AN EVALUATION 0F 'FHE EFFECF Q? A QNETEQ STATES OFFECE QF EDUCATEON TALENT SEARCH PROfECT ON THE ACABEMHC FERFQRMANCE Q? M-gCALEcEDENYEFEED EQWuMQTWATED MEN'S-I GRADE MICHEGAN WUDENTS “weeks for flu Degree 0? pk. D. MICHEGAN STATE UNWERSETY David V. Schultz 1968 4 iii giiiiii / iii/WWW! " 3 93 01007 2092 if”! This is to certify that the thesis entitled “An Evaluation of the Effect of a United States Office of Education Talent Search Project on the Academic Performance of M-Scaie-ldentified Low-Motivated Ninth Grade Michigan Students” presented by David V. Schultz has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ___E.'1_-__Q_-__. degree in Mn Date JUII ‘9, I968 0-169 ‘ gy/ifi' J; ZJ.’ ”/19” runs; Agwuhwm f,:____t_fi ‘ "'-_——.~ . Olt'it‘! I ‘ ABSTRACT AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF A UNITED STATES OFFICE OF EDUCATION TALENT SEARCH PROJECT ON THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF M-SCALE— IDENTIFIED LOW-MOTIVATED NINTH GRADE MICHIGAN STUDENTS by David V. Schultz The purpose of this study was to determine if an outside agency could bring about an improvement in academic performance among ninth grade students who had been identi— fied by a reliable instrument and by school officials as being low—motivated. The treatment consisted of letters to high school personnel confirming the identification of their low- motivated youngstersg'letters to the students themselves describing ten ways to improve grades; and letters to the parents of the students requesting their help in this critical problem. The letters originated with Project MEMO: (a United States Office of Education Talent Search Project) and were distributed by high school officials. Three hundred and thirty—four (334) Michigan schools and 51,998 ninth graders participated in the Project MEMO: Ninth Grade Motivation Study. A "low-ten" group (bottom 10 per cent of all ninth graders as determined by scores on the David V. Schultz Farquhar M—Scales) was selected to receive the "paper treatment." All males scoring 79 or below and females scoring 65 or below on the M—Scales received the letters. To establish a comparison group for this study the investi- gator selected all males with scores of 80-81 and females with scores of 66-67 (the llth percentile) for a non- equivalent control group. Males scoring 78-79 and females with scores of 64—65 (the 10th percentile) were selected from the "low—ten" students for the treatment group. Two hundred and nine (209) schools had students with these scores and 173 of the 209, or 83 per cent, provided com— plete grade point information for this study. This figure represented a total control group of 506 (322 male and 18“ female) and a treatment group count of 391 (227 male and 16“ female). The students were identified and the treatment was given midway through the ninth grade. Grade point averages were requested at the end of the first semester of the tenth grade. The pretest measurement was the grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade. The posttest measurements included the grade point averages for the second semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade. The dependent variable was the gain score in grade point average (Gain 1: the first semester ninth grade grade point averages subtracted from the second semester ninth David V. Schultz grade grade point averages, and Gain 2: the first semes- ter ninth grade grade point averages subtracted from the first semester tenth grade grade point averages). The grade point averages were determined on a twelve point scale, i.e., A = 12, A- = 11, B+ = 10 . . . E = l. Null Hypotheses Null Hypothesis Hozl. No difference will be found in grade point averages for Gain 1 and/or Gain 2 between the total treatment and total non-treatment groups. Null Hypothesis Ho:2. No difference will be found in grade point averages for Gain 1 and/or Gain 2 between male (female) treatment and male (female) non-treatment groups. Null Hypothesis Ho:3. No difference will be found in grade point averages for Gain 1 and/or Gain 2 between treatment and non—treatment groups independently in Class A, Class B, Class C or Class D schools. Null Hypothesis Ho:u. No difference will be found in grade point averages for Gain 1 and/or Gain 2 between treatment and non-treatment groups when these groups in- dependently consist of Male-Class A, Male-Class B, Male- Class C, Male-Class D, Female-Class A, Female-Class B, Female—Class C, and Female-Class D schools. The hypotheses were based on these possible trends: 1. Lasting results from treatment (significant improvement in Gain 1 and in Gain 2). David V. Schultz 2. Short-term results from treatment (significant improvement in Gain 1 only). 3. Delayed results from treatment (significant improvement in Gain 2 only). The grade point averages were first tested by com— puting an analysis of variance of gain scores. No significant mainfieffect was found for the treatment. The F—ratio's were not found to be significant when testing for the interaction of treatment and sex, treatment and school size, sex and school size and treatment, and treatment, sex and school size. Secondly, a one—way analysis of variance was com— puted to determine Gain 1 and Gain 2 cell mean grade point averages. The obtained mean gains could be explained in terms of chance. These results supported the first data and no significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups. Since no significant differences were found in either test, Hozl, Ho:2, Ho:3, and Hozu were accepted in their entire forms. These results tend to disprove the educational value of the "paper treatment." However, some boys and girls did benefit, as evidenced by an increase in academic per— formance and by a noticeable improvement in their over- all attitude in school. Some parents were benefited by becoming aware of the concept of "low-motivation" as re- lated to their son or daughter, and by subsequent dis— cussions with high school officials. David V. Schultz The known examples of positive affect (identified in individual case studies and in letters from school officials to the investigator), represented the minority and did not significantly alter the statistics in favor of this type of treatment. However, some students did measureably profit from this attempt by an outside agency to effect the academic performance of low—motivated ninth graders. Perhaps the improvement in these isolated cases made the entire project worthwhile. AN EVALUATION OF THE EFFECT OF A UNITED STATES OFFICE OF EDUCATION TALENT SEARCH PROJECT ON THE ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE OF M-SCALE- IDENTIFIED LOW-MOTIVATED NINTH GRADE MICHIGAN STUDENTS By David v. Schultz A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Department of Administration and Higher Education 1968 DEDICATION To Nancy, Doug and Deb. An eternally welcomed source of motivation. ii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to acknowledge the encouragement and professional direction given to me by my guidance com- mittee: Dr. Laurine E. Fitzgerald, Dr. Walter F. Johnson, Dr. Max B. Raines and Dr. Edgar A. Schuler. Particular acknowledgment is given to Dr. Laurine Fitderald, who has served as the chairman of this committee and has been of invaluable assistance as the major advisor for this research. It has been through her patience and insights that this project has reached its conclusion. To Dr. Gordon Sabine, I would give thanks for his inspirational leadership and creative direction which he provided for Project MEMO:'S Ninth Grade Motivation Study. To the United States Office of Education, Mr. Hugh Satterlee, for his permission to use the information ob- tained in the Project MEMO: Ninth Grade Motivation Study. To the principals and counselors of the participating schools, my sincere thanks for the splendid cooperation and important feedback of information. To Dr. W. w. Farquhar, author of the Michigan M- Scales for permission to use his instrument in this research project and for his advice throughout the entire effort. iii For assistance in working out the technical details of procedure and statistical analysis, I would like to acknowledge Dr. Andrew C. Porter and Mr. David Wright. And foremost, to my wife, Nancy, son, Doug and daughter, Debbie, for their sacrifice, patience, inspir— ation and love, for without their understanding encour- agement, this project would still be on the drawing board. iv DEDICAT ACKNOWL LIST OF LIST OF Chapter I. II. III. TABLE OF CONTENTS ION O O O O O O O EDGMENTS . . . . . TABLES O O O O O I O O APPENDICES . . . STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM . . Introduction The Problem The Need for the Study Hypotheses to be Evaluated Definition of Terms Organization of the Study REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. Motivation Self-Concept Summary DESIGN OF THE STUDY. . . . Nature of the Sample Instrumentation Reliability of M-Scales Statistical Hypotheses Experimental Design Analysis Summary Page ii iii vii viii 12 28 Chapter Page IV. ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS . . . . . . . 59 Hypothesis Hozl Hypothesis Ho:2 Hypothesis Ho:3 Hypothesis Ho:u Summary of Results V. CASE STUDIES. . . . . . . . . . . 73 Introduction Interview Procedure Case #l--Paul Case #2--Tom Case #3--Lon Case #A-—Virginia Case #5--Carol Case #6—-Susan Summary VI. SUMMARY, DISCUSSION OF RESULTS, CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS . . . . . 120 Summary Discussion of Results Conclusion Implications Implications for Further Research BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143 APPENDICES. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148 vi Table 1. LIST OF TABLES Analysis of Variance for Over—all Regres- sion of Gain 1 . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Variance for Over—all Regres- sion of Gain 2 . . . . . . . . . Analysis of Variance of Grade Point Averages for Gain 1 . . . . . . . Analysis of Variance of Grade Point Averages for Gain 2 . . . . . . . Cell Frequencies and Cell Grade Point Averages for the First Semester Ninth Grade (Pretest) and the Second Semester Ninth Grade and First Semester Tenth Grade (Posttest) . . . . . . Cell Means for Gain 1 and Gain 2 by Treatment, Sex, and School Size Summary of F-Ratio's and Respective Significant Levels for Gain 1 and Gain 2. . . . . . . . . Cell Frequencies and Cell Mean Grade Point Averages for First Semester Ninth Grade, Second Semester Ninth Grade, First Semester Tenth Grade, Gain 1 and Gain 2 by Treatment, Sex and School Size. vii Page 60 61 6A 65 69 71 123 12A LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A. Description of Project MEMO: . B. Male M-Scale C. Female M-Scale. . . . . . . . D. Sources of Additional Information on M-Scales. . . . . . E. Letter to Principal Identifying the "Low- Ten" Students . . F. Student "Shingle" Letter G. Parent Letter (Blue—Son) . . H. Parent Letter (Pink-Daughter). I. Letter to Principals Requesting Participation in Research Project . Grade Point Average Request Form. K. Case Study General Information Sheet viii Page 149 152 157 162 164 167 169 172 175 177 l79 CHAPTER I STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM Introduction There are few problems more puzzling than how to improve the academic performance of low-motivated boys and girls. Despite counselors' and classroom teachers' best efforts, these underachievers seem always to be with us. And naturally enough, it is from this group that our society loses much potential talent via the school drop-out route. To try to prevent some of this dropping-out, Project MEMO: (Appendix A) conducted its Ninth Grade Motivation Study The MEMO: ninth grade project dealt with low- motivated students. The goal was to increase their motivation toward academic success. Project MEMO: supplemented rather than replaced the efforts already being made by teachers, counselors, and school officials. Assuming that parent-student conflict is a source for much low-motivation, MEMO:'s method was to write to both student and parent to state that (a) the student's grades apparently could be better, (b) having the motivation to make better grades requires good communication and support between parent and student, and (0) making better grades requires work, not merely dreaming or wishful thinking, and this work must start now, not sometime in the future. The Problem It is the purpose of this study to determine if letters by an outside agency can improve the academic performance of ninth grade students who have been identi- fied as being low in motivation. The treatment in this case consisted of letters to school personnel identifying the low—motivated youngsters, letters to the students themselves, and letters to the parents of these students. The academic records of these students will be studied to see if any noticeable changes take place following the treatment. It is admitted that any increase in academic performance cannot be entirely credited to the treatment. However, it is possible that the treatment will serve as a catalyst and subsequently will play an important part in the over-all improvement in academic performance. This improvement may be the result of the parents', student's and/or school's interests or a combination of factors resulting in the increase in actual grade point average. The Need for the Study Simple as the Project MEMO: approach sounds, a pilot study conducted in a Lansing High School confirmed it did do some good for some students--and with the very low in academic motivation for whom nothing else had succeeded, any improvement at all could mean fewer pro- blems for the teacher, the school and the student. Fifty-one thousand nine—hundred and ninety-eight (51,998) Michigan ninth graders were given an instrument which measured motivation. This instrument, the M-Scale (Appendices B and C) was designed and created by Dr. William Farquhar, Professor of Education at Michigan State University. Professor Farquhar has been developing these measures of motivation for seven years. During this period, the M-Scales