck (1974) point out that the t-test
is most Often used to compare the means of two groups. If the two
sample means are far enough apart, the t-test will concede a sig-
nificant difference, thus permitting the researcher to conclude

that the two populations probably do not have the same mean.

The researcher used the t-test statistical analysis to test

the significance Of the difference between the two groups by age,

66

high school grade point average, units Of high school mathematics,
and science, and Scholastic Aptitude Test scores (mathematics,

verbal).

Multiple Regression Analysis

 

Another statistical technique used to examine the data and
define relationships among the variables in this study is multiple
regression analysis. A statistical comparison is be made Of
apprOpriate characteristics derived from students' files and com-
pared through a multiple regression technique. This technique is
a mathematical analysis that will give one a set of coefficients
that can be multiplied by each carrier Of information to yield a
prediction Of what a person's college grade point average

will be.

SUMMARY
Following an initial review Of the data, this researcher de-
' cided to use the chi-square and t-test to test the hypotheses.
This researcher used the multiple regression method to best prO-
vide an accurate comparison of the data to predict college grade
point average from a relevant subset Of variables in this limited

sample.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS

Introduction

 

The focus Of this study was to investigate and discuss
selected characteristics which impact on the academic success and
performance of minority disadvantaged students in the Educational
Opportunity Programs Of the State University Of New York Agricul-
tural and Technical Colleges. Also, certain characteristics will
be employed together to compose the best model for predicting
college grade point average for the population in this study.
These students were admitted as a result Of the Educational
Opportunity Program, a vehicle charged with admitting capable
students who have not reached their academic potential because Of
limited financial resources and inadequate academic preparation.
The pOpulation was divided in several ways: by age, sex, geo-
graphical area, ethnicity, major, and by comparisons Of the stu-
dents who were successful and those who were unsuccessful.

In this chapter the hypotheses will be restated. Comparisons
will be made through the chi-square and t-test statistical analy-
sis On selected variables to Observe statistical significance.
These statistical analyses will demonstrate if there exists a
significant difference between the successful and the unsuccessful

67

68

groups, and if the variables tested can be considered related to
academic success.

A descriptive statement will be made about the statistical
outcome Of the hypothesis testing. Also, multiple regression is
used to predict college grade point average from a relevant subset

Of variables that was employed in the study.

Testing Of the Hypotheses

 

1 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
geographic area and academic success Of minority disadvan-
taged students in the program.

 

1b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
geographic area and academic success of minority disadvan-
taged students in the program.

 

The chi-square Of the geographical area of the two groups
shown in Table 2 shows no significant difference in the success Of
minority disadvantaged students. The table further illustrates
that the New York City region had 139, or 48 percent of the stu-
dents in that region. The New York City and the Long Island re-
gions are both downstate metropolitan areas, and combine for a

total Of 177, or 62 percent Of the sample.

69

TABLE 2 -- GEOGRAPHICAL AREA BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

GEOGRAPHICAL SUCCESSFUL UNSUCCESSFUL
AREA GROUP GROUP ROW TOTAL
NIAGARA FRONTIER/ 13 21 34
LAKE ONTARIO REGION 38.2 61.7 11.8
SOUTHWESTERN 2 2 4
REGION 50.0 50.0 1.4
FINGER LAKES/ 6 18 24
1000 ISLANDS REGION 25.0 75.0 8.4
CENTRAL REGION 7 13 20
35.0 65.0 7.0
ADIRONDACK REGION ' l 2 3
33.3 66.6 1.1
CAPITAL DISTRICT 4 11 15
REGION 26.6 73.3 5.2
CATSKILL REGION 4 6 10
40.0 60.0 3.5
NEW YORK CITY 47 92 139
REGION 33.8 66.1 48.4
LONG ISLAND 13 25 38
REGION 34.2 65.7 13.2
COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287
33.80 66.20 100.00

 

CHI-SQUARE = 2.126 WITH 8 DEGREES OF FREEDOM P=.977

70

2a: Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
ethnicity and academic success Of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

 

2 : Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
ethnicity and academic success of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

 

The figures in Table 3 illustrate that 70, or 30 percent, Of
the 231 Black students experienced academic success. It was ex-
pected, according to the testing Of ethnicity, that 78 Black stu-
dents would be successful. There were 161, or 70 percent, Of the
Black students who were unsuccessful, with the expectancy Of 153.
The table illustrates that the expectancy Of academic success Of
Black students should have been greater than 30 percent.

The Spanish surname students did much better than the Black
and Native American students. The figures illustrate that 15.2
Spanish surname students were expected to be successful and 22, or
49 percent, were. Also, there was an expectancy Of 29.8 Spanish
surname students tO be unsuccessful, while only 23 were.

There were 11 Native American students, 3.7 were expected to
be successful and 5, or 45 percent, were. Thirty-four percent Of
the total sample experienced academic success.

There is a significant relationship between ethnicity and

academic success.

71

TABLE 3 -- ETHNICITY BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

 

 

ETHNICITY SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
BLACK * 70 161 231

78.1 152.9

30.30 69.70 80.49
SPANISH 22 23 45
SURNAME 15.2 29.8

48.89 51.11 15.68
NATIVE 5 6 11
AMERICAN 3.7 7.3

45.45 54.55 3.83
COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287

33.80 66.20 100.00

 

CHI-SQUARE = 6.509 WITH 2 DEGREES OF FREEDOM P=.039
*CELLS (Observed frequency, expected frequency, row percent)
3 : Reseach Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between

sex and academic success Of minority disadvantaged students
in the program.

 

3b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between sex
and academic success of minority disadvantaged students in
the program.

 

Table 4 illustrates that 51, or 32 percent, Of the males were
successful, along with 46, or 36 percent, Of the females and 97,
or 34 percent, Of the total sample. The table further illustrates
that 108, or 68 percent, Of the males were unsuccessful, along
with 82, or 64 percent, of the females who were unsuccessful.

