THESIS RAIRES IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIII 31293 00900 16 This is to certify that the dissertation entitled A STUDY OF FACTORS RELATED TO INTEREST IN STUDENT AFFAIRS CAREERS AMONG UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ENROLLED IN LEADERSHIP TRAINING COURSES ' presented by Joseph Lawrence Murray has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for Ph.D. degreein EdilcanQn \ / \ Major professor T Louis C. Stamatakos Date JUTy 23, 199] MS U is an Affirmative Action/ Equal Opportunity Institution O~ 12771 r we. LIBRARY Michigan State University L fl PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE I——I MSU I. An Affirmative ActIoNEquel Opportunity Institution emote”! I A STUDY OF FACTORS RELATED TO INTEREST IN STUDENT AFFAIRS CAREERS AMONG UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ENROLLED IN LEADERSHIP TRAINING COURSES By Joseph Lawrence Murray A DISSERTATION Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Educational Administration 1991 I hutch. 5:": a fig :r‘v ire ‘elei o‘ ir“ 2":"ed ir t»: *e'at‘orsi‘p be' r“ rap-reuse“ o »9 | u U ' I‘o IEIIPI'CI‘N‘ ‘rer ~ vu- 22":t7b1Ii-tv '4 ”are rt . "-18. g [ere y i'Iiri' n P“ J 'Fe' to v. :‘I'u' "‘- . .. C1,], “ere a "'C‘Ce’fu'e. a P , .e 99': In Stu: “w- 3 “L35 CCITD‘ at; M ..Ir‘r J 'c ”lng tie. e.' indent Cue“ r* a g . ’ , ess‘hlraj P '2’; . E ABSTRACT A STUDY OF FACTORS RELATED TO INTEREST IN STUDENT AFFAIRS CAREERS AMONG UNDERGRADUATE STUDENTS ENROLLED IN LEADERSHIP TRAINING COURSES By Joseph Lawrence Murray Purpose. The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of exposure to printed materials related to careers in student affairs on the level of interest in such careers among undergraduate students enrolled in two leadership training courses. The study dealt with the relationship between changes in attitudes toward student affairs careers and compatibility with the profession, based on Holland's career development theory. The study also examined the degree to which compatibility with the profession and a favorable response to the treatment were related to residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement. Differences in responses to the intervention, based on ethnicity, were also explored. Procedure. Of 167 students, 83 (49.7%) were sent information about careers in student affairs and 84 (50.3%) received no treatment. Both groups completed the Extracurricular Involvement Inventory, the Vocational Preference Inventory, pretest and posttest questionnaires concerning their likelihood of pursuing a career or graduate education in student affairs, and a questionnaire concerning any information about the field which they read during the time of the experiment. Changes in ratings of interest in student affairs careers and. professional preparation, within the experimental and control groups, were compared using a t-test. Analysis of variance was used to detect scss‘b‘e dliie' PESIIQICjis ETC. :fl‘ESSiCni EEC st;C€rIS' We. I‘ES‘CE'CY' 9'5. find‘fiCS. ;nc :ra‘essfc'a :Efneei‘ II‘E 8‘: U'C SEINE L) alarmed, re’a‘. ’evels of ccrca‘ possible differences in responses to the intervention, based on residency, employment, cocurricular involvement, compatibility with the profession, and ethnicity. Chi-square analysis was used to compare students' levels of compatibility with the profession, according to residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement. Findings. Changes in levels of interest in student affairs careers and professional preparation were not found to differ significantly between the experimental and control groups. No significant interaction was found between the treatment and any of the student characteristics examined, relative to levels of interest in student affairs careers or professional preparation. Students were not found to differ in their levels of compatibility with the profession, based on residency, employment, or cocurricular involvement. flimsht by .cse:I Lawrenco a: tag. Copyright by Joseph Lawrence Murray 1991 This dissertation is dedicated to my father, James M. Murray, who always taught me to work diligently, to think logically, and to communicate clearly. 1p carry"??? 3.99 to unic“ eczcsc‘ish our 3 u‘it’CSt tte 9‘3"? rat a were 0‘ ‘. First, I w‘ :sn-ittee, for ‘ :r this orcjec‘. snaiitv in 9H w \ d "'"3‘ team “6 'red‘Dl-Tif “GI-c ' l ACKNOWLEDGMENTS In carrying out this study, I was continuously reminded of the degree to which we all must depend upon one another in order to accomplish our goals. I could never have completed this dissertation without the generous assistance of others. It would seem, therefore, that a word of thanks is in order. First, I wish to thank Dr. Lou Stamatakos, chair of my doctoral committee, for the countless hours which he spent in consultation with me on this project, for his attention to detail and his insistence on quality in my work, and perhaps most importantly, for his interest in me, both as a person and as a developing professional in Student Affairs. I am also deeply grateful to Dr. Pat Enos, who served both as a member of my doctoral committee and as the supervisor of my graduate assistantship. She contributed immensely to the successful completion of this dissertation by gently prodding me when I needed it, by encouraging me to think in terms of practicality, and by helping me to keep my disappointments in perspective. My sincere thanks are also extended to the other members of my doctoral committee, Drs. Steve Yelon and Max Raines. By challenging some of my basic assumptions, Dr. Yelon helped me to greatly increase the credibility of this study and to learn from its results. His suggestions concerning instrumentation proved to be particularly helpful. Dr. Raines also helped me to learn from this study by vi , generous {also vi 4,. tire coTTect .12 115;- arc .2 :59)“. Le'rcv . "Creel Sachs, a'so wish to t! vii encouraging me to challenge my own assumptions and to continue asking new questions. I also wish to express my appreciation to Drs. Terry Williams and Tim Luckadoo, who shared with me the benefit of their previous related research, and Dr. Steve Geiger, who provided me with much needed consultation concerning the analysis of my data, and who along with Dr. Enos, generously allowed me the use of their personal computer. I also wish to express my sincere gratitude to those who assisted in the collection of the data, particularly the following instructors of EAD 415A and 4158: Andy Acosta, Keith Daniels, Lisa Desautels, Erin Foley, Lenroy Jones, Lisa Landreman, Rodney Petersen, Peter Reilly, Michael Sachs, Mary Ellen Sinnwell, Beth Skinner, and Kent Workman. I also wish to thank Linda Trevarthen, whose cooperation and assistance prior to the collection of the data was critical to the successful completion of this task. Special thanks are also extended my doctoral student colleagues, who helped to make my experience at Michigan State both challenging and enjoyable. I am particularly grateful to Dr. Lisa Johnson, Vickie Sneckenberg, Laura Peterson, and Diane Brimmer, who served as a sounding board during the development of my research proposal and who continued to provide me with support and assistance when needed, during the implementation of the study. Most of all, I wish to thank my father, Jim Murray, without whose constant support and encouragement I could not have completed this dissertation. Finally, I must also acknowledge the contribution of my mother, the late Mary Murray, who provided me with much love and support during the early stages of my doctoral program, and who has since fl . ‘a‘ -. reflélI‘Ed WV" - irsz'frat‘fno viii remained with me, in a very special way, as a source of ongoing inspiration. 0.9 9 \ I": :D‘ :C .0. a . v-_. H‘. A PUFF-av- \ t D . ~D< .OU‘ V cv". __, A gluon“ _--V ’d Sacra! Stats! Dl'rhfs d \eed 'ESEC‘. H- . .ygc . G) ‘71 '11 (_J (—5 (D I. we...“ ‘1 (.4 "" l: ) (nt- 0 u hm .3 C3 (1 o «l (/1 an In 1" TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURES CHAPTER 1 H 0 CHAPTER 2 INTRODUCTION Background and Theoretical Foundation Statement of the Problem Purpose of the Study Need for the Study Research Questions Hypotheses Methodology 1. Subjects 2. Instrumentation 3. Data Collection Procedures 4. Scoring the Data 5. Data Analysis Definition of Terms Limitations of the Study Organization of the Chapters REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE Introduction Recent Patterns in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession Issues Related to Interests and Work Values in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession 1. Holland's Theory of Career Development 2. Interests and Work Values of Student Affairs Professionals 3. Interests and Work Values of Today's Students Issues Related to Race and Ethnicity in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession 1. Demographic Changes in the General Population 2. Racial and Ethnic Backgrounds of Student Affairs Professionals 3. Racial and Ethnic Backgrounds of Today's Students ix xii xiv '71 I?" C ‘3 (—9 b“ ‘7 m (D In I) (t) 1‘. If! I‘. n.26f' t‘e " Checti .n‘rni A -.. _ Subje Instr“ 5 a ‘Ptr v ‘IJC F. G. CHAPTER 3 A. B. C. CHAPTER 4 D. X Issues Related to the Undergraduate Experience in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession 1. The Influence of the Undergraduate Experience on the Vocational Development of Students 2. The Undergraduate Experience of Student Affairs Professionals 3. The Undergraduate Experience of Today's Students Alternative Means of Introduction to the Student Affairs Profession Chapter Summary METHODOLOGY Introduction Subjects Instrumentation 1. The Extracurricular Involvement Inventory 2. The Vocational Preference Inventory 3. The Student Information Questionnaire 4. The College Student Affairs & Services Career Interest Questionnaire 5. The College Student Affairs & Services Career Information Questionnaire Data Collection Procedures Scoring the Data Data Analysis PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE DATA Introduction Student Characteristics 1. Initial Likelihood of Pursuing a Career or Graduate Education in Student Affairs 2. Compatibility With the Student Affairs Profession 3. Residency 4. Cocurricular Involvement 5. Employment 6. Racial or Ethnic Background 7. Age 8. Class Standing 9. Gender 10. Marital Status Empirical Analysis Descriptive Analysis Chapter Summary 85 85 93 106 129 134 137 137 137 138 138 139 143 146 147 147 157 161 161 163 163 164 165 167 168 171 174 175 176 176 186 188 \. . i9, p -R ~U 1; LIT. nun-9'1! ="IF :5 IR” _. pry: '-T A“: F. 3‘ :.A.~- I. a. C.C .JI r i r S .J to .i . . X C C. c. C a C a r. .1. S. C e 6?... hi. 3. a. r . r:Ni.IQ.CFCPCrci..\:\...U.3 CCY.C; ..?.3 AIHHUI LFUI I I I I I I I I I :5 :1 Pa H VIII?!“ K I15» CHAPTER 5 Im'nrn I I I I xi SUMMARY, DISCUSSION, AND RECOMMENDATIONS Introduction Summary 1. Statement of the Problem 2. Purpose of the Study 3. Need for the Study 4. Methodology Limitations of the Study 1. Limitations in the Initial Design 2. Reading Behavior of the Subjects 3. Reliability of the Instrumentation Generalizability of the Results . 1. Generalizability to the Population Studied 2. Generalizability to Other Populations Results of the Study Conclusions Practical Implications Recommendations for Further Research LIST OF REFERENCES APPENDICES A B C. D E -n O Lat-«IO O O O 0 3r- Extracurricular Involvement Inventory Vocational Preference Inventory - 1985 Revision (Short Form) Student Information Questionnaire and Instructions College Student Affairs & Services Career Interest Questionnaire College Student Affairs & Services Career Information Questionnaire Instructor's Directions, Instructor's Report Forms, Student Identification Form, Letter to the Student, Consent Form Cover Letter to Student and Informational Booklet Memorandum to Instructors Rating of On-Campus Jobs' Relationship to Student Affairs Classification and Overall Ratings of Individual Positions and Departments, Based on Relationship to Student Affairs Test-Retest Reliability of Student Information Questionnaire Items T-Test and ANOVA Results Based on Adapted Scales Permission to Use Copyrighted Materials 253 266 275 279 282 285 286 289 ‘.A , (X) I p ”I IN) I» .4 LA) I). (II EICE'R‘ar‘ ' I che :Xcerifer '.r.i‘ .eg I" T! LIST OF TABLES Table Page 1. Illustrative Weights for Assessing Agreement Between Two Three-Letter Codes .............................. 154 2. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Initial Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career ............. 164 3. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Initial Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs ................................... 164 4. Subjects' Compatibility With the Student Affairs Profession ...... 165 5. Subjects' Housing Arrangements While Attending School ............ 167 6. Subjects' Cocurricular Involvement ............................... 168 7. Subjects' Employment Statuses .................................... 169 8. Racial or Ethnic Background of Subjects .......................... 171 9. Distribution of Subjects by Age .................................. 173 10. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Age .................. 174 11. Class Standing of Subjects ....................................... 175 12. Gender of Subjects.. ............................................. 176 13. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career .......... 177 14. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs ........ . ................. 177 15. Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Characteristics Relevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career .......... 178 n9 I’D '._. (:h4 ects' va '11::3 U Ratings c l) r') xiii 16. Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Characteristics Relevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs .......................... 179 17. Subjects' Compatibility With the Student Affairs Profession by Employment Status ..................... 180 18. Students' Compatibility With the Student Affairs Profession by Level of Cocurricular Involvement ............. 180 19. Subjects' Compatibility With the Student Affairs Profession by Residency... .......................... 181 J-1. Ratings of On-Campus Jobs Classified as Related to Student Affairs ............................... 282 J-2. Ratings of On-Campus Jobs Not Classified as Related to Student Affairs ........................... ....283 K-I. Test-Retest Reliability of Individual Student Information Questionnaire Items ..................... 285 L-1. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career, Based on Adapted Scale... ................... 286 L-2. Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs, Based on Adapted Scale .......... ' ........... 286 L-3. Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Characteristics Relevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career, Based on Adapted Scale ............ ........ .......... 287 L-4. Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Characteristics Relevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs, Based on Adapted Scales ................. 288 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Page 1. A Hexagonal Model for Interpretation of Inter- and Intra-Class Relationships ......................... 50 xiv I". 4 Tier OO'IAan. a: :UUUb-‘v :crtrastfrc Me an: he ‘ I .c it' H CHAPTER 1 Introduction Background and Theoretical Foundation Over the course of its history, the guiding principles of the student affairs profession have become increasingly future-oriented. In contrasting the pre-World War 11 "student personnel" orientation with the "student development" movement of the early 1970's, Crookston (1972) specifically noted a shift toward an increasingly "proactive" (sic.) approach to student affairs work, as opposed to the reactive stance of the profession's pioneers. This forward-looking posture was perhaps most clearly articulated in the “Tomorrow's Higher Education" model, which stated, "If we are to influence the directions to be taken in the future, we must anticipate change and help individuals and groups shape change, not merely adjust to it" (American College Personnel Association, 1975, p. 335). The document also called for "the development of a 'proactive' (sic.) approach which will better direct the efficient use of our professional resources for promoting more fully developed persons within the context of higher education in a world of accelerating change" (p. 335). It would seem that any examination of the future of student affairs practice must include consideration of demographics. Attention must be given to changes within the population served by American higher education, in addition to demographic changes within the student affairs profession itself. The profession's ability to prepare new practitioners to carry on the work of its aging members will have a major impact on its ability to respond to the demands of the future. The characteristics of those entering the profession will also be influential in determining its 1 "sureti; crarg-z—s in II rise to a Innsa‘ (AA HI I i‘3'“1'! 'ukd 2 ability to respond to the needs of an increasingly heterogeneous clientele. Accordingly, attention must be given to enrollment trends in professional preparation programs in student affairs, as they hold direct implications for the profession's ability to proliferate during the years ahead. In studying these patterns, Keim (1983) and Stamatakos (1989) have observed a consistent decline in the number of students enrolled in both master's and doctoral level programs since the early 1970's. In addition to declining enrollments within professional preparation programs, concern has been raised regarding observable changes in patterns of departure from the profession which have given rise to a "revolving door syndrome" (Evans, 1988, p. 19) within the field. Studies by Packwood (1976) and Greer, Blaesser, Herron, and Horle (1978), focusing on immediate placement of professional preparation program alumni, revealed a slight rise in the percentage of graduates leaving the field between 1974 and 1976. More recent studies by Aronson, Bennett, Moore, and Moore (1985) and Richmond and Benton (1988) have shown a decline in this percentage. Nevertheless, studies of long-term employment patterns among professional preparation program alumni have shown attrition rates of 32 to 39% in the first five to six years after graduation (Holmes, Verrier, and Chisholm, 1983; Wood, Winston, and Polkosnik, 1985). One study by Burns (1982), which dealt with employment of preparation program alumni, one to ten years after graduation, also showed an overall attrition rate of 39%. Moreover, in‘a study of job satisfaction among current professionals, Bender (1980) found only 36% planning to stay in the field for the remainder of their working lives. Among respondents ages 23 through 36, GM 27: int-3’- ‘icusing s:eC‘. sgrve‘ved 1.". 1': r .-~ ‘1’... bhaJ' an glib, v . . .n acd‘tu af'airs work c. WM and etr.‘ SCEUTEIIOQ, say 55'9“ DCpuiatt i,- do I4. 5I- Accordi O u . .A‘ I A "9 1:ch 3: (II % O . 3115.5 mm ”'3‘3rj ”'Hm. pan 1 C VVJUI d 4? gift- iIOD. a» v I . IS‘ .51? ' ‘- . 13;. ‘w s. It ‘IS "i(:e I 9 _ tue needs is“ . 432,10” of . ItSe‘.‘ I ~dt‘~ Increzs‘ 9337A .. be a 1»- 3 only 27% intended to remain in the field. In several similar studies, focusing specifically on the area of admissions, 19 to 63% of those surveyed indicated plans to leave higher education (Chapman and Benati, 1986; Chapman and Urbach, 1984; Urbach and Chapman, 1982). In addition to the number of professionals engaged in student affairs work during the years ahead, attention must be given to the racial and ethnic background of tomorrow's practitioners, if the profession is to reflect the growing diversity of its clientele. Today, racial and ethnic minorities represent a growing segment of the nation's population, particularly in younger age groups including the public school population (Commission calls, 1988; Cowell, 1985; Hodgkinson, 1976, 1985). According to Hodgkinson (1985), it has been estimated that between the years 1985 and 2020, America's Black population will have increased from 26.5 million to 44 million. During this same period, the nation's Hispanic population is expected to rise from 14.7 million to approximately 47 million. Hodgkinson (1985) also estimated that the number of Asian-Americans would rise from 3.5 million to almost 6 million during the 1980's. It is widely maintained that if the student affairs profession is to meet the needs of this changing population, attention must be given to reflection of these changes within the composition of the profession itself. Evans and Bossert (1983) expressed this point of view, stating that "increasing the numbers of minorities working in student affairs should be a top priority of the field" (p. 15). They explained that "minority students need and deserve role models and the profession of student affairs would benefit from the diversity of ideas and approaches which individuals from different backgrounds can provide“ (p. 15). Cier ICE ,- IIICII 3'3”“ 7 II.” 375 area ,-.. 2 AA' ' .' :TJOKS ADC " ‘F'T‘. vrsacn, ‘O::..’ ntxard, 1::: mm and C!" 1'11, #116 5 Rain some 38' 39mm SEQTQ' q l reins 'Ias ac: ”ei'esentamp 'IV-I [Enn‘ ‘rr Eton, :97 SéncEan 'P‘A "| .373; I»; - 4.: M‘ t I '0? -I FEDre 1 :, . "'3 “5101131 in iI‘aj 1 P5 3‘.“ ”Ice. 3.10795 0f CUP! ”9 SInCE 36““ .- - HFEYICU A \ v 4 Over the past two decades, a number of studies have been conducted, which provide a basis upon which to monitor the profession's progress in this area (Appleton, 1971; Borg, Stamatakos. Stonewater, and Studer, 1988; Brooks and Avila, 1973, 1974; Chapman and Benati, 1986; Chapman and Urbach, 1984; Harter, Moden, and Wilson, 1982; Myers and Sandeen, 1973; Rickard, 1985a, 1985b, 1985c; Rickard and Clement, 1984; Studer, 1980; Urbach and Chapman, 1982; Wilson, 1977). These studies have revealed that, while overall minority representation within the profession has shown some gains in recent years, wide variation has been found between specific minority groups, and specific types of institutions. Within certain segments of higher education, representation of some minority groups has actually declined (Borg et. al., 1988). Minority representation has consistently been strongest at public institutions (Appleton, 1971; Borg et. al., 1988; Harter et. al., 1982; Myers and Sandeen, 1973; Rickard, 1985b; Wilson, 1977). Although initial gains in minority representation seemed to occur primarily at the lower end of the professional hierarchy (Myers and Sandeen, 1973), more recent studies have revealed noticeable increases in representation among chief student affairs officers (Rickard, 1985a; Wilson, 1977). Nevertheless, several studies of current graduate students in the field raise some cause for concern, since minority representation within these programs has fallen below previous levels of representation among program graduates (Aronson et. al., 1985; Forney, 1989; Greer et. al., 1978; Luckadoo, 1990; Packwood, 1976; Williams, McEwen, and Engstrom, 1990). As the student affairs profession approaches the third millennium, efforts must be made to ensure that greater numbers of new professionals will enroll in graduate preparation programs, and that attrition from 1'9 3r3‘QSSICD I gjfe"’_"31‘. as: a reresentatfcn v - V rt? reate t: A career : R'scnaiitfes : O :ROG'. “ o 5.. Jr 1 fl s ~. s.n,, 1 q ' I ‘CTEIEOCIQS 0' '8 ' .. b‘rta‘n (\nr‘s A ‘n 1 '9‘“: 4.. ‘¢en.> a C4 ’Pe Dru}... '- ‘- "'-‘:n 3"-e “r V UlanC: Isgree ‘. bV fin]. ‘ T I , p ME CTDIG‘ It; ‘- ._. I ‘ ~e , .. _ , S'J’ ‘ I kg; b.~ R *‘ "5-:Srr- 21-; I: f 5 the profession will be reduced. Throughout this process, however, attention must also be given to ensuring continued minority representation within the profession at all levels. As student affairs professionals begin to devise strategies for achieving these goals, it is essential that they develop an understanding of those personal factors which relate to the decision to enter or leave the field. A career development theory proposed by Holland (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) provides some insight into these phenomena, by focusing more generally on personality as it relates to vocational choice as well as satisfaction and success within a chosen field. Holland asserted that personalities can be broadly categorized according to their resemblance to each of six basic types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. He theorized that, as a result of heredity and experience, each individual develops a unique set of competencies and interests, which creates a predisposition toward certain kinds of activities. Each of the types identified by Holland represents a different category of preferred activities. The primary personality type of the individual refers to that type which he or she most closely resembles. Most individuals, however, bear some degree of resemblance to each of the basic types, though the degree of resemblance will vary. By ranking the basic types according to the degree to which the individual resembles them, it is possible to obtain a more complete profile of that individual. Holland (1966, 1973, 1985a) referred to this kind of profile as a "personality pattern," and used the term, "subtype, in reference to specific personality patterns. These patterns are identified by the names of two or more of the six basic types, usually abbreviated using the first letter of each. six basic sate :recsninant oer tie basic tjse= R'chiar worr :attern COTCér, -oT‘.and’s tie-"I Jerssnelir'es . . EZHarities Icn yr; an ar‘nr ”y :7" in: ‘ 'ne qu1 r!‘ r ital" . I‘n . . g ' CIC‘As-' - alCr ’ i, 1* ‘pp;.' "1‘ Ii . 