have been tested on approxi— mately 24,500 different students at all levels of upper elementary and high schools, and with some college stu- dents. They have been used in school systems in England, Israel, and in Puerto Rico. In the United States they have been used in North and South Dakota, California, Minnesota and Michigan. Validity coefficients have been in the acceptable range for measures of this type. Repeated validation and cross-validation studies have yielded reliability coefficients at the .80 and even the .90 level. Further details on the M—Scales are available in the publications listed in Appendix D. Specific information on the reli- ability and validity of the M-Scales is found in Chapter III. In the Project MEMO: Study, the M—Scale results were machine scored for 51,998 ninth graders. These scores were then ranked in order and an arbitrary line was drawn at the 10th percentile, and it was this group (the "low ten") that was designated by Project MEMO: as being low in motivation. This "low-ten" group included 2,857 males and 2,379 females. The MEMO: plan was then put into operation. This project consisted of three distinct areas of concentration; the school, the student, and the home. First, the adminis- trative personnel of each participating school received a list of the names of the boys and girls whose M-Scale scores were at or below the "low-ten" cut-off point (Appendix E). Secondly, the schools received student letters which listed ten ways grades could be improved. One letter was given to each identified student by the school counselor (Appendix F). Thirdly, letters were sent to the parents of the identified students (Appen- dices H and I). This concentration of letters and counselor attention took place in February and March of 1967. In June of 1967, a comparison was made between the grades for the first half of the year (pre-treatment) and the grades for the second half of the year (post-treatment). School officials were asked to indicate if the academic performance of these "low-ten" boys and girls improved, decreased or remained the same. At this time the actual amount of change was not indicated. The direction of change was simply noted by the words "higher," "lower," and "same" for each student. Results on returns for 4,967 students showed an increase in academic performance in 1,752 cases or 35.3 per cent, a decrease in 1,709 or 3H.“ per cent and the remaining 1,506 or 30.3 per cent were recorded as re- maining the same. This return was chance variation and did not provide sufficient proof for a repeat of the Project MEMO: Ninth Grade Motivation Study. As the Director of Project MEMO:, the investigator had the opportunity to work with many of the high school principals and counselors in Michigan and during this interaction gained sufficient testimonial feedback to indicate that the project possibly did have merit. The following comments taken from letters written by high school officials provide some insight into the positive effect the "low-ten" study did have on some identified low-motivated boys and girls. The program really proved beneficial for all concerned. The letter to parents and the brochure to the students were excellent. You told the parents what we would not dare tell them. Thank you so much for permitting our school to participate in such a worth-while project. In comparing second semester averages with first semester marks, appreciative gains were made by almost all the students studied. Also the personal outlooks of many appeared greatly improved. Our students were motivated to pursue better study habits from interest and encouragement from a source not directly connected with the school. Each of the students who received the letter seemed pleased in the interest taken in her and left the interview with definite practical resolutions on how to improve her marks. The information provided for the parents was of greatest value since it came from an out- side source. Many parents called asking what they could do to better help their youngsters. I feel confident that I speak for the adminis- tration and staff when I say that the entire study was a tremendous success. One mother commented that the letter compli- mented what she felt about her husband's attitude toward their girl. This was that the father was pushing the child too much. Several parents contacted our school and expressed interest in the information made avail- able by Project MEMO:. Personally I am favorably impressed that it was a project that was worth the time and effort and should be repeated every year. We are enthused that you are offering another direction of attack on these problems and are only too happy to cooperate with these studies. Project MEMO: is no longer actively in existance, and with its conclusion goes the possibility of proving that the Ninth Grade Motivation Study does have definite educational value. If evidence is to be gathered to support similar motivation studies, it will have to be done in this type of broad investigation. The "need" for this investigator's study is self—evident, i.e., if a successful program were discontinued because of lack of sufficient evidence, then someone must accept the responsibility of gathering data and carefully studying the results while the information is available. Hypotheses to be Evaluated The primary goal of this study is to demonstrate than an outside agency, by means of the use of letters to school officials, students and parents, can be in— strumental in initiating an improvement in academic performance of ninth grade boys and girls who have been identified as being low in motivation. Possible trends which may be uncovered are: (1) positive results from the treatment (improvement in the academic performance in both semesters immediately following the treatment); (2) short term results from the treatment (improvement in academic performances in the second semester of the ninth grade but no carry-over into the tenth grade); and (3) delayed results from the treatment (no signifi— cant academic improvement in the semester immediately following treatment, but a noticeable improvement for the first semester of the tenth grade). The statistical hypotheses then become:* 1. The grade point average gain for the treatment group will exceed the grade point average gain for the non-treatment group. (Is there a treatment main effect?) *These hypotheses are restated in testable form in Chapter III. 2. The grade point average gain for the treatment group males (females) will exceed the grade point average gain for the non-treatment group males (females). (Does treatment interact with sex?) 3. The grade point average gain for all treatment group students enrolled in Class A (Class B, C and D) schools will exceed the grade point average gain for the students in the non- treatment groups who are enrolled in Class A (Class B, C, and D) schools. (Does treatment interact with size of school?) A. The grade point average gain for all treatment males (females) in Class A (Class B, C and D) schools will exceed the grade point average gain for all non-treatment males (females) in Class A (Class B, C and D) schools. (Do sex, size of school and treatment interact?) Definition of Terms Outside Agency.--Refers to any establishment that is non-affiliated or non-identified with a particular school system. This type of agency could vary from one of the United States Office of Education's Talent Search Projects to the State Department of Public Instruction. The agency-student relationship is one of an impersonal nature, in that, all interaction and discourse takes place via letters and similar correspondence. The out- side agency does not attempt to interrupt the natural dialogue which goes on within the individual schools. Academic Performance.-—Refers to the execution of scholastic achievement for an individual student and is measured by computing the grade point average for all subjects for any single marking period or group of marking periods. The higher the grade point average, the higher the degree of academic performance. Low-Motivated.--Refers to a below normal stimulus to action in the area of academic performance. The stu- dent's grade point average is not indicative of his intellectual capabilities. Somehow there is a lack of impulse, incentive or inducement which ordinarily spurs the student to perform on a higher achievement level. Ninth Graders.--Refers to those students in both public and private schools who have completed eight years of formal schooling. In some systems the ninth grade is the first year of high school, in others, it is the last year of junior high school, and in still others, it is either the last or next to the last year in a middle or intermediate school. nger Treatment.--Refers to the mailed corres- pondence to the schools, students, and parents. The school initially received the M-Scales and machine scoreable test forms. Later it received a listing of 10 the names of all boys and girls whose M-Scale score was at or below the "low-ten" cut-off score. The students received a twelve page letter (developed and distri- buted by Project MEMO: but individually handed out by school personnel) which listed ten ways the students could improve their grades. The parents received a blue letter for boys and a pink letter for girls. These letters defined low-motivation and explained the impor- tance of the role the parents must play if their child is to be properly motivated. Low-Ten.--Refers to those boys and girls whose scores on the M-Scale placed them in the bottom ten per- centiles of all the students that participated in the study. This does not mean the bottom 10 per cent of any single participating school. It does mean the bottom 10 per cent of the students from all schools who took the M—Scale. M-Scale.--Refers to the instrument used to measure the factor of motivation for each individual student. This instrument was created and developed by Dr. William Farquhar of Michigan State University. Additional in- formation on the M-Scale can be obtained from the sources listed in Appendix D. Organization of the Study The format of this study will be as follows: in Chapter II a review of pertinent literature is 11 presented; Chapter III contains the methods used in the collection of the data, its organization, and statis- tical methods used for analysis; the findings of the study are reported in Chapter IV, together with the tables to assist in clarification of data; Chapter V contains several brief case studies of students whose academic record showed a considerable change after participating in the MEMO" project; Chapter VI contains a summary, discussion of findings, conclusions and implications for similar treatments and further research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF LITERATURE In this study the selection of low-motivated ninth graders was based on motivation scores obtained from the Michigan M-Scales developed by William Farquhar. The concepts of "motivation" and "self" or the "self-concept" are critical if one is to understand the reasoning behind this attempt to improve academic improvement on such a wide scale. Motivation In the simplest terms, motivation is what lies be- hind our behavior--the "why" we do what we do. Psychologists have a somewhat more precise definition. Lindsleyl defines motivation as a combination of forces which initiate, direct and sustain behavior toward a goal. Psychologists differ in their beliefs regarding the nature of these forces that initiate and sustain behavior. Combs and Snygg2 see behavior as powered by a continuing 1D. B. Lindsley, "Psychophysiology and Motivation," Nebraska Symposium on Motivation (Lincoln, Nebraska: University bf Nebraska Press, 1951). 2A. W. Combs and S. Snygg, Individual Behavior (New York: Harper and Brothers, 19597. ' l2 l3 attempt to preserve and enhance one's concept of one- self. Guthrie3 feels motivation is simply "the condition which increases the vigor of responses." FarquharLl defines "academic motivation" as a combi- nation of forces which initiate, direct and sustain be- havior toward a scholarly goal. The subject of motivation has been studied by a 5’6’7’8 as is evident number of researchers and scholars, by a review of literature relevant to the topic. McClelland has been one of the leaders in this field. McClelland's9 theoretical analysis of motivation is that all motives are learned. He feels they develop out of 3E. R. Guthrie, The Psychology of Learning (New York: Harper and Brothers, 1952). uW. W. Farquhar, Motivation Factors Related to Academic Achievement, Cooperative Research Project,8A6, January, 1963 (East Lansing: Office of Research and Publications, College of Education, Michigan State Uni- versity). 5Dalbir Bindra, Motivation: A Systematic Reinter- pretation (New York: The Ronald Press Company, 1959). 6Jerome Kagan and G. S. Lesser, Contemporary Issues in Thematic Apperceptive Methods (Springfield, IlIinoiE: Charles C. Thomas, Publisher, 1961). 7K. B. Madsen, Theories of Motivation (Copenhagen, Denmark: Munksgaard, 1959). 8D. C. McClelland et al., The Achievement Motive (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, Inc., 1953). '9Ibid., p. 12. 