In the test for significance, there was no Significant rela-

tionship between sex and academic success.

72

TABLE 4 -- SEX BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

 

 

SEX SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
MALE 51 108 159
32.08 67.92 55.40
FEMALE 46 82 128
35.94 64.06 44.60
COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287
33.80 66.20 100.00
CHI-SQUARE = 0.473 WITH 1 DEGREE OF FREEDOM P=.492
4a: Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
age and academic success of minority disadvantaged students
in the program.
4b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between age

 

and academic success of minority disadvantaged students in

the program.

Table 5 Shows that there was no significant difference in the

age Of the successful and unsuccessful groups. The mean Of the

two groups show little difference.

TABLE 5 -- AGE BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

NO. MEAN STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS AGE DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 97 18.938 2.474
UNSUCCESSFUL 190 19.257 2.956

 

t=-0.914 df=285 P=.361

73

5 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
high school grade point average and academic success Of mi-
nority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

5 : Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
high school grade point average and academic success Of mi-
nority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

Table 6 Shows that the successful group had a mean high
school grade point average that was higher than the unsuccessful
group. The t-test showed a significant difference between the two

groups.

TABLE 6 -- HIGH SCHOOL GRADE POINT AVERAGE BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

MEAN
N0. HIGH SCHOOL STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS GPA DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 91 74.606 5.001
UNSUCCESSFUL 176 72.896 4.927

 

t=2.67 df=265 P=.008

6 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
the number of units Of high school mathematics and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

61f Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between the
number Of unTts Of high school mathematics and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

In examining the number of units of high school mathematics
as it relates to academic success, Table 7 shows no significant

difference in the mean of units Of math taken by the two groups.

74

TABLE 7 -- NUMBER OF UNITS OF HIGH SCHOOL MATH BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

 

 

MEAN

NO. HIGH SCHOOL STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS MATH UNITS DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 93 2.602 0.945
UNSUCCESSFUL 178 2.511 1.100
t=0.676 df=269 P=.499
7 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between

a the number of units Of high school science and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

7b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between the

 

number Of units Of high school science and acdemic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

Table 8 further shows that there is no Significant difference
in the number of units of high school science between the suc-
cessful group and unsuccessful groups.

TABLE 8 -- NUMBER OF UNITS OF HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE BY
ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

MEAN
NO. HIGH SCHOOL STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS SCIENCE UNITS DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 93 2.483 0.892
UNSUCCESSFUL 178 2.432 0.931

 

t=0.436 df=269 P=.662

75

Table 9 indicates that 58, or 20 percent, Of the sample took
the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Twenty-two were from the successful
group and 36 were from the unsuccessful group. The table further
illustrates that 229, or 80 percent, of the sample did not take
the Scholastic Aptitude Test, 75 were from the successful group

and 154 were from the unsuccessful group.

TABLE 9 -- SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST COUNT

 

 

SAT COUNT SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
YES 22 36 58
37.93 62.07 20.2
N0 75 154 229
32.75 67.25 79.8
COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287
33.80 66.20 100.00

 

83: Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
Scholastic Aptitude Test mathematics scores and academic
success of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

8b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
SEhOTastic Aptitude Test mathematics scores and academic
success Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

Table 10 shows that, according to the t-test, of the students
from the successful group and the unsuccessful group who tOOk the
Scholastic Aptitude Test, there was nO significant difference in
the mean score Of the Scholastic Aptitude Test mathematics sec-

tion.

76

TABLE 10 -- SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST MATHEMATICS BY
ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

NO. MEAN STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS SAT MATH DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 22 324.090 75.571
UNSUCCESSFUL 36 299.444 49.277

 

t=1.362 df=32 P=.182

9 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
SchOTastTt Aptitude Test verbal scores and academic success
of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

9b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
SchOTéstic Aptitude Test verbal scores and academic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

Table 11 shows that, according to the t-test, Of the students
from the successful group and the unsuccessful group who took the
Scholastic Aptitude Test, there was no significant difference in
the mean score Of the Scholastic Aptitude Test verbal section.

TABLE 11 -- SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST VERBAL BY
ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

NO. MEAN STANDARD
GROUP SUBJECTS SAT VERBAL DEVIATION
SUCCESSFUL 22 300.454 99.210
UNSUCCESSFUL 36 278.888 73.320

 

t=0.949 df=56 P=.346

77

10 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
type of high school diploma and academic success Of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

 

10b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
type Of high school diploma and academic success Of minority
disadvantaged students in the program.

 

Table 12 illustrates that 273, or 95 percent, of the sample
held a regular high school diploma, and 14, or 5 percent, held a
general equivalency diploma. Only 34 percent of the students who
held a regular diploma experience success, while only 21 percent
Of the students who held a general equivalency diploma experienced
success.

There is no significant relationship between type of high

school diploma and academic success.

TABLE 12 -- TYPE OF HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

HIGH SCHOOL

 

DIPLOMA SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
REGULAR 94 179 273
34.43 65.57 95.12
GENERAL 3 11 14
EQUIVALENCY 21.43 78.57 4.88
COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287
33.80 66.20 100.00

 

CHI-SQUARE = 1.006 WITH 1 DEGREE OF FREEDOM P=.316

78

11 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
college major and academic success of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

 

11 : Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
college majOr and academic success Of minority disadvantaged
students in the program.