'dua.s we Drain .SSIon IMP! JM" Uc’ . I»tlve 0f Offr' b.15ffi C .d‘ 1 1,9 “55" Jon to file A. 1c" .IQn'S U :Pd’ '9' 5"“ 'e entir 6 In addition to individuals, Holland's (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) classification system is used to describe work environments. Using the six basic categories, these environments are classified according to the predominant personality types of those who work within them. By ranking the basic types according to the degree to which they dominate a particular work environment, it is possible to obtain an environmental pattern comparable to the individual personality pattern. According to Holland's theory, an occupation attracts people with similar personalities, and creates work environments which reflect these similarities. Satisfaction and success in a particular field depend upon an appropriate match between the personality type of the individual and the environmental type of the particular work setting. Applying this theory to the current crisis in the student affairs profession, it appears necessary for the field to attract more individuals whose personality patterns are compatible with the profession, while not attracting those whose profiles are less predictive of success and satisfaction within the field. The magnitude of this challenge, however, can only be appreciated when viewed in relation to changes which have been observed over the past 20 years in the nation's undergraduate student population. These changes suggest that the entire pool of undergraduate students who are temperamentally suited to the student affairs profession may actually have decreased. During the early 1980's, a number of authors (Guardo, 1982; Levine, 1980, 1983; Sandeen, 1985; Stodt, 1982; Winn, 1985) began to draw contrasts between those students entering higher education during that era and their predecessors of the late 1960's and early 1970's. What has emerged from this literature is a portrait of today's collegiate " ‘ent tfia’. 3-«- 3 s f“. . u: I‘ln‘fi . .1 g 3‘ In- H ‘V. 1:.' ‘ i‘vura . ‘1‘ Pa. “ 9:13r ‘9 v' II S‘i A 'U‘C-rt- ‘ '5‘ q JV Pin. 4 b-J‘Fn a; :98 fi ‘5'!- I *- 'v F§~._ .~ :~ . 5-:“1?, a E‘iip 1‘ “ 5:.‘lfin VI 5' T I 7 student that is characterized by high degrees of materialism, vocationalism, and narcissism. Students are presented as being concerned primarily about themselves and those who are closest to them, with an emphasis on wealth, power, and physical comfort. They are believed to regard higher education, not as an end in itself, but as a means of obtaining these other desired commodities. These observations have been supported by a good deal of research on college students' attitudes toward education and work (Astin, Green, and Korn, 1987; Astin, Green, Korn, Schalit, and Berz, 1988; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990; Levine, 1980). These observations are also consistent with changes that have been observed in students' career plans and proposed fields of undergraduate study. Geiger (1980) observed a shift away from "academic" (p. 18) fields of study, in favor of more "instrumental" (p. 18) fields. Studies of specific major preferences have generally revealed increasing interest in the field of business and declining interest in education, the humanities, the social sciences, and the natural sciences (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Carnegie Foundation, 1985a, 1986a; Jones, Bekhuis, and Davenport, 1985; Krukowski, 1985; Roemer, 1983). During the last two years, a slight decline has been observed in the number of students planning to pursue business careers, ibut it is not yet clear whether or not this decline signals a major change in students' attitudes (Dodge, 1990). This decline has been accompanied by changes in students' attitudes concerning some social issues, and a tendency toward greater activism. However, this pattern has not necessarily been indicative of any change in students' attitudes toward education and work (Collison, 1990). In addition to changes in students' preferred fields of study over :ne sast 2C 1‘35 creasing :0 WI in: ms: recer: Decccurring, 1 Telels have :5- .. 3 ’. . «'3‘3'0 COL... IIIE’ESti-d in :rz'ession, .5 .._ , n ‘H a.” .- ""5'=’-~‘:ii in In. ’ e5 1‘. 8 the past 20 years, declines have been observed in the number of students choosing to pursue traditional graduate study (Brademas, 1984). However, the most recent data available suggest that a change in this pattern may be occurring, since both graduate school enrollment and application levels have taken an upward turn (Blum, 1990; Evangelauf, 1990). The number of doctorates conferred has also risen, although the greatest gains have been made in the field of business (Fact file: A profile, 1987; Fact file: A profile, 1990). Research on current student affairs professionals' sources of satisfaction has generally led to the conclusion that individuals who are interested in working with people are usually best suited to the profession, while those who are motivated primarily by salary and status are unlikely to find satisfaction in the field (Borg, et. al., 1988; Buckner, 1989; Burns, 1982; Studer, 1980). Studies focusing specifically on the areas of housing (Hancock, 1988) and admissions (Chapman and Benati, 1986; Chapman and Urbach, 1984; Urbach and Chapman, 1982) have likewise supported this conclusion. Studies of individuals' reasons for entering the field, and personal characteristics of those who choose such a career, have generally revealed patterns of work values that are consistent with the challenges and rewards found in student affairs work (Cheatham, 1964; Forney, 1989; Frantz, 1969a; Williams et. al., 1990). Studies of undergraduate majors of current professionals and graduate students in the field have revealed a preference for majors in education, the social sciences, and the humanities (Forney, 1989; Frantz, 1969a; Kuh, Greenlee, and Lardy, 1978; Luckadoo, 1990; Williams et. al., 1990). Given this profile of the successful student affairs professional, the Prevailing attitudes of current undergraduate students pose obvious :ne'iIenges ta ICED CBC: :rcs:ective 5‘ pen further I :JTIege attem I I; I ‘ lsiwn en.- die 3:33; Fact 6 A;\ p "II A IchI. Vne a . A. ... "" U =-.r1_l:ri l Wiresertatia eszeciaiiy :31 t . Sweats at I. '22“. Idgél. ”“9 ”Sta: 5”,} 4 “hat-"en, '1 mi veFSItY ca: 9 challenges to those seeking to recruit new professionals into the field. When consideration is given to the racial or ethnic background of prospective student affairs professionals, these challenges are magnified even further by low high school completion rates and low rates of college attendance among certain minority groups (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Breneman, 1983; Cardoza, 1987; Carnegie Foundation, 1985b; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990; Middleton, 1982; Racial and ethnic, 1986). One area of particular concern has been the relatively high rate of attrition among minority college students (Cardoza, 1987; Conciatore and Wiley, 1990; Cowell, 1985; Winkler, 1975). Additionally, representation of minority groups in graduate education has been especially low (Cardoza, 1987; Middleton, 1982). Attrition of minority students at the graduate level has also been an area of concern (Text of, 1982). One notable exception to these trends is the Asian-American population, which has shown rapid gains in representation on college and university campuses (Conciatore and Wiley, 1990; Racial and ethnic, 1986; Whitla, 1984). However, data on the academic interests of Asian-Americans have shown a strong preference for the hard sciences, within this population, and less interest in fields more closely related to student affairs (Greene, 1987). Among other minority groups, majors related to student affairs have been relatively popular (Greene, 1987; Powers and Lehman, 1983). Nevertheless, due to low representation of these groups in higher education, particularly at the graduate level, student affairs professionals have found difficulty in drawing from this population individuals who are prepared to enter the field (Harter et. al., 1982). iezent figures I a ‘ r.’ :iceurigefe... .- tai’.’ 31 1'1 Lt: I‘CIETEI', the ‘.; is Stu-GE" recruiting 09w than: we vac, ,iEi'S. Ann“; anti-anal. an urea I Id 3; Theocni‘. indies have i aszirations or ‘22-» Factsr accusations er I! . ifs 0A.. 3A; . in» T..Ee’1 'fh 10 Recent figures on minority student enrollment have offered some signs of encouragement, with gains in representation appearing during the latter half of the 1980's (Evangelauf, 1990; Greene, 1987; Magner, 1990). However, the long-term impact of these changes is not yet clear. As student affairs professionals seek to identify strategies for recruiting new professionals, it seems that attention should be directed toward the vocational development of students during the undergraduate years. A number of studies have dealt with factors influencing the educational and occupational values of undergraduate students (Phelan, 1979; Theophilides, Terenzini, and Lorang, 1984; Weidman, 1979). Other studies have focused on factors influencing their occupational status aspirations or attainment (Gurin and Katz, 1966; Smart, 1986; Weidman, 1984). Factors affecting undergraduate students' choices of specific occupations and academic majors have also been studied extensively (Astin, 1977; Astin and Panos, 1969; Selvin, 1963; Thistlethwaite, 1960), as have those factors influencing their decisions to pursue graduate study (Astin, 1961, 1962, 1977; Astin and Panos, 1969; Ethington and Smart, 1986; Hearn, 1987; Iverson, Pascarella, and Terenzini, 1984; Knapp and Goodrich, 1952; Knapp and Greenbaum, 1953; Pascarella, 1984; Thistlethwaite, 1959a, 1959b, 1960, 1962; Thistlethwaite and Wheeler, 1966; Wallace, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967; Wilson, Gaff, Dienst, Wood, and Bavry, 1975). In general, the studies have revealed that while entering characteristics of students remain the best predictors of vocational outcomes, a number of factors in the undergraduate experience have also been influential. A particularly close relationship has been found between the vocational development of students and their interaction I, I " facu.t .1 it ‘ “ "I '8)»OFE' a, “ Studies C‘ St§§€$t that : tie r vocaticr :e:t‘ti:rers 3:153. Ir; ‘5 33r99e is ex: vv' . «er an: .ar Like 31's I: “‘3‘!” ‘Ar 'i."lan! «:20; 2‘ i ‘1 .‘l:|A\ . IF P" 9n. n I, I. 6y, .323; 8‘ I u. A I a .‘ ‘3Cr Us: 11 with faculty (Feldman and Newcomb, 1973; Iverson et. al., 1984; Pascarella, 1984; Phelan, 1979; Thistlethwaite, 1959a, 1959b, 1960, 1962; Thistlethwaite and Wheeler, 1966; Weidman, 1979; Wilson et. al., 1975). Studies of current student affairs professionals in particular suggest that the undergraduate years constitute a critical period in their vocational development. It is often during this time that future practitioners first become aware of the field's existence as a career option. In fact, knowledge of this option prior to enrollment in college is extremely rare (Brown, 1987; Frantz, 1969b; Luckadoo, 1990; Miller and Carpenter, 1980; Williams et. al., 1990). Like other students, those who subsequently enter the student affairs profession are often influenced by mentors (Brown, 1987; Cheatham, 1964; Forney, 1989; Miller and Carpenter, 1980; Williams et. al., 1990). The experience of participating in career-related activities can also be influential in the decision to enter the field (Brown, 1987; Forney, 1989; Frantz, 1969b; Greenleaf, 1977; Luckadoo, 1990; Williams et. al., 1990). As a number of authors (Brown, 1987; Forney, 1989; Young, 1985) have noted, however, academic preparation in the field of student affairs is not offered at the undergraduate level. Consequently, neither experience related to the field nor mentoring relationships with those engaged in this type of work are readily available to undergraduate students within the context of their major departments. It is not surprising, therefore, that individuals who subsequently enter the profession are often heavily invested in the cocurricular aspects of their undergraduate experience (Forney, 1989). In general, and based upon a number of studies of graduate students III the IIEIdi rfission are unsergraduate en:a;ed in pro d and are often .FAA' '.Pbmn A 0::U’ FIN-19L"— é-“e introduce: iniohenent r; in if“ of $8 1829.41 years. CIRZ'JSQS’ re... r? “-i-E‘Srac‘uate I3”. I ““5 I00, Inf. . 33: . ', ‘Jorflrr ‘2‘. 6.150 u ’ OFS‘; :‘s . "3:1 12 in the field, it appears that individuals who subsequently enter the profession are also of a "traditional" college age during their undergraduate experience. These studies have indicated that students engaged in professional preparation are typically under the age of 30, and are often as young as 22 (Forney, 1989; Kuh et. al., 1978; Luckadoo, 1990; Richmond and Benton, 1988; Williams et. al., 1990). The fact that most student affairs professionals experience their undergraduate education while they are of a traditional college age and are introduced to the profession largely through cocurricular involvement holds serious implications for the future of the profession, in view of several trends in higher education that have been observed in recent years., Today, growing numbers of students are commuting to their campuses, rather than participating in a traditional residential undergraduate experience (Andreas and Kubik, 1980; Hardy and Williamson, 1974; Thon, 1984). Estimates of the proportion of college students who commute have ranged from two-thirds to 80% (Hardwick and Kazlo, in Peterson, 1975; Jacoby and Burnett, 1986; Jacoby and Girrell, 1981; Moore, 1981; Schuchman, 1974; Stewart and Rue, 1983). Within this population is a growing number of students who are attending college on a part-time basis (Carnegie Foundation, 1986b; National Center for Education Statistics, 1989; Rodgers, 1977; Than, 1984). A second major segment of this population consists of an increasing number of older students who are now returning to college (Brodzinski, 1980; Christensen, 1980; Ferguson, 1966; Fife, 1980; Flynn, 1986; Gordon and Kappner, 1980; Harrington, 1977; Jacoby, 1983; Leckie, 1978; Morstain and Smart, 1977; National Center for Education Statistics, 1989; O'Keefe, 1985; Peterson, 1975; Reehling, 1980; . . . ~c" TCQCFS, -4" A magsr urban instit; trenc has be: cart ‘2] to: .i.; 'cnrse, P 9 In-“ :a‘r‘cri’ or' : $141795 3 Cafisus l'f IISZIZ'JIIons i‘mtec aroun 13 Rodgers, 1977; Salmon and Gordon, 1981; Than, 1984). A major factor in the commuter student movement has been the emergence of a large number of financially and academically accessible urban institutions (Garni, 1974; Grobman, 1980; Harrington, 1974). This trend has been accompanied by a rapid expansion of the nation's two-year community colleges (Chickering, 1974; Flynn, 1986; Medsker and Tillery, 1971; Monroe, 1972; Ogilvie and Raines, 1971; Riesman and Jencks, 1979; Sanford, 1979; Schuchman, 1974). Studies of newly emerging student populations have revealed patterns of campus involvement which differ dramatically from that of the traditional undergraduate resident student. It has been observed that commuter students are often considerably less involved in their institutions than are their resident peers, and typically spend only a limited amount of time on campus (Andreas, 1983; Andreas and Kubik, 1980; Astin, 1984; Banning and Hughes, 1986; Burtner and Tincher, 1979; Idatross, Hannaford, Pilarski, and Jurkovic, 1984; Schuchman, 1974; Ward .and Kurz, 1969). The tendency to limit institutional involvement or tflie amount of time spent on campus has specifically been observed among ccunmunity college students (Monroe, 1972), part-time students (Carnegie Foundation, 1986b), and adult learners (Salmon and Gordon, 1981; Thon, 1984). It also appears that commuters are less likely to develop close relaitionships with faculty and other students at their institutions than 3'1! their resident peers (Andreas, 1983; Andreas and Kubik, 1980; Astin, 197:3; Chickering, 1974; Demos, 1966, 1967; Flanagan, 1976; Glass and Hodgin, 1977; Harrington, 1972, 1974; Pascarella, 1985; Reichard and McArver, 1975; Ward and Kurz, 1969). Low social involvement on campus 1““ F Jrafidm, I:vs; Ire 3‘ t O .... .3116 6:1.‘7 Zngf'lCU ar nrncicatisr a“airs pr":- tae DEEP if: :Il'n ire chr- i), 19"” Av .11, a.ass a N. 'MCIVQC'QM 3| “€519.19?- ‘3 i ,-,., . 'I»3t1rric;f Ht. . . ,ng ACUIt 1 ieiEra] it“ ; . 1511’, l fled. ‘ri THC-l :fln \ «’4’. 0.“: ‘ l “Orrie . Q r; I" 31‘ 14 has specifically been observed among part-time students (Carnegie Foundation, 1986b), adult learners (Rawlins, 1979), and community and junior college students (George and George, 1971; Goldberg, 1973; Graham, 1962; Medsker, 1960). One of the areas in which resident and commuter students have been found to differ considerably is in their levels of participation in cocurricular activities on their campuses. The issue of low participation rates among commuters and the challenges facing student affairs professionals seeking to promote commuter student involvement have been widely discussed (Astin, 1977; Burtner and Tincher, 1979; Chickering, 1974; Demos, 1966, 1967; Foster, Sedlacek, and Hardwick, 1977; Glass and Hodgin, 1977; Wilmes and Quade, 1986). Much of the literature has focused specifically on the issue of low cocurricular involvement among students at community and junior colleges (George and (Seorge, 1971; Goldberg, 1973; Graham, 1962; Monroe, 1972). Participation in cocurricular activities has also been found to be particularly low among adult learners (Kuh and Ardaiolo, 1979; Solmon and Gordon, 1981). Several common barriers to commuter student involvement have been 'hdentified. One of these obstacles is the failure of some institutions tc> effectively convey information to commuter students (Burtner and 'Fincher, 1979; Copland-Hood, 1985; Jacoby and Girrell, 1981; Matross et. 37- . 1984; Rue, 1982; Rue and Ludt, 1983; Ward and Kurz, 1969, Nilmes and Quade, 1986). It appears that work or family commitments also form a bal~r~ier to many commuter students' involvement in the cocurricular life l”: 1their institutions (Andreas and Kubik, 1980; Glass and Hodgin, 1977; w”mes and Quade, 1986). This seems to be particularly true of adult '93 Pners (Friedlander, 1980; Hughes, 1983; Kuh and Ardaiolo, 1979; Q ~ 19. A H J \ lanlins, '31" Several J :azeus life '5 activities tr: {ways or’ inta CCrStTIJIE ar 4'." - .7 'EFE‘EI .‘r: are dealing, Wit learner .‘Clufiger S‘ m 54.: 15 Rawlins, 1979; Richter-Antion, 1986; Shriberg, 1984; Spratt, 1984; Thon, 1984). Several other potential barriers to adult learners' involvement in campus life have also been identified. As Shriberg (1984) noted, activities that are of interest to traditional aged students are not always of interest to adult learners. Richter-Antion (1986) observed that, due to their broad age range, adult learners do not even constitute an age cohort among themselves. Consequently, they are different from one another in the developmental issues with which they are dealing. Negative attitudes on the part of traditional aged students, whether real or imagined, form another potential barrier to adult learners' cocurricular involvement. Rawlins (1979) found that younger students' attitudes were a matter of common concern to adult learners. Research by Peabody and Sedlacek (1982) revealed that while younger students were generally accepting of adult learners in academic or nonintimate settings, they were less receptive to social or intimate involvement with older students. Much of the literature has dealt specifically with the use of student services by comuters, adult learners, and part-time students, 1" addition to their perceptions of the need for these services (Burtner and Tincher, 1979; Carnegie Foundation, 1986b; Matross et. al., 1934; Rawlins, 1979; Salmon and Gordon, 1981; Thon, 1984). In general, “3 aDpears that nontraditional students recognize the need for student Services, and will make use of those services which are made available and Made known to them. However, it has been observed that often CWNSe‘ling and other student services are not available in the evening h°“"5. when many nontraditional students are on campus (Friedlander, ”:3" “edge“ _u.‘l How, Not urS' Chasering, 1. be less satiS‘ exserience 'ch' 11369) found 1 he social l1” malt learnerf acecuately se' satis‘action smears. Growing “as drawn at: DCZUTethns H {1934; and R3 mm else ”at S’s-“5192‘ differ? ,4 wsueu t3“: 16 1980; Medsker, 1960). Not surprisingly, in comparison to resident students, commuters are often less satisfied with the undergraduate experience (Astin, 1973; Chickering, 1974). Additionally, part-time students have been found to be less satisfied than full-time students with the overall college experience (Carnegie Foundation, 1986b). Baird, Richards, and Shevel (1969) found that two-year college students were often dissatisfied with the social life on their campuses. Kuh and Sturgis (1980) concluded that adult learners' needs for support and self-understanding were not being adequately served, though Solmon and Gordon (1981) found that levels of satisfaction were higher among adult learners than among younger students. Growing concern for the needs of nontraditional student populations has drawn attention to the need for increased representation of these populations within the student affairs profession itself. Both Shriberg (1984) and Rodgers (1977) have emphasized the potential benefits of e"gaging older practitioners to work with adult learners. It would seem that strategies for recruitment of new professionals should not only be dlY‘ECted toward adult learners, but toward traditional aged commuters as well. Not only would individuals drawn from these populations be POtENtially more responsive to the needs of the profession's emerging c”entele, but they represent a large pool of potential graduate students that 'is continuing to grow. Thus far, however, few student affairs professionals have been drawn from nontraditional student populations, possibly due to the fact that 1m"’l‘lement in activities that are representative of the traditional u . . . . nde"‘Qr‘aduate experience remain the primary entree to the professmn. In some prcies mm is an 1971; long, '. ccttrary, rese experience is or in student In racer: alternative rm, :n-e 5FE'ican 1: fr. tnis mveme iecrui‘revit (5 isscciation's iri‘essional s 17 In some professional preparation programs, experience related to student affairs is an expectation or even a requirement for admission (Tracy, 1971; Young, 1986). However, despite an assertion by Riker (1977) to the contrary, research by Young (1986) does not support the notion that such experience is predictive of subsequent success in preparation programs or in student affairs work. In recent years, a growing emphasis has been placed on the use of alternative means of introduction to the profession. Commission XII of the American College Personnel Association (ACPA) has played a major role in this movement, through the establishment of its Task Force on Recruitment (Champagne, 1988). Since the establishment of the Association's "National Careers in Student Affairs Week," student affairs professionals on campuses across the nation have begun to employ a variety of strategies to increase awareness of career opportunities in the field. These strategies have included: open houses, resource fairs, receptions, information sessions, bulletin boards, and mentoring programs (National week, 1988). Thompson, Carpenter, and Rausch (1990) described a non-credit course about the profession, which has been made available to interested students on one campus. Additionally, ACPA has begun to experiment with the use of regional recruiting events to introduce PPOSpective graduate students to the profession in general, and to a Variety of professional preparation programs (Keegan, 1989). Knock and REth (In press) have coauthored a booklet, Careers in the College §52§£§9t Personnel Profession, which provides written information about the Profession to undergraduate students considering careers in the field. 'The ACPA-NASPA Task Force on Professional Preparation and Practice Recruitment, recruirent st seielopmen: c‘ scsciarsnigs ‘ Srsgrams whicr institution; Detent‘fal and successful ma, national leve' léterialg far enrolled in E Sm” 1Intern Em“ leader 18 (Recruitment, preparation, 1989) has recommended that several other recruitment strategies also be employed. These strategies include: development of multimedia recruitment programs; establishment of scholarships for talented minority students; on-campus recognition programs which highlight the work of student affairs practitioners within institutions; expansion of graduate assistantship opportunities; presentation of professional conference workshops directed toward both potential and current professionals; offering of incentives for successful marketing and recruitment efforts at both the local and national levels; production and dissemination of career-related imaterials for students at all educational levels, including those enrolled in elementary and secondary schools; establishment of paid sumner internships for promising undergraduate students; and use of campus leadership courses as a vehicle for identifying promising students, and for dissemination of information about the field. Although the student affairs profession has begun to devise alternative strategies for exposing undergraduate students to information regarding career opportunities in the field, little is known about the actual effectiveness of these strategies. In a study of current student affai rs graduate students, conducted by Williams et. al. (1990), sources 0f irrformation that did not involve direct participation in activities ”Hated to student affairs or personal interaction with current PrOfessionals in the field were found to be relatively noninfluential in the decision to pursue a student affairs career. The three sources of i"fbr‘mation that were identified as least helpful were career counselors, b"‘C’Cl‘IUres about the profession, and academic or faculty advisors. It is not Clear from the research, however, whether nontraditional sources of information ar gapiy reflect me pro‘essicr In recent instucert eff sign attritio: evacuation 01 sment affaii e'eac. Eeclines Dmiessional recent years, l"Acreased. ' lbiession‘s 4,1 “use clier .he Dur: sC Drlnted It 19 information are truly ineffective or whether the students' responses simply reflect the greater prevalence of other modes of introduction to the profession. Statement of the Problem In recent years, enrollments in professional preparation programs in student affairs have shown dramatic declines. During this period, a high attrition rate within the profession has also been observed. This combination of trends has led to widespread concern regarding the student affairs profession's ability to sustain itself during the years ahead. Declines in representation of racial and ethnic minorities in professional preparation programs have specifically been observed, in recent years, while minority representation in the general population has increased. This pattern has raised further concern regarding the profession's ability to respond to the demands of its increasingly diverse clientele. Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study was to explore the influence of exposure ‘10 Printed materials related to careers in student affairs on the level 0f 1°nterest in such careers among undergraduate students enrolled in two 1 eadership training courses at Michigan State University. The study fOCUSed specifically on the relationship between students' degrees of ComDatibility with the profession and changes in their attitudes toward careErs in the field, subsequent to exposure to the printed materials. Compatibility with the profession was measured by the degree of com=0lr‘mity between the individual's Holland personality pattern and a Corresponding pattern representing the overall orientation of the m‘ess:on. ‘ccial Enter A -~+ undefgfaxc: . “ein’Ctrert basic print? ' I 'ec'rtcue 'E 'erkirg :re assertive t: 1cccircirg to a“: CCCUPNCL ‘Ptervenfscn‘ 20 profession. The subtype used in reference to the profession, Social Enterprising Artistic (SEA), was derived from data on undergraduate majors of ACPA members, obtained by Frantz (1969a). Development of the composite pattern was accomplished by applying the basic principles of Holland's (1973, 1985a) Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT), whereby environmental patterns are established by ranking the primary types of the individuals inhabiting environments, according to their degrees of prevalence within those environments. According to Frantz (1969a), 41% of ACPA members surveyed had majored in fields classified as Social, 23% as Enterprising, and 21% as Artistic. This study also examined the degree to which compatibility with the profession and a favorable response to the presentation of information about the field were related to stUdents' residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement. Differences in students' responses to the intervention, based on racial or ethnic background, were also explored. Need for the Study According to Holland's (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) theory of career development, success and satisfaction in a chosen occupation depend upon the degree of compatibility between an individual and his or her work environment. It would seem that a key element in satisfactory occupational decision making would be the possession of accurate information about a particular field prior to entry. The individual who is attracted to a particular field based on incomplete or inaccurate information is likely to experience subsequent dissatisfaction in his or her work, and may ultimately leave the field. Meanwhile, the individual whose personality is suited to the demands of a particular profession may not pursue a career in the field, simply because he or she is unaware of *CFC exist :?3 "a it :e, 2* tne ‘s.. , c ' '1 r r. r4 . I 9‘5 '1 w J Fnl SE DE’SC uh: . ‘ "uraging Efi.a 1 '“cansetibm la . ?(1115 (al “all: 21 its existence or holds misconceptions about it. It would seem, therefore, that the degree to which accurate information about the student affairs profession is made available to undergraduate students holds implications with regard to both declining enrollments in professional preparation programs and the currently high rate of attrition from the profession. Wider dissemination of information about the student affairs profession could provide a solution to both of these problems, should such dissemination be proven to promote interest in the profession among those whose personalities are suited to student affairs work, while not encouraging entry into the field by those whose personalities are incompatible with the demands of the profession. Thus far, involvement in activities related to student affairs during the undergraduate experience has been a principal source of initial information about the profession. However, reliance upon this form of exposure may no longer be sufficient in view of recent changes in the typical undergraduate student profile. Today, growing numbers of students are choosing to commute to local institutions, rather than going away to college and living on campus. Within this population are a large number of part-time students and older students. These students tend to be less involved than their more traditional peers in many of the undergraduate activities that are closely related to student affairs. While the student affairs profession has begun to turn toward nontraditional modes of introduction to the field, there appears to have been little research dealing with the effectiveness of these approaches. Research involving current graduate students in the field has revealed that thus far sources of information which do not involve direct Participation in activities related to student affairs or personal interaction ' articular“), reflectlfin 0‘ 93m noptl‘dC‘ eco‘ectivefeSf cev'el-JC'W: ‘ retrcsoect‘iv! it is not $0! 23176an ide' TCECE 3! 3i nontradit' have not otm attivities. d‘l‘ferences ' in‘cmation, mae‘ib" l it 22 interaction with professionals in the field have not been regarded as particularly helpful. These findings, however, may simply be a reflection of the current availability of information about the field from nontraditional sources, rather than an indication of the potential effectiveness of these sources. Because studies of the vocational development of student affairs professionals have typically involved retrospective reporting by current graduate students or practitioners, it is not surprising that traditional sources of information have been commonly identified as influential. There appears to have been no experimental research on the influence of nontraditional sources of information upon undergraduate students who have not otherwise been exposed to the profession through their activities. There also appears to have been no research on possible differences in students' reactions to nontraditional sources of information, based on their racial or ethnic backgrounds, or levels of compatibility with the profession. Depending upon the findings, this study could assist current student affairs professionals in attracting and retaining new professionals who would represent the growing diversity of the nation's collegiate population and the broader society. Research Questions The investigation was guided by the following questions: 1. Is the expressed likelihood of pursuing a career or a master's degree in student affairs among undergraduate students enrolled in leadership training courses at Michigan State University influenced by exposure to printed materials presenting information about the profession of student affairs? 2. Does the presentation of information about the profession of st.dert their c the de: and a ( oro‘es. 23 student affairs affect these students differentially, according to their degree of compatibility with the profession, as measured by the degree of conformity between their Holland personality patterns and a composite pattern representing the overall orientation of the profession? What is the relationship, if any, between measured compatibility with the profession and residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement, among these students? What is the relationship, if any, between these students' residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement and changes in their expressed likelihood of pursuing a career or a master's degree in student affairs, subsequent to the presentation of printed information about the profession? Does the presentation of information about the profession of student affairs affect these students differentially, according to their racial or ethnic backgrounds? Hypotheses The following hypotheses were tested in this study: 1. There is no relationship between exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. There is no relationship between exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master‘s degree in the field. There is no relationship between compatibility with the student kl. (I) o ‘(J o «I. ae‘airs inforta express There i af‘airs inforne express There i stu:ent T"ere i stuaent There i Stuflen: involve 7. ilere i 10. 11. 24 affairs profession, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. There is no relationship between compatibility with the student affairs profession, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field. There is no relationship between students' compatibility with the student affairs profession and their residency. There is no relationship between students' compatibility with the student affairs profession and their employment statuses. There is no relationship between students' compatibility with the student affairs profession and their levels of cocurricular involvement. There is no relationship between residency, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' eXpressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. There is no relationship between residency, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field. There is no relationship between employment status, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. There is no relationship between employment status, exposure to printe: prc‘ess aurSuir 12. There i EXCOSJT‘ StudeCZ Iikelin :3. There 1 GAS-03M S.JC€C‘ likelin 14' here 1 exDOSur Studer' llkEilr 1:. l'ere 1 exSCStr StUderr Ilkeiir 3J3:§Cts The S .: G Undergr; 'Vefsi: -l ;. i “Heats we. :EEGersth. azfinllcall 25 printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field. 12. There is no relationship between level of cocurricular involvement, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. 13. There is no relationship between level of cocurricular involvement, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field. 14. There is no relationship between racial or ethnic background, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. 15. There is no relationship between racial or ethnic background, exposure to printed materials presenting information about the student affairs profession, and changes in students' expressed likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field. Methodology Subjects The subjects of this investigation included 177 students enrolled in two undergraduate student leadership training courses at Michigan State University during winter of 1991. One hundred fifty-six (88%) of these students were enrolled in a course dealing with the general topic of leadership. The remaining 21 students were enrolled in a course dealing specifically with minorities in leadership. The general course was taught in 1 studerts. ended a: di“erert ' .as used ‘: Irsfrs'erfe Five ' :revicus‘y ‘rvesh'pao. The fi (tool: . “‘4': "as I. - Jr the SUV ”l'C‘r'JErer: 26 taught in seven sections, each with an enrollment of approximately 25 students. The special topic course was taught in one section, which also enrolled approximately 25 students. Each course section was taught by a different instructor or team of instructors, although a common syllabus was used for all sections of the general leadership course. Instrumentation Five instruments were used in this study. These included two previously existing assessment instruments, one of which was adapted for purposes of this study, and three questionnaires designed by the investigator. The first instrument, the Extracurricular Involvement Inventory (EII), was developed by Massaro and Winston (Winston and Massaro, 1987) for the purpose of measuring the intensity of students' cocurricular involvement. The EII is a questionnaire that consists of 15 items. The first six items request information about the student's age, gender, ethnic background, class standing, marital status, and residency. The remaining items pertain to the student's involvement in cocurricular activities for which he or she is not compensated (See Appendix A for complete instrument). The second instrument which was used in this study was an abbreviated version of the Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI) - 1985 Revision, a personality-interest inventory which was developed by Holland. The abbreviated instrument consists of 84 "Yes" or "No" items, which produce scores on six scales: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional (See Appendix B for abridged instrument). The third instrument used in this study, the Student Information :-.esti0""" solicit I": the re'ainir 1‘ :‘ start a; c ‘Cr [CWC‘etE The {Cb :“airs 5 SE atrrevlafe’: items lie-'9" and the “1‘6 ‘ie‘d. It 5 In‘cmaticn The fii Career Info? ‘irst item 1 any irfonra‘ :eried prev are scene" rateria's r Strccse of 27 Questionnaire, consists of thirteen items. The first two items solicit information about the student's current employment status, and the remaining items deal with his or her level of familiarity with the student affairs profession, likelihood of entering the field, and likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in the field (See Appendix C for complete instrument). The fourth instrument used in this study, the College Student Affairs 8 Services Career Interest Questionnaire, consists of an abbreviated version of the third instrument. It includes only those items pertaining to the likelihood of pursuing a student affairs career and the likelihood of entering a graduate preparation program in the field. It serves as a posttest for use in conjunction with the Student Information Questionnaire (See Appendix D for abbreviated questionnaire). The fifth instrument, the College Student Affairs & Services Career Information Questionnaire, consists of three questions. The first item requests that students indicate whether or not they have read any information about the profession over the course of the seven week period preceding completion of the instrument. The second two items are open-ended questions soliciting information about the nature of any materials read and the student's reactions to these materials. The purpose of the questionnaire is to determine whether or not the amount of information about the profession that is actually assimilated by students differs, based upon their assignment to either of two conditions, and to assess students' overall level of satisfaction with the information about the profession that is available to them (See Appendix E for instrument). feta Cc: eC n.,.,' JL‘ .rg were provicr These mater Stucents rel :sring a 5], Choosing :3 mm: €3,- l'aeSticnnaii Ext-”ACUI‘PIC', After i 393P3ximatef CGECIeted U5 InfgmdtlQn We ’E'I-e‘ini. to the We 36115::an t "rr‘ - J ‘ ESSlQn 3”ch u. ~ ‘ J1 Jr: The s: 28 Data Collection Procedures During a preliminary training session, instructors of both courses were provided with all materials necessary for collecting the data. These materials included instructions, copies of all instruments, and several forms and publications which were used in conjunction with the investigation (See Appendix F for instructions and forms). In accordance with the directions provided to the instructors, students received a standardized verbal explanation of the study during a class period within the first two weeks of the term. Students choosing to participate in the study then completed and returned a consent form, a student identification form, the Student Information Questionnaire, the Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI), and the Extracurricular Involvement Inventory (EII). After the completed materials were received by the investigator, approximately half of the students from each course section who had completed usable identification forms, VPI's, EII's, and Student Information Questionnaires were assigned to the experimental group. The remaining students served as a control group. Students were assigned to the experimental and control groups, using a stratified random selection technique whereby students rating their familiarity with the profession as "Moderate," "High," or "Very high" were equally distributed between the two groups. The students' instructors were not aware_of whether they had been assigned to the experimental or control group. Three weeks after completion of the first three assessment instruments, each student assigned to the experimental group was mailed a copy of an informational booklet written by the investigator, along with a cover letter encouraging him or her . r {reenCTX d instruction Sarina the —__ Each 5 éetennine h :mzared iii of tie s‘ .4, maul (EbeTed "3.: Identify S‘ The 5' WGIVEE.‘ rf e735 1iabet; Slater 19" "'9 thy 29 him or her to eXplore career possibilities in student affairs (See Appendix G for cover letter and booklet). During the last two weeks of the term, instructors administered the College Stddent Affairs & Services Career Interest Questionnaire and the College Student Affairs & Services Career Information Questionnaire to all students participating in the study, in accordance with the written instructions provided. Scoring the Data Each student's three highest scores on the VPI were used to determine his or her individual personality pattern, which was then compared with the composite pattern representing the general orientation of the student affairs profession, using a system devised by Iachan (1984), which places a weighted value on matched scales, based on their placement within the three letter configuration. The measure of agreement between students' personality patterns and the composite pattern for the profession was calculated as the sum of the weighted values assigned to each matched scale within the two codes. This value was then used to divide the students into three categories of approximately equal size, labeled "High," "Medium," and "Low." These designations were used to identify students' levels of compatibility with the profession. The EII was used to obtain an extracurricular involvement index for each student. The students were then divided, according to their involvement indices, into three categories of approximately equal size, also labeled "High," "Medium," and "Low." These classifications were used to describe students' levels of cocurricular involvement. Students were divided into two categories based on their responses to the third item on the EII, which deals with racial or ethnic :ggeground. :2) minori: their respo The categor sorority In: Stucer In‘ometior statuses, L " III-- sectiens 0. each SZUCe 3f Dossibl lit-IFS DEr: an index 0 fleid, 3.6: ,‘Ielg Ware 30 background. The categories used included: (1) White or Caucasian, and (2) minority. Students were also divided into two categories based on their responses to the sixth item on the EII, which deals with residency. The categories used included: (1) residence halls and fraternity or sorority houses, and (2) other housing. Students' responses to the first two items on the Student Information Questionnaire were used to determine their employment statuses, using four categories: (1) Not employed; (2) Employed off campus, not employed on campus; (3) Employed on campus, not employed in Student Affairs; and (4) Employed in Student Affairs. The last two sections of the Student Information Questionnaire were used to assess each student's initial level of interest in student affairs as a field of possible future endeavor. Each student's ratings of five Likert type items pertaining to careers in student affairs were totaled, to produce an index of his or her initial likelihood of pursuing a career in the field. Ratings of five items pertaining to graduate preparation in the field were likewise totaled, to produce an index of the student's initial likelihood of pursuing a relevant master's degree. All College Student Affairs & Services Career Interest Questionnaires were scored using the same procedures employed in scoring the last two sections of the Student Information Questionnaire, thereby providing posttest indices of students' likelihood of pursuing careers in student affairs and related graduate preparation. Pretest indices were then subtracted from the corresponding posttest indices, in order to determine the degree and direction of change, if any, in each student's attitude toward careers in the field of student affairs and related professional preparation. I-test was C tfie basis 0‘ and initial Cri-scuare a gerder, raci affairs pro: CES'EE to w" The mes EXDErtnentaj t0 jetemlfie marials. :Etfif‘filne HQ Crtatibjij. 3" '“fQWat; a‘l Stddt‘ratg trial,- . . e‘fhp; C) 5.30 U590 {—9 1 \ 31 Data Analysis After the students' participation in the study was concluded, a t-test was conducted, to compare the experimental and control groups, on the basis of age, initial likelihood of pursuing a student affairs career, and initial likelihood of pursuing a master's degree in student affairs. Chi-square analysis was used to compare the two groups, on the basis of gender, racial or ethnic background, class standing, residency, employment, cocurricular involvement, and compatibility with the student affairs profession. The purpose of these analyses was to determine the degree to which the two groups were initially equivalent. The mean difference in pretest and posttest ratings for the experimental and control groups were compared, using a t-test, in order to determine the main effect, if any, of exposure to the printed materials. Analysis of variance was then conducted, in order to determine what relationship, if any, existed between students' compatibility with the profession and their response to the presentation of information about the field. Chi-square analysis was used to compare all students' levels of compatibility with the profession, according to their employment and cocurricular involvement. Chi-square analysis was also used to compare levels of compatibility with the profession for all students of at least sophomore status, according to their residency. Because of the University's freshman residency requirement, it was not possible to examine differences in levels of compatibility with the profession, among freshmen, on the basis of residency. Analysis of variance was used to detect possible differences in students' responses to the presentation of information about the profession, which related to their residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement. Again, Extrema-m“: I'assar the q; activi Elf'ac LY‘P‘I n 3'4 cu 32 differences based on residency were determined only for students of at least sophomore status. Finally, analysis of variance was used to determine possible differences between Caucasian and racial and ethnic minority students' responses to the presentation of information about the field. For more detailed information on the subjects, the instrumentation, and the procedures employed in collecting, scoring, and analyzing the data, the reader is referred to Chapter 3, Methodology. Definition of Terms Extracurricular Involvement Inventory (EII): An instrument, developed by Massaro and Winston (Winston and Massaro, 1987), designed to measure the quality and quantity of students' involvement in cocurricular activities for which they are not compensated. Extracurricular Involvement Index: A numerical indicator of the quantity and quality of students' involvement in cocurricular activities for which they are not compensated, based on information reported in the Extracurricular Involvement Inventory (Winston and Massaro, 1987). Cocurricular Involvement: The investment of time and energy in campus activities outside of class. Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI): A personality-interest inventory, developed by Holland (1985b), which yields scores on 11 scales, including Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, Conventional, Self-Control, Status, Masculinity/Femininity, Infrequency, and Acquiescence. Adapted for purposes of this study to include only the first six scales. Holland Personality Type: The prevailing temperament of the individual, based ( a . .eSicre ancrg ‘ p ufl‘ b". r 9.3' a!!! . are new (OCae' 33 based on a classification scheme developed by Holland (1973, 1985a). Designated by the individual's single most highly rated scale from among the following: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Holland Personality Pattern: The prevailing temperament of the individual, based on a classification scheme developed by Holland (1973, 1985a). Designated by the individual's three most highly rated scales from among the following: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Holland Environmental Type: The classification of a work environment, according to the prevailing disposition of those who populate it, based on a system developed by Holland (1973, 1985a). Designated by the single most highly rated scale from among the following: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Holland Environmental Pattern: The classification of a work environment, according to the prevailing disposition of those who populate it, based on a system developed by Holland (1973, 1985a). Designated by the three most highly rated scales from among the following: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. Vocational Development: Clarification of values and goals related to a life's work, and progress toward achieving occupational goals in accordance with one's values. Student Affairs Profession: The occupational group composed of college and university employees whose primary responsibility is to promote the overall development of students through educational programs ar' '5 A-nz‘q'. bil- F I rh «H: i 1: I II ‘\ .fu al.. a flu. ‘\ E :- r\ c F . O u r .v . e e .h. r. a: n a . 