14 repeated affected experiences connected with certain types of situations and types of behavior. In cases of academic motivation the situation should involve "standards of ex- cellence," presumably imposed on the child by the culture, or more particularly by the parents as representatives of the culture. Behavior should involve either "competition" with those standards of excellence or attempts to meet them which, if successful, produce positive affect or, if unsuccessful, negative affect. It follows that those families which stress "competition with standards of ex- cellence" or which insist that the child be able to per- form certain tasks well by himself would produce children with high achievement motivation. There has been a dearth of studies in the area of motivation, and until the 1960's, no study had produced a usable instrument which could be utilized by a classroom teacher to measure the concept of motivation. In 1963 an objective test was created by Dr. William W. Farquhar.lO Farquhar polarized the McClelland theory which posits that achievement motivation is composed of: (l) long-term involvement, (2) common accomplishment, and (3) competition with minimal standard of excellence. Along the continuum Farquhar assumed that highly moti- vated students would be found at the top with less lOFarquhar, Motivation . . ., op. cit. l5 motivated students falling somewhere below that level but above failure. By utilizing an aptitude base, Farquhar identified those students who exceeded an aptitude based expectation of academic performance as over—achievers, and those students falling below expectation as under- achievers. The Farquhar study shows that some of the variance between aptitude and actual achievement, as indicated by grade point average, can be measured to increase the predictability of achievement. In Farquhar's study11 a summary of personality traits associated with academic achievement are presented. They are: (1) academic anxiety; tension expressed as fear of failure, denial of shortcomings, and excessive concern with problems of control; (2) self valuation; the attitude held toward self; (3) authority relations; ac- ceptance or resistance to externally imposed controls by a responsible agent; (A) interpersonal relations; (5) dependence—independence; the reliance on self or others for direction and decision making; (6) activity patterns; the area in which satisfaction is pursued, academic or social, individual or group; and (7) goal orientation; the flexibility and persistence exhibited in pursuing immediate, short—term or long-term objectives. 11Ibid., p. 8. 16 Of special interest to this study are the forces associated with academic low—motivation. Farquhar and Stewart12 state that low-motivation is a symptom generated from and associated with many forces. They see the more important dimensions as: l. Hostility: the low-motivated adequate ability student uses his under—achievement as a device to punish significant adults. 2. Intolerance of Delayed Rewards: the low- motivated student has little desire or toler- ance for delayed academic rewards. 3. Negative Reflected Self Concept: the low- motivated student feels that teachers view him with negative terms. A. Persistent Syndrome of Under-achievement: the syndrome extends way back into their school history. 5. Low Job—Task Involvement: the low-motivated student's task of involvement extends to other commitments of life. 6. Low Academic Involvement: the low-motivated student either rejects the goals of school or passively endures their intrusion into his life. 12W. W. Farquhar and N. R. Stewart, "Counseling the Low Motivated Male: A Working Paper," East Lansing, Michigan, Michigan State University, 1966. (Mimeo- graphed.) 17 7. Unique Versus Common Accomplishment: doing the unusual, standing out from the crowd, and identifying with the teacher are re- jected by the low-motivated male. The research by Farquharl3 has provided information which implies that academic motivation is a syndrome com— posed of non-intellectual factors such as the need for academic achievement, self-concept, occupation aspirations and academic personality factors. Further support to the fact that self-concept, occupation aspirations and personality traits are related to achievement was given by the studies of Payne,1u Taylor,15 Duetsch,l6 Green,17 and Kipfmueller.18 13Ibid., p. 13. 1”D. A. Payne and W. W. Farquhar, "The Dimensions of an Objective Measure of Academic Self-Concept," Journal of Educational Psychology, LIII, No. A (February, 1962), pp. 1874192. 15R. G. Taylor and w. w. Farquhar, "The Validity and Reliability of the Human Trait Inventory Designed to Measure Under and Over Achievement," The Journal of Education Research, LIX, No. 5 (January, 1966), pp. 19-21. 16M. Deutsch, "Minority Groups and Class Status as Related to Social and Personality Factors in Scholastic Achievement," Society for Applied Anthropology and Per- sonality Factors in Scholastic Achievement (Society for Applied Anthropology, No. 2, 1960), pp. 1-32. (Mimeo- graphed.) 17R. L. Green and W. W. Farquhar, "Negro Academic Motivation and Scholastic Achievement," Journal of Edu- cational Psychology, LVI, No. 5 (September, 1965), pp. 18 M. Kipfmueller, "The Predictability and Factored 18 Of special interest to this study is Payne's19 "Parental Influences and Achievement." Payne reviewed many studies of parental influences and their impli— cations for the achievement of the children. At the end of his review he drew the following conclusions about high academic achievement after cautioning the reader that the lack of comparability in sampling techniques, instrumentation and analysis procedures are just a few of the factors which affected the frequently contradictory results. 1. Parents exert a high degree of achievement pressure that develops in the child a competi— tive spirit and a need for achievement. 2. There is a high frequency of parental behavior which is perceived by the child as rejecting or ignoring. The child is encouraged to be on his own at an early age, this behavior being interpreted as rejection. The father is generally seen as a rejecting figure, the mother as a warm and accepting one. There is often a rejection of parental responsibility and the homemaking role on the part of the mother. 3. Parents exhibit a low degree of possessiveness where the child is not dominated by his parents and is not encouraged to depend upon them. A. A high degree of permissiveness exists, en— couraging the child to act freely and to make decisions on his own at an early age. The frequent practice of independence training is found. 5. A generally high degree of authoritarianism is shown on the part of the parents. The Dimensions of the M—Scale for Eleventh Grade Parochial School Students" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1963), pp. 22-29. 19Payne and Farquhar, op. cit., p. 15. 19 child is not consulted on decisions which affect the whole family or its individual members. 6. There is a low frequency of discipline. The child is expected to accept the consequences of his own behavior. 7. Children manifest a high valuation of and respect for parents, but without a warm and intimate association. Frequently a somewhat emotionless atmosphere engenders feelings of doubt and confusion in areas of felt under- standing and acceptance. Parents are trusted and confidence is placed in them, as evi- denced by acceptance of their standards. Achievement is a result of an attempt to please parents and to meet expectations. The above conclusions, even though directly associ- ated with high academic achievement, allow the reader to identify areas which may be the causative factors for the non-performing child who has adequate academic ability. In other words, the low-motivated boy or girl. Self-Concept In the psychological literature two chief meanings of "self" have evolved: the self as an individual who is known to himself, and the self as the subject or agent.20 As Wylie has noted, the words "self-concept" have come into common use to refer to the first of these meanings. William James saw the "self" as a composite of thoughts and feelings which constitute a person's 20H. B. English and A. 0. English, A Comprehensive Dictionary of Psychological and Psychoanalytical Terms (New York: Langmans, Green, 1958), pp. ABA—485. 2O awareness of his individual existence, his conception of who and what he 13.21 Drawing upon the symbolic interaction framework of social psychology and phenomenological field theory, these theoretical tenets have been presented by Brookover22 and later substantiated by additional research: 1. The student learns what he percieves he is able to learn. 2. Significant others, particularly teachers, have important influences on the development of a student's self concept. One of America's leading perceptualists, Earl Kelley suggests that: One of the most revealing facts about per- ception is that it is selective. There are thou- sands of coincidences in the situations in which we find ourselves at any given point of time. To perceive them all would cause pandemonium. We therefore choose that which the self feeds upon. The direction of growth of the self depends upon these choices. The available research appears to indicate that self-concept and school achievement are positively related. 21William James, The Principles of Psychology (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1902), Vol. I. 22w. B. Brookover, "A Social Psychological Con— ception of Classroom Learning," School and Societ , 23E. C. Kelley, "A Perceptual View of the Adequate Personality," Perceiving, Behaving, Becoming, A. S. C. D. Yearbook (Washington, D. C.: National Education Associ- ation, 1962), p. 1A. 21 Evidence in support of this position has been found by Bruck and Bodwin2u in their study on the relationship of the self-concept and scholastic under-achievement. The authors utilized the Self-Concept Scale of the Machover Draw-A-Person Tests and correlated the scores with the presence and absence of under-achievement for thirty children with learning difficulties and thirty under— achievers. They obtained a significant correlation of .60 indicating a positive relationship between under- achievers and a low self-concept. Wilbur B. Brookover's study, "The Self-Concept of Academic Ability" represents continuous phases of a six- year longitudinal study of the relation of self-concept of academic ability to school achievement among students in one school class while in the seventh through the twelfth grade. The research has been based on the symbolic interactionist theory of behavior, which has been developed by George H. Mead25 and C. H. Cooley.26 Briefly, the general theory states that self-concept is developed through interaction with significant others 2“M. Bruck and R. F. Bodwin, "The Relationship Between Self—Concept and the Presence and Basence of Scholastic Under Achievement," Journal of Clinical Psychology, XVIII (April, 1962), 181—182. 25George H. Mead, Mind, Self and Society (Chicago: University of Chicago, 193A). 26C. H. Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order (New York: Charles ScribnerTs Sons, 1902). 22 which in turn influences one's behavior. When applied to the school learning situation, a relevant aspect of self- concept is the person's conception of his own ability to learn the accepted type of academic behavior; performance in terms of school achievement is the relevant behavior influenced. The student role is composed of several sub- roles, including one involving academic achievement; the student self-concept similarly is a complex of several segments, including self-concept of ability. Previous studies have not attempted to measure the academic ability segment of self—concept and test its relationship to achievement and the perception of other's evaluation.27 The propositions basic to this theoretical approach are that: l. A functional limit on a student's ability to learn in school is set by his "self-concept of ability"; 2. A student's self-concept of academic ability is acquired in interaction with his significant others through his perception of their "evalu- ation of his academic ability"; 3. A student's self-concept of academic ability is an "intervening variable" between his per- ceptions of others and his attempts to learn in school.28 This basic theory of the research of Brookover, postulates that human behavior is a function of the 27w. B. Brookover, Self-Concept of Ability and School Achievement, Final Report of Cooperative Research Project No. 8A5 (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University, Office of Research and Publications, 1962). 28 Ibid., p. AA. 23 expectations and evaluations of others who are signifi- cant to the actor as perceived by him and as internalized in a self-conception of what is appropriate and proper for him to do and what he is able to do. The author defined self-concept of ability as referring to "the evaluation definitions an individual holds of his ability to achieve in academic tasks as compared with others in his school class."29 The basic propositions of the theory of self—concept of ability assert that: . . . a student's self-concept of academic ability results from his perceptions of the evaluations significant others hold of his ability. The stu- dent's self-concept of academic ability in turn functions to limit the level of academic achieve— ment attempted. Self-concept of academic ability is therefore hypothesized as an intervening vari- able between the expectations and evaluations of significant others and evaluations of significant others and school achievement. The relationship of perceived evaluations of significant others is conceptualized as necessary and sufficient condi- tion, i.e., a change in the perceived evaluations of others will be reflected in a change in self- concept. The relationship of self—concept of academic ability to academic achievement, on the other hand, is hypothesized as a necessary but not a sufficient condition for the occurrence of a particular level of academic performance.30 Brookover found that parents were the most important significant others over the six—year period. Friends, who were at no point as important significant others as were parents to the self-concept of academic ability, tended to become more important to the subjects as time passed. 291bid., p. 139. 30Ibid., p. 19. 