 

Table 13 illustrates that whether a student is successful or
unsuccessful can depend upon the major field Of study they choose.
There were 109, or 41 percent, Of the sample who chose or were put
into the major Individual Studies. Chi-square test results indi-
cate that 28 with an expected 37.2 students were successful and 81
rather than the expected 71.8 were unsuccessful. The major areas
Of business and engineering seemed to illustrate a noticable dif-
ference, having much greater success than expected as compared to
the other major areas. There were 53, or 20.08 percent, Of the
sample who chose business as a major, with 26 students Of an ex-
pected 18.1 experiencing success. In the major area Of engineer-
ing, 20, or 7.57 percent, Of the sample chose this area Of study,
11 with an expected 6.8 experiencing success. Some of the re-
ported majors were excluded, because the expected frequencies were
so small that they would jeopardize the validity Of the chi-square
test.

There is a significant relationship between college major and

academic success.

TABLE 13 -- COLLEGE MAJOR BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

COLLEGE MAJOR SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
AGRICULTURE *3 11 14
4.8 9.2
21.43 78.57 5.30
BUSINESS 26 27 53
18.1 34.9
49.06 50.94 20.08
ENGINEERING 11 9 20
6.8 13.2
55.00 45.00 7.57
FOOD SCIENCE 3 13 16
5.5 10.5
18.75 81.25 6.06
HEALTH SERVICES 7 12 19
6.5 12.5
36.84 63.16 7.20
INDIVIDUAL STUDIES 28 81 109
37.2 71.8
25.69 74.31 41.29
LIBERAL ARTS 6 12 18
6.1 11.9
33.33 66.67 6.82
MECHANICAL 6 9 15
ENGINEERING 5.1 9.9
40.00 60.00 5.68
COLUMN TOTAL 90 174 264
34.09 65.91 100.00

 

 

CHI-SQUARE = 15.576 WITH 7 DEGREES OF FREEDOM

*CELLS (Observed Frequency, Expected Frequency, Row Percent)

P=.029

8O

12 : Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
years between high school and college and academic success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

 

 

12b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be no relationship between
years between h1gh school and college and academ1c success
Of minority disadvantaged students in the program.

Table 14 illustrates that 29, or 71 percent, Of the students
who did not enter college directly after high school were in the
unsuccessful group. Also only 85, or 34 percent, Of the students
who entered college immediately following high school, experienced
academic success.

There is no significant relationship between years between
high school and college and academic success.

TABLE 14 -- YEARS BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE BY
ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

LAPSE BETWEEN
HS and COLLEGE SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL

 

YES 12 29 41
29.27 70.73 14.29

NO 85 161 246
34.55 65.45 85.71

COLUMN TOTAL 97 190 287
N 33.80 _ _ ~~ 66.20 _ , > . 100.00

 

CHI-SQUARE = 0.439 WITH 1 DEGREE 0F FREEDOM P=.508

13a: Research Hypothesis -- There will be a relationship between
studentsTinterVTewed and academic success Of minority dis-
advantaged students in the program.

 

13b: Null Hypothesis -- There will be nO relationship between
studEhtsFTnterviewed and academic success Of minority dis-
advantaged students in the program.

 

81

Those students who had an admissions interview with the Edu-
cational Opportunity Program Office tended to be more successful
than the students who did not have an interview.

The figures in Table 15 illustrate that 37, with an expec-
tancy Of 29.1, or 43 percent, Of the students interviewed were
from the successful group, while 60, with an expectancy Of 67.9,
or 30 percent, of students who had no interview were from the same
group. The table also further illustrates that 141, with an
expectency 133.1, or 70 percent, Of the students who had no in-
terview were unsuccessful.

There is a significant relationship between students inter-
viewed and academic success.

TABLE 15 -- EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM ADMISSIONS
INTERVIEW BY ACADEMIC SUCCESS

 

 

INTERVIEW SUCCESSFUL GROUP UNSUCCESSFUL GROUP ROW TOTAL
YES * 37 49 86
29.1 56.9
43.02 56.98 29.97
NO 60 141 201
67.9 133.1
29.85 70.15 70.03
TOTAL 97 190 287
33.80 66.20 100.00

 

CHI-SQUARE = 4.671 WITH 1 DEGREE OF FREEDOM P=.031

*CELLS (Observed Frequency, Expected Frequency, Row Percent)

82

College Grade Point Average Prediction

 

The multiple regression analysis technique employed to assist
in the prediction Of college grade point average based upon in-
formation from selected variables, was used for the sample in this
study. The variables used in the analysis were ones that college
admissions personnel could have on hand to use in the selection
process. The pOpulation in this study is so specialized, in that
certain information on specific variables was not complete, caus-
ing difficulty with the analysis used. An example would be the
Scholastic Aptitude Test, which so few students in the population
took. Also, the number Of semester hours completed and the stu-
dents' reasons for leaving college were not considered, because
this information would not be available to a counselor making an
admission decision.

Based upon the multiple regression analysis that was per-
formed, the following six independent variables, listed from most
to least important carriers Of information, together composed the
best model for predicting college grade point average for the
population in this study.

1. High School Grade Point Average
2. Admissions Interview

3. College Major

4. Units Of High School Science

5. Age

6. Years Between High School and College

  
   

83

The coefficient of determination (R = 0.197) indicates the
proportion of the variance among the college grade point averages

that can be explained by this six variable model.

The diagram below, Table 16, represents the total variance Of
the college grade point averages. Variance in the college grade
point average scores that is unexplained by the model, is the area
outside the Slice. Only less than one-fifth or 20 percent of the
observed variance in college grade point average scores can be
explained. The six independent variables together account for the
small slice of the diagram. It is interesting to note that three
Of these six variables, listed in order of importance (high school
grade point averages, admissions interview, college major) were

all significant in the study.