5.. r- r n. n... a D» M F m. :U S Rb: fiU t F a Q R. ’I +- ad fl,— -!|. a o. ( G‘ ‘QN a‘. :1 S .‘m a”. .4 . A . .J .0. AU ‘3 w d ...: m n. F55 1.”. a» a» A ,v til. i, I“. ll“ Ir v ALHI 34 and services not traditionally classified as academic. Professional Preparation Programs: Graduate degree programs designed to prepare individuals to enter the student affairs profession. Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession: Recruitment and preparation of new student affairs professionals. Compatibility with the Student Affairs Profession: The degree to which an individual is likely to be successful and satisfied in the student affairs profession, based on characteristics of his or her personality. Indicated by the degree to which his or her Holland personality pattern conforms to a composite pattern representing the overall orientation of the profession, derived from research by Frantz (1969a), by applying the basic principles of Holland's (1973, 1985a) Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT). Environmental Assessment Technique (EAT): A system devised by Holland (1973, 1985a) for determining environmental patterns, whereby the primary personality types of those inhabiting an environment are ranked according to their prevalence within the environment. Undergraduate Experience: All events and activities in which an individual participates while enrolled as an undergraduate student, and his or her perception of these events and activities. Residency: The student's place of residence while attending college (e.g., residence hall, off-campus apartment). Resident Students: Collegiate students residing on campus. Commuters, Commuting Students: Collegiate students residing off campus. Part-time Students: Students enrolled for less than the minimum number of course credits required by their institutions for classification as a full-time student. Iraditit Sertraci ed; ant Tre CGRC7usi carpetib to the Ca derived . EE'ETal ( C" SIX Di ‘ield. 1 data uric SIGdEnt a GQCECQS , tehl'Erarrg flela FUr+ as 'C39 Der as: . "oc'qte< “n1. . “‘f with CCntinUed In 1" L :A -VGut the . 35 Traditional Aged Students: College students who are 18 to 23 years of age. Adult Learners: College students who are 24 years of age or older. Nontraditional Students: Student populations not widely served by higher education historically. Includes commuters, part-time students, and adult learners. Limitations of the Study The design of this study placed some inherent limitations on the conclusions which may be drawn from it. First, it should be noted that compatibility with the student affairs profession was defined according to the degree of conformity between the individual's personality pattern, derived from a single measure, and_a composite pattern representing the general orientation of the profession, based on the relative prevalence of six primary personality types within a sample of professionals in the field. This information was also derived from a single measure, using data which are now over 20 years old. Although the fundamental nature of student affairs work has not changed substantially over the last two decades, it is possible that changes have occurred in the prevailing temperament of individuals who have found success and satisfaction in the field. Furthermore, it should be noted that no attempt was made to identify those personal characteristics or experiences which are commonly associated with departure from the profession. Rather, the study dealt only with broadly defined characteristics commonly associated with continued membership in the profession. In its assessment of the impact of the presentation of information about the student affairs profession, this study focused on a single inte'Vl t3 irC 36 intervention. Therefore, conclusions cannot necessarily be generalized to include other forms of presentation, particularly those which do not rely exclusively on print media. All students participating in the study were enrolled in student leadership training courses, further limiting the scope of the study. _ This population was selected partly in response to a report by the ACPA-NASPA Task Force on Professional Preparation and Practice (Recruitment, Preparation, 1989), in which it was recommended that such courses be employed as a vehicle for disseminating information about the profession. Enrollment in these courses may reflect an initial interest in campus leadership activities, which are often closely related to student affairs work. Students enrolled in these courses may, therefore, be more responsive to the treatment than would be the general student population. Conclusions cannot necessarily be generalized beyond this particular student population. Additionally, it should be noted that all students participating in the study were enrolled at Michigan State University. A number of unique characteristics of the University and its students may have influenced the outcomes of the study, and limited the generalizability of its findings and conclusions. Specifically, it should be noted that the University offers nationally recognized professional preparation programs in College and University Administration with a Student Affairs emphasis (Beatty, 1988; Sandeen, 1982). Therefore, students enrolled at the University may have greater exposure to the profession than would the general student population. In the analysis of data, a number of possible complex interactive effects were not explored, due to the limited size of the sample. FereGVE" raical a staterts Siren II" interest: ' ‘ 1 ‘ Infra-E"; §‘O ELLE’PS Elnorifv '55 DTE'r Sieuld es “I"! 9"‘C3Fcu1 37 Moreover, all independent variables were defined rather broadly. While raical and ethnic minority students were distinguished from Caucasian students, no distinctions were drawn between specific minority groups. Given the differences which have previously been observed in the career interests of students from various minority groups, it would seem likely that observations concerning minority students' responses to the intervention, when taken collectively, would not accurately reflect the patterns of response which might be found within certain individual minority groups. Specifically, it should be noted that Asian-Americans have previously been found to differ considerably from other identified minority groups in their preferred fields of study. Therefore, caution should especially be exercised in drawing conclusions about this particular segment of the minority student population. Although distinctions were drawn between on-campus employment and off-campus employment, as well as on-campus student affairs employment and other on-campus employment, other differences in the nature of students' work were not considered in analyzing its relationship to their personality types and career aspirations. Distinctions between types of student housing were also limited. Although residence halls and fraternity or sorority houses were distinguished from other types of housing, further distinctions were not drawn. Additionally, students' residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement classifications were based entirely upon their statuses at the time of the initial survey. The influence of previous residency, employment, and cocurricular involvement has remained largely unknown. Finally, it must be noted that the investigation was conducted over a period of approximately seven weeks. Therefore, definite conclusions cancernin'é stacent a‘ resaits 0" In a: design 0.‘ tre canal; ‘imitaticr rentire-ride ?- . .ms CCBtalns a 38 concerning the long-term influence of exposure to information about the student affairs profession would not be justified, based upon the results of this study alone. In addition to the recognized limitations inherent in the initial design of the study, a number of unanticipated limitations further eroded the conclusions which may be drawn from the investigation. These limitations are explored in Chapter 5, Summary, Discussion, and Recommendations. Organization of the Chapters This report is organized in five chapters. The second chapter contains a review of the literature relevant to the purpose of this study. Information is presented on current patterns of entry and departure from the student affairs profession. The relationship between interests and work values and satisfaction in student affairs is also explored. Information related to Holland's theory of career development is presented. Comparisons are drawn between the interests and work values of student affairs professionals and those of today's students. Consideration is also given to issues of race and ethnicity in the recruitment of new professionals. The changing demographics of the nation are examined. Information is presented on minority representation in the student affairs profession and in the nation's student population. The influence of the undergraduate experience on the decision to enter the profession is explored. The influence of the undergraduate experience on the vocational development of students, in general, is examined. Comparisons are then drawn between the undergraduate experience of current student affairs professionals and that of today's students. Finally, alternative means of introduction to the profession are examined. Vi, 5M: emits-yea .: sa:;‘ects analysis Study, a fincings T‘EC GTE!) 39 The third chapter provides information related to the methodology employed in the investigation. It includes information related to the subjects, instrumentation, data collection procedures, scoring, and data analysis techniques. The fourth chapter presents the findings of the study, and the final chapter provides a summary of the study, major findings, conclusions, implications for the student affairs field, and recomnendations for further research. C-ve :eccre i stance i itse‘f i CHAPTER 2 Review of the Literature Introduction Over the past two decades, the student affairs profession has become increasingly committed to the adoption of a "proactive" (sic.) stance in relation to societal changes. This commitment has manifested itself in continuous documentation and analysis of trends, within both society and the profession itself. The resulting body of literature provides a basis upon which to recognize and understand the current challenges facing the profession, and points toward possible strategies for overcoming these challenges. This chapter contains a review of the literature related to the specific challenges posed by recent and anticipated demographic changes within the student affairs profession and the nation as a whole. Attention is focused specifically on descriptive and theoretical material related to the recruitment, preparation, and maintenance of a corps of professionals capable of serving the needs of a changing population. The review begins with an overview of the regenerative patterns that have been observed within the student affairs profession in recent years, followed by an introduction to a general theory of career development proposed by John L. Holland. Interests and work values of student affairs professionals, and those of today's students, are then explored in relation to this theory. Changes in the racial and ethnic composition of the nation is then considered, along with information concerning the racial and ethnic backgrounds of current student affairs professionals and those of today's students. The influence of the 40 an“ .ercr 15:" at.“ 41 undergraduate experience upon the vocational development of students is then explored, and comparisons are drawn between the undergraduate experiences of current student affairs professionals and those of today's students. Finally, alternative means of introducing prospective student affairs professionals to the field are examined. Recent Patterns in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession Throughout its history, much of the student affairs literature has dealt with issues related to the professionalization of the field, with very little consensus beyond a common recognition that full professional status has long been desired (Carpenter, 1983; Carpenter, Miller, and Winston, 1980; Darley, 1949; Knock, 1988; Koile, 1966; Kuk, 1988; Moore, 1988; Nygreen, 1968; Penney, 1969; Remley, 1988; Rickard, 1988a, 1988b; Stamatakos, 1981a, 1981b; Williams, 1988; Wrenn, 1949). In making a case for the status of student affairs, as a "professional community," Carpenter (1983, p. 152) cited three defining characteristics of such communities. First, he observed that professional communities share a common set of goals and objectives. Additionally, he noted that such communities employ formal and informal sanctions. Finally, he stated that "any community must attend to socialization and regeneration" (p. 153). Carpenter (1983) viewed socialization as the formal and informal processes through which the body of knowledge and traditions of the field are communicated to its newer members by those who are more experienced. He added that, while regeneration is closely related to socialization, "the focus is more upon the actual bringing of individuals into the field" (p. 153). 3689 the rule in '35 SEN tncse w.’ ~‘., abmty 42 Since its inception as a recognized occupational field, one of student affairs' primary vehicles for socialization and regeneration has been the professional preparation program. In addition to playing a key role in promoting the initial growth of the field, this type of program has served as an ongoing means of preparing new professionals to replace those who have left the field. It seems, therefore, that the profession's ability to regenerate itself, during the years ahead, will depend largely upon the ability of faculty in the field to prepare new professionals at a rate comparable to that at which experienced professionals are leaving the field. In recent history, the rate at which graduate preparation programs have prepared new professionals has varied greatly. According to Evans and Bossert (1983), while the period from 1946 to 1970 brought a rapid growth in the number of graduate preparation programs in student affairs, it was followed by a period of decline in both the number of programs in existance and the total enrollment of the remaining programs. Research by Keim (1983) revealed that 13 professional preparation programs were discontinued between 1973 and 1977, and that an additional ten programs were discontinued between 1977 and 1980. According to Meabon (In Evans and Bossert, 1983), five programs curtailed activity between 1979 and 1982. At the doctoral level, 756 students were enrolled in professional preparation programs in 1979-80, compared with 771 in 1976-77 and 966 in 1972-73. At the master's level, 1,630 students were enrolled in 1979-80, compared with 2,820 in 1976-77 and 2,586 in 1972-73 (Keim, 1983). More recent data from The Directory of Graduate Preparation Programs in College Student Personnel, as cited by Stamatakos (1989), indicated Evi 43 an increase in the number of preparation programs from 73 in 1980 to 101 in 1987. However, the average enrollment in preparation programs continued to decline during this period, reaching 41.6 in 1987, compared with 48.4 in 1984 and 59.4 in 1973. Of particular importance to the future of student affairs practice is the number of individuals actually completing graduate preparation programs annually, since these are the individuals who are likely to enter the work force, eventually replacing aging members of the profession. Again, a downward trend has been observed. The total number of graduates from doctoral preparation programs fell from 195 in 1970-71 to 169 in 1985-86, and the total number of master's level graduates fell from 1,142 in 1970-71 to 921 in 1985-86 (Stamatakos, 1989). An additional factor affecting the number of professionals engaged in student affairs work during the years ahead is the rate at which individuals of all ages are leaving the field. According to Evans (1988): Although individuals desiring a career in student affairs seem to have little trouble securing entry-level positions following completion of master's degrees, advancement in the field seems to be more difficult. As a result, many individuals seem to be leaving the profession. Given the time, resources, and energy being invested by students, faculty, and student affairs staff in the preparation of new professionals, the revolving door syndrome evident in the profession is a major concern. (p. 19) A number of studies have been conducted, which lend support to Evans' assertion. In one of these studies, focusing on placement of college student personnel graduates during the 1973-74 academic year, Packwood (1976) found that 19% of master's and specialist level graduates and 23% of doctoral level graduates had not remained in the field after graduation. This study was replicated two years later by Greer, Blaesser, Herron, and Horle (1978), with even less encouraging findings. 44 They reported that 26% of the graduates included in their study had not been placed in student affairs positions. At the master's level, the figure reached 27%; at the specialist level, 20%; and at the doctoral level, 26%. In a survey of students graduating from professional preparation programs at two eastern universities between June 1970 and December 1979, Burns (1982) found that only 61% were still employed in student affairs while 39% had left the field. In a survey of students graduating in 1978 from four nationally known professional preparation programs in student affairs, Wood, Winston, and Polkosnik (1985) found that 68% were still employed in the field five years after graduation, while 32% reported that they had left the field. In a study of students graduating from a professional preparation program at an eastern university between 1971 and 1981, Holmes, Verrier, and Chisholm (1983) found a gradual attrition from the student affairs field such that only 39% of the graduates were employed in the field by the sixth year. In a study of individuals graduating from professional preparation programs in 1983, Aronson, Bennett, Moore, and Moore (1985) found a rise in the percentage of master's level graduates finding work in the field upon graduation. Eighty percent of those included in their study found such employment, while only 61% of those included in earlier studies from 1976 to 1979 found such employment. They cautioned, however, that the return rate for their survey was only 45%. Consequently, only tentative conclusions could be drawn. In a more recent study of master's level student affairs graduates, Richmond and Benton (1988) found that 11% of both men and women left the field upon graduation. Although 11% of the men had indicated such an ‘l.- a.» , A: «N\ Te. 45 intent prior to graduation, only 9% of the women included in the study had planned to leave the field. In a study of job satisfaction among a sample of practicing student affairs professionals drawn from the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators (NASPA) Region II membership, Bender (1980) found that only 36% planned to stay in the profession for the remainder of their working lives. Moreover, among those respondents ages 23 through 36, only 27% indicated an intent to remain in the field. In a 1981 study by Urbach and Chapman (1982), focusing specifically on admissions staff below the level of director, 51% of all counselors, 54% of all assistant directors, and 53% of all associate directors indicated plans to seek future employment outside of education. Additionally, 12% of all counselors, 3% of all assistant directors, and 3% of all associate directors planned to seek future employment in education at the elementary or secondary level. In a concurrent study of admissions directors, Chapman and Urbach (1984) found that, of the 63% of those surveyed who indicated plans to leave admissions within five or ten years, 28% planned to find employment outside of education, and 3% planned to remain in education at the elementary or secondary level. In a similar study three years later, Chapman and Benati (1986) found that 57% of admissions directors expected to leave admissions within five to ten years. Of those planning to leave the field, 27% expected to find employment outside of education, and 4% planned to remain in education at the elementary or secondary level. Even among graduate students in student affairs some uncertainty about long-term employment in the field has been expressed. In a study of students enrolled in 22 master's degree programs in student affairs, I I;<~.v _' IU‘ l . trefise‘ ' ‘ < C 3‘ 3‘ Add n11 o o Fa rad pi. 1 £ a r». "'90 CJI'FETI‘. eCTiné field. p U 46 Williams, McEwen, and Engstrom (1990) found that only 52.3% considered themselves "very likely to remain" in the profession for ten or more years, while 3.4% considered themselves "very unlikely to remain" and 5.9% considered themselves "probably unlikely to remain." Additionally, 26.9% considered themselves "somewhat likely to remain," and 11.1% indicated that they could not respond. In summary, student affairs research has generally revealed a decline in the number of new professionals being prepared in graduate degree programs within the field, over the past 20 years, in addition to a high rate of attrition from the profession. Moreover, studies of current professionals' plans for the future have generally indicated a high level of uncertainty regarding their likelihood of remaining in the field. This combination of trends has raised considerable concern about the profession's ability to regenerate and sustain itself during the years ahead. Issues Related to Interests and Work Values in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession Holland's Theory of Career Development A career development theory proposed by Holland (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) provides some insight into patterns of entry and departure from the student affairs profession by focusing generally on personality as it relates to vocational choice, as well as satisfaction and success within any chosen field. Holland asserted that personalities can be broadly categorized according to their resemblance to each of six basic types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. He theorized that, as a result of heredity and experience, each :tivi‘ 'ex;71( rethine In‘vesti activit creativ order t 2955a, | “”575ter 47 individual develops a unique set of competencies and interests, which creates a predisposition toward certain kinds of activities. Each of the types identified by Holland represents a different category of preferred activities. The Realistic person prefers activities which involve the "explicit, ordered, or systematic manipulation of objects, tools, machines, and animals" (Holland, 1973, p. 14; 1985a, p. 19). The Investigative personality type is characterized by a preference for activities which involve the "observational, symbolic, systematic, and creative investigation of physical, biological, and cultural phenomena in order to understand and control such phenomena" (Holland, 1973, p. 14; 1985a, pp. 19-20). The Artistic person prefers "ambiguous, free, unsystematized activities that entail the manipulation of physical, verbal, or human materials to create art forms or products" (Holland, 1973, p. 15; 1985a, p. 20). The Social person is drawn toward "activities that entail the manipulation of others to inform, train, develop, cure, or enlighten" (Holland, 1973, p. 16; 1985a, p. 21). The Enterprising personality type is characterized by a preference for activities which involve "the manipulation of others to attain organizational goals or economic gain" (Holland, 1973, p. 16; 1985a, p. 21). Finally, the Conventional person prefers "activities that entail the explicit, ordered, systematic manipulation of data, such as keeping records, filing materials, reproducing materials, organizing written and numerical data according to a prescribed plan, operating business machines and data processing machines to attain organizational or economic goals" (Holland; 1973, p. 17; 1985a, p. 22). Although the primary personality type of the individual refers to that type which he or she most closely resembles, in reality, most inclV O n .A .b b no U U 7 $5 a. :8 a» a: (u 1 36381 taassi -~in5 Rhn, h nil. V .\ _ .H.