2“ Thus, in the later years of adolescence the peer group became more important than it had previously.31 From the Brookover data, teachers were not seen by children as being as important significant others as their parents or friends, but yet had some influence. The findings indicated that a change in self- concept of academic ability over two-year periods was significantly related to parallel change in grade-point average.32 Brookover has written that: The relationships supporting the social psychological theory of school learning presented here are not therefore greatly affected by vari- ation in either measured intelligence of socio- economic status. Rather, the evidence indicates that much of the correlation between these vari- ables and school achievement is accounted for by variation in self-concept of ability.33 Self-concept--symbolic behavior in which the individual articulates a program of action for him- self as an object in relation to others. It was stated that the self-concept is not a static phenomenon, but is ever changing and complex. It appears to be affected by the child's stage of psychosexual development, parents, friends, and teacher association, as well as by anxiety and stress brought about by fear of failure, which may be connectfid to one of many education practices and policies.3 Summary The low-motivated student may be the boy or girl who has failed to develop an adequate self—concept. This failure plus the possibility of a poor academic record 31Ibid., p. 19. 32Ibid. 3A 33Ibid. Ibid. 25 tends to group the low—motivated youngsters as prime candidates for the school drop-out lists. As they con- tinue with high school they represent a sizable financial and emotional investment to themselves, their families, the schools and to the total national economy. Being under-achievers, they are apt to become discouraged and quit school. They are presently not adequately moti- vated, yet they have the potential to learn. The problem is to stimulate them—-to provide the opportunity to con- struct, develop or even uncover adequate "self—concepts" --to tap the hidden potential, in short, to motivate them. The key to academic success is proper motivation and this academic motivation as defined by Farquhar35 con- sists of a combination of forces which initiate, direct and sustain behavior toward a scholarly goal. These same forces if adequately directed will lead to the proper development of self-concept. Additional studies support the statement that self-concept and school achievement are positively related. Therefore, the key to providing the proper motivation is directly related to establishing an adequate concept of "self." This concept of ability is the functional limit that regulates, stimulates, inspires and motivates the student's ability to learn. Important figures in this developmental program are the parents, the school personnel, and the students themselves. 35Ibid., p. 12. 26 Project MEMO: attempted to increase the motivation factor by working with three of the agents involved. The parents of identified low—motivated youngsters received a letter which asked, Have you ever wondered whether your 9th grader could do better in school than he is doing? Accord- ing to a recent test of his desire to do school work, he seems to have more ability than his pre- sent grades show. But your son cannot improve these grades alone. He needs help and support-- not merely from his teachers and counselors at school but also from you. Parents are very impor- tant to a student's work at school. The parents cannot do the whole job but can make the difference between a successful motivated student and an un- successful one. 3 The letter continued by describing two types of parents who hurt rather than help this motivation process: (1) the high pressure—nagging type, and (2) the low pressure, leave them alone type. The purpose of the parent letter was to enlist the help of parents by identifying the term "low—motivation" and by stressing the importance of their role in the development of self—concept in their child. A similar procedure was carried out with the schools. The students were identified as being low in motivation and suggestions were made as to what part the school must play in the over-all developmental picture. And a letter went to the student. The theme of this letter was based on the questions, "Ever wonder whether you could earn better grades in school? Would you like to?" The letter continued by stating, 36See Appendix G. 27 The purpose of this letter is to help you raise those grades. That's if you really want them to improve just to please yourself. Of course, it is easy to decide to'do better (but really tough to bring it off). But if you're interested, so are we, and we have some ideas that we think can help you.37 A list of ten questions were provided with a page of suggestions for each question (Appendix F). The value of proper motivation and an adequate self- concept is undeniable if the student is to excell. And as Brookover states, ". . . a student's self-concept of academic ability results from his perceptions of the evaluations significant others hold of his ability."38 Others in this case refers to parents, teachers, and peers. In the following chapters the results of the treatment are unfolded. 37See Appendix F. 38Brookover, Self Concept . . ., opJ cit., p. 19. CHAPTER III DESIGN OF THE STUDY Nature of the Sample In January of 1967, Project MEMO: sent an invitation to 933 Michigan schools containing a ninth grade. This invitation encouraged each school to participate in a study dealing with low-motivated students. The goal of the study was to increase the motivation of low-motivated students toward academic success. The schools were offered three choices. Plan A was for those schools in which it was felt that they could not identify their lowest motivated students and wanted in- dependent verification. Plan A: Step 1. You administer to all your 9th graders the M-Scale, which produces a measurement of the moti- vation of 9th grade students. Send the answer sheets to MEMO: for scoring. MEMO: will report to you the names of your students who fall within the lowest 10% of the entire state in motivation. Step 2. You hand to each student in the "low-ten" group a special letter from MEMO:. Step 3. You mail to the parent of each student another special letter from MEMO:. Step A. At the close of school this spring, you send MEMO: a report on the grades of each of the students in the "low-ten" group, so we can know whether spring grades are higher, lower, or the same as fall grades. 28 29 Plan B was for the schools who believed that they personally knew all their ninth graders who belonged in the low—motivated category and did not desire verifi- cation. Plan B Step 1. You do not administer the M-Scale, but with the help of your teachers and counselors, make up your own list of your 10% lowest-motivated students. Step 2. Same as Plan A. Step 3. Same as Plan A. Step A. Same as Plan A. Plan C combined both Plans A and B, in that the school provided a list of the students that they believed to be low-motivated and a comparison was then made be- tween these students and the ones identified by the re— sults of the M-Scale study. Plan C Step 1. Make up your own list of the 10% lowest- motivated 9th graders in your school. Also ad— minister the M—Scales. Send us your list and we will report to you how it compares with the M- Scale results. Step 2. Same as Plan A, but including every student from both lists. Step 3. Same as Plan A, but including the parents of every student from both lists. Step A. Same as Plan A, but including every stu- dent from both lists. The entire MEMO: study was done at no cost to the schools except clerical time for addressing the parent envelopes. Project MEMO: (financed by the United States Office of Education under Section “08 of the Higher Education Act of 1965) paid for the M-Scales, answer 30 sheets, scoring and postage. All the schools had to do was administer the M-Scales; return the answer sheets to MEMO:; personally distribute the student letters; type the home addresses on the postage paid envelopes to the parents; and mail the parent letters. Three-hundred and thirty-four (33”) schools indi- cated they wanted to participate in the MEMO: study. Distribution of these schools in the three different plans was as follows: Plan A Plan B Plan C Public 175 Public 6 Public 68 Private 6A Private 1_ Private 20 7 88 l'\) U0 \0 The 327 schools in Plans A and C were mailed M—Scales. [It was MEMO:'s objective to identify the bottom 10 per cent of low—motivated youngsters from the total ninth grade population. A stratified sample of schools was selected, M-Scales scored, and the scores ranked in order. The estimated male M—Scale 10 per cent cut-off score was 77 and the similar female score was 69. Since the original MEMO: goal was to identify the bottom 10 per cent of males and bottom 10 per cent of females these cut-off points were later changed to 79 for the males and 65 for the females. Results of the final scoring were as follows: 31 Total Tests Scored 51,998 100% Total "low-ten" Identified 5,236 10.1% Total Tests Not Able to be Scored 1,337 2.6% Total Males 26,281 50.5% "Low-ten" Males 2,857 10.8% Males Not Able to Score 881 3.3% Total Females 25,717 “9.5% Females Not Able to Score 456 1.8% For this study, only those schools which selected "Plan A" were included. This represented 72 per cent of the total number of schools in the Project MEMO: study. Since the treatment was not withheld from any student who had been identified as being within the "low-ten" group, it was impossible to set up a true control group situation. It was decided to establish a nonequivalent control group which would come as close as possible to the true control group situation. Therefore, the population in this study consisted of those boys and girls with M—Scale scores with- in two points above and below the "79" male and "65" female "low-ten" cut-off scores. All males with Michigan M-Scales scores of 78 and 79 formed the male treatment (experi- mental) group and those with scores of 80 and 81 formed the nonequivalent control group. All females with M-Scale scores of 6A and 65 were included in the female treatment group and females with scores of 66 and 67 made up the nonequivalent control group. 32 The tests for the 239 schools that participated in "Plan A" were sorted accordingly. The number of students within the schools having the above mentioned scores ranged from 0 to 33. Seven schools no longer existed due to consolidations. Eighteen schools with zero students were dropped leaving a total of 21A schools. Five of the 21A schools replied that the one, two or three students in their system had either dropped or moved prior to the completion of the ninth grade, and these student changes reduced the number of participating schools to 209. [The twenty-three schools having no students consisted of one Class B, seven Class C and fifteen Class D schools.] Of the 209 schools, two indicated that they did not wish to participate and thirty-seven schools did not respond to the original request or to the follow-up requests. The final school population participating in this study was 173 out of 209, which represented 82.5 per cent. The breakdown of the 173 participating schools according to enrollment classification was: Class A Class B Class C Class D Total 48 A2 5“ 29 Public A3 38 30 15 Private 5 A 2A 1A 33 Instrumentation The students were selected on the basis of their scores on the Michigan M-Scales (Appendix B for males and C for females). All males scoring 79 and lower, and females scoring 65 and lower, were considered as being in the bottom 10 per cent of the total population of ninth graders who took the M-Scale test. For this specific study, males with scores of 78-79 were selected for the treatment group. Males with scores of 80-81 made up the non-treatment group. Females with scores of 6A-65 formed their treatment group and those with scores of 66-67 were included in the non-treatment group. A letter (Appendix I) was sent to the principal of each school. Accompanying the letter were forms (Appendix K) for each student in that particular school whose origi- nal M-Scale score was in the above mentioned ranges. The principal was asked to complete each form so a semester grade point average would be available for all the stu- dents from the first semester of the eighth grade through the first semester of the tenth grade. The grade point average was determined on a twelve-point scale: A = 12, A- 11, 3+ = 10, B = 9, B- = 8, 0+ = 7, C = 6, C— = 5, D+ = A, D = 3, D- = 2, and an E = 1. The grades for all subjects, academic and nonacademic, were included in determining the semester grade point averages. 3A The grade point averages were used as the pretest and the posttest measurements for the analysis of the data. The use of semester gain in grade point averages comes under considerable attack. As support for the use of them in this study the following is taken from W. W. Farquhar's study: "The use of grade point average as an achievement criterion can be defended on a number of grounds. However, the most important supporting aspect is its usefulness in predicting future academic grades."l Reliability of the M-Scales In the study by W. W. Farquhar, entitled Motivation Factors Related to Academic Achievement, eleventh grade high school students residing in nine different Michigan cities were studied. For the purpose of this project, Farquhar defined under-achievers as those who achieved significantly lower than predicted from an aptitude measure. A Hoyt's analysis of variance reliability estimate of .9“ was obtained for the 139 male cross—validated items for a total male sample of 2A0. A female sample of like size yielded a com— parable .93 reliability estimate on 136 cross- validated items. . . . Based on a sample of 25“ males and 261 females the validity estimates of the total M-Scales against grades was .56 and .A0 re- spectively. The cross-validation estimates were .A9 and .AB for males and females.2 1Farquhar, Motivation . . ., 0p. cit., Summary, Conclusions, and Discussions. 2Ibid., p. 3. 