TABLE 16 -- COLLEGE GRADE POINT AVERAGE VARIANCE

 
  

  
   
  

Vaflance
Explained

 

Vaflance
Unexplained

84

Summary

The results of the study have been presented as they pertain
to the research hypotheses and related questions. Relationships
between those selected characteristics which impact on the pre-
diction of academic success and minority students' performance at
State University of New York Agricultural and Technical Colleges'
Educational Opportunity Programs are drawn. To test the hypothe-
ses, a population was selected which included all entering minor-
ity students admitted during the period of this study (Blacks,
Spanish surname, Native Americans).

This chapter has analyzed data which have been generated from
statistical tests of a number of hypotheses.

Based on the results of this study, several of the above
variables appear to be factors which warrant consideration by
Educational Opportunity Program Offices and admission committees
in selecting and guiding members of prospective classes. The
findings presented in this chapter appear to indicate that a ma-
jority of the population was performing unsatisfactorily, although
the variables (race, interview, college major, and high school
grade point average) showed a significant difference in regards to
the academically successful group and the unsuccessful group. The
high school grade point average was the Single most important
carrier of information about college grade point average. Multi-
ple regression was used to find the best model for predicting

college grade point average.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS,
AND IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

Summary Discussion

 

Educational Opportunity Programs provide the opportunity for
capable students who have not reached their academic potential
because of limited financial resources and inadequate academic
preparation to receive a college education. The purpose of this
study was to investigate certain characteristics and the perfor-
mance of the successful and unsuccessful disadvantaged minority
matriculants in the State University of New York Agricultural and
Technical Colleges' Educational Opportunity Programs, and to use
selected characteristics to predict academic achievement of these
students.

The pOpulation consisted of 231 Blacks, 45 Spanish surname,
and 11 Native Americans attending five of the State University's
six agricultural and technical colleges. The pOpulation was divi-
ded into groups who experienced success or were unsuccessful in
academic performance. Academic success was defined as any student
who completed at least one semester with a minimum of 12 credit
hours with a grade point average of 2.0 or better. Each student's
high school and college transcripts were analyzed to determine
academic achievements based on geographic area, ethnicity, sex,

85

86

high school grade point average, units of mathematics and science
completed, Scholastic Aptitude Test (mathematics, verbal), type of
high school diploma, college major, years between high school and
college, personal interview, and age.

Once disadvantaged students are admitted into the colleges
and universities throughout the United States, the commitment to
academic and social support is valuable toward the success of the
student. Educational Oopportunity Program Staff and other guid-
ance personnel need more direction in the establishment of poli-
cies, programs and procedures, to meet the needs of their stu-
dents. In addition, the institution's administrative staff must
realize the importance of prOper programming to insure the success
of disadvantaged students. These students should not be admitted
because of legislation, and then be denied necessary supportive
assistance. Schools that accept disadvantaged students have an
obligation to create, nurture, and maintain a supportive environ-
ment which aids the student in overcoming personal and academic
deficiencies. This study attempts to illustrate how establishment
of better admissions guidelines, and guidance practices can bene-
fit the minority disadvantaged student and the college he or she

enrolls in. The study examines the following subquestions:

1. Is there a significant difference in the selected vari-
ables of successful and unsuccessful minority disadvan-
taged students?

2. What has been the nature of the performance of minority

disadvantaged students to State University of New York

87

agricultural and technical colleges' Educational Oppor-
tunity Program?

3. 00 variables outlined in this study have a significant

affect in predicting academic success?

AS indicated in Chapter II, the review of literature, Grant
and Singleton (1983) state that admissions criteria based on test
scores tend to be correlated with socio-economic status and are
biased against racial and ethnic minorities. It is suggested that
other factors such as personality traits be considered when
reviewing a minority student for admissions. Creighton (1974), in
the study of the effectiveness Of traditional and subjective
methods in predicting the academic performance of disadvantaged
college freshmen, discovered that traditional methods proved
inadequate. In subjective methods, peer prediction was found to be
significantly related to the disadvantaged student's academic
success. Counselors had the poorest record of predicting academic
performance of the students. Study results also suggest that the
more hours disadvantaged students attempt, the higher their grade
point average.

Hammond and Rosick (1972) found in their study of possible
predictors of college success, that standardized tests are not
valid predictors of college success for disadvantaged students.

In a study by Dunn (1972) describing certain characteristics
of the successful ethnic minority students enrolled in Arizona
community colleges, it was found that:

1. Few minority students were successful.

88

The number of Asian-Americans was small compared to the
other groups.

Marital status, number of hours completed, and status as
a veteran were characteristics of limited importance.

A prediction of success could not be made on curricular
choice based upon given information. However, the re-
gression equation technique could be used to guide stu-
dents into certain curricula in which success could be
achieved.

American College Testing composite and rank in class used
as admission criteria Should be used only with careful
study. Also, the use of a single criteria for admisson
is inadvisable.

The regression equation used in this study can improve
the prediction Of academic success for each ethnic group.
A college success factor could be predicted and each
variable could possibly give student advisors a guideline

for individual curricular choice.

In a study conducted by DiCesare, Sedlacek and Brooks (1972),

looking at non-intellectual correlates of Black student attrition,
it was discovered that Black students who continued their academic
studies had more self-confidence and higher expectations than

those students who left college.

The findings from the study indicate similar results as found

1.

in some of the previously mentioned studies. It suggests:

Very few minority disadvantaged students were successful

at the colleges studied.

89

2. Spanish surname students experience greater success than
the other groups.

3. High school grade point average is a positive indicator
for academic success.

4. Choice of college major showed a positive relationship to
academic success.

5. Use of Educational Opportunity Program admissions inter-
views Showed a significant relationship to academic suc-
cess.

6. Geographical area, sex, age, units of high school mathe-
matics and science, Scholastic Aptitude Test mathematics
and verbal, type of high school diploma, and years
between high school and college, were not significant.

7. The best model that was found to predict college grade
point average from relevant variables was still so poor

as to be impractical.