‘ .d 48 individuals bear varying degrees of resemblance to each of the basic types. By ranking these types according to the degree to which the individual resembles them, it is possible to obtain a more complex profile of his or her personality. Holland (1966, 1973, 1985a) refers to this type of profile as a personality pattern, and uses the term, subtype, in reference to specific personality patterns. These patterns .are identified by two or more of the six basic labels, presented in :sequence and usually abbreviated using the first letter of each. In addition to individuals, Holland's (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) niodel is used to classify work environments according to their degrees caf conformity to each of the basic types. Work environments are <:lassified according to the prevailing personality types of those who [Jopulate them. By ranking the basic types according to the degree to vvhich they prevail in a particular work environment, it is possible to ()btain an environmental pattern comparable to the individual personality Pattern. Both personality and environmental patterns vary in the degree to hflnich they resemble certain basic types, to the exclusion of others. In time most extreme case, an individual or an environment may resemble only Che type. Others may resemble all types equally. Holland (1973, 1985a) T‘efers to this characteristic of personality and environmental patterns aS differentiation. The degree of differentiation within a personality (3" environmental pattern refers to the difference between the strongest a"d weakest resemblances to the basic types. An additional characteristic of personality and environmental Patterns, identified by Holland (1966, 1973, 1985a), is the degree of Consistency that exists among its components. The six basic types vary 49 in their resemblance to one another. For example, Realistic and Investigative types share many common characteristics, while Artistic and Conventional types share little in common with one another. Therefore, a profile in which the principal components include both Realistic and Investigative tendencies is said to be more consistent than one marked by high degrees of resemblance to both Artistic and Conventional types. Holland, Whitney, Cole, and Richards (1969) presented a hexagonal Inmdel, shown in Figure 1, which illustrates the relative similarity of 'the six basic personality and environmental types. Within this model, :similarities between types are assumed to be inversely proportional to ‘the distances between them. Specific correlations between types have also been identified. Fictre I all: '5 '1 Cu CONl 50 Figure 1. A Hexagonal Model for Interpretation of Inter- and ntra- ass Relationships REAL .46 ’ INT .16 .30 .36 ' .34 / .16 .16 / .ART / .11 #- CONV / .21 .35 V 6 .42 .30 .38 ENT .54 soc Note. From An Empirical Occupational Classification Derived From a 'fie or of Personalit andTntended for Practice and Research (p. 4) by 3 E. Holland; 5. R. Whitney; N. S. Cat; and J. M. Richards, Jr. ; 1969; Iowa City: Research and Development Division, American College Testing pY‘ogram. Copyright 1969 by The American College Testing Program. All 7‘1 ghts reserved. Reproduced with permission. in eniiron: tiecry 1 career . ACCeria Serscn ‘ s:n1:ar' a aartic DGI‘SOR d 5U§gest SatlSTaC the DErS 51 The similarities and differences between personality and environmental types form the crux of Holland's (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) theory of career development, influencing the individual in both career selection and successful continuation within the chosen field. According to this theory, a vocation attracts people with similar personalities, and creates work environments which reflect these similarities. Moreover, achievement, stability, and satisfaction within a particular field depend on the degree of compatibility between the person and the environment. The theory of career development proposed by Holland seems to hold implications for the regeneration of the student affairs profession. Hancock (1988) related this theory to the current crisis in the field, concluding that "the high attrition rate in student affairs would suggest incongruence exists between young professionals and their work environments" (p. 25). According to Holland's theory, success and satisfaction in any field are related to the degree of conformity between the personality type of the individual and the type of work environment that prevails within the particular field. It would seem, therefore, that the problems faced in the regeneration of the student affairs profession could be diminished if the field were to attract more individuals whose personality patterns were compatible with the profession, while not attracting those whose profiles were less predictive of success and satisfaction within the field. In summary, according to Holland's theory of career development, both individual personalities and environments can be classified according to their resemblance to each of six basic types: Realistic, Investigative, Artistic, Social, Enterprising, and Conventional. 52 Because most personalities and work environments bear varying degrees of resemblance to several of the basic types, it is possible to gain a more accurate profile by ranking the basic types according to their degrees of manifestation within the personality or work environment. This type of profile is known as a personality pattern or environmental pattern. .According to Holland's theory, both entry into a field and subsequent success and satisfaction in one's work are influenced by the degree of (:ompatibility between the work environment and the personality of the individual. Holland's theory has been applied to the challenges currently being 'Faced in the regeneration of the student affairs profession. The theory seems to hold some promise for promoting both understanding and Iresolution the current crisis in the field. ngterests and Work Values :2: Student Affairs Professionals A number of studies have been conducted, involving current and fkarmer student affairs professionals, which offer some indication of the t.Ypes of interests and values that are satisfied through student affairs work. Several studies have also dealt with sources of dissatisfaction iri this type of work. In one study by Hancock (1988), in which supervisors of entry level VHDusing positions assessed various occupational reinforcers provided by tfliese positions, only two items were rated negatively, indicating that tflie corresponding reinforcers were lacking in the positions. These two l”Items were compensation and social status. In a survey of former mid-level student affairs professionals who had left the field, Borg, Stamatakos, Stonewater, and Studer (1988) found .Inv ‘IU l . in" ,I'\ wrrE AA .U A: .s 38" 3Er'ar '\I C}, «var Ru :1 Auk '1 hid F. A iv P11 1.” ..' Rd H .u-.. c. 1 $1 0.. e .11 h i. .h... $1 ,- Alb 53 that "lack of opportunity for advancement" and "inadequate salary" were the two most frequently cited factors in the decision to leave the field, influencing respectively 67% and 60% of those surveyed. In a corresponding survey soliciting chief student affairs officers' perceptions concerning reasons for attrition of mid-level professionals, these two factors were likewise most frequently cited, at rates of 83% and 85% respectively. In Burns' (1982) survey of professional preparation program alumni, among those who left the field, "potential for advancement" (p. 11) and "salary" (p. 11) were also among the most frequently cited reasons for .accepting positions in the course of their careers, with 19% and 16% ‘respectively indicating that they had been influenced by these factors. (Only "geographic location" (p. 11) was cited more frequently, with 21% ‘indicating that it had been a factor in their decisions. Those who left 'the field also indicated an intent to seek more variety, more responsibility, and higher salaries in future employment. In the study by Borg et. al. (1988), the chief student affairs crfficers and former mid-level professionals were also surveyed on their perceptions of current mid-level student affairs practitioners' favorite and least favorite aspects of their positions. The findings Sdlggest that the single most desirable aspect of these positions is 'WNorking with students." This factor was most frequently cited among ‘the»first three choices of both groups, being chosen by 85.7% of the (”iief student affairs officers and 80.1% of the former mid-level llrofessionals. In contrast, the single factor most frequently cited by b0th groups as being among the three least desirable aspects of the Positions was "lack of opportunities for advancement." This factor was 54 cited by 48.2% of the chief student affairs officers and 60.0% of the former mid-level professionals. In a study of chief student affairs administrators, Studer (1980) found that those surveyed tended to be very satisfied with all aspects of their own positions, with the exception of compensation. They tended to be only moderately satisfied with this aspect. In a study of job satisfaction among student affairs professionals eat 22 private colleges in Iowa, sources of dissatisfaction were found to 'include: "lack of opportunities for advancement, poor salary, lack of 'faculty acceptance of student affairs profession, long hours, and campus laolitics." In contrast, sources of satisfaction included: "helping students grow, stimulating work environments, and involvement with a ‘variety of tasks." The study revealed that, while 52% of the women and 134% of the men included in the study were dissatisfied or very (dissatisfied with their salaries, their total job satisfaction was not affected to a large degree (Buckner, 1989). In studies focusing on sources of satisfaction among admissions personnel, salary and opportunities for advancement have also been raised as areas of concern. In their study of admissions officers below tile rank of director, Urbach and Chapman (1982) found that only 63% (T? associate directors, 57% of assistant directors, and 54% of admissions Counselors felt their positions offered the prospect of future adVIancement. In their 1981 study of admissions directors, Chapman and lerach (1984) found that, while 80% of those surveyed reported being '“Very" to "extremely" (p. 65) satisfied with their positions, only half bElieved that their positions offered any opportunity for future advancement. Two years later, Chapman and Benati (1986) found a 5% declini :csitii “rsitii de-v I. afzif“ .‘UVG ‘ Ri “-1 9:: i . L lnci l'Uenr 3‘. ":l P 55 decline in the proportion of directors who were satisfied with their positions, but found a 7% increase in the proportion who felt their positions offered advancement opportunities. Salary was reported as an area of concern, with 67% indicating that their earnings were not sufficient to enable their families to live as comfortably as they would like. Nevertheless, those who believed their salaries were inadequate to meet the needs of their families were not necessarily less satisfied with their jobs than were other directors. A number of other studies dealing with factors influencing student affairs professionals' decisions to enter the field reveal similar patterns of work values. In a survey of student affairs practitioners, vvho belonged to the American College Personnel Association (ACPA), Cheatham (1964) found that respondents represented a wide variety of (acmupational backgrounds and undergraduate majors, but that they seemed to share a comon propensity for "people-oriented" activities. In exploring occupational reinforcers, she found that student affairs practitioners "derive their satisfactions from helping students with tflieir problems, contributing to the improvement of society, exercising l eadership, being creative and working as team members with others in education." Similarly, in a study of personality characteristics of student affairs practitioners at ten collegiate institutions, using undergraduate majop as the defining criterion, and applying the Holland typology, Fr‘afltz (1969a) concluded that "student personnel workers may be described as Ihost sensitive to personal, humanitarian, social, and emotional i"fluences" (p. 195), and that "they are least sensitive to materialistic, abstract, and analytic influences" (p. 195). He added that "their goals JDZ: 56 and satisfactions in life relate to working with and helping people, and they have little interest or motivation for purely intellectual pursuits" (p. 195). Finally, he stated that "student personnel may be described as a social, personal, and humanitarian profession with little emphasis on abstract and materialistic concerns" (p. 196). The study by Frantz (1969a) was one of several focusing on undergraduate majors of student affairs professionals, which have .yielded similar findings. In this particular study, although business administration was the fifth most prevalent undergraduate major of the respondents, the remainder of the ten most common majors were all taranches of the arts and humanities, the social sciences, or education. 'These three subject areas accounted for 82% of the total sample. In a :study of graduate students enrolled in professional preparation programs at 27 institutions, Kuh, Greenlee, and Lardy (1978) found that the most conmon undergraduate fields of study were education and psychology, with each of these fields accounting for 25% of those surveyed. It was also found that 17% of those surveyed held baccalaureate degrees in other areas of the social sciences, and 16% had majored in the humanities as undergraduates. In a more recent study of master's level students in 16 Professional preparation programs, Forney (1989) also found that psychology was the most comon undergraduate major, with 15% of those surveyed having received their bachelor's degrees in that particular field. Psychology majors were followed in prevalence by double majors, arki rnajors in communications, education, and sociology. Together, these f‘iVe majors accounted for 55% of those surveyed. In the study of I master's level students, conducted by Williams et. al. (1990), it was foufld that 29.7% of those surveyed had majored in the liberal arts as Pm. ” "V: 57 undergraduates, 19.8% had majored in psychology or counseling, 12.7% in education, 12.4% in business, and 10.5% in other areas of the social sciences. Forney (1989), in her study of student affairs graduate students, also sought to identify common reasons for entering the field. 0f eight alternatives presented, the most frequently cited reasons were "want to work with students," "want to contribute to students' development," and "like the college atmosphere" (p. 78). Students were least likely to enter the field based on a desire for prestige. Salary and opportunities for advancement were not among the options presented. In the study by Williams et. al. (1990), of fifteen alternatives laresented, the most influential factors in students' decisions to enter ‘the field were: (1) the "desire to work on a college campus," (2) the "desire to help influence/nurture/support the development of students," (:3) the "desire for the variety found in student affairs work," (4) the "desire to continue to learn and develop in an educational environment," and (5) the "desire to provide programs and services for students." Salary and status were identified as the two least influential factors in students' decisions to enter the field. Luckadoo (1990) sought to identify those values which were most Comonly held by master's level students in ten professional preparation programs in student affairs. Of 21 values that were assessed, it was f(lurid that "ability utilization," "achievement," "altruism," and "personal development" (p. 89) were most commonly endorsed, while "physical acti vity," "risk," and "physical prowess" (p. 89) were ranked lowest. In summary, research involving current and former practitioners has generally revealed that compensation and opportunities for advancement are a qu‘!‘ dduu JCCOF €539! :refei 58 are areas in which the rewards of student affairs work are limited, while opportunities for interaction with others provide reinforcement for those engaged in this type of work. The research seems to also support the notion that individuals who are most satisfied in the profession are those for whom salary and status are of less importance than are opportunities for interpersonal contact. Studies of undergraduate academic backgrounds of student affairs professionals have revealed a preference for majors in education, the social sciences, and the humanities. Common reasons for entering the field include a desire to \NOFk in a collegiate environment, and to promote the development of (:ollege students. The variety of responsibilities found in student affairs work has also been identified as one of the field's most appealing aspects. Interests and Work Values of Today's Students The profile of the successful student affairs professional that has emerged from the current literature differs dramatically from that of the 'tg/pical undergraddate student. During the early 1980's, a number of .aeathors (Guardo, 1982; Levine, 1980, 1983; Sandeen, 1985; Stodt, 1982; and Winn, 1985), began to draw contrasts between those students entering higher education during that era and their predecessors of the late 1960's and early 1970's. What has emerged from this literature is a portrait of the contemporary undergraduate student that is characterized by high degrees of materialism, vocationalism, and narcissism. These StUdents have been presented as being concerned primarily about themselves and those who are closest to them, with an emphasis on wealth, power, and physical comfort. They have been seen as regarding higher ed“iltation, not as an end in itself, but as a means of obtaining these 59 other desired commodities. Levine (1980) supported this portrayal of undergraduate students, with references to a series of studies conducted by the Carnegie Commission on Higher Education and the Carnegie Council on Policy Studies in Higher Education. In one of these studies, student affairs administrators on 586 campuses were surveyed concerning changes observed among the students on their campuses between 1969-70 and 1978. On 71% of the campuses, students were believed to be "more career-oriented" (p. 7). On 54% of the campuses, they were described as "more concerned with inaterial success" (p. 7). On 40% of the campuses, they were described as 'hnore practical" (p. 7). On 57% of the campuses, they were found to be "less activist" (p. 7), and on 44% of the campuses, "more concerned with sealf" (p. 7). Other surveys cited by Levine (1980) revealed changes in students' (nun expressed views on higher education between 1969 and 1976. In 1976, 67% of those surveyed stated that "training and skills for an occupation" were "essential" (p. 61) components of a college education, compared with carily 59% of those surveyed in 1969. Similarly, 68% of those surveyed in 1976 rated a "detailed grasp of a special field" as "essential" (p. 61), compared with 62% of those surveyed in 1969. In contrast, those surveyed in 1969 endorsed "learning to get along with people" and "formulating the values and goals for my life" (p. 61), at rates of 76% and 71% respectively, compared with rates of 66% and 62% respectively, for those surveyed in 1976. More recent research on changes in college students' attitudes on a "“"“3eer of issues have revealed an apparent continuation of the trends Observed in these earlier studies. In an ongoing study initiated in 1966 .JJ Nu S‘d'l‘i .A bVIT: I 3. I g A“, .‘ill I § ' ‘4‘ 60 by the American Council on Education and the UCLA Higher Education Research Institute, known as the Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP), dramatic changes have been observed in the stated values and goals of incoming college freshmen. Of fifteen to twenty items included in the annual survey, pertaining to values and goals, the single item which showed the greatest decline in student endorsement, between 1966 and 1985, was "developing a meaningful philosophy of life," with only 43.3% of those surveyed in 1985 identifying it as "very important" or "essential," compared with 82.9% in 1967. More recent surveys revealed a brief reversal of this trend, with student endorsement reaching 50.5% in 1988. In 1989, however, this figure dropped to 40.8%. In contrast, the item showing the greatest increase in student endorsement was "being very well off financially," with 75.4% of those surveyed in 1989 identifying it as "very important" or "essential," compared with a low of 39.1% in 1970 (Astin, Green, and Korn, 1987, p. 97; Astin, Green, Korn, Schalit, and Berz, 1988, p. 60; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990, p. A34). The study has also revealed changes in students' stated reasons for pursuing higher education. Of those surveyed in 1989, 72.2% stated that "making more money" was a very important consideration in the decision to attend college, compared with only 49.9% in 1971 (Astin et. al., 1987, p. 88; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990, p. A34). Not surprisingly, the changes which have been observed in student attitudes have been accompanied by changes in preferred careers and fields of study. A study by the National Center for Educational Statistics (Geiger, 1980) revealed that 57.9 percent of bachelor's degrees conferred by American colleges and universities in 1977 were in 'instr; n‘r GngCIE :1) ("I sncwn t busines careers ‘ L) l\) I ‘u y a 'lCnEVer sane a:1 not tni: discern: decline increagi 3 Nature Col 61 "instrumental" (p. 18) as opposed to "academic" (p. 18) disciplines, compared with only 48.6 percent in 1968. According to the CIRP study, the single occupational field which has shown the greatest increase in student interest in recent years is business, with the percentage of students intending to pursue business careers reaching a high of 24.6% in 1987, compared with only 10.5% in 1972 (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988). In the last two years, however, this figure has declined, reaching 21.8% in 1989. Nevertheless, some administrators have maintained that it is not clear yet whether or not this decline signals a changing trend. They have not reported any discernible change in students' attitudes, and have pointed out that the decline in students' interest in business careers may be reflective of increasing academic standards in the field of business, or may be part of a natural process of leveling off (Dodge, 1990). Collison (1990) observed that a number of administrators, as well as students themselves, have reported a change in students' attitudes in other areas, which has given rise to increased levels of social activism. However, this activism has not necessarily been indicative of changes in students' orientation toward work. Collison (1990) quoted one administrator working with students, who stated that "[Students] are concerned about finding good jobs and getting decent grades. But they are also finding ways of involving themselves in their communities" (p. A-37). The increase in student interest in business careers, over the past 20 years, has also been reflected in a similar rise in the percentage of students planning to major in the field of business. Studies of undergraduates and college-bound high school students revealed that arr-i ' .315; u “A O - t:O.EF .1 1m Study, 1 JECP. me. Sei :r» V 1 :‘IOBE! Fcuncat- INA “936 SL 62 approximately 19 to 29% of those surveyed during the 1980's planned to major in the field, compared with approximately 12 to 18% of those surveyed during the late 1960's and early 1970's (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Carnegie Foundation, 1986a; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990; Jones, Bekhuis, and Davenport, 1985; Krukowski, 1985; National Center for Education Statistics, 1990). The increasing popularity of business, as a field of undergraduate study, has been particularly evident among women. Using figures from U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare reports, Roemer (1983) found a 9.1% increase in the number of bachelor's degrees in business and management which were earned by women between 1970-71 and 1978-79, Compared with a 3.2% increase in the number of such degrees conferred Upon men during this period. Several studies have revealed even greater gains in the fields of engineering and computer science than in the field of business (Carnegie Foundation, 1986a; Krukowski, 1985). While approximately 5 to 8% of those surveyed during the early 1970's planned to major in engineering, approximately 10 to 17% of those surveyed during the 1980's planned to major in the field (Carnegie Foundation, 1986a; Jones et. al., 1985; Kru kowski, 1985). The proportion of students planning to major in cOmputer science reached approximately 5 to 10% during the 1980's, cOrnpared with approximately 1 to 2% during the 1970's (Jones et. al., 1985; Krukowski, 1985; Astin et. al., 1987). However, according to Astin et. al. (1987), interest in the fields 0? engineering and computer scienCe actually peaked in 1983, and has declined since then. They noted that such a pattern of interest conforms C1 osely to changes which occurred in the job market within both of these Sb?