35 The following information was taken from an un- published study conducted by W. W. Farquhar and Arthur Resnikoff.3 The population in this study consisted of 18M male and 202 female eighth graders. The students were enrolled in the Duluth, Minnesota Public School System. Two different test batteries, the Iowa Tests of Educational DevelOpment and the Lorge-Thorndike Intelli- gence Test, were used in an attempt to establish the pre- dictive value of the M-Scales in identifying grade point averages. The students' cumulative grade point averages for 1962, 1963 and 196A, total M-Scale scores, scores from the English portion of the ITED, and scores from the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test were subjected to analysis. Simple correlations for males: Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test scores with cumulative grade point averages: .60 English portion of ITED scores with cumulative grade point averages: .68 Total M-Scale scores with cumulative grade point averages: .58 Multiple correlations for males: Grade point averages = Lorge- Thorndike plus M-Scale: .7A Grade point averages = ITED (English portion) plus M-Scale: .79 3William Farquhar and Arthur Resnikoff, "An Un- published Study of Eighth Graders in Duluth, Minnesota," College of Education, Michigan State University, 1968. 36 Simple correlations for females: Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test scores with cumulative grade point averages: .66 English portion of ITED scores with cumulative grade point averages: .68 Total M—Scale scores with cumu- lative grade point averages: .57 Multiple correlations for females: Grade point averages = Lorge- Thorndike plus M-Scale: .73 Grade point averages = ITED (English portion) plus M—Scale: .7A Statistical Hypotheses The statistical hypotheses were based on the follow- ing possible trends: 1. Lasting results from treatment. 2. Short-term results from treatment. 3. Delayed results from treatment. The desired results from treatment would provide an increase in academic performance in both the second semes- ter of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade. This increase would be measured by subtracting the first semester ninth grade grade point average from the second semester ninth grade grade point average and the first semester ninth grade point average from the first semester tenth grade grade point average. The dependent variable was the gain scores between semesters. This is graphically depicted by: 37 L__ 2nd 9th-1st 9th lst lOth—lst 9th [Expgrimental ' FControl Positive lastingresults would be demonstrated by an experimental group gain in grade point average for both the second semester ninth grade and the first semester tenth grade minus the first semester ninth. By "lasting" the investigator is not claiming "eternal" results, but lasting results for both semesters included in the posttest. Positive short-term results from treatment obtained by the same method would be represented by a gain in grade point average for the second semester of the ninth grade but no noticeable results for the first semester tenth grade. Positive delgyed results from treatment would be represented by no gain in the second semester of the ninth grade but a noticeable gain in the first semester of the tenth grade. The statistical hypotheses are: 1. There is a treatment main effect: The grade point average gain for the treatment group will exceed the grade point average gain for the non-treatment group. 2. Treatment does interact with sex: The grade point average gain for the treatment group males (females) will exceed the grade point 38 average gain for the non-treatment group males (females). Treatment does interact with size of school: The grade point average gain for all treatment group students enrolled in Class A (Class B, C, and D) schools will exceed the grade point average gain for the students in the non- treatment groups who are enrolled in Class A (Class B, C, and D) schools. Sex, size of school and treatment do interact: The grade point average gain for all treatment males (females) in Class A (Class B, C and D) schools will exceed the grade point average gain for the non-treatment males (females) in Class A (Class B, C and D) schools. Experimental Design Null Hypothesis Hoil A. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the total treatment and non- treatment groups. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester 39 ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the treatment and non-treatment groups. Symbolically: Ho Legend: M1 = M2 = M = 3 Mu The difference obtained when sub- tracting the treatment group's grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. The difference obtained when sub- tracting the control group's grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. The difference obtained when sub- tracting the treatment group's grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the control group's grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. A0 Alternate Hypothesis A. Symbolically: H : M >M The treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the second semester of the ninth grade will exceed that of the non- treatment group. The treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade will exceed that of the non— treatment group. 1aA 1 2 Hlas‘ M3>MA Null Hypothesis Ho:2 C. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point average for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the mgle_treatment and male non- treatment groups. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point average for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the male treatment and male non-treatment groups. A1 E. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the female treatment and female non-treatment groups. F. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the female treatment and female non-treatment groups. Symbolically: HoC: M5 u 3 ox m o 3 n 3 Ho : M = M8 Ho : M = M Legend: M5 The difference obtained when sub— tracting the male treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. M6 = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the mglg control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. A2 M7 = The difference obtained when sub— tracting the male treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. M8 = The difference obtained when sub— tracting the mglg control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. M = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the female control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. 10 = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the female control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. 11 = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the female treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. “3 M12 = The difference obtained when sub- tracting the female control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. Alternate Hypothesis C. The mgle treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the second semester of the ninth grade will exceed that of the mgle non-treatment group. The mgle_treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade will exceed that of the male non-treatment group. The female treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the second semester of the ninth grade will exceed that of the female non-treat- ment group. The female treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade will exceed that of the female non—treat- ment group. AA Symbolically: H : M 230 5>M6 H : M >M 2aE 9 10 H : M 2aD 7 M >M >M8 H2aF‘ 11 12 Legend: Same as for null hypothesis Ho:2; M5, M6’ M7, M8, M9, M10, M11, and M12. Null Hypothesis Ho:3 G. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the treatment and non—treatment groups in Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D schools. H. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the treatment and non—treatment groups in Class A, Class B, Class C and Class D schools. ”Michigan High School Athletic Association Bulletin, XLIV, Number A-S (November, 196*). Class A Schools have an upper four grade enrollment of 1100 or more; Class B = A50-1099; Class C = 250-AA9; and Class D = less than 250. Symbolically: Legend: AS HoG: M13 = MlA HoH: M15 = M16 HOG: M17 = Ml8 HOH‘ M19 = M2o HOG‘ M21 = M22 HOH‘ M23 = M2u HoG: M25 = M26 HoH: M27 = M28 M13, M17, M21, and M25 = The difference obtained when subracting the Class A, B, C, and D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. MlA’ M18’ M22, and M26 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Class A, B, C, and D non—treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. M = The difference 15, M19, M23, and M27 obtained when subtracting the Class A, B, C, and D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. A6 M16’ M20, M2“, and M28 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Class A, B, C, and D non-treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth. Alternate Hypothesis G. The Class A, B, C, and D treatment group's differences in grade point averages between the first semester of the ninth grade and the second semester of the ninth grade will exceed that of the non—treatment group. H. The Class A, B, C, and D treatment group's differences in grade point averages between the first semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade will exceed that of the non-treatment group. Symbolically: H3aG: M13>M1A H3aH: M15>Ml6 H : M 3aG 17>M18 H ‘ M 3aH l9>M 2O H3aG‘ M21>M22 H3aH‘ M23>M2A H3ac‘ M25>M26 H3aH‘ M27>M28 A7 Legend: Same as for null hypothesis Ho:3; M13, MlA’ M M M15: M16: "17’ “18’ "19’ “20’ , and M 21’ 22’ M23: M2u’ “25’ “26’ M27 28' Null Hypothesis Ho:A I. No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade be— tween the treatment and non-treatment groups (these groups consist of Male—Class A, Male— Class B, Male-Class C, and Male-Class D, Female-Class A, Female—Class B, Female-Class C, and Female-Class D respectively). No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade be- tween the treatment and non-treatment groups (these groups consist of Male-Class A, Male- Class B, Male-Class C, Male-Class D, Female- Class A, Female-Class B, Female-Class C and Female-Class D respectively). A8 Symbolically: HoI: M29 = M30 HoJ: M31 = M32 "01‘ M33 = M3u H°J‘ "35 = M36 HoI: M37 = M38 HoJ: M39 = MAO HoI: MAl = MA2 HoJ MA3 = MAA H0: Mus = "us HOJ Mu7 = "as HoI: MA9 = M50 HoJ: M51 = M52 HoI: MS3 = M5“ HoJ: M55 = M56 HOI‘ M57 = M58 HOJ‘ M59 = M6o Legend: M29, M33, and ML,1 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Male-Class A, Male- Class B, Male-Class C, and Male-Class D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. MAS’ MA9’ M53, and M57 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Female-Class A, Female—Class B, Female—Class C, and Female- Class D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. A9 M30, M3“, M38’ and Mug = The difference obtained when subtracting the control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade using Male- Class A, Male-Class B, Male-Class C and Male—Class D groups respectively. MA6’ M50, M5“, and M58 = The difference obtained when subtracting the control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade using Female-Class A, Female-Class B, Female-Class C and Female— Class D groups respectively. M31, M35, M39, and M43 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Male-Class A, Male-Class B, Male-Class C, and Male-Class D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. and M = The difference M47: M51’ "55’ 59 obtained when subtracting the Female-Class A, Female-Class B, Female-Class C and Female- Class D treatment group's grade point averages for the first semester of the 50 ninth grade from the second semester of the ninth grade. M32, M36’ MAO’ and MAA = The difference obtained when subtracting the Male-Class A, Male Class B, Male-Class C, and Male— Class D control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. MA8’ M52, M56’ and M60 = The difference obtained when subtracting the Female-Class A, Female—Class B, Female-Class C, and Female- Class D control group's grade point averages for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade. Alternate Hypothesis I. The treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the second semester of the ninth grade will exceed that of the non-treatment group. The treatment group's difference in grade point average between the first semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade will exceed that of the non—treatment group. 51 Symbolically: HAaI: M29>M3O HAaJ: M31>M32 HAaI: M33>M3A HAaJ: M35>M36 HAaI: M37>M38 HAaJ: M39>MAO HAaI: Mu1>Mu2 HuaJ‘ Mu3>Muu Huai‘ MA5>MA6 HuaJ‘ Mu7>Mu8 HuaI‘ MA9>M5o HuaJ‘ M51>M52 HAaI: M53>M5A HAaJ: M55>M56 HAaI: M57>M58 HAaJ: M59>M60 Legend: Same as for null hypothesis HozA; M29, M33, and MAlS MAS’ MA9’ M53, and M57; M30, 3“, M38, and MHZ; Mu6, M50, M5“, and M58; ”37’ M M31, M35, M39, and MA33 MA?’ M51, M55, and M59; M32, M36, Muo, and Mn“; and MHB, M52, M56, and M60. Analysis The nonequivalent control group design was selected for this study. This involved an experimental group and a control group both given a pretest and a posttest. Symbolically this design is represented as: 52 lst 9th (Treatment) 2nd 9th lst 10th Experimental 01 X 0 0 Control 0A 0 06 The pretest (01 for the experimental group and 0A for the nonequivalent control group) was the grade point average for the first semester of the ninth grade. The treatment (X) consisted of the MEMO: letters sent to schools, stu- dents and parents. The posttest (02, 05 and 03, 06) repre- sented the grade point averages for the two groups for the second semester of the ninth grade and the first semester of the tenth grade respectively. The treatment group consisted of males with M-Scale scores of 78-79 and females with M-Scale scores of 6A-65. The control group was made up of males with M—Scale scores of 80-81 and females with scores of 66-67. The dependent variable was the gain scores between semesters, i.e., the difference between the grade point averages for the second semester ninth grade and the first semester ninth grade and the difference between the first semester tenth grade and the first semester ninth grade. An analysis of variance of the gain scores was computed. The model used is as follows: 53 ONTROL FEMALE FEMALE *S.S. = School Size which is based on upper four grade enrollment. Campbell and Stanley5 regard the proposed design as one that controls the main effects of history, maturation, testing, instrumentation, selection, and mortality in that the difference for the experimental group between pretest and posttest (if greater) cannot be explained by main effects of these variables such as would be found affecting both the experimental and control group. An apparent weakness in this design was in the area of interaction of selection and maturation. This source of internal invalidity was controlled by the method of selecting the two groups. In this case the groups repre- sented the 10th percentile (experimental group) and the 11th and part of the 12th percentiles (control group) of 5Donald Campbell and Julian Stanley, Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963). 