CONCLUSIONS

 

Within the limitations of this study, and the statistical
analyses employed, the following conclusions are drawn from the
data collected and reported in Chapter IV. The findings show
there is a lack of successful minority students. In this study
only 33.8 percent of the students experienced academic success.
Had the researcher used the traditional view of academic success
-- graduation -- the percentage Of students having success would
have been 18.8 percent. After review of the data in this study,

there are questions concerning why there are so few successful

9O

minority disadvantaged students at the agricultural and technical

colleges in the State University of New York.

GEOGRAPHICAL AREA

 

There was no significant difference in the academic success
of minority disadvantaged students based upon the particular area
of the state they were from. Less than 50 percent of the students
from any region of the state, with the exception of the southern
region, experienced academic success.

However, a significant number of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents were from the New York City and Long Island areas. The
conclusion here is that whether a minority disadvantaged student
was from a particular area of the state made no difference in the

attainment of academic success.

ETHNICITY

There is, within this study, a significant relationship be-
tween ethnicity and academic success. Spanish surname students
did much better than the other two groups studied. Forty-nine
percent of that group experienced success. Native American stu-
dents had a 45 percent success rate. Black students, who com-
prised 80 percent of the total sample, had only a 30 percent suc-
cess rate.

Combined, study subjects had only a 34 percent success rate.
This indicates there should be a concern about services and

structure of the programs for these students.

91

Q

There appears to be no Significant relationship between sex
and academic success. The male population was 55 percent of the
sample (127 Black, 27 Spanish surname, five Native Americans).
The female population was 45 percent of the sample (104 Black, 18
Spanish surname, six Native American). The Native American group
was the only ethnic group which had a smaller male representation.
The two groups were very close in experiencing academic success.
Thirty-two percent of the males experienced success, while 36

percent of the females experienced academic success.

A§E_

As stated, age of the disadvantaged minority students appears
to play no Significant role in predicting one's success. However,
it is interesting to note that the table shows the students who
experienced academic success were Slightly younger than the un-

successful.

HIGH SCHOOL GRADE POINT AVERAGE

 

There appears to be a significant relationship between high
school grade point average and academic success in college. The
minority disadvantaged students who experienced success had a
higher grade point average than the unsuccessful. The researcher
points out that a student with a high school grade point average
of 75 (C) or better based upon the results, appears to stand a

reasonable chance of experiencing success in college.

92

UNITS OF HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS

 

There appears to be no significant relationship between the
number of units of high school mathematics and academic success.
However, because possession of mathematic skills is important in
our society, one would have expected to see a significant differ-

ence between the two groups.

UNITS OF HIGH SCHOOL SCIENCE

 

The number of units of high school science also appears to
show no significant relationship to academic success. However,
the two groups seemed to have taken less science than mathematics.
Again, one would expect to see a difference in the units of sci-

ence taken between the two groups.

SCHOLASTIC APTITUDE TEST
MATHEMAIICS AND VERBAL

 

There was a very low percentage (20) Of the minority disad-
vantaged matriculants who took the Scholastic Aptitude Tests. The
information reported in the results indicates that there was no
significant relationship between those who took the Scholastic
Aptitude Tests and those who did not. The results indicated that
all Of the students who took the Scholastic Aptitude Tests scored
poorly. Finally, it appears that the Scholastic Aptitude Test is
not an accurate predictor of the success for this group of stu-
dents because 77 percent Of the minority disadvantaged matricu-
lants who experienced success did not take the Scholastic Aptitude

Tests. Also, the results indicate there is no significant

93

relationship between Scholastic Aptitude Test and academic success

of the two groups.

TYPE OF HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA

 

There appears to be no relationship between type of high
school diploma and academic success. The researcher points out
that there was a small number of minority disadvantaged students
who held a general equivalency diploma. Only 21 percent of those
who held a general equivalency diploma experience academic suc-
cess. Also of those students in the sample who held a regular

diploma, only 34 percent experience academic success.

COLLEGE MAJOR

 

There appears to be a significant relationship between a
student's choice of college major and academic success. The
research showed that whether a minority disadvantaged student is
successful or unsuccessful depends on area of study they have
chosen. Students choose college major areas of study for many
different reasons. Many times college major choice is because of
income or trend or guidance from an outside source. The choice is
often made without considering prior academic preparation for the

particular area of study.

YEARS BETWEEN HIGH SCHOOL AND COLLEGE

 

There appears to be no relationship between the number of
years elapsed between high school and college and a student's

academic success. Only 29 percent of the students who took a

94

break experienced success, while only 35 percent of the students
who took no break experienced success. After the characteristic
of years between high school and college as related to academic
success is studied, one realizes that the characteristic of age
will probably follow a similar pattern. Such was the case.
However, the researcher points out that 86 percent of the sample
enrolled directly upon completion of high School.

EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITY PROGRAM
ADMISSIONS INTERVIEW

 

 

There appears to be a Significant relationship between an
Educational Opportunity Program pre-enrollment admissions inter-
view and academic success. Those minority disadvantaged students
who had an interview with the Educational Opportunity Program Of-
fice experienced greater success than those who did not. 0f the
students who were not interviewed, the tests used in this study
showed a greater number were expected to have success and a lesser
number was expected to be unsuccessful. It is clear that if a
minority disadvantaged student is interviewed before being ac-
cepted to college, the college has a greater chance of increasing

the success rate of these students.

PREDICTING COLLEGE GRADE POINT AVERAGE

 

The coefficient of determination was so small that in prac-
tice there can be almost no benefit to using this equation to

predict college grade point average.

95

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Considering the findings and conclusions of this study, the

following recommendations seem apprOpriate:

1.