“ v'. scie tri . s 'leti I SC' 401 63 fields, thus reinforcing the notion that students have become more pragmatic and vocationally oriented. An examination of those fields which have declined in popularity over the past 20 years also tends to reinforce the common image of today's undergraduate students. Declines have consistently been observed in such traditional areas as the social sciences, humanities, and natural sciences, as well as education (Astin, et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Carnegie Foundation, 1985a, 1986a; Jones et. al., 1985; Krukowski, 1985; Roemer, 1983). While approximately 7 to 15% of those surveyed during the middle 1970's planned to major in the social sciences, only about 4 to 11% of those surveyed during the 1980's chose this field (Carnegie Foundation, 1985a, 1986a; Jones et. al., 1985; National Center for Education Statistics, 1990). The proportion of Students planning to major in the humanities reached approximately 11 to 18% during the late 1960's and early 1970's, but fell to approximately 5 to 10% during the early 1980's (Carnegie Foundation, 1985a; Jones et. a] . , 1985). By 1986, the percentage of undergraduate students majoring 1"1 the humanities fell to 0.5% (National Center for Education Statistics, 1990). During the early 1980's, approximately 2 to 3% of those surveyed Planned to major in the physical sciences, compared with about 3 to 4% (hiring the early 1970's (Jones et. al., 1985; Krukowski, 1985). The Percentage of students planning to major in the biological sciences fell to approximately 3 to 5% during the early 1980's, compared with figures of approximately 7 to 10% during the early 1970's (Jones et. al., 1985; Krukowski, 1985). While approximately 9 to 17% of those surveyed during the early 1970's planned to major in education, only about 5 to 9% of those 64 surveyed during the early 1980's planned to major in the field (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Carnegie Foundation, 1986a; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990; Jones et. al., 1985; Krukowski, 1985). However, the findings of the CIRP study have revealed that while student interest in the field of education reached a low in 1982 and 1983, this trend has since reversed somewhat, with the percentage of students planning to major in the field reaching 9.3% in 1988 but dropping back to 9.2% in 1989 (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin, et. al., 1988; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990). The changes observed over the past 20 years in students' preferred fi elds of undergraduate study were also accompanied by a more general decline in the number of students pursuing traditional graduate study. According to Brademas (1984, p. 9), "many students who, thirty years ago, would have pursued advanced studies now avoid graduate preparation because they see little future in it alongside Opportunities in law, medicine, business, and industry." To illustrate his point, he cited Harvard University, where only one-third of the top graduates in the Class of 1980 planned to pursue traditional graduate study, compared "1' th over three-quarters of the top graduates of the 1960's. More recent data, however, suggest that graduate level enrollment tIr‘ends may be changing. Statistics from the U.S. Department of Education have revealed an overall increase in the number of graduate students e"rolled in American universities. A comparison of 1988 figures with those of 1986 revealed a 20.8% increase in graduate school enrollment. The increase in professional school enrollment during this period was 4.7% (Evangelauf, 1990). Data from the National Research Council's Survey of Earned Doctorates revealed an increase in the number of COCtC in M maraci . A‘P 4 1 ' u &,Vva‘ 65 doctoral degrees conferred between 1985 and 1988. Nevertheless, the area in which the most dramatic increase has occurred is business and management, where the number of conferred doctorates rose from 793 to 1 ,039, thus representing a 31% increase over the 1985 figure (Fact-file: l\ profile, 1987; Fact file: A profile, 1990). According to Blum (1990), a rise in the number of applications to Ph.D. programs for Fall, 1990, was reported by a number of universities. She noted, however, that the trend was not necessarily indicative of a rise in the number of students planning to pursue doctoral level study, but may have simply been reflective of changes in application patterns, with students applying to more institutions than in the past. Changing interests and values of undergraduate students have been offered as one possible explanation for the decline in the number of Students entering professional preparation programs in student affairs. Evans and Bossert (1983) noted that "economic considerations may cause potential applicants to enter other fields" (p. 14). They also speculated that "the lower number of students in college student personnel may be a reflection of the general shift away from education toward business, law, and other more lucrative fields which are popularly believed to offer more placement potential" (p. 14). Holland's (1959, 1966, 1973, 1985a) theory of career development W(Juld seem to support the notion that declining enrollments in professional preparation programs are reflective of changes in the '5 nterests and work values of undergraduate students. Those values which have been increasingly adopted by students in recent years are among those which are satisfied least through student affairs work. Moreover, Changes in students' academic interests have included a shift away from VI" 66 those fields which have traditionally been most popular among student affairs professionals. In summary, it is not yet clear how the student affairs profession's ability to attract new members during the years ahead will be affected by changes in the prevailing disposition of undergraduate students. Over the course of the past 20 years, several dramatic changes have been observed in student attitudes, including a shift toward greater concern with making money. Changes have also been observed in students' vocational plans and preferred fields of study. While fewer students have chosen to major in the humanities, social sciences, natural sciences, and education, increasing numbers of students have chosen to pursue careers in business, and to major in the field as undergraduates. In addition to changes in students' preferred fields of study, an overall decline has been observed in the number of students pursuing graduate studies in general, though this pattern may be changing, according'to the most recent figures available. It has been suggested that the decline in the number of students entering graduate preparation programs in student affairs in recent years may be reflective of the changes that have been observed in the attitudes of undergraduate students. Holland's theory of career development would seem to support thisassertion, since the work values that have been increasingly adopted by students in recent years are among those which are satisfied least through student affairs work. Furthermore, changes in students' academic interests have included a shift away from those fields which have traditionally been most popular among student affairs professionals. It has been suggested that student attitudes are again beginning to 67 change, as higher education enters the 1990's. However, the extent to which the observed changes represent a major shift in students' vocational orientation is not yet clear. Issues Related to Race and Ethnicitygin the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession Demographic Changes in the General Population As the student affairs profession attempts to respond to the needs of the general population, it is important that attention be directed toward changes in the characteristics of this population. A good deal of research has been conducted, which has enabled student affairs professionals to project changes in the demographics of the nation. Several trends have been observed, including a major shift in the racial and ethnic composition of the nation's population. Today, racial and ethnic minorities represent a growing segment of the general population, due largely to differences in fertility rates. Hodgkinson (1985) noted, for example, that while Mexican-American females have an average birth rate of 2.9 children, the average birth rate for white females is only 1.7. While the number of white middle-class children is actually declining, the number of minority school children continues to grow. It has been estimated, for example, that between the years 1985 and 2020, America's Black population will increase from 26.5 million to 44 million. During this same period, due to both immigration and higher birth rates, the nation's Hispanic population is expected to rise from 14.7 million to approximately 47 million. Hodgkinson (1985) also estimated that the number of Asian-Americans would rise from 3.5 million to almost 6 million during the 1980's. J.- l Miter: 'J'eéfS ] A: ‘h J hut E 68 Cowell (1985) stated that, while racial and ethnic minorities currently make up only 20% of the total population, they constitute 27% of the public school population. According to Hodgkinson (1985), non-white students already constitute a majority of those enrolled in California's elementary schools, while in Texas, the percentage of minority students enrolled in the public schools has reached 47%. According to Rhodes (in Commission calls, 1988), minority groups will soon constitute one-third of the nation's population. He noted that, as of 1985, members of identified minority groups constituted 14% of the adult population and 20% of all children under 17 years of age. He stated, further, that by the year 2000, one-third of all school-age children and 42% of all students enrolled in public schools will be members of minority groups. Additionally, he noted that between the years 1985 and 2000, members of minority groups will make up one-third of the net additions to the nation's work force. Citing data from the Office of Management and Budget, Hodgkinson (1976) specifically noted a shift in the racial and ethnic makeup of the nation's traditional college age population, during the 1980's. He noted that, while live Caucasian births fell from 3,078,000 in 1970 to 2,600,000 in 1972, the number of live births among racial and ethnic minorities held relatively constant, with only a minor decline from 640,000 in 1970 to 635,000 in 1972. Based on these and related figures, Hodgkinson (1976) stated that between 1965 and 1985, the percentage of 18-year-olds who are Black could be expected to rise from 12% to 18%, and that the percentage of this cohort representing all minority groups could be expected to reach approximately 30%. Cardoza (1987) described one study, conducted by the Educational Testing Service, in which the nuns : ‘ ‘ , "Ttni 69 number of Hispanic students in a 1982 sample of high school seniors was found to be almost double that observed in 1972. Additionally, Hodgkinson (1976, 1985) noted a general increase in the percentage of the nation's students who have come from lower socioeconomic classes. According to the American Council on Education's Commission on Minority Participation in Education and American Life minority representation within this stratum of society has remained disproportionately high. For example, in 1985, nearly 47% of the nation's Black children and 42% of its Hispanic children were living in poverty. In 1986, the median family income of Blacks was only 57% that of Whites. Furthermore, 31% of Blacks and 27% of Hispanics had incomes below poverty level. These figures are nearly three times the rate for Whites (Commission calls, 1988). Using data from a 1985 study by The College Board, Jacobson (1986) reported 67.6% of Black students coming from families with incomes below $24,000, compared with 27.4% of White students. Changes in the nation's population have prompted growing concern within the student affairs profession, regarding issues of professional diversity. Evans and Bossert (1983) emphasized this concern, stating that "increasing the numbers of minorities working in student affairs should be a top priority for the field" (p. 15). They explained that "minority students need and deserve role models and the profession of student affairs would benefit from the diversity of ideas and approaches which individuals from different backgrounds can provide" (p. 15). In summary, it would seem that the racial and ethnic background of tomorrow's practitioners should be a major consideration in the student affairs profession's attempts to overcome the challenges posed by lIS sfe pr the ; :736 I- \ n’: E T... . G \ r4 , a), W A.‘ F J A Ellen 7O changing patterns of entry and departure from the field. A number of studies have revealed a rise in the percentage of the general population representing racial and ethnic minority groups. This trend is expected to continue well into the third millennium. It has been suggested that in order to respond to the needs of this changing population, the student affairs profession must strive to mirror this diversity within its own ranks. Racial and Ethnic Backgrounds of Student Affairs Professionals Over the past two decades, a number of studies have been conducted, which have examined the racial and ethnic backgrounds of student affairs professionals. These studies have provided a basis upon which to monitor the profession's progress in the recruitment and advancement of racial and ethnic minority group members. In one of the earliest of these studies, Appleton (1971) found that, after excluding those professionals employed at predominantly Black institutions, 11% of those included in his survey were identified as members of minority classes. In a replication of the study, two years later, Myers and Sandeen (1973) found that 13.7% of those identified in the survey represented minority classes. However, gains appeared to be made primarily in entry level positions, with 77% of the minority group members included in the survey employed at this level, compared with 70% of those included in the previous study (Appleton, 1971). In contrast, 21% of the minority group members included in the more recent study (Myers and Sandeen, 1973) were responsible for a division or department, compared with 28% of those studied previously (Appleton, 1971). The percentage of minority group members employed as chief student affairs [1,. r «H— I!” 71 officers held constant at 2% (Appleton, 1971; Myers and Sandeen, 1973). The study was again replicated, two years later, by Wilson (1977). In this study, the percentage of staff described as members of minority classes fell to 13.1%. However, the percentage of chief student affairs officers identified as members of minority groups rose to 4.6%, compared with 4.4% of those included in the previous study by Myers and Sandeen (1973). Of those responsible for divisions or departments, Wilson (1977) found 10.4% representing minority groups, while Myers and Sandeen (1973) reported only 9.8% of division or department heads identified as members of minority classes. The studies consistently revealed that minority representation was strongest at public institutions (Appleton, 1971; Myers and Sandeen, 1973; Wilson, 1977). During the same period, in a survey of chief student affairs <>fficers at junior and community colleges, Brooks and Avila (1973) found 11% identifying themselves as members of minority groups. In a concurrent survey of chief student affairs officers at four-year institutions, Brooks and Avila (1974) found that 4.7% belonged to minority classes. In fiis.study of chief student affairs officers at four-year institutions, Studer (1980) found 88% of those surveyed describing themselves as White. In a review of several studies conducted during the 1970's, Gross ( 1978) found minority representation in the profession concentrated F’i"”imarily at the lower levels of the professional hierarchy. He "eported 5% of teaching faculty and 4 to 5% of chief student affairs o‘F‘f'icers representing minority classes, compared with 9 to 16% of new student personnel graduates, 11 to 24% of those in staff positions, and :l-Jl to 14% of those in entry level positions. He noted, however, that Asian-Americans were not consistently classified as a minority. 'r Hie f9" A.. an: :30 ”ED‘ l'hp 1.37 u 1'Er )6 fc ‘h .P “.956 .P --. «9.:; ‘AD 72 Therefore, the figures may be distorted somewhat. Studies of admissions personnel have also shown minority representation concentrated at the lower levels of the hierarchy. In their study of admissions officers below the rank of director, Urbach and Chapman (1982) found that 28% of those holding positions at the . counselor level belonged to minority classes. Rates of minority representation at the assistant director and associate director levels were 14% and 12% respectively. In their 1981 study of directors of admissions, Chapman and Urbach (1984) found 6% representing minority groups. In a similar study, Rickard and Clement (1984) also found 6% representing minority groups. Of those directors appointed prior to 1981-82, 5% represented minority groups. In 1981-82, this percentage r~ose to 7%. In their study conducted two years later, Chapman and Benati ( 1986) also found only 6% of admissions directors surveyed describing tzhemselves as members of minority groups. Further research by Rickard (1985a) focused specifically on niinority representation at the level of chief student affairs officer (<35AO). Citing the annual surveys of the College and University Personnel Association (CUPA) for the period from 1979-80 through 1983-84, (Ice found the percentage of minority CSAO's ranging from 10 to 13%. Of tiflcase CSAO's appointed in 1978-79 and 1981-82, minorities accounted for 10-5% and 13.5%, respectively. In his own study of new CSAO's, Rickard ftCJIJnd 13% describing themselves as Black, Hispanic, or Asian. When C3551l0's from four historically Black institutions were eliminated from the Sréinnple, minority representation was reduced to 9%. Nevertheless, in comparing his findings with those of similar studies conducted in the ear-1y 1970's, Rickard found that the percentage of minority group members "C in .. FEWEE p” ”I 73 in CSAO positions had actually tripled. Rickard's (1985b) work also revealed that minority representation in CSAO positions was strongest at four-year public institutions, where 17% of all CSAO's belonged to minority classes. In contrast, only 4% of CSAO's employed at four-year independent institutions were members of minority groups. Advancement of minority females has lagged far behind that of minority males, with only 2% of CSAO positions held by minority females, compared with 9% held by minority males. In studying department directors within several areas of student affairs, along with CSAO's, Rickard (1985c) found 10% representing minority classes. In comparing 1983-84 figures with those of 1980-81, he found that minority representation had held constant. Only directorships in counseling and financial aid, along with the CSAO position, showed gains in minority representation. Areas showing declines included admissions, housing, recreation and intramural sports, and registrar. In a survey of student affairs professionals in NASPA Region IV-East, Harter, Moden, and Wilson (1982) found that 14% of those surveyed described themselves as members of minority groups. Comparatively, census figures for the region indicated that minority groups represented 8.6% of the general population. Minority representation in the profession was higher within public institutions, where 17% of those surveyed described themselves as members of minority classes, compared with 11% of those employed at private institutions. The more recent study by Borg, et. al. (1988) charted the progress of minority representation within the profession, from 1974 to 1988, according to type of institution. Within two-year institutions, an overall increase was found in the percentage of staff described as 74 members of minority groups, which rose from 11.4% to 19.8%, though the percentage of staff described as Native American fell from 1.0% to 0.7%, during this period. Within four-year institutions, an increase was also found in the percentage of staff identified as members of minority groups. This figure rose from 6.6% to 17.3%. Within this segment of higher education, the percentage of staff described as Native American held constant at 0.0%. Within public institutions, the overall percentage of staff identified as members of minority groups rose from 13.2% to 21.9%, though the percentage described as Native American declined from 0.9% to 0.8%. Within private institutions, the overall percentage of positions held by minority group members fell from 9.7% to 8.9%, with only a slight increase in the percentage of staff identified as Asian and Native American. These figures rose from 0.5% and 0.4% respectively to 0.8% and 0.5% respectively. Studies focusing specifically on the ethnic backgrounds of individuals graduating from professional preparation programs in student affairs have produced similar findings. Packwood (1976) found 16% of master's level graduates, 12% of specialist level graduates, and 9% of doctoral level graduates representing minority groups. In comparison, the study by Greer et. al. (1978), two years later, revealed some progress in both the number and percentage of minority group members receiving master's and doctoral degrees in the field. However, none of the specialist level graduates included in the study represented minority groups. At the master's level, members of minority groups accounted for 19% of the graduates included in the study, while at the doctoral level, they accounted for 20%. In both studies, the number of minority women receiving degrees in the field remained particularly low in proportion 75 to other groups. In the 1983 study of student affairs graduates, conducted by Aronson et. al. (1985), no increase was found in minority representation, except in the southern region, where the percentage of master's level graduates from minority groups rose from 17% in 1976 through 1979 to 23% in 1983. However, few conclusions could be drawn from the 1983 survey, due to the low return rate. In the more recent study of student affairs graduates by Richmond and Benton (1988), minority representation was lower, with 12% of the graduates described as members of minority classes. More recent studies of graduate students in student affairs have revealed even lower minority representation. In the studies by both Forney (1989) and Williams et. al. (1990), 9% of the respondents were identified as members of minority groups. In Luckadoo's (1990) study, 11.6% of the respondents were members of minority groups, though none were identified as American Indians. In summary, the studies have generally revealed an increase in minority representation within the student affairs profession, over the course of the past 20 years. Progress in this area has been most pronounced within public institutions. Minority representation at the level of chief student affairs officer has increased considerably, though representation of minority women has continued to lag behind that of minority men. Current levels of minority enrollment in professional preparation programs raise some cause for concern, since minority representation within these programs has fallen below previous levels of representation among program graduates. :3»; Ecru? Teere ln‘fl! 1"]; 04.