5A the same pOpulation. The percentile ranking consisted of the M-Scale scores for all ninth graders who took the test. A line for treatment was arbitrarily drawn at a point separating the approximate bottom 10 per cent of the total population, the experimental group from the non-experimental or in this case the nonequivalent control group. The similarity in the groups nearly approached that of a true control group situation. The threat to external invalidity is partially re- duced as stated by Campbell and Stanley,6 "One way to increase it [external validity] is to reduce the number of students or classrooms participating from a given school or grade and to increase the number of schools or grades in which the experiment is carried on." In this study the groups were taken from 173 different Michigan schools. The students per school varied in number from one to thirty- three. It is acknowledged that the population did not repre- sent a true random selection. Nine-hundred and thirty- three Michigan schools were asked to participate in the original MEMO: project. One-third of these schools which contained a ninth grade elected to participate. Of this one-third, 232 participated in Plan A and were subsequently selected for this study. Several of these schools either consolidated or did not have students in the selected 6Ibid., p. 19. 55 score ranges and this reduced the total number of possible participating schools to 209. Of this 209, the 173 or 83 per cent which did participate were represented as follows: Class A Class B Class C Class D Public A3 38 30 15 Private 5 A 2A 1A In March of 1968, these 173 participating schools returned completed forms for 897 tenth graders. This figure represented a total control group count of 506 (322 male and 18A female) and a treatment group count of 391 (227 male and 16A female). The variation in school size (A, B, C, and D), school location (large urban areas such as Detroit to small rural villages in the Upper Peninsula), and school types (public, private, and parochial); the use of a nonequivalent control group which was closely related to the treatment group; and a population of boys and girls totaling 897 all are points which favor the generalization which may be made for the value of the MEMO: "paper treatment." These generalizations should be confined to future Michigan ninth grade student populations. In addition to the statistical analysis of the grade point averages of the students in the two groups, the in- vestigator attempted to uncover some positive evidence of the value of the MEMO: letters by personally interviewing six students from the treatment group. (I) h. 5|. I Hut 1 56 Secondarily, it was considered essential for the investigator to gain some insight into the life activi- ties of this type of youngster. Grade point averages, alone, could not provide the necessary information if an understanding of students who had been identified by schools and the Michigan M—Scales as having the potential to do better academic work was to be acquired. Therefore, the case studies provided an Opportunity for the investi- gator to familiarize himself with some of the characteris- tics, problems and general activities of identified low- motivated youngsters. Three boys and three girls were interviewed in the attempt to uncover some of the underlying factors which may have caused them to become labeled as being low in motivation. These case studies are presented in Chapter V. Summary One-hundred and seventy-three Michigan schools sub- mitted grade point averages for 897 current sophomores for the semesters of the first ninth through the first tenth grades. The selection of the students was based on their scores on the Michigan M-Scales which were administered to 51,998 ninth graders in February of their ninth grade. The students in the experimental group were involved in Project MEMO:'s letter treatment. This "paper treat- ment" consisted of letters to high school personnel, to the students themselves and to the students' parents. 57 The treatment took place in the early part of the second semester of the ninth grade. The dependent variable for the students was the grade point average gain score (the grade point average difference between the two semesters of the ninth grade and likewise the difference for the first semester of the ninth grade from the first semester of the tenth grade). An analysis of variance of these gain scores was computed to determine the value of the treatment. The nonequivalent control group was made up of stu- dents scoring 80-81 (male) and 66—67 (female) on the M- Scale. The experimental group was selected by students scoring 78-79 (male) and 6A-65 (female) on the same in— strument. The experimental group represented the top percentile (10th) in the "low-ten" experimental group. The control group represented the 11th and part of the 12th percentiles for the total population. The four possible results which may come from the analysis of the data are: (1) lasting results (two semesters) from treatment; (2) short-term results (first semester only) from treatment; (3) delayed results (second semester only) from treatment, and (A) no effect from treatment. The statistical hypotheses test if there was a treatment main effect; if treatment interacted inde- pendently, with sex, and with size of school; and if there 58 was an interaction when sex, size of school and treat- ment were combined. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF THE RESULTS A general review of the statistical procedures and comments, and the rationale for the procedures used have been integrated in the following pages to assist in clarification of the analysis. To determine whether or not there were improvements in the academic performance of identified low-motivated ninth graders, an analysis of variance with unequal cells was computed. The population was selected from the original Project MEMO: Ninth Grade Motivation Study. The treatment males had M—Scales scores of 78-79 and treatment females had M—Scale scores of 6A-65. The nonequivalent control group consisted of those ninth graders whose M- Scale scores were within two scores of the MEMO: bottom 10 per cent (low-ten) cut-off level. The control males had M—Scale scores of 80-81 and control females had scores of 66-67. The grades were reported in terms of twelve levels: A = 12, A- = 11, B+ = 10, B = 9, B- = 8, 0+ = 7, C = 6, C- = 5, D+ = A, D = 3, D- = 2, and E II l—’ An analysis of variance of gain scores was selected as the statistical analysis to be used in the computation 59 60 of the results. The principal reason for this selection was to insure adequate control of the high school counse— lors' hypothesized cyclic pattern of marks from fall to spring semesters. A one-way AOV was used to compute cell frequencies, cell grade point average means (Table 5) and cell grade point average differences for Gain 1 and Gain 2 (Table 6). The over-all regression of all variables for Gain 1 is provided in Table l and the same information for Gain 2 is found in Table 2. TABLE l.-—Analysis of variance for over-all regression of Gain 1.* Source of Sum of df Mean Variation Squares Squares Between Groups 20.353 15 1.357 Within Groups 763.697 882 0.866 Total 78A.050 897 F = 1.567 Significance 0.076 *Gain 1 = The difference obtained when subtracting the first semester ninth grade grade point averages from the second semester ninth grade grade point averages. 61 TABLE 2.--Ana1ysis of variance for over—all regression of Gain 2.* Source of Sum of df Mean Variation Squares Squares Between Groups A8.l70 15 3.211 Within Groups 2212.051 882 2.508 Total 2260.221 897 F = 1.2805 Significance 0.207 *Gain 2 = The difference obtained when subtracting the first semester ninth grade grade point averages from the first semester tenth grade grade point averages. Hypothesis Ho:l Null hypothesis Hozl consisted of two parts: HoA: M1 = M2 HOB: M3 = MA HoA: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference of grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the total treatment and non-treatment groups. HoB: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference of grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the treatment and non-treatment groups. The F-ratio of the main effect 3: treatment for the entire population when computed for Gain 1 was 0.179 62 (Table 3) and for Gain 2 was 0.501 (Table A). The signifi- cance levels were 0.676 and 0.A86 respectively. These re- sults indicate that the treatment group's grade point average did not significantly exceed that of the non- treatment group for either Gain 1 or Gain 2. Since there apparently was no statistically significant treatment main effect the investigator failed to reject Ho:1. Hypothesis Ho:2 Null hypothesis Ho:2 consisted of four parts: HoC M5 = M6 HoE M9 = Mlo HoD: M7 = M8 HoF: Mll = M12 HoC: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester 9th grade from the second semester 9th grade between the male treatment and male non-treatment groups. Ho No difference will be found in grade point D: averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the male treatment and male non—treatment groups. Ho No difference will be found in grade point E: averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the 63 second semester ninth grade between the female treatment and female non-treatment groups. HoF: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the female treatment and female non-treatment groups. The data in Tables 3 and A confirm that the F-ratio for the main effect of sex was 0.12u for Gain 1 and 0.613 for Gain 2. The significance levels were 0.723 and 0.AAO respectively. Interaction of treatment and sex had a F-ratio of 1.1A8 for Gain 1 and 2.269 for Gain 2 with significance levels of 0.28A and 0.128 respectively. The data supported that there was no noticeable main effect of sex or any favorable interaction of treatment and sex and since these results were not statistically significant, the investigator failed to reject null hypothesis Ho:2. Hypothesis Ho:3 Null hypothesis Ho:3 consisted of eight parts: HOG: Ml3 = MlA HoH: M15 = M16 HOG: Ml7 = M18 HoH: M19 = M2O HOG: M21 = M22 HoH: M23 = M2“ HOG‘ M25 = M26 HOH‘ M27 = M28 6A TABLE 3.--Analysis of variance of grade point averages for Gain l.* Source of Sum of Mean Variation Squares df Squares F-Ratio Treatment 0.155 1 0.155 0.179 Sex 0.108 1 0.108 0.12A School Size 11.510 3 A.u31b 0.00A Interaction of: Treatment and Sex 0.99A 1 0.99A 1.1A8 Treatment and School Size 3.03A 3 1.011 1.168 Sex and School Size 2.232 3 0.7AA 0.859 Treatment, Sex and School Size 1.917 3 0.639 0.738 Within Groups 763.697 882 0.866 Total 783.6A7a 897 *Gain 1 = The difference obtained when subtracting the first semester ninth grade grade point averages from the second semester ninth grade grade point averages. 3Lack of equal cell frequency accounts for the discrepancy of Total for Sums of Squares. bFour school sizes (A, B, C, and D) and 882 degrees of freedom: Significance of F at .05 = 2.600 and at .01 = 3.800. 65 TABLE A.--Ana1ysis of variance of grade point average for Gain 2.* Source of Sum of df Mean Variation Squares Squares F-Ratio Treatment 1.255 1 1.255 0.501 Sex 1.538 1 1.538 0.613 School Size 17.182 3 5.727 2.28A Interaction of: Treatment and Sex 5.690 1 5.690 2.269 Treatment and School Size 1.793 3 0.598 0.238 Sex and School Size 10.33A 3 3.Au5 1.373 Treatment, Sex and School Size 2.765 3 0.921 0.367 Within Groups 2252.051 882 Total 2252.608a 897 *Gain 2 = The difference obtained when subtracting the first semester ninth grade grade point averages from the first semester of the tenth grade grade point averages. aLack of equal cell frequency accounts for the discrepancy of Total for Sums of Squares. 66 HoG: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the treatment and non—treatment groups in Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D schools. HoH: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the treatment and non— treatment groups in Class A, Class B, Class C, and Class D schools. The data in Table 3 show that the main effect of school size was significant for Gain 1, i.e., the F-ratio was A.A3l and the significance factor was 0.00A. Four school sizes and 882 degrees of freedom at a .05 are significant with an F-ratio larger than 2.6 and at .01 are significant with a 3.8 or larger. This was not the case for Gain 2 as illustrated in Table A. When comparing the interaction of treatment and school size and also sex and school size the F-ratio's are insignificant for both Gain 1 and Gain 2. Therefore, the investigator accepted Ho:3 and admitted that the results of the data indicated that the treatment had no significant effect on the majority of the students regardless of the size of school attended. 