Because there appeared to be a small number of successful
minority disadvantaged students, in the State University
Of New York Agricultural and Technical Colleges, it is
suggested that all minority disadvantaged students in the
university system be counted and that these data be ana-
lyzed to see how many are achieving a C (2.0) grade av-
erage or better and completed one semester minimum Of 12
semester hours.

Educational Opportunity Program staffs should become more
involved in the academic scheduling process of students
in the program. These students should be academically
advised by those who are most familiar with their per-
sonal and academic backgrounds. Because there is a sig-
nificant relationship between choice of college major and
the success of the student, it is important that the
student receive adequate enlightened counseling to help
make a reasonable choice.

It is a fact that education is a “building block“ pro-
cess; skills are added on top of skills as a student
progresses from grade school through college. Because of
this, it is essential that compensatory education pro-

grams be expanded and improved to assure that the

96

building process properly prepares a student with the
skills necessary for success following high school grad-
uation.

Recruitment efforts should insure that applicants who
Show the most promise for college success are identified.
This researcher suggests that once students have been
identified that a required interview with the Educational
Opportunity Program Office be conducted. This interview
would give the college an opportunity to know more about
the student and therefore assist in making the decision
of whether the college has the necessary support to help
the student succeed. This interview could also help in
making sure the student has chosen the right field of
study based upon proper qualifications and interest.
Compensatory education programs at the five colleges
studied should be strengthened. The State University of
New York, based upon the findings of this study, may also
want to consider a review of such programs at all of its '
campuses.

This researcher's definition of academic success, while
practical, is limited. It does, however, suggest that
attention should be directed toward retention of these
students. Monitoring their personal and academic success
is important to ensure these students of successful
completion Of college, and the ultimate goal -- one which

many use to define college success -- of graduation.

7.

97

Individual campuses that have Educational Opportunity
Programs should be held more accountable to the State
University of New York Central Administration for the
development and operation of the programs.

An effective management systems approach program should
be developed for use by the State University of New York
campuses that sponsor Educational Opportunity Programs.
The concept and programs that have been developed for
minority disavantaged students are now at a stage where
effective program management is important to the success
Of the students.

Learning environments that are not traditionally designed
for the disadvantaged minority student may require
changes. These should be reviewed with an eye towards a
separate, specialized curriculum, changes in scheduling,
more individualized instruction and counseling, special-
ized tutorial programs and a more flexible means of

evaluation.

IMPLICATIONS FOR FURTHER RESEARCH

 

The findings of this study suggest further research, as

indicated by the following recommended questions:

1. What institutional characteristics and services
assisted in the success or lack of success of
students?

2. Do characteristics such as size Of family, and

parental education and attitudes, affect the success

98

or lack of success of minority disadvantaged stu-
dents?

What psychological factors are associated with the
unsuccessful minority disadvantaged students?

What specific Educational Opportunity Program fac-
tors aided or prevented the minority disadvantaged
student's success?

How can cognitive and noncognitive factors in the
admissions process be more accurately measured for
minority disadvantaged students?

What factors are associated with the choice Of col-
lege major in the success of minority disadvantaged
students?

The findings of this study may be compared to Simi-
lar studies of all minority students, and the entire
student population within the State University of

New York.

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY

Aitken, L.D., and Falk, D.R. “Promoting Retention Among American
Indian College Students." Journal gf_American Indian
Education 23 (January 1984), 24-31.

 

Allen, B.V. "The Success Of the EOP: A Refutation of the Immuta-
bility of Scholastic Achievement." Journal gf_Negro
Education 45 (Winter 1976), 70-77.

Anderson, E., Dale, L., Morris, E., and Powell, N. "Successful
Retention of the Educationally Disadvantaged and Minority
Student.“ College and University Journal 55 (Summer 1980),
427-428 0

 

Angerosa, John. “History of the Development of the Agricultural
and Technical Colleges in New York State.” Morrisville,
New York, 1982. (Unpublished Research)

Anton, Kristin P. “Socioeconomic Factors in Preparation for Higher
Education Among Whites, Blacks, Hispanics and Asians."
Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Edu-
cational Research Association. Los Angeles, California,
April, 1981.

Astin, Helen S., Astin, Alexander W., Bisconti, Ann 5., and
Frankel, Hyman H. Higher Education and the Disadvantaged
Student. Washington, O.C.: HUman Services Press, 1972.

 

Bailey, Robert L. Minority Admissions. Massachusetts: Lexing-
ton Books, 1978.

 

Barlow, M.L. History pf_Industrial Education jp_the United
States. Chas. A. Bennett CO., Inc., 1967.

 

 

Biemiller, L. "Board Says Minority-Group Scores Helped Push Up
Averages on SAT." Chronicle g:_Higher Education 25
(October 1982).

 

Blustein, D.L. “The Complex Role of an Opportunity Program Coun-
selor." Journal gf_College Student Personnel 22 (May
1981), 218-223.

 

Bounds, W.G., Jr., Cormier, W.H., and Huck, S.W. Reading Statis-
tics and Research. New York: Harper and Row, 1974.

 

 

99

100

Boyd, William M., 11. "Black Students Outperform Their SAT Scores.
Excellent Secondary Preparation Can Impart Important Know-
ledge and Attitudes." Independent School 39 (May 1980),
35-370

 

Brewington, K., Daniels, H., Ewers, J., Gooden, R., and
Williams, F. “Admissions Criteria and the Minority Stu-
dent.“ Journal gf_Non-White Concerns ig_Personnel and
Guidance 12 (October 1983), 19-32.

 

 

Burrell, Leon F. "15 There a Future for Black Students on Pre-
dominantly White Campuses?" Intergrateducation XVIII,
5-6 (December 1981), 23-27.

 

Bynum, Effie M., Gordon, Edmund W., Garrahan, David P., and Lewis,
Anne. Report pf_tfle_$tudy pj_Collegiate Compensatory Pro-
grams for Disadvantaged Youth. Department Of Guidance,
TeacherST College, COTUmbia Univeristy, 1972, 65.