“ 76 Racial and Ethnic Backgrounds of Today's Students Although gains have been made in minority representation within the student affairs profession in recent years, the profession's ability to keep pace with changes in the general population during the years ahead will be influenced greatly by patterns of minority participation in higher education, because it is from the nation's student population that new professionals will be drawn. A good deal of recent research on minority enrollment trends has yielded findings which, in view of these considerations, raise some cause for concern. Despite increases in minority representation within the general population, the percentage of college and university students representing minority groups remained relatively constant from the mid 1970's through the 1980's, following a period of rapid increase during the late 1960's and early 1970's. According to the CIRP study (Astin et. al., 1987; Astin et. al., 1988; Fact file: Attitudes, 1990), only Asian-Americans have made appreciable gains since 1975, while the percentage of freshmen representing other minority groups has remained largely unchanged. The disproportionately low representation of minority groups in higher education might be due partly to the fact that minority high school completion rates, particularly among Blacks and Hispanics, have continued to lag behind that of the majority population. According to Breneman (1983), in 1977, the high school graduation rates for Blacks and Hispanics, ages 18 to 24, were 69.8% and 55.5% respectively, while the rate for Whites in this age group was 83.9%. According to the Carnegie Foundation (1985b), based on U.S. Census Bureau statistics, the proportion of 18 and 19 year old Blacks and 77 Hispanics who have completed high school has remained lower than that of their White counterparts by about one-fourth and one-third respectively. Nevertheless, figures for the years, 1973, 1978, and 1983, have revealed slight increases in the percentage of Blacks and Hispanics in this age group who have completed high school, while the percentage of Whites has remained fairly constant. While only 56% of Blacks and 45% of Hispanics in this age group had graduated from high school in 1973, by 1983 these figures rose to 59% for Blacks and 50% for Hispanics. In comparison, the figure for Whites fell slightly from 74% in 1973 to 73% in 1983. Although some gains may have been made in the number of minority students who have completed high school, Cardoza (1987) has maintained that the number of high school graduates from minority groups who continue on to pursue higher education has declined in recent years. She has stated that the percentage of Black high school graduates who continue on into college fell steadily from 33.5% in 1976 to 27% in 1983, while the figure for Hispanics fell from 35.8% in 1978 to 31.4% in 1983. In comparison, the figure for Whites remained relatively constant during this period at about 33%. According to a report by the Ford Foundation's Commission on the Higher Education of Minorities, minority participation in higher education increased considerably between the mid-1960's and mid-1970's (Middleton, 1982). One study by the U.S. Census Bureau revealed that while Blacks represented only 5% of all college students in 1964, this figure rose to 9% by 1974. It was further estimated that 12.3% of all college freshmen in 1974 were Black, compared with only 11.4% of the general population (Winkler, 1975). Despite this progress, the Ford Foundation report revealed that few CH em 78 gains have been made in this area since the mid 1970's. In the report, it was noted that the percentage of Blacks in the 25 to 29 year old age range who had completed four or more years of college rose from 10% in 1970 to 15% in 1975, but increased only slightly from 1976 to 1979 (Middleton, 1982). Enrollment figures which were gathered by the U.S. Department of Education's Civil Rights Office between 1976 and 1984 have indicated a decline in the actual number of college and university students representing certain minority groups. Although these figures have indicated a steadily increasing number of Asian and Hispanic students enrolling in colleges and universities, Black and Native American enrollments, after showing increases during the first half of the period studied, began to show declines in 1982 and 1984 respectively. The greatest percentage of minority students in higher education were enrolled at public two-year institutions (Racial and ethnic, 1986). Additionally, the number of Blacks participating in the College Board's Admissions Testing Program was found to decline by 5% between 1980 and 1985, while the number of Whites participating in the program declined by only 4%. In contrast, participation rates among other minority groups increased during this period. The number of Asian-Americans participating in the program rose by 48%, that of Mexican-Americans rose by 26%, that of Puerto Ricans by 11%, and that of American Indians by 2% (Jacobson, 1986). More recent data from the U.S. Department of Education have shown increased participation in higher education among all ethnic groups. A comparison of overall 1988 figures with those of 1986 revealed an increase of 3.6% for Whites, 4.4% for Blacks, 10% for Hispanics, 10.9% 79 for Asians and Pacific Islanders, and 3.3% for American Indians and Alaskan natives. Over the course of the ten-year period between 1978 and 1988, overall enrollments were found to increase by 111.5% for Asians, 63.1% for Hispanics, 19.2% for American Indians, and 7.2% for Blacks. During this same period, undergraduate enrollments were found to increase by 112.1% for Asians, 62.6% for Hispanics, 19.4% for American Indians, and 6.6% for Blacks. Despite these gains, participation rates among high school graduates between the ages of 18 and 24 remained lower for minority groups than for the majority population. The 1988 figures for specific groups were 38.7% for Whites, 28% for Blacks, and 30.9% for Hispanics. Figures are not available for Asians and Native Americans (Evangelauf, 1990). Recent data from the American Council on Education also revealed that minority groups collectively made some gains in the number of degrees earned from 1985 to 1987. At the undergraduate level, it was found that the number of minority students earning associate degrees rose 3% and the number earning bachelor's degrees rose 6%. Nevertheless, the overall enrollment of Black and Hispanic students during this time did not consistently improve. In 1986, approximately 27.8% of Black males between the ages of 18 and 24 were enrolled in college. Although this figure rose to 31.7% in 1987, it abruptly dropped to 25% in 1988. The percentage of Black women aged 18 to 24 who were enrolled in college improved somewhat, rising from 29.3% in 1986 to 30.5% in 1988. Participation rates among Hispanics in this age group also improved somewhat, rising from 29.4% in 1986 to 30.9% in 1988. In comparison, participation rates among college-aged Whites rose from 34% in 1986 to 38% in 1988 (Magner, 1990). Are Wii 80 The reasons for limited representation of certain minority classes in higher education, over the past 15 years, are not clear. In examining factors related to declines in Black participation, Oliver and Brown (1988, p. 40) stated that "soaring tuition costs, changes in student financial assistance policy, discontinuance of many minority college outreach programs, expanding number of Black families below the poverty line, high rates of Black unemployment, decreased federal emphasis on affirmative action, and the shift in social mood regarding equality as a national goal are among factors frequently cited by scholars when discussing declining Black college enrollment." Findings of a study by the American Council on Education have suggested that socioeconomic factors might play a major role in minority students' decisions not to enroll in college. The study revealed that slightly more than half of all 1980 high school seniors who did not «:ontinue on to college came from the lowest socioeconomic class included 'in the study. Even among White students, whose overall enrollment rates liave tended to be relatively high, almost half of those with low socioeconomic status never attended college, and after two years, only 25% of this group were still enrolled (Statistics you, 1985). According 'to the Council's more recent study, the college participation rate among ‘traditional aged Blacks and Hispanics from lower socioeconomic classes «declined significantly from 1976 to 1988 and has shown little promise of improving (Magner, 1990). One of the major concerns surrounding minority enrollment in higher education is the completion rate of minority students enrolled in degree IJrograms. While studies have shown that up to 40% of all students Vvithdraw from college before completing their degrees, the percentage of mirt (A) l * . -.§E SfJC 3?ac arc refe :Eri 81 minority students who do so is considerably higher (Cardoza, 1987). In the American Council on Education study, it was revealed that 31% of Black 1980 high school seniors applied to college but were not attending two years later, compared with an overall figure of only 23%. The lowest college attendance figure, after two years, was that of Mexican-Americans, only 23% of whom had enrolled and were still attending (Statistics you, 1985). According to a 1974 survey by the U.S. Census Bureau, among those students entering college in 1971, retention rates were only 47% for l3lack males and 35% for Black females, compared with 61% for White males (and 52% for White females (Winkler, 1975). According to Cowell (1985), retention rates for Hispanic and Native American students during this 13eriod were even lower than for their Black counterparts. A more recent study by the National Institute of Independent (Zolleges and Universities revealed that of 12,000 students entering four-year degree programs, 41% earned their degrees within six years. bvhile over 50% of all White and Asian American students in the sample completed their degrees during this period, the figure for Black and Fiispanic students ranged from 25 to 30%. The study also revealed that (aver 25% of Black students withdrew by their third semester, compared VVith an overall figure of approximately 20%. Asian-American students Were more likely than others to remain in college, with only 10% dropping out (Conciatore and Wiley, 1990). According to the Educational Testing Service study, cited by Cardoza ( 1987), the greatest relative decline in minority participation in higher education, particularly among Blacks, occurs after completion of the tDachelor's degree. The Ford Foundation report also identified graduate eCL be: he refit irs‘ e. L'J( thei ‘Po~ <‘IA ..CJ 7 . 'ndli 82 education as an area of particular concern. According to the report, between 1973 and 1977, the percentage of doctorates awarded to individuals identified as Black, Mexican-American, Puerto Rican, or Native American rose from 3.8% to 6.3%, but since 1977, this percentage has declined somewhat (Middleton, 1982). In addition to recruitment of minority graduate students, the Ford Foundation report raised the issue of minority graduate student retention as an area of concern. In the report, it was noted that institutional environments tend to have a greater impact on minority students' levels of satisfaction with graduate education than on those of their White counterparts (Text of, 1982). Nevertheless, according to Greene (1987), 1985 figures from the lNational Research Council revealed that minority participation in (doctoral study has remained fairly constant in recent years, while [marticipation by White males has declined. Consequently, the proportion crf doctoral degree recipients representing minority groups has risen. (If those U.S. citizens earning doctorates from American universities in '1985, whose racial and ethnic backgrounds were known, 0.4% were American Indian, 4.3% were Asian, 4.2% were Black, 2.6% were Hispanic, and 86.2% were White. In comparing the 1985 figures with those of 1975, Greene (1987) noted an overall increase in the percentage of doctorates earned by members of American minority classes. This figure rose from 6.3% to 9. 1%, over the course of the ten-year period. More recent data from the U.S. Department of Education have revealed 3'1 increase in graduate level enrollment among all minority groups since 1986. A comparison of 1986 and 1988 figures revealed that graduate level enrollments had increased by 91.7% for Asians, 62.5% for Hispanics, ad.» 83 50.0% for American Indians, and 11.8% for Blacks (Evangelauf, 1990). Data from the American Council on Education revealed that, between 1985 and 1987, the number of minority students earning master's degrees increased by 3%, and the number earning professional degrees rose by 15% (Magner, 1990). Clearly, the group which has fared most favorably in higher education in recent years is Asian-Americans. According to Whitla (1984), this group now represents a disproportionately large segment of the collegiate student population. He observed, for example, that Asian-Americans now constitute more than one-quarter of the student body at The University of California at Berkeley. The figures presented by the U.S. Department of Education's Civil Rights Office revealed a 94.9% ‘increase in college enrollment for this group between 1975 and 1984. In contrast, the overall increase in college enrollment for all groups charing this period was only 10.9 percent (Racial and ethnic, 1986). Despite the increased participation in higher education by I\sian-Americans, it appears unlikely that any significant increase in representation of this group within the student affairs profession will follow, based on the National Research Council's figures, which reveal a :strong preference among Asian-Americans, for graduate study in the hard Scriences, rather than in fields more closely related to student affairs. 0f ‘the seven identified fields of study, education and the social SCTiences were respectively the fourth and fifth most popular majors among 1985 Asian-American doctorate recipients, and collectively accounted for 25.4% of this population (Greene, 1987). In contrast, the other three identified minority groups were all ch“awn in greater numbers to education than to any other field. The 84 social sciences constituted the second most popular field among Blacks and Hispanics, and the third most popular field among Native Americans. Collectively, education and the social sciences accounted for 60.2 percent of American Indians, 71.4% of Blacks, and 53.8% of Hispanics receiving doctoral degrees in 1985 (Greene, 1987). In a study of prospective graduate students, who completed the Graduate Record Examination, Powers and Lehman (1983) also found that Black students more frequently chose education and the social sciences as fields of graduate study than did White students, while White students more frequently chose the biological sciences, the humanities, and the physical sciences. Despite the popularity of student affairs related majors among lilack, Hispanic, and Native American graduate students, it has been (observed that the comparatively low representation of these groups in iiigher education, particularly at the graduate level, has resulted in a shortage of minority candidates prepared for work in the field. As liarter et. al. (1982, p. 47) pointed out, "the supply of credentialed Ininority graduates from which the student affairs area can draw is small." They added that "the potential for recruiting minorities credentialed as specialists is even further eroded given the fact that higher education must compete with other segments of society for Qualified candidates" (p. 47). In summary, statistics related to minority participation in higher e‘ducation have generally offered few signs of encouragement for those l'Tterested in and committed to increasing racial and ethnic diversity W‘l'thin the student affairs profession. While minority representation “Flthin the general population has increased considerably in recent years, CCE str IRE (Tail Stu: ETC“ 90r: raci L) if j J" I‘D '- '— . . / . 85 college-going rates for minority groups have generally remained low. One apparent factor in underrepresentation of minorities in higher education has been the relatively high dropout rate among high school aged minority students. An additional factor that has frequently been cited is the concentration of minority group members within the lowest socioeconomic strata. Even among high school graduates, declines have been shown in the percentage of individuals from certain minority groups who have gone on to enroll in colleges and universities. Moreover, among those who have enrolled, attrition rates have generally been high. Minority student enrollments have been particularly low at the graduate level. One notable exception to the trends that have been observed is a steady increase in participation in higher education among Asian-Americans. Nevertheless, interest in fields of study related to student affairs has remained low within this particular minority group. Some signs of encouragement have been found in the most recent college and university enrollment figures, which have shown an increase in participation by all iracial and ethnic groups. The extent to which these changes represent a Inajor trend is not yet clear. Issues Related to the Undergraduate Experience in the Regeneration of the Student Affairs Profession The Influence of the Undergraduate Experience EEL_the Vocational Development of Students Much of the literature in higher education has focused on factors l'rfluencing students' vocational development during their undergraduate .Years. Specific outcomes of interest have included changes in e'Clucational and occupational values, major and career choices, and eGlucational aspirations and attainment. St‘ JC acar the SR .EC 86 In exploring the influence of higher education on undergraduate students' values, Vreeland and Bidwell (1966) focused specifically on the academic department as a unit. Building upon the theoretical base provided in this earlier work, Weidman (1979) studied the influence of the academic department on undergraduate students' values, as they relate specifically to occupational rewards. Phelan (1979) also studied the influence of the academic department on students' vocational orientations, but dealt specifically with attitudes toward scientific and scholarly careers. Theophilides, Terenzini, and Lorang (1984) examined changes in attitudes toward four educational goals, over the course of the freshman year. In each of these studies, changes in students' attitudes were found to be influenced by interaction with faculty. Additionally, PheJan (1979) found that attitudes toward scientific and scholarly (:areers were positively influenced by involvement in academic work. In addition to changes in students' occupational values, much of the literature has focused on changes in the social status of (occupations to which students aspire. In one such study, dealing with <:hanges in occupational aspirations among students enrolled in ten Predominantly Black institutions in the Deep South, Gurin and Katz (1966) identified a number of institutional characteristics which related to ‘lncmeases in student aspirations, though the influence of these factors (fiffered according to the gender of the student. In another study of changes in the level of occupational prestige to Vfllich students aspired, Weidman (1984) found a considerable decline in the l'In'fluence of parental socialization, over the course of a student's e"trollment in college. The single most important predictor of the Slnadent's occupational choice at the close of a two or three-year 87 period was his or her initial aspiration. Departmental norms and student-faculty interaction were found to exert some influence. However, the impact of the collegiate experience varied according to the gender and initial major choice of the student. Smart (1986), in a longitudinal study of former college students' occupational status attainment, examined the influence of a number of factors, and conducted separate analyses for those employed in professional and nonprofessional fields. The influence of factors in the personal undergraduate experience of students, as well as the impact of institutional characteristics, were found to differ for the two groups. In addition to general occupational status aSpirations and attainment, a number of studies have explored the influence of the undergraduate experience on students' decisions to pursue careers in specific fields, aand to choose specific academic majors. In one such study, conducted by Selvin (1963), relationships were found between undergraduate men's 'living arrangements and changes in their occupational plans. Astin and IPanos (1969), later found that the single best predictor of a student's final major and career choice was his or her initial choice, and the second best predictor was his or her gender. Nevertheless, several ‘fiactors in the undergraduate experience, including the student's living arrangements and methods of financing his or her edUcation, were also 1"Qund to be influential. In a subsequent examination of factors llrfluencing the implementation of initial career plans for students aSpiring to ten different occupations, Astin (1977) found that, although student characteristics, particularly gender, were very influential, several characteristics of students' undergraduate institutions also had 535. 8 3.0 on 93> 3:2... 268 sol-.8983. Cocoa.- 9101.81.50.31 6.35.8833... .3.. 1.3383385333313381... ....3 .RiosnI—iefllec 3.8.5.. 3.3.3.3511; .’ 3895-4—3- oi..3.8.¢a..ue.iaee .3.: mi 31.1.3.833853egn1e5559hJ 3.389.313.1533”. 33.383.38.36... 9. 33331331533...- u-Re-x: 3.30.553; v... Jae—.3- 33...- e... .33. 30.38.80 9.. mos... 31.383.383.33 63833.3. 33.9.3333- ..au 6.53.3333: are .33 :33...- 1.65.33.33.33... 5,5. 4.3 .- 3.308.893.8855!!- a... 8... 3.. 8.3- 0.8.00 .35).... 338-: e131 6.2.33.3... 33.33... 46.35.33... .gegua1-333156nn2 .8...an .1... 33.2... 2.1.18.2... is... 3.3.5.353 38.-.30 .53....- .....e 8313.33. 3.0.. 46338 13.5%... 53 C... 832.03... 0.... 3.58... . 2.3.3.315. 58.53.33... :31303 833.37: 3.31:8... ....8.t...a ea... .38.... 3....o ‘ ._ k. A .TsTeIE-uaiisaosuiaig w 269 43.33.. 1315.13. .4. 3. 3.2.2.5.! ~. .3... . 3.3.3.5 3.3.. 1... 63......— 8 5.033... .. 30.... 833:3}... 1.. .3.. $3.33....- .=.31..13 :02.- [313.535.1«335... 3.3.3.3.“...I..5.... 4.23.39... .5. .3....13. 3 13.3.... 3.350.. .33 .3.. .3 .3.. I... I... 0.... 3. 3.....uo5w ./I .K . . .3... . 38.33.3235... .. . ._ 5. 3 . — m a can... £35313 .= 3 .ufih=.fiafio “13:.“ 1:31... 3. .33.... . 3.1.3.... Q. .3.? 053.... _....e.:.._ .3355. 33...... 33......23... a... .3 2... 3 .8 5: .fluesfldfi.‘ .3 .33... 3.33.533... .2..— 3333. .4. =3... .3. 5.3.3.333... .3.. 0.... G. 3 3... . .= 3.. 305 33.53.. 5395 V... 2.3.5.3.. gazes... 3.5.— 3.535 13:33.. 39.3..“ 3 a... 3.3.09.9... ‘3. 1.. i 1,. .fl...>‘ «33.3.2350! I .. . . . .. . . .I — 33.. on... 0.... 31.".3. 3.53.31... “3.. 5:13... 350.5 pal-53.5 1.8.3.05.- .. 15.9.... .8... .3.... 3.... .3..) 333...... 0a.. .155. .. ....3 7[ 31m. 5.... 3“... “M... 1!..< .13.“. .3...u3..3“8.3.fl H 3.321.335.3- EBL 853...: .3 23925 .3. .. .- :Iu.30.fl...aw uh” I ”a .13....- . .5... 5.13.3 I... 02. S a...) 2. .2. :5 E 3.33.315”... i-z .fih-BE5 (A .355. ‘33 ill,- 1.32 S... 6.06.2. .01... 1:03.93? «.4. 33.3—53.5.v 5.33538 6...... Nicola-0‘ .50... 33.31.... 2.314.. 3. 4.32.... .539..- ....835 3:33.. 32.25 .3.... 313.33 dug—.00. .33... 3.03.05 . ._5 8 1.2.. 3.. 5.... .33 3.3 2. 3...... v... .30.. .3. . . ”3:8 ”Hung-.300- 5... 3.3.5.3.... .o...» :32. 0...... .3303... 5.3.... 3. 35.3.2.5... 2.5.. 8 “a... . 523‘ 3.3:. 31°": clO‘8: 615.5 3 {a} 1'... .23 5 311,095” .0:— 3030239. , .3.... .3. .3335... 5:33.35. 3... 2.50 .3 .2. .5 :33...- »....3u_...05 .3.... 3.353.533 .539.- 3. 5.5.3.0... E..- . a 3 5.3.3... .2... P3... .3.. 3.3335955. 2.9.03.3: ..:_.3.u< 0:3. I... 52.33 33.33.. 5.1 0. 3.3.8.1 ills-9.5 33.13.3. .3 5.............m......3a. 3.. 8.. 3.3“...“ .3333........ . 3.35 3 0.... 3.6.5.6... .5 .. 3:03.035... 33......- 2...... .5 c. 3.... naflrfinahquu.“ 9...: .. 3.2.... v...- 3...)> . . 3.3.3.... 3 .3.—33...»..- .30333. 1... 3.3.3 3.2.5... .3... .3... 3.0.0 I3.3.5.... .83....» .3.—.3.. 5..- ..33 .2. .3.. .35.... .3... .8 .5. 2... .9- 233 2..» £0 .23 .3 313832 .3.-1.)... 333.33.; .3.... P .3: 3333.8 83.3.. 3.. 3.83... .3 .3.. a... :2... \ 7|, 6553.355 .3.-g .335 be. .32 . g. .0... .43 3. 3.3.3... 3.0.! 5:33... 51:03 03> 1.... 330—25.. ~3 8.00 .3.—u... 1335.1... .2. . u... .3.... .3.-.590 ~3.3.3.3.... a... 3. 3336. E01...- ..Eu .5 .. 3»... o... €03.05 n.3C. 33.55.3233 59:95 3... .4930... 3:05.233... 1.532.... .253. 333—3.: 5:.3... 3.3.5.235... s... .3 d a... 32.5... 2...... .3.—.3.. 3.3 .35.) 3.3.5.3... 6.3.3.163. 3.33.13.- .3 3233...... v... 833.323... 3.3 .3 39.3.3.1. 5.13.3 .3....5 .3.... 55.335 3...... 33.33.. m 38.35.... 5...... .0 9.35... 16.1... 33.33.8355 33.... . v3.33. 3.... 0... .3.-5021 .353... a...) .5533? z... 303......535. ....0:.n .5 3...». 3 33.5.3... .21... 3.8.3.2.. a»... 5.... .5 5.3.1.3 313153.323 £13563 3...: .3 .=. .3 3...... ‘ 270 L A 0:30 9.50.5.3... t..- .hfiatl 0.580. 6053030 52000 non 9:130... 0010. .3....0» .330 5:03..- 300310 09.0 0...: E . . 5...... . 1. i .1 .91.... 59.2.: .020: .335 :0... 5 2.05:1...- 50' 3 E033... :3. 0... 9.10—0.6.. a. 3:02... .330 0.0.1009 2.03.301. 9.0 9.1.301 .00.: £0.53...) 0 053.10 E 3:03..- 350100 3 .833.- =— 00): :05 s is... :2 2.. 3 53...... 1.9... 5... .2... 01.00... 0.30.0 030.3 3 30 .3.—01.. v..- 0.00.58... :0... 4. . .l . . 23.-own:— va uni-ESL 0L3 “r. 311.0% 0.0M 1: 0.0momla01mooa. quad 0.50.- ..050 5....- 205 0...< .232 .5 I. 15.! It‘ll 0:11:00 .11.! he. .. .1. .-.. 4 3.3.... E0068 0.0 .3 .3603... 5.... 1.2.5.301. N 13...»: A...) 3 0330 0.0.. 30¢ 0A. 5 0300.— ..05 {0B .050 0.05 990.0 .5.— .auo—ogusa 0x: — 9:30: 0.. fol 31 0590310 3I0s0o< .-0> «2:09.00 .9203 0.500.300 E 5:350...- 354 1.4.»... 22. 3.31:. 8 .1. .3.. 5:09.00 105015.05 5.3 .00! 01 93.00.33 .__03 1| J .02.!!— u=2.3_0~0 621.20 :33 5950:1310. .- . . 01 00 .. 0.0 05:30 flotsam 4.380.305 0...... 1:0 0050 00 49:0 833 5...! .00! 3.00%». 05201.03 .3863 08:58 .0300. 5.! 05—00.. 5 3.003.: .0100 £02! 0.... 20.3..- 1..0 05304.03 3 .3.-.3.. 0 .9313... 00:0 0.300.300 .013 .3.-.365 :- .5 3:01... 5.) 9.3.0! 8 003.30 :— .00..00_ 1.30.0.- .0 40.3339. .382? 3 1.0!! .H...“ 0.3.3.533 1.. 3.... .3. 8...... .3.. . . .1... . . n. .4. . E 0.05 3.300 3 1:0 Lcuvzfl s. 9.12.80... 0.015.20- 6.5358! 00.0 04. 3 xvi—33.00 .13! a. 0:. 02. 3.. 0031.33.80 5:0... 0..th 20: 05. VII, L 5.03.0 15 .3. 3.. b.5680... 1‘ .000: .3.—03.04 .3 060500 133030 .3.: 40:60:33 .2x1 .13!!- .1¢on.0s.63 .1000 05 5.! 003.038 0.0 .33).}: 008:. 650.21.. 100 510A! 0.80. =0 0. 53.-3.0 4:! 6.3003 109.03 0 303053 3 :3! its 5.3—0.0! 3. 03.0.3502 0153):...— ..:0..00 15.50::qu 1:0 £00023 21h: 2.03...- 05 E «30...:— ..Qc° 0.0 .05 .0203... 121.535 3 2.0500... 62.6 03.5... 2.! 75.3.1. 10303 AA 31.08.... «.050 !0 000.3340 .02.: .3 E3..Ou 5105 2.01:..- 55352 .003)...- v.3 21:0 $.03...- 000.15% 0510!. 05 .03... 1050-03 :33 2. 0'3»...- 53 .5530} 0‘0 3F 00> .3.-3.. 8 cl 3 04: .3.-0.31.... 8.... .123... a... 5... K¥5330553355.31511 . P .3.. . a. . . .. . 2...... .3... 5... 1... .83.... .2. 0.0.. 0.1....- 30130 :00 a. 01.005 .05 :0.- .u...0 v.05 . . 4 . 0..» l< ..1..¢1I .... 1....1. 271 . . .1. . u. w 1.1 .3133; Quasar-.23.!- 1.51.353 3.53%.: 5:12.13 1.1.0“ La. « . . ~ :1 th 1 .5 basil... all... §.3§3%II 55:31:53.3}!!! .- 32333.99...» coca—I336 . salad—anon 1e 8 Ail I 13. 3.338 .2 .2. E. in: Iii—I805} a: 113 05 35 3:03:- I... . . u A .4 atriu- Icmn (. 1 P . . 51- :3.- 3541- eon-:53 .3.-01:. 326-..- .ln5 51. I23 .0— . :3 219. :3 50> “nu-1:5: 3 null—I irks—P .3.-013. In: 51- 2]»!- od— 0‘ A _ .3.!— 5050 .5 :0 23:: noeol 4.1- 3.9- .) 3 :1! .25: 2..— SEE: ? Jnoflouai 193663 c!- 05 E 53. Eco—.5..- 8391. 3 {at 3850 1.3 1.5.1:: 69.-«2Q:- 52 033:8 3 vs .GPE. 3 3:03:- 3:32.. 3 to? Vu. 5 Jenn-ko— i- 265-v.3 161.232 .3 .32.:5298 0‘32: aun— £u£l 653:: a. V.;—9...... L.;—.Yas .11 _laoflild -. «nun—=2:- 3 .3.-A Shiva 82'. £02! :— -2- .3595 60> ‘ t2... 0‘ 8 8.35 I o»... v.— 2!!- coauuzuflosnso =2- ...50 n..- p.85 5 .83-<3. 21.80.: 4:3 23.3) we :3 .5 ca: — k bf $1.3 3:33- 3:585 .33- 60:03:35.4 8— 0316.92 3 2.2.1533 350 c5 0.2} . fab-‘9- 2: na :12] :13 .860 33...: c A a... $0130 3 5.32.2 25 .ncoasafl-E =50 :— 45331 3:35..- IE:=::8 1.3- 5:253... . nun-1.63 33.52:: 3:33.. o..- .28... v:- 2333- a. 35° 3...... c 65:35.... 1:3 :— 1“ .3.)... rail—Ive»... .9..- .5 E Jud :_ .:°=-:v.:h hoe- vc- 95.95 53 3:03...- 3 35.3.? o... 32.. c5 5:13.303:— guzi E :25 5:5 I: 23$. fl \ 35:3- 3...- Jcogo 3 . 8: .81....- 15 IF:- ...cv3- 5:3 I.- .ufllorciagouSYI-SI-aas fl ionic—:53! 3 £030— 13 53.-uncl— Eé 5.5.5.53: .151... 2.33.5. 52! .33 1.5.3193 2:53:15 3 i=5..- 3 035...:- E 3 035:8 335° 22:09.1 1:- 25:31. :23 .5555qu .1:- :25 4:06.50.an I32 .3.— ilflu so IQESE 3 3.553630 :4 5.:- . r. N 1 ~J .1. 60:93: a . . .I I1 1.31.08. c.3581.“ v:- Iifii-A 30:0 .QLE‘U 3:03:- 3 3:2 I. 3: >3: 3 :E :22! SSE-on 22.5. 0:23; 3 3:33: :03 0):. uni-Luau 3035.12. 3 .BEa 8:30- ..3032 £3an3 '35 «En Zen.- 8 nEoc 1:931:80 231.: 3 $31! .9311: 13.39:. c... 3 ooaaataae .3)?!“ 49.2! 37.-E35 335...: 3 Ed: 35.. 3.8. 3 3.5 use... 3 2 .212: e... .5 .e 21.39:— ... 3.3.93- ...31 33.23305 3.5-0:... 7: 222-1 :23 5...! E :1 .3522 Fl, \\ 7 7. 0&3. §0§ 3 g. a; 3‘34 300030900— 8.); 3 55006000 gag}. .000 000.0.3008 0.0300051083010001 00306301000300 0. 