67 Hypothesis Ho:A Null hypothesis Ho:A consisted of sixteen parts: Ho : M = M Ho : M = M I 29 30 J 31 32 HoI: M33 = M3“ HoJ: M35 = M36 HoI: M37 = M38 HoJ: M39 = MAO HoI: MAl = Ml,2 HoJ: M,43 = MAA HoI: MAS = MA6 HoJ: MA7 = MAB HoI: Mug = M50 HoJ: M51 = M52 HOI‘ M53 = MBA HOJ‘ M55 = M56 HoI: M57 = M58 HoJ: M59 = M60 HoI: No difference will be found in grade point averages as measured by the difference in grade point averages for the first semester ninth grade from the second semester ninth grade between the treatment and non-treatment groups (these groups consist of Male—Class A, Male-Class B, Male-Class C, and Male-Class D; Female-ClassA, Female-Class B, Female-Class C, and Female—Class D re- spectively). Ho : No difference will be found in grade point J averages as measured by the difference in grade point 68 averages for the first semester ninth grade from the first semester tenth grade between the treatment and the non- treatment groups (these groups consist of Male-Class A, Male-Class B, Male-Class C, and Male-Class D; Female- Class A, Female-Class B, Female-Class C, and Female— Class D respectively). The AOV results indicated that the interaction of treatment, sex, and school size was not statistically significant. Gain 1 (Table 3) had an F-ratio of 0.738 and a significance of 0.533 and Gain 2's (Table A) F-ratio was 0.367 and significance level was 0.779. Since these results were not statistically significant the in— vestigator failed to reject Ho:A. In an attempt to study the individual cell grade point average means a one-way analysis of variance was com- puted. Table 5 provides information on cell frequency and mean grade point averages for the specific categories de- picted in the proposed model on page 53. As was to be expected the grade point averages were higher for females than for males. No cyclic trend (grade point averages lower for the second semester than for the first semester) was noticeable in this information. As stated in Chapter I, one of the key reasons for this study was that many high school counselors hypothesized that spring semester grade point averages are generally lower than fall semester grades and if a student's record was the same for both oAH " m o o o gv bacon chOQ H on NH B so pohswfim mowmso>m pCAOQ compo .ommu u a .meeuomm u 0 ¢ pcoEHHomco mommw 930m hoods no woman oNHm Hoonom u mm* OH u +m .HH u us .mH .mmoauoms u m .+OOHH E mm m. . om. mam. . m o Hme.m eme.m zes.m s: m masses omm.m who.b mmm.c AA 2 pcmEpmmpB mas.m mmo.m amm.: ma o maa.e amo.m emp.e em 0 was: boo.m Hmo.m bmo.m mm m Hem.m mom.e =mo.m mHH a an an an m m soe.m saa.m ama.m am a masses Ame.m mHo.b emo.b mm a Hoppcoo mmm.z mmm.z 33.: ea c mom.m mmm.m sma.m mm o has: Sad fad mom.m mg m oca.m owm.m smm.m mea s cooauana hemuosm chances aososooam *mm sow usosusoae .Apmouumoqv oompw nude» Amundsen unnam can mpmpw Susan Amundsen pcoomm can Aummpondv mpmnw saga: nmpmmEom pmnfim one mom mowmnm>m peace spasm flame one mofiocosummm HHmOII.m mqmam3p an UmcHELopmp mmwmpm>m chOQ momma "meoz mmo.n sam.u :ma.m m:m.m mmH.m :H a mom. ewe. som.m owo.m mmm.m mm o mflmsmm mmo.- mHH. Hmm.m :ms.m :mm.m a: m mom.- mmH.u mmm.m moo.m mmm.m we a pcmEpmmpB mom. mmm. m::.m mmo.m emm.: ma a mom. mmm. mmm.: emo.m am».: :m o mfimz mmo.u mac. ooo.m Hwo.m wmo.m mm m mwm. mem.- Hem.m mow.: :mo.m QHH a Hmm. Ham. mwm.m mos.© :m:.m OH a pm . Hao. ms:.m mmfi.m Hma.m mm o mmo.- mmo. soa.m mae.m mma.m mm m madamm sam.- H:O.- ems.m mHo.m smo.m mm a Hoppcoo mmo. 000.- mam.: mmm.: :mm.: ea a sac. Ham. mom.m mmm.m :ma.m mm o mam: mmH.- moo.- Hma.m s:m.m mom.m moa m mom.- mmo.u omH.m owm.m :mm.m mad a m came H came sped pma gum cam cum pmH seemsempm Hmmmwm xmm semapmmse .m cams cam H same .momuw npcmp nmpmmEmm pmpfim .mompm sonac nmummEmm ocoomm .opmgm Susan memmEmm pmnfim on» non mommsm>m pcfiom oompw some Hamo pcm mmHoCmSUmpm Hamo||.m mqm‘ . How good is your evidence of this ”low” opinion? Or have you let a few incidents bug you: . Just because one teacher doesn’t have a good opinion of you is no sign that all teachers don’t have a good opinion of you. Be fair to yourself; don’t assume that because one teacher thinks one way, all teachers think the same way. They don’t—but they might if you force them to. Just because a teacher doesn’t have an outstandingly good opinion of you is no sign that teacher automatically has a bad opinion of you. There’s such a thing as being neutral, you know. . Honestly now, have you given any teacher a reason for disliking some thing you’ve done? Have you gotten pretty mad about being criticized? Do you suppose this could be what the teacher dislikes, rather than disliking you as a person? Have you clowned around, knowing good and well that you were mak- ing things difficult? Have you caught the teacher in some mistake and used this against the teacher? VI Do you feel your parents really don't care about you or how you do in school? If so, read this: )— P ink S” . You want to be able to love your folks, and you want them to love you, too, and to be interested in you, and to care about you, and to be proud of you when you do something well and to be disappointed for you when things go wrong. That’s the way nearly all parents feel about their children, too — only some parents don’t let a son or daughter know this is the way they feel. Some parents find it very hard to ”Show” their love. That doesn’t mean they don’t care; it just means they have trouble talking about it. Some parents have so many worries they may not seem to pay much attention to their children. That’s probably more because they’re trying to solve a problem than it is because they don’t care. In a separate letter, we are asking your folks whether this ”don’t care” attitude might be one of their problems, and suggesting how to improve the way you and they get along. Ifyou see even the faintest glimmer of a new interest from your parents, help them along all you can, won’t you? They may stumble a bit at first, so you’ll have to be very patient and very understanding. If you and your folks start to get along better, do everything you can to keep up that good relationship. It’s a great thing. Doing better in school will help a lot, so do your best. VII. Do your parents “ride" you too hard about school work? If so, read this: J... 3° 5” fl '5" S” Some parents are the ”High Pressure—Nagging” type. They’re all the time fussing and griping and nagging and asking whether you’ve finished this or done that and threatening to “ground” you or take away some privilege if you don’t straighten up and fly right. This is fairly common (in fact, you’ll have to watch out you don’t do the same things to your own children). This pressure is high because parents think it is the best way to help you. Yes, they really want to help — they know how much a good education can mean, and they want to be sure you get the best. It’s just that sometimes they over-do. In a separate letter, we are writing your parents to ask whether they have this problem, and to suggest how to improve the way you and they get along. Try giving your folks a fresh start, won’t you? If they try to be more understanding, meet them half way. If they get off your back about school work, see what you can do on your own. Most likely you’ve resented their not treating you like an adult, so how about acting in a way that will make them sit up and take notice (good notice) of you? You know—be careful, more action, less bellyaching. If for the first time in a long time your parents tell you straight out they love you, try telling them how you love them. Your parents may be embarrassed—yes, really-as they try to change their ways and to let you know how much they really feel for you. Help them all you can. VIII. Do you sometimes feel that nothing ever will go right? If so, read this: H N) 5” iii U1 9' .“ Most people, adults and students alike, feel like this at one time or another. When this happens, what we all need is a chance to share our feeling with someone else, and a chance to look at the brighter side of things. When this feeling hits you, pick out some adult you especially like — a teacher, a counselor, a principal, a parent, your third grade teacher from way back, a clerk in a store, just someone you like—and see whether the two of you can have a talk together. One way to start a conversation like this is to ask: What do you do when you re feeling down’ all over and just can’t seem to see any- thing good in life? Listen hard. Maybe your friend has problems, too. See whether you can be of any help to him or her (yes, 9th graders frequently can help adults). . What can you learn from your friend’s experience? Is there some good pick—me-up method you, too, can try? Or some mistake you can avoid? Watch out if you’re tending to blame someone else for all your troubles. See whether there isn’t at least one place where maybe you’re the cause of the trouble. And if you’re the cause, then you can also be the solu- tion. Correct even that one item, and things will be just a little better. If your world continues to be all “down” for too long a time, you might think about consulting a doctor. Maybe even a visit to the school nurse might get you started toward feeling better quickly. Do you put school work off? If you do, read this: Most of us are ”puttervoffers” at one time or another. We— —think we have more time than we really do have to do a job; —always let anything else that comes up get done first; —think there will be some magic moment when we’ll feel just like pitch- ing in and getting the job done (there never is); —let things build up until finally we cannot possibly recover; —-don’t want to do the job in the first place. Sound familiar? Of course, but how do you improve? Do these things: H 5° 9° a; F" Recognize how “put-off” works in you. It can be licked by breaking big tasks into small ones. Pick out one school job—some homework, or some reading, or any kind of assignment (even the easiest one, if you wish) and get it done before tomorrow. You can do just one where you might not be able to finish everything. When you’re doing this one job, concentrate on it. Force yourself to finish it. Don’t let anything else interfere. And don’t worry about other assignments —get this first one done first. After you finish the first job, make a list of all the others that have to be done for tomorrow. See how many of these you can finish before school starts tomorrow. Concentrate on one assignment at a time, and and be sure it’s done before you move on to the next. When you actually complete all you can for tomorrow, congratulate yourself. This is a fine start. If you can make this kind of a start, you can keep going for another day. So keep going. After you’ve kept up for two days straight, try stretching them to a week. In the end you won’t be playing games with yourself about what you need to do. Are you outside the “in” group at school? If you are, read this: )—‘ N 9° A 9" .°’ 5‘ Have you ever analyzed just what it is that makes certain students popular and others unpopular? . Studies show that the most popular students are cheerful, happy, co- operative, helpful. enthusiastic but self-controlled, friendly, considerate, honest, unselfish. The least popular students are show-offs, disinterested in others and their activities, shy, rebellious, or boastful. Look the list over carefully. Notice how many of the words describe you. Notice how many are changeable characteristics. Of course, only in fairy tales can you become handsome or beautiful overnight; but you can show interest in others, be concerned about their successes or failures, or curb your sharp tongue. You also can stick your neck out so that people know you care. Popular people take chances, and when they are ignored, shrug it off as the other person’s problem. Sure, look- ing nice counts, too, but it is only one small part of relating to other human beings. . It’s said that to have a friend, you must be one. If you don’t have as many friends as you’d like, could you gain one more by being friendly to someone you’d like to know better? If this means sticking your neck out, OK. It will be worth it. Building friendships and close relationships is something most of us have to work on. These things don’t ”just happen” all by themselves, you have to help them along. Don’t try to rush friendships. If you can build up a new one every month or so, you’ll be doing great. Whatever your number of close friends, don’t ever break your own per- sonal standards just to be popular. Always be able to be proud of yourself. You’re not the first to think of this. For some comments, let’s go to some students who are seniors in Michigan high schools this year. In a sepa— rate study, Project MEMO: asked these seniors for their opinions about what causes school drop-outs, and what could be done about this pro- lem, and why they themselves weren’t among the drop-outs. Here are some of their actual answers to that last question: “I have some friends who are dropouts, they can’t hold a job, and if they do get one, it's Mickey Mouse.” ”I know dropouts don’t have a prayer in today’s world.” “I was a dropout last year. I quit and then came back because you can’t get a good job without a high school diploma." ”Knowing a dropout, I would not forsake my education for temporary thrills and heartache and insecurity.” "I know what kind ofjob I’d have if I was a dropout. Shoveling manure. You can’t raise a family on that. “I dislike school very much but I won’t drop out because I saw what it did to five guys on my block alone.” “My mother and father were dropouts. To this day they regret it. I’m never going to.” “No one will hire a dropout. They feel that if you can’t stay in school and stick it out how can you stick a job out? They’re right.” “Dropouts won’t amount to anything in this world today. You have to have an education if you want to be anything.” ”I’m not fond of digging ditches.’ ”If I don’t go to school now, I‘ll only end up sweeping floors and taking night classes somewhere, or else getting blown up in Viet Nam.” ”My older brothers. They were both dropouts and they told me ifI left school they would kill me.” “It pleases my father that I'm in school. Sometimes I wish I were out but I can't hurt my father by telling him this.” ”I wouldn’t know what to do ifI did drop out. I’d lose lots of my friends.” “I am a Negro; it has been harder for me in the past and will be harder yet in the future. Being Negro I have to strive twice as hard as the aver- age white student. This main thought with the help and encouragement of my mother has kept me working in schoo ." ”I don’t plan to go to college, 501 figure I might just as well learn all I can in high school.” “When Iwas in the tenth grade I had a chance to tour a motor company. I watched the men on the assembly line and decided I wanted something better than that." ”I am not real smart or rich so I need my diploma.” "I have seen people who have dropped out of school and they are never going to be anything. If you know the suffering they are doing now at ages 17-18-19, it would keep anyone in school. ’ ”I’ve always been made to feel no good but I decided I would prove people wrong by making something of myself.” “A girl who is not well educated could not support a family if necessary.” ”I see people living in run—down houses with a bunch of dirty kids run- ning loose and I want more for my family than that.” ##t‘t That's what seniors say. Think about it. APPENDIX G PARENT LETTER (BLUE-SON) 169 Post Office Box 6366 D East Lansing, Michigan 48823 C '3 AC 517 / 353-6366 Dear Parent: Have you ever wondered whether your 9th grade son could do better in school than he is doing? You're probably right. According to a recent test of his desire to do school work, he seems to have more ability than his grades show. But your son cannot improve these grades alone. He needs help and support-~not ‘merely from his teachers and counselors at school but also from 123. Parents are vegz important to a student's work at school, as many research studies have shown. The parents can't do the whole job, of course, but they well can.make the difference between a successful student and an unsuccessful one. As the first step toward improving grades, please read the statements below. See whether you find yourself described there. If you do, you can help your son by following the suggestions that we are making as we work for your school and your student on this problem. David V. Schu.r Director CAN'YOU FIND YOURSELF HERE? There are two kinds of parents who may hurt, rather than help, their students in school. They are: 1. The High Pressure-Nagging Type. Some parents simply put too much pressure on their children to do well in school. They emphasize high performance too much. They are the ones who insist the student make top grades in every subject, regardless of his ability. They nag and rant and fuss, and keep at this even when it doesn't produce results. So what happens? Over the years, the child comes to resent this pressure and learns that one way to "get back" at his parents is to get low grades. Net result: everyone loses. 2. The Low Pressure-Leave Them Alone Type. Some parents rarely show any interest in what their child does in school. They ask few questions about what has happened in school. They let the child merely "wander" around and through school without any support from home. They aren't displeased with poor grades or pleased with good ones. They live their own lives apart from the child so the child must live an independent life entirely too early. The child feels "If no one else cares, why should 1?" Net result: everyone loses. 9 What you can do about this: --Please turn over-- 1. If you are the High Pressure-Nagging type, ask yourself this question: "Just what good is all this doing me? Or my son?" In most cases, your high pressure does little to change a child's grades, but goes a long way toward creating a bad relationship between parent and son. So why not give up a method that is a proven failure? Why not remove the pressure at home, and let the school provide it, normally and naturally? 'Your son.must come to realize he is responsible for his own learning. He is--and no one else. Once he really understands this, he'll make better use of his ability. When you take off the pressure, you still must show interest. Let your son know you are pleased for him.(not with htm) for what he does, but don't say "I told you so" or "I knew you could do it all along." If you say these things, you make your son feel that his accomplishments are yours, not his, and that loses you all you have gained. 2. If you are the Low'Pressure-Leave Them Alone type, don't change overnight into the "high pressure," but work on building up the ways your son knows you are interested in him and everything he does. Ask about the school work -- the content, and what is being taught. See whether your 9th grader is learning about some things that weren't a part of school when you attended, and point out where he is "ahead" of you in this learning. Discuss with your son the importance of education. Point out examples of people you know'for whom education has been a big advantage. If you need help, ask your student% teachers and counselors; they'll be pleased to join with you, because your son is important to them, too. Be interested in your son in other ways as well. Build a closer personal and fandly relationship any way you can. Whatever helps improve the way you and your son get along with each other generally, also will improve his grades. *** Whichever type you are -- or even if you're neither of these extreme types -- remember these basic points: Every boy wants to love and respect his parents more than anyone else in the world. As parents, we owe it to our children to give them that chance to love us. AND You know you love your son, but does he know this? He mmst be sure that you love him., clearly, and openly, and specifically. (This is one subject we ought to be very direct about, because when we're too indirect, the youngster may doubt us.) Project MEMO: is a cooperative effort on the part of 26 Michigan colleges to work with the junior and senior high schools of the state to help their students get all the education they possibly can use. ‘MEMO: is financed through the U.S. Office of Education "talent search" program. APPENDIX H PARENT LETTER (PINK-DAUGHTER) 172 0 Post Office Box 6366 East Lansing, Michigan 48823 C '3 AC 517 / 353-6366 Dear Parent: Have you ever wondered whether your 9th grade daughter could do better in school than she is doing? You're probably right. According to a recent test of her desire to do school work, she seems to have more ability than her grades show. But your daughter cannot improve these grades alone. She needs help and support-~not merely from her teachers and counselors at school but also from 223. Parents are very important to a student's work at school, as many research studies have shown. The parents can't do the whole job, of course, but they well can make the difference be- tween a successful student and an unsuccessful one. As the first step toward improving grades, please read the statements below. See whether you find yourself described there. If you do, you can help your daughter by following the suggestions that we are making as we work for your school and your student on this problem. Si rely, /W/ David V. Schu Director CAN YOU FIND YOURSELF HERE? There are two kinds of parents who may hurt, rather than help, their students in school. They are: l. The High Pressure-Nagging Type. Some parents simply put too much pressure on their children to do well in school. They emphasize high performance too much. They are the ones who insist the student make top grades in every subject, regardless of her ability. They nag and rant and fuss, and keep at this even when it doesn't produce results. So what happens? Over the years, the child comes to resent this pressure and learns that one way to "get back" at her parents is to get low grades. Net result: everyone loses. 2. The Low Pressure-Leave Them Alone Type. Some parents rarely show any interest in what their child does in school. They ask few questions about what has happened in school. They let the child merely "wander" around and through school without any support from home. They aren't displeased with poor grades or pleased with good ones. They live their own lives apart from.the child, so the child must live an independent life entirely too early. The child feels "If no one else cares, why should I?" Net result: everyone loses. What you can do about this: --Please turn over-- 1. If you are the High Pressure-Nagging type, ask yourself this question: ”Just what good is all this doing me? Or my daughter?” In most cases, your high pressure does little to change a child's grades, but goes a long way toward creating a bad relationship between parent and daughter. 30 why not give up a method that is a proven failure? ‘Why not remove the pressure at home, and let the school provide it, normally and naturally? Your daughter must come to realize she is responsible for her own learning. She is-- and no one else. Once she really understands this, she'll make better use of her ability. When you take off the pressure, you still must show interest. Let your daughter know you are pleased for her (not with her) for what she does, but don't say "I told you so" or "I knew you could do it all along." If you say these things, you make your daughter feel that her accomplishments are yours, not hers, and that loses you all you have gained. 2. If you are the Low Pressure-Leave Them Alone type, don't change overnight into the "high pressure," but work on building up the ways your daughter knows you are interested in her and everything she does. Ask about the school work -- the content, and what is being taught. See whether your 9th grader is learning about some things that weren't a part of school when you attended, and point out where she is "ahead" of you in this learning. Discuss with your daughter the importance of education. Point out examples of peOple you know for whom education has been a big advantage. If you need help, ask your student's teachers and counselors; they'll be pleased to join.with you, because your daughter is important to them, too. Be interested in your daughter in other ways as well. Build a closer personal and family relationship any way you can. Whatever helps improve the way you and your daughter get along with each other generally, also will improve her grades. *‘kie Whichever type you are -- or even if you're neither of these extreme types -- remember these basic points: Every girl wants to love and respect her parents more than anyone else in the world. As parents, we owe it to our children to give them that chance to love us. AND “You know you love your daughter, but does she know this? She must be sure that you love her, clearly, and openly, and specifically. (This is one subject we ought to be very direct about, because when we're too indirect, the youngster may doubt us.) Project MEMO: is a cooperative effort on the part of 26 Michigan colleges to work with the junior and senior high schools of the state to help their students get all the education they possibly can use. MEMO: is financed through the U.S. Office of Education "talent search" program. APPENDIX I LETTER TO PRINCIPALS REQUESTING PARTICIPATION IN RESEARCH PROJECT 175 176 Dear You may recall that a year ago as the director of Project MEMO:, I was writing to you to ask your help in a state-wide motivation study of 9th graders. You did help, and in a very important way... Our goal in this study was to see whether we could help the under-motivated student obtain better grades. The study was too limited to produce clear results, so now I have undertaken an additional study (a personal one, since MEMO: has ended) that will take a closer look at the grades of these same students for a longer period of time--for all of the 8th, 9th, and the first half of the 10th grades. In your school, this involves students, some of whom were followed-up in the earlier study, some of whom (a control group) were not. Individual sheets for each of these students are enclosed. I will very much appreci- ate it if you can have someone record the grades and re- turn the sheets to me in the enclosed addressed and stamped envelope within the next two weeks. What's in this for you? If the results prove that the MEMO: "paper-treatment" did assist in improving aca- demic performance, then score one for education. Thousands of boys and girls may then receive similar assistance. Your personal cooperation is of vital importance if we are to find a way of helping our boys and girls who have the ability but for some reason are not producing. No school or student will be identified by name anywhere in this study. If you have any questions please feel free to call me collect at AC 517/353-6366. Thank you very much indeed. Sincerely yours, David V. Schultz APPENDIX J GRADE POINT AVERAGE REQUEST FORM 177 178' GRADE POINT AVERAGE REQUEST FORM Please record the frequency of letter grades for all courses earned in the 8th, 9th, and first half of the 10th years for , Student Code Number , School Code Number . If your school is on the semester plan, use EXAMPLE: BOX I and record only the final semester marks for all subjects attempted. A student earned 2 B-‘s, 1 C+ and 3 0'3 for the lst semester of the 8th grade. If your school does not give semester grades, use BOX II. This is for schools marking on the three, four, or six period systems. Use only those periods that apply to you. Omit the final grade. If you use numerical grades, please change the numbers to letter grades and fill in accordingly. If the student is no longer with you, please provide what grades you have and complete the following: MOVED DROPPED GRADUATED Name of new school , Address of new school BOX I OFFICE USE ONLY E _____c _____M _____F _____P _____PR _____A _____B c D H L BOX II at h 6th lst 2nd rd uth th 6th lst 2nd Thank You APPENDIX K CASE STUDY GENERAL INFORMATION SHEET 179 180P School Code Number Student Code Number Date Sex: M F Age Race Religion Physical Attributes Academic Record lst 8 2nd 8 lst 9 2nd 9 lst 10 Father: L D S D EduC. 8 12 College Age Occupation Mother: L D S D Educ. 8 12 College Age Occupation Male Siblings No. Age Education Female Siblings No. Age Education Home Inner City Suburb Rural Extra Curricular Activities Outside Interests High School Program Dif. Subject Future Goals College Vocational School Student's Reason for Academic Improvement Counselor's Reason for Academic Improvement Reaction to MEMO: Study School Size Enrollment Community Number of Counselors Records General Comments: MICHIGAN STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES \liWINWWII"WINll‘IHHIWIIWIHIWI 31293010072092