 

 

Carr, Ronnie, and Ledwith, Frank. "Helping Disadvantaged Students.“
Teaching §t_§_Distance 18 (Winter 1980), 77-85.

Casas, J.M., and Ruiz, R.A. Counseling Across Cultures. The
East-West Center. 1981.

 

Cole, 8. "The State of Education for Black Americans." The_
Education Digest (December 1983), 28-31.

 

Cole, Darnell E. A Trend Analysis of Academic Measures of Minority
Matriculants: Michigan State University, College of Osteo-
pathic Medicine, 1974, 1975, and 1976. Entering Classes
(Doctoral Dissertation, Michigan State University, 1978).

Cornell University Subcommittee on Minority Education. "Review of
Minority Education at Cornell University 1983." Cornell
University, Ithaca, New York, March 1984.

Cox, Taylor, Jr. “Blacks and Higher Education: Where Do We Stand
and What Difference Does it Make Anyway?" The Negro
Educational Review XXXIV, 1 (January 1983),—4:11.

 

Creighton, Samuel L. "Predicting the Academic Achievement of
Disadvantaged College Bound Students." Paper Presented at
the Meeting of the American Orthopsychiatric, July 1974.

Cross, K. Planning Non-Traditional Programs. San Francisco:
Josey-Bass PubliShers,’1974.

 

. "Old Practices and New Purposes." "Community and
Junior College Journal 50 (September, 1979), 4-8.

 

 

101

Dawkins, M.P., and Dawkins, R.L. "Perceptions and Experiences as
Correlates of Academic Performance Among Blacks at a Pre-
dominantly White University." College and University
55 (Winter 1980), 171-180.

 

DiCeasare, Sedlacek, W., and Brooks, G. "Nonintellectual Corre-
lates of Black Student Attrition.“ Journal gf_College
Student Personnel (July 1972), 319-342.

 

Dunn, Melvin 8. Characteristics and Prediction of Success of
Minority Students in Arizona Community Colleges (Doctoral
Dissertation, Arizona State University, 1972).

Egerton, John. Higher Education for “High Risk“ Students. South-
ern Education Foundation. Atlanta, Georgia. April, 1968.

 

Francisco, R. "Special Programs for Black Students in Higher
Education: The Need for Reorganization During a Conserva-
tive Era." Journal of Non- White Concerns in Personnel and
Guidance 11 (April 1983), 114- 121.

 

 

Gaffrey, C. M. State University New York Agricultural and Tech-
nical College at Coblesk1ll--1916-1966. State Univers1ty
of New York Agricultural and Technical College at Coble-
skill, Cobleskill, New York, 1966.

 

 

 

 

General Plan and Guidelines for Educational Opportunity Program
of State University Of New York, 1983- 84. State Uni-
vers1ty OTTNew YOrk ,—Office Of Special Programs, Albany,
New York.

 

 

 

Gordon, Edmund W. Opportunity Programs for the Disadvantaged lg
Higher Education. Washington, O.C.: American Asssociation
for Higher Education, 1975.

 

 

Gordon, Edmund W., and Wilkerson, Doxey A. Compensatory Education
for the Disadvantaged. New York: COTlege’Entrance Exami-
nation Board, 1966.

 

 

Grant, Marvin L., and Singleton, Roy, Jr. "Alternative Admissions
Criteria in the 80's." Negro Educational Review 33 (July-
October 1982), 167-175.

 

Green, R.L. and Gifford, R.J. "The Impact of Standardized Testing
on Minority Students." Journal pf_Negro Education 3 (1980),
238-243.

 

Gunnings, B. 8. "Stress and the Minority Student on a Predominately
White Campus." Journal of Non- White Concerns in Personnel

and Guidance 11 (October—1982), 11-16.

 

 

102

Hammond, Loretta T., and Rosick, Don C. "Problems of Prediction with
College Education Achievement Project Students at Allan
University." Paper Presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Educational Research Association, New York, New
York, February 1971.

Hattenschieviller, Dustan L. "Counseling Black Students in Special
Programs.“ Personnel and Guidance Journal 50 (October
1971), 29-35.

 

Heath, G. Louis. "Berkeley's Educational Opportunity Program."
U.S. Office of Education Research Fellow, Berkeley,
California, 1970, 1-11.

Hepworth, 0., and Landward, S. ”Support Systems for High Risk
College Students: Findings and Issues.“ Journal pf_tfle_
American Association gj_Colle e Registrars and Admis-
sions Officers 59 (Winter ,7119-121.

 

 

 

Hilliard, Asa 0., III. “10 and the Courts: Larry P. vs Wilson
Riles and Pose vs Hannon." The Journal pf_Black Psychology
10,1 (August 1983), 1-18.

 

 

Houghton, W.M. History and Development gf_Morrisville College
1908-1972. State University of New York Agricultural and
Technical College at Morrisville, Morrisville, New York,
1967.

 

 

Jensen, Arthur R. Bias jg_Mental Testing. New York: Free Press,
1980.

 

Kahler, A. and Hamburger, E. Education for gg_1ndustrial Age.
The Center for Applied Research in Education, Inc., 1967.

 

 

Kendrick, S.A. "Extending Educational Opportunity-~Problems of
Recruitment, Admissions, High Risk Students." Liberal
Education LV, 1 (March 1969), 12-17.

Kirk, Roger E. Introductory Statistics. California: Wadsworth
Publishing Company, 1978.

 

Knoell, Dorothy M. Toward Educational Opportunity for All. State
University of New York at Albany, 1966.

 

Knowles, T.S. "A Systems Approach to Managing Educational Oppor-

tunity Programs Serving Black Youth.“ Journal pf_AfrO-
American Issues 4,1 (Winter 1976), 255-273.