008.000.. .00.. 0000000 0‘. 0.11009000000523 0100500400} 000.. 08.00.000.000... 0000.0 2.0.. 00.0 00 .01000 0... 0. 000000.30 00000000.. 00 30' 00 9.0108500 00000.2 63.3. 0030 3 89.: .10.. .00.. 00000 , II 0004 3.8 :0» .20: 00.0 00000 0. 000050 .0030. 0.3 000» .00 .000. P000 .8 00.00.00 .0058 '0000< .‘ 33.10%. at. 3.0": 2 a. dang-c V A 000). 00.. 0.0 00- 00 00.00.00 000.. ......03 an". 0.000 50.00 .10 p.040 0.0013 .00. 00 0.00100 0...... all: 60.00000054000- {008.81.001.80 0808008003800. 89235333833000” _ué 5. 000 00300000080080 00100.0: 300091.020 00. . 90005010100101; :203300 33.0 00600050 00.0.00. “.05... 70003300000: .0...08..I0IJ.0.43)A00.000 000.0 50.0000'010-04000000830300 5.20000 0.0.08. 25.330800000080810. 2 00200801808820. .02.? 0080100003003... , . 7 ”I A w §.i0500000000.l§ 2 . 8000.1!01000040850—00031380. 0040. 004. 3.0030018001380180; 2.0000001000003800. 001000080400... 00010. 0031000100 808-8800300108}: 00.0050 :333030000188: .101. 0.8302. 0L... :0 1’ 03801300.;4158001803 0.001... 02 .§.g~0 0.800 0.. 040 00 3.0000 ~03... 0;... 0000 0.... 0. 0.01303 0.0.5.00.— 00030 9.00.... s0 0000 0 0. 83.0050 00’ 030.0 000 010 0. 02.. . .0 =2 l .. . . . 0 . 0040000.} ~38:9004018010 800- .0050 0000. 0.0003 . is"; .08110000060000300034000‘308018 . . 00.0050HJ00333000300100001001003“ 0.1 .50; 0008000030". 531.0 00.000...0 8030:. ‘0 0000.000 00 000300.033 5.10.5)— 004000000004000> 030.500.1000.... . .000 .080 . _ 33000380003001.10015300000010...‘ 0.08.03: 00838818000008.0008; . A 80585300118130.0110 ‘ 273 7i £10.04. 305:300‘3202030030 580.331.08I.15.01..3305 0.080.803 .080 000110100.503.00 3.832... .0.) 3.00.50.00.00...» 3105.01083535 1000—.04.3.h§£05500.118£0000£3 00 V I 0 . .1 10 III)! — 002 $00500 5.03.000 100 r0110 00. 0. 000.0”... P 08.00.355.010!— 003.009.03.01... 0020.00.30.00 3.0.0.. 0. 0:30 00.000.. 0. 20300.0» .8. 0000.01.00 v0.0.0. 0.0- 3 0031300059 10200.8 900.. v:< 0030000 33 00.0...0 20010.0 000:8 0 30C 0.... .030 .0000. 3 0.00.030 Sgt-.500?! 0... 200.0280 V00- AIIEES. 0 [0‘0 60.0.02. .0303 0:30.00... 0:... 0009.00 000» .8 305050.. 00.0 0 200.030 053 0.00 5 EII-001.000 0030.0 00. x... < .020 0020.00.00 :0 0.. 0. 000.0015 0.000000000- 300000 0. 100.020. 0.080.. 0000:0030 ‘ 2003.0 0 0.0.. .0008! 0005 :0 00.0.3000 00.0.00 0. 100.00.... 00080.. :8 000 .100 .00.... ‘ ~20: 05 .0. 000000 0 00.. 002.000 0. IS. 0.. _ 000 00.0 .0... 25 0.00.300 0005.0 :0 0. v0.3.0.0. I.— .00. 3 .89- 03000 .00... don-00.8 0. 00 .3100 1.0 9.010.. 00 :00- 60000.00 100.010.. 0. 10000300.. 0000.0 0 2.0.. 30010.0 . 0.001 ’03. .04. 101—0.0.0800 2.000.000 . I. 0. 600080: 01030030.. i030 0000—0050015. ‘ g a. 0.0!. 0 I... 3.8 0.00 2.. 0. 00508.20 .83-5001000000500?!— 0u840.0..0.0n 01030103005000.0330 000.300: 110000827030510030E . 000-0000 0000.: 03 .mmfifiwfifiunfiwfifi .0 0.000.! I 00%..300 3 03.600 .0. $30,000.... 0.0000 .2002 .000 I000 00.000- .._:._._....._....... .................................... :sflhufifiagdfifihfiuuuu 0. 000 00.. 0.00.0...0‘ 2.0000 000. 0003—. 0005901.. .0.0£...m.0 00.50.050.000 30.. 0. 0.00130 0000...:- .00. .010 003.00.000.00 000.0000... .000 00» 00> I A .128 0300.00.50.90... SEE-.1: 3.: 00:30.8 .0202... S $30.00 030: . .0. 00?! A3000: 00:00.60. «.00 0.0050 70000000.: 5 30:000nm .20.. .030...- I 00 0.0.5.003 3.0.0 3.00.3». 0003000 5.00.. .003... 0. 0000000 00000.. 3 05.0.00... 0005 .000 30.3.0000 05.00.0000 0. 0070! 2.000: 000...!» 30.70.0300 0. 100.0 .0. 330.001 000 018 0.023210. .02.:- 3003005 — 00 .00>080: I‘D—.90 ”0.00.05 0.37.: .3.-.00 .0 00...... 00.50.00 I'VE: «yr—I F=I=I dfitulufi l'.=8 3 ”SI—O.— »:3c00o.0 00E; 0.00.0000 2.0.. 01.00.000.903 .30. 9:0 .0... «00.50.50.300 3.0.0:; I. .— 000.8000 8i:0.1.330013111.§ .00 1001.3030820128» .308 274 .43.. .80- 33 :638...» 9.3.5 g A d I b, u i 9.: dough... 2.. .8 «6.15 no: “A!” den-£101.. .3 all. .3.-63.33 .5 E {at S..- .«La :5» so .1533... 55.30 An. nconq-Ennua :05 2:11:93! 2:. 16¢ .30 30> Iii: . .. = g I b 7 13.1.32... .15.... - lawn-5 heed-131.034. 8 anag- :— 6<93 ‘ rllltfl APPENDIX H MEMORANDUM TO INSTRUCTORS 275 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY OFFICE Of THE VICE PRESIDENT $08 STUDENT AHA!” AND SERVICES STUDENT SERVICES BUILDING EAST LANSING 0 MICHIGAN 0 MIC-III} February 22, 1991 MEMORANDUM TO: EAD 415 In tructors 1 FROM: Joe Murray\ bl RE: VPI Profiles Thank ydu for your assistance in gathering data for my study of undergraduate students' attitudes toward careers in the Student Affairs profession. Your time and dedication are greatly appreciated. I am enclosing a Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI) score report for each student in your section of EAD 415 who requested his or her results. Please do not return or examine the students' reports until after you have administered the College Student Affairs 5 Services Career Interest Questionnaire and the College Student Affairs & Services Career Information Questionnaire. In the meantime, please refer to the sample illustration below in order to familiarize yourself with the general format of the reports. p01 .4 b-q p..- F-l _ o r. I Vocational Preference Inventory (VPI); D mam—1mm U-S“N ;_gJ C 86: O-buLOOQOQI'g'.“ I, ._ I'm Inna . _ m It. 1091 - m... 3.1.! ’_ u l I." n— OLHOLBOBOO'Q 05-665.. fin. .‘g‘ bhhbbebhbbigu banana-5a.}.g a; 5%.. .1. nag b bath-ht .iéibiii'flitthlltfll" ..... b‘bb-.‘n‘.i= . MSU it an A/finnaiw Attica/Equal Opportunity Institution 276 Page 2 You will notice that scores are provided for the first six scales only. The abbreviated form of the instrument, which was used in this study, did not include those items pertaining to the remaining scales. . Normative data are provided on the profile forms. A T-score of 30 equals the second percentile, 40 equals the sixteenth percentile, 50 equals the fiftieth percentile, 60 equals the eighty-fourth percentile, and 70 equals the ninety-eighth percentile. Separate norms are provided for male and female populations, and students' scores are plotted accordingly. In interpreting students' vocational orientations, please refer to their raw scores, rather than to the corresponding T-scores. The scales on which students receive their highest raw scores represent those personality types which they most closely resemble. Please note that the markings (-) to the left of the raw scores are purely for purposes of plotting relationships between scores. They are not to be interpreted as signifying negativity. I am enclosing descriptions of the six basic personality types represented on the occupational scales of the VPI. The descriptions.are drawn directly from the Second Edition of MakiQQAVocational Choices, by John L. Holland (1985). Most individuals bear some degree of resemblance to each of these types, though the degree of resemblance varies. By ranking the basic types, according to the individual's degree of resemblance to them, it is possible to obtain a more detailed profile of his or her vocational orientation. This type of profile is known as a personality pattern, and is identified by two or more of the six basic labels, presented in sequence and abbreviated using the first letter of each. Each student's personality pattern is presented on his or her score report, on the line labeled "VPI Code." In most cases, three letters will be presented, separated by commas, with the first letter representing the highest score, the second letter representing the second highest score, and the third letter representing the third highest score. In some cases, students' scores on at least two of the more highly rated scales are identical. In such cases, a slash (/) mark is used to separate the letters representing these scales, rather than a comma. Because of a lack of differentiation among some students' highest scores, their personality patterns include more than three letters. Similarly, some students' patterns include less than three letters, due to a lack of differentiation between their lowest scores. Examples.of each type of profile are provided on the following page. 277 Page 3 . I I l l I 2 l :- R ' o .. .. .. P";- . fl- Vocational ., . '2 '° -° . g, Preference ' II 4. .u . n . .. 1.. .. .- :; Inventory (VPI)__ It I. J. I ' 41 a 1:- mam—mam . 4 4| -u .u 4: D : ImO~~ . C9 0 an o a an .0 -. ‘ o ' t T ‘ -II 0 '. f - '. “- _ . a ' .6 a -u o 4 a a 40 ‘ -. ,. - I! m a 4 a. i?) . '0 4 . " T“ ' m 2.2'. @- ”4:24: -t a l a .u ‘ o a .. . I ‘ J I J ' . J 4 ‘ a T a a a a -. o 4 a - ‘ c a ‘ ' ‘ : i a 4 O 4 .9 ‘ . .‘ a 4 . 4 a a 4 ‘ 3 f . . ° 1 ‘ a . ‘ 1 j. ' O J O ‘ . . I a» G) a a 4 a I g ‘ ‘~ . ‘ i E IHB=====§§EEE&:.- ‘ 4' ==' '=_='—="a'-~' ' *3 . I I R l E I. I: i J.“ . , i .. :7 Vocational u .. .. . . Preference 4: 4- " a .4‘ . . . 1° _. ~ .. .. .. .. InventoryWPl). a. . u I: 4: ‘ a in “EM—1mm u .u . .u .u .u -l I. 43 a ,. . I .u-tD-I~ . '. . 0 -ll .. , . o " n l "‘ n " . a"! m , .. .. I . : 43 . '3 . 4' -——=L‘_1:_— s a a a .o " ' . ,,. . b—n—ML . u a a .. . . “m l.¢ 1.69: : : ‘ « ' Li'- 0 a a . . a t -t a .1 Q : . ~ 0 : - .— s ‘ 4 ‘ a a 4 a .u I a I a a -I .a : ‘ . " I ‘ ‘ @@ j ‘ ' . " ‘ . . Q‘ .. -l -t (I) 3 a 4 v . . . o ‘ -t W a ’ a 4 ‘4. 0 . O a 0 . ‘ Z a a a - ’ O ‘ " I , 7 ‘ ‘ :i tan;-ae=:;;r-:.- ' ’ Wu“? 0 ooaoou m In addition to individuals, Holland's system is used to describe work environments. Using the six basic categories, these environments are classified according to the predominant personality types of those who work within them. By ranking the basic types according to the degree to which they dominate a particular work environment, it is possible to obtain an environmental pattern comparable to the individual personality pattern. Satisfaction and success in a particular work situation depend upon an appropriate match between the personality pattern of the individual and the environmental pattern of the work setting. 278 Page 4 The personality patterns obtained from individuals' VPI results are frequently used to provide vocational guidance. Some of the students in your class may be interested in exploring occupations corresponding to their personality types. I am enclosing a copy of The Occupations Finder. This booklet includes a list of occupations, classified according to octupational code. You may wish to share the information contained in the booklet with the students in your class. You may also wish to refer interested students to the Dictionary of Holland, Occupational Codes (Gottfredson and Holland} 1989), which provides a more complete list of occupations. In presenting students‘ score reports to them, it will be helpful to review Holland's theory of career development. You may wish to refer them to the booklet, You and Your Career. Additional information on the interpretation of the VPI is provided on pages 5 through 14 in the user' s manual. Please remember to also distribute copies of the Career Planning_Guide to all students in your class. The Graduate/Professional Schooli Preparation Guide & Checklist should be distributed only to those students interested in pursuing graduate studies at some time in the future. If you have questions or need additional copies of any of the materials provided, please contact me at 353-3860 or 484-5667. Thank you again for your time and assistance. Note. Illustrations reproduced and adapted by special permission of the Publisher, Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc., 16204 North Florida Avenue, Lutz, Florida 33549, from the Vocational Preference Inventory by Eh“. John L. Holland, Ph.D., Copyright 1978, 1985. by PAR, Inc. APPENDIX I RATING OF ON-CAMPUS JOBS' RELATIONSHIP TO STUDENT AFFAIRS 279 RATING 0F DN-CAMPUS JOBS' RELATIONSHIP TO STUDENT AFFAIRS The list of on-campus jobs and departments below was drawn from students' responses to the following item on the Student Information Questionnaire: Are you presently employed on campus? a. No b. Yes (Please specify department): The positions and/or departments are presented exactly as they were presented by the students themselves. Using the following scale, please rate the degree of relationship that you perceive between student employment in the particular department or position and professional employment in the field of college student affairs and services: 1 Very low 2 Low 3 Moderate 4 High 5 Very high In rating each item, please consider the degree to which the work environment provides opportunities for meaningful interaction with current student affairs professionals and/or opportunities to engage in work activities which are typically conducted under the auspices of student affairs professionals, either at Michigan State University or at other collegiate institutions. Please circle only one response for each item. 1 2 3 4 S ASMSU - Student Govt. 1 2 3 4 5 Brody Bakery 1 2 3 4 5 Cafeteria 1 2 3 4 S Cafeteria (Brody) 1 2 3 4 5 Cafeteria in dorm 1 2 3 4 5 Central Bakery, MSU 1 2 3 4 s Department of Art I 2 3 4 5 Department of Public Safety 1 2 3 4 S Department of Residence Life NNNNN (.0wa“ ##bh-fi NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN uuwwwwwwwwwwww bhhh-fibh#h#khbhh#hb®hé wwwwwww 010101 010101010101 U‘MU'I 01010101 01 (J! (”'01 U" m U1 (’1 280 Desk Receptionist Shaw Hall English Entomology I Family and Child Ecology Family Cancer Caregiver Studies College of Nursing FCE Cooperative Extension Service Financial Aid (Records) Financial Aid Office - Scholarships Food and Housing Services Food Service General Stores Holden Hall Resident Life Staff R.A. Honors College Housing IN IN Sports Intramural Sports Jack Breslin Student Event Center Kellogg Center Kellogg Center Catering Libraries Library Library (Document Delivery) Math dept. N.S.U. Alumni Association Museum N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N N V N N N N N wuwuwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwwmeow bhhhbhbhhhbk#&h##hhhbhb#hh mmmmmmmmmm mmmmmmmmmmm 01m 281 Office of Minority Student Affairs Office of Provost OPB - Administration (Office of Planning & Budgets) Parking Division of DPS Pest Control PH Res Lab - DOE Physical Plant Physics Dept. Registrar's Office Admin. Building Residence hall Residence Life, Cafeteria Residence Life Staff Residence Life Staff (Sny/Phi) Resident Assistant Shaw Cafeteria Sports information Student Radio Student Services Career Info. Center Union Catering Univ. Housing University H & FS Snack Shop University Housing Programs Vehicle Office Wharton Center Hilson Hall Cafeteria wonders Hall Desk recp. APPENDIX J CLASSIFICATION AND OVERALL RATINGS 0F INDIVIDUAL POSITIONS AND DEPARTMENTS, BASED ON RELATIONSHIP TO STUDENT AFFAIRS 282 Table J-l Ratings of On-Campus Jobs Classified as Related to Student Affairs Position or Department Description Rating Department of Residence Life 15 Holden Hall Resident Life Staff R.A. 15 Office of Minority Student Affairs 15 Residence Life Staff 15 Residence Life Staff (Sny/Phi) 15 Resident Assistant 15 Student Services Career Info. Center 15 University Housing Programs 15 ASMSU - Student Govt. 14 Desk Receptionist Shaw Hall 13 Financial Aid (Records) 13 Financial Aid Office - Scholarships 13 Housing 13 IM 13 IM Sports 13 Intramural Sports 13 Residence hall 13 Univ. Housing 13 Jack Breslin Student Events Center 12 Note: All ratings are based on a scale of 3 to 15. 283 Table J-2 Ratings of On-Campus Jobs Not Classified as Related to Student Affairs Position or Department Description Rating Registrar's Office Admin. Building 11 H.S.U. Alumni Association 10 Wharton Center 10 Wonders Hall Desk recp. 10 Food and Housing Services 9 Kellogg Center 8 Residence Life, Cafeteria 8 Shaw Cafeteria 8 Student Radio 8 Union Catering 8 University H 8 FS Snack Shop 8 Wilson Hall Cafeteria . 8 Cafeteria 7 Cafeteria (Brody) 7 Cafeteria in dorm 7 Department of Public Safety 7 Food Service 7 Kellogg Center Catering 7 Sports information 7 Vehicle Office 7 (table continues) 284 Table J-2 (cont'd) Position or Department Description Rating Brody Bakery 6 Central Bakery, MSU 6 FCE Cooperative Extension Service 6 Office of Provost 6 OPB - Administration (Office of Planning & Budgets) 6 Parking Division of DPS 6 Family Center Caregiver Studies College of Nursing 5 English 4 Entomology 4 Family and Child Ecology 4 General Stores 4 Honors College 4 Libraries 4 Library 4 Library (Document Delivery) 4 Math dept. 4 Museum 4 Physical Plant 4 Department of Art 3 Pest Control 3 PH Res Lab - DOE 3 Physics Dept. 3 Note: All ratings are based on a scale of 3 to 15. APPENDIX K TEST-RETEST RELIABILITY OF STUDENT INFORMATION QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS 285 Table K-l Test-Retest Reliability of Individual Studént Information Questionnaire Items Item Initiating contact with a college student affairs and services professional, to discuss career opportunities in the field of college student affairs and services. Reading books and periodicals about career opportunities in the field of college student affairs and services. Contacting a professional organization in the field of college student affairs and services, to inquire about career opportunities in the field of college student affairs and services. Applying for professional employment in the field of college student affairs and services. Pursuing a long-term career in college student affairs and services. Initiating contact with a faculty or staff member to discuss types of master's degree programs specifically related to college student affairs and services. Referring to college guides or graduate program directories to obtain information about master's degree programs specifically related to college student affairs and services. Contacting a graduate school to inquire about a particular master's degree program specifically related to college student affairs and services. Applying for admission to a master's degree program specifically related to college student affairs and services. Enrolling in a master's degree program specifically related to college student affairs and services. .55 .50 .62 .38 .08 .72 .53 .45 .40 .07 APPENDIX L T-TEST AND ANOVA RESULTS BASED ON ADAPTED SCALES 286 Table L-1 Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career, Based on Adapted Scale Experimental (n=83) Control (n=84) p -o.49 -o.45 SD 2.98 2.45 t=.099, df=165, p=.922 Table L-2 Experimental and Control Groups Compared by Change in Likelihood of Pursuing a MasterrsiDegree in StudentAffairs, Based on Adapted Scale Experimental (n=83) Control (n=84) g -o.55 -o.35 SD 2.53 2.71 t=.515, df=165, p=.607 287 Table L-3 Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Characteristiciselevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Student Affairs Career, Based on Adapted Scale Variable n df MS F p Compatibility with the student affairs profession 167 2 5.843 0.780 0.460 Residency 152 1 0.549 0.077 0.782 Employment 166 3 9.044 1.203 0.311 Cocurricular involvement 167 2 7.584 1.032 0.359 Racial or ethnic background 161 1 8.683 1.167 0.282 I Table L-4 Analysis of Variance for Interaction of Treatment With Selected Student Chagacteristics Relevant to Changes in Likelihood of Pursuing a Master's Degree in Student Affairs, Based on Adapted—Scale Variable n df MS F p Compatibility with the student affairs profession 167 2 17.878 2.641 0.074 Residency 152 1 2.490 0.399 0.529 Employment 166 3 5.734 0.815 0.487 Cocurricular involvement 167 2 6.897 1.008 0.367 Racial or ethnic background 161 1 5.105 0.719 0.398 APPENDIX M PERMISSION TO USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIALS 289 l:!t|l;!FkychokxficolAsmusneanesmuceanc. Mailing Address PO. Box Miocene Florida 33556 , Telephone (013) 963-3003 snoouaam: WMWMJWWW momma” October 26, 1990 Mr. Joseph L. Murray 105 N. Pennsylvania Avenue Apartment F Lansing, MI 48912 Dear Mr. Murray: In response to your recent request, permission is hereby granted to you to adapt the vecational Preference to include only the first six scales of the instrument and reproduce 225 copies for use in your dissertation research. This Agreement is subject to the following restrictions: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) Any materials used must contain the following credit line: ”Reproduced and adapted by special permission of the Publisher, Psychological Assessment Resources, Inc., 16204 North Florida Avenue, Lutz, Florida 33549, from the Vocational Preference Inventory by Dr. John L. Holland, Ph.D., Copyright 1978, 1985. by PAR, Inc.” None of the materials may be sold, given away “or used for any purposes other than those mentioned above. Payment of a royalty/license fee of $.20 per copy (S45. 00 for 225 copies). One copy of any materials reproduced will be sent to the Publisher to indicate that the proper credit line has been used. One copy of the research results will be sent to the Publisher. 290 Mr. Joseph L. Murray October 26, 1990 Page 2 BOTH COPIES of this Permission Agreement should be signed and returned to me, along with your check for $45.00 to cover the Royalty/License fee, to indicate your agreement with the above restrictions. I will return one fully executed copy to your for your records. Sincerely, 803 TH I, . President RES/bu ACCEPTED AND AGREED: 291 PET! July 11, 1991 Joseph L. Murray :' Staff Advisor ~ Department of Student Life Michigan State University East Lansing, MI 48824—1113 Dear Mr. Murray: L You have ACT's permission to use the diagram on page 4 in An Empirical Occupational Classification Derived From a Theory of Personality and Intended for Practice and Research in your dissertation. as described in your letter and enclosures of June 19, 1991. Please use the following credit line: Copyright 1969 by The American College Testing Program. All rights reserved. Reproduced with permission. Sincerely, mung 3W Patricia A. Farrant, PhD Assistant Vice President Public Affairs /dvh 2201 North Dodge Street. PO. Box 168 ' Iowa City. lows 52243 (319) 337-1000 292 July 9, 1991 Joseph L. Murray 101 Student Services Building Michigan State University ' East Lansing, Michigan 48824-1113 Academic Press, Inc. 1250 Sixth Avenue San Diego, California 92101 Dear Sir/Madam: I am in the process of completing my doctoral program at Michigan State University, and am scheduled,to graduate at the end of this summer. In preparing my dissertation for submission to the Graduate School, I have found that I must obtain written permission to include a table in my methodology chapter which was adapted from a previously existing table that appeared in volume 24 (1984) of the Journal of Vocational Behavior. I am writing to request such permission. I am enclosing copies of both the article containing the original table and the relevant portion of my dissertation. For your convenience, I am also enclosing a stamped, self-addressed envelope. If you have questions about any of the materials, please feel free to contact me at (517) 353-3860 or (517) 353-3600. Your prompt attention to this matter would be greatly appreciated, as I am faced with an August 9 deadline for submission of my dissertation and all supporting materials. I realize that I have provided you with short notice, and apologize for any inconvenience which may have resulted. Please do not hesitate to contact me if I can be of assistance to you in any way. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Jos:ZE L. Murray Enclosures. ‘ PLEASE TURN OVER 293 July 18, 1991 PERMISSION GRANTED, provided that 1) complete credit is given to the source, including the Academic Press copyright line; 2) the material to be used has appeared in our publication without credit or acknowledgement to another source and 3) if commercial publication should result, you must contact Academic Press again. A Martha Str-ssberger Contracts, Rights at Permissions ACADEMIC PRESS, INC. Orlando, Florida 32887 294 NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STUDENT PERSONNEL ADMINISTRATORS. INC. 1875 Coma-rm»... NW I Suite 418 I Washington. DC 200095728 I 202/265.7500 July 10, 1991 Mr. Joseph Murray Staff Advisor Department of Student Life Michigan State University Student Services Bldg. East Lansing, MI 48824 Dear Mr. Murray: Thank you for your interest in the NASPA's publication. You have our permission to reprint the excerpts from "The Recruitment, Preparation and Nuturing of the Student Affairs Professional." I ask. however. that the following credit line appear in your dissertation: ‘ Reprinted by permission.of the National Association of Student Personnel Administrators, 1989. Sincerely, fi/flef /(./fl1/(£ a, Sybil Walker Publications Coordinator 29S l:a"l;!FtwdwflogkxflfiusmsnwwflReaxuceguw; MoithddnscROJaMIOdemFbNdom 0000000 .3003 Streamed: 16204N.FiondoAve./Luiz.Floddo33$49 ' 1 Max:345” June 24, 1991 Mr. Joseph L. Murray 105 N. Pennsylvania Avenue Apartment F Lansing, MI 48912 Dear Mr. Murray: In response to your recent request, permission is hereby granted to you to include a copy of your memorandum which includes sample illustrations of the VPI reports (as submitted to PAR) in the appendix of your dissertation. This Agreement is subject to the following restrictions: (1) Any materials used must contain the following credit line: "Reproduced and-adapted by special permission of the Publisher, Psychological Assessment Resources,'Inc., 16204 North Florida Avenue, Lutz, Florida 33549, from the Vocational Preference Inventory by Dr. John L. Holland, Ph.D., Copyright 1978, 1985. by PAR, Inc.” (2) None of the materials may be sold, given away or used for any purposes other than those mentioned above. (3) Payment of a royalty/license fee will be waived. (4) One copy of any materials reproduced will be sent to the Publisher to indicate that the proper credit line has been used. (5) One copy of the research results will be sent to the Publisher. . ' 296 Mr. Joseph L. Murray June 24, 1991 Page 2 ONE COPY of this Permission Agreement should be signed and returned to me to indicate your agreement with the above restrictions. Please keep one copy for your records. Sincerely, R. 80 SM H III, President “one: .. RES/bu ACCEPTED AND AGREED: JEP;;L.m DATE TA; .5- gig/w 7/wm7 "I7'1?li'fliiiifliii‘iiii ‘--ia----A