 

Mack, R.P. "Educational Opportunity Program Graduates Compared to
Educational Opportunity Programs Non-Graduates.“ Journal
pf_Negro Education (Fall 1974), 41-46.

 

103

Marshall, Jon C. and Birenbaum, Robert A. "A Longitudinal Study
of Disadvantaged Persons Placed in Post-Secondary Educational
Institutions." College and University 55 (Spring 1980),
221-236.

 

Masters, K. and Masters, M. "The Academically Unprepared Student: A
Continuing Educational Dilema." College Student Journal 16
(Summer 1982), 144-146.

 

Maynard, M. "Can University Adapt to Ethnic Minority Student Needs."
Journal of College Student Personnel 21 (Summer 1980),
398- 401.

 

McKinney,C.W., Garza, Y., Davis, J.S., and Blount, B.C. “A Look at
the Future: Organizing the Institution to Meet the Needs
of Minorities and the Educationally Disadvantaged."
College and University Journal, 55 (Summer 1980), 396-397.

Miller, Theodore K., and Prince, Judith S. The Future pf_Student
Affairs. San Francisco, Jossey-Bass Publishers, 1976.

 

MOhr, P.B. "Issues Related to Affirmative Action: Policies and
Program for Admission and Retention of Minority Students."
Negro Education R32 (January 1981), 94-100.

 

Morales, Crecensio. "Higher Education and the Needs of Hispanic
Students." Paper Presented at the Special Programs Insti-
tute XV, Albany, New York, April 1984.

Morris, E., Anderson, E., Dale, L.R., and Powell, N.H. “A Second
Priority: Successful Retention of the Educationally Disad-
vantaged and Minority Student." College and Universty
Journal 55 (Summer 1980), 427-428.

 

Morrison, James L. and Ferrante, Reynolds. Academically Disadvan-
taged Minority Group Students in Public Two- Year Colleges.
Pennsylvania State Dept. of Educat1on, Harrisburg. Bureau
of Curriculum Development and Evaluation. Office of Edu-
cation (DHEW), Washington, D.C., 1971, 1-16.

 

 

 

. A Descriptive Analysis of Programs for the Disadvan-
taged in Two- Year Colleges. Pennsylvania State Dept. of
EducatIOn, Harrisburg. Bureau of Curriculum Development
and Evaluation Office of Education (DHEW), Washington,
D.C., 1971, 1-51.

 

 

 

Morton, Cornel N. "Higher Education's Response to the Needs of
Minority Students: Leadership and Institutional Issues.“
Paper presented at the Annual Conference Of the Society of
Ethnic and Special Studies, Edwardsville, Illinois,
October, 1982.

104

Nieves, W. and Valle, M. "The Puerto Rican Family: Conflicting Roles
for the Puerto Rican College Student." Journal of Non-White
Concerns jp_Personnel and Guidance 10 (July 19827:'154-157.

 

Nolan, Donald J. Postsecondary Opportunity Programs jg_Ney_York
State. The State Education Department on Higher and
Professional Education. (1983), 1-26.

 

Norton, M. Scott. "Student Promotion and Retention: What the Research
Says." The Education Digest (January 1984), 19-21.

 

Olion, LaDelle, and Gillis-Olion, Marion. "Improving the Assessment
of Black Students." The Education Digest (January 1984),
26-29.

 

Ornstein, Allan C. "Educating Disadvantaged Learners.“ .133 Educa-
tional Forum 2 (Winter 1983), 225-244.

 

Osandar, John, and Summerskill, John. Educational Passport. Life
long Learners--A New Clientele for Higher Education.
Current Issues in Higher Education Series. Jossey-Bass
Publishers, 1974.

 

Perry, Floyd, Jr., and Tucker, Albert B. "Organizing the Institu-
to Meet the Needs of Minority and Disadvantaged Students."
College Student Journal 15 (Summer 1981), 185-189.

 

Pfeifer, C.M., Jr., and Sedlacek, W.E. "The Validity of Academic
Predictors for Black and White Students at a Predominantly
White University." Journal of Educational Measures 8
(1971), 253-261. —-'

 

Post Secondary Education and the Disadvantaged: A_Policy Study.
Center for Policy Research, New York, New York. Office of
Education (DHEW), Washington, D.C., (1969), 1-131.

 

 

Rovezzi-Carroll, Susan, and Thompson, Donald L. “Forecasting College
Success for Low-Income Students." Journal gf_COllege Stu-
dent Personnel 21 (July 1980), 340-343.

 

 

Smith, E.H. Delhi Tech-The First Half Century. State University
of New YOrk AgriCUltural and TeChnical College at Delhi, 1970.

 

Spaights, F. and Hudson, A.C. “Educational Opportunity: A Review
of the Literature." Education 92 (1971), 4-14.

True, A.C. A_History‘pf_Agficultural Education jp_the United
States. Arno Press and the New York Times, 1969.

 

 

105

Wallace, Jeffrey J. Historical DevelOpment of the Educational
Opportunity Programs in the State University of New York
(Doctoral Dissertation, State University of New York at
Buffalo, 1980).

Weis, Lois. "Minorities in the Two-Year College Sector: A Case Study."
Community College Review 9, 4 (Spring 1982), 28-35.

 

Wharton, Clifton R., Jr. Agricultural and Technical Colleges 9:
the State University 9: New York: The Critical Role.
State University of New York, Albany, New York, 1984.

 

 

 

Williams, R. and Robinson, G. “Critical Issues in the Specialty:
Minority Counseling." Journal pf_Non-White Concerns 9, 3
(April 1981), 109-113.

 

MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES
l l l llllll lll llll lll llllll ll ll lllll lll lllll llll lll lllll lll l l
31293006969962