. 11R 15 )..¢itl..:....$ra12 1113‘ 1‘ 5.3.0.1.“. A $71-$05... . 5.5? 33:. £53.! L:....?.St..; A? to}... 3: 2. 1 . ~76... 5.1!. .: t u . . V , . 3. {pi .. :1. 4s .0. i. ut.».‘v‘.1.‘ . $32.5. . ... . \u. illitt¥h c: awry“? .v. \, trunk. ..l hit.“ 71*.ng .# . I i .1 . E .. 1‘ min... c 13.15.... 3.5.5111... . . t o. .n . $11.”... ‘ltciits mind... ‘4.........I.. . !.r.1..1§...\l. i: 1.141. lafvgflr. .. .: 2 . 5. i. . A :Kul: . a 4.1. .1; .a. Imuufi‘flflu . . «Edda»? hwflauru. a! 21.5.31: fir... as x. in) .hun Haiku; . .suu .110"qu a“ l‘?! .f...’ . -. (Ta. . m1- 4 at...) 2.. s. ._ -1 .u..v:....,§...ué.h§w 35)|9115tnl§1u§€ . 33.1. ; . “$91....imfizfinusifi 3.1.1.: 1...... k.t)~ii§.\la‘firzw. «8.. 33. aka”. . , . at} X‘u‘": ‘ .92....5xizxzi a...“ "2., .54.}? ., a: » .z . 1.5 ,x . .45 . ‘ _. E}... 3M. 3.! . V #1:}?! . . .3. . 1%‘1. 3A.:h’rrl.lll.( n13.” .l.\!!b... . .1.‘ y . .ai gent! £1 (5;- « ¢lll lit. . I33” a ‘ ‘37): .l‘.’ 1 vi. .vzal; it pl .3 1‘.....MH;II.L LIBRARY Michigan State University PLACE IN REI'URN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. To AVOID FINES return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 2/05 cJCIRC/DateDueJndd-p. 15 This is an authorized facsimile, made from the microfilm master copy of the original dissertation or master thesis published by UMI. The bibliographic information for this thesis is contained in UMI’s Dissertation Abstracts database, the only central source for accessing almost every doctoral dissertation accepted in North America since 1861. ® . . UMI Dissertation Services From : ProGuest COMPANY 300 North Zeeb Road PO. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Michigan 48106-1346 USA 800.521 .0600 734.761.4700 web www.il.proquest.com Printed in 2005 by digital xerographic process on acid-free paper A STUDY OF WITHIN-TERM MAKE DROP-OUTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLBEGE FOR THE SCHOOL YEARS 1947-‘49 L. DILE FIUNCE A DISSERTAT 1011 Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies or Iichigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF'EDUGATION Depart-ant or Guidance and Oouneelor training School of Education 1952 A STUDY OF'WITHIN-TERM MALE DROP-OUTS AT MICHIGAN. STATE COLLEGE FOR THE SCHOOL'YEARS 1947-49 By L. Dale Faunce AN ABSTRACT Submitted to the School of‘Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree or DOCTOR. OF EDUCATION Department of Education Year ' 1952 Approved W W . y fit?“ L. Dale Faunce THESIS ABSTRACT This investigation was undertaken to identify and describe attributes of within-term college drop-outs during the freshman and sophomore years, and to interpret the relationship of these attributes to the over-all functioning of a student personnel program at the college level. Specifically, the problem is concerned with describ- ing the differential statuses of drop-out students at the time they leave school and the reasons they give for leaving. Two primary sources of information were used in this study. Official records from various student personnel offices at Michigan State College were made available and provided a basis for collecting data pertinent to the personal-social background of the within-term drop-outs and the conditions under chich this behavior occurred at the time of withdrawal. A second source of information was the drop-out student in person after at least one year had elapsed since the time of his withdrawal. Information was obtained from these former students by means of a question- naire which.had been checked for both validity and reli- ability by means of several outside criteria, including Judges, trial runs, and interviewing. The records of all male freshman and sophomore students withdrawing from Michigan State College during the terms of years 1947-49 were used for analysis. L. Dale Faunce The study revealed that within the college community the potential within—term drop-out fails to participate on a par with others in campus organizations. The requirements of academic discipline are more of a casual anchoring point for him, while his housing, health, personal matters, and finances stand in the foreground. The important values, the values about which he is concerned in either a positive or negative frame of reference (either for or against but in either case primary objects of attention and evaluation), serve as diversions from meeting the prerequisites of social ‘ and academic participation in the college as a community of interacting persons with mutual and reciprocal role expecta- tions. As a further index for potential within-term drop-out behavior the study also revealed that, (l) Off-campus housing presents the student with a financial dilemma, real or imaginary, which makes it difficult for him to main- tain his student status and carry out his role obligations in the college community, (2) Poor academic work is acknowledged by students as a reason for their withdrawal only when some other reason is lacking, i.e., as a last resort, (3) Students who consider illness, finances, or employment as reasons for withdrawal will be functioning academically at the same level as students who recognize academic difficulty as their reason for leaving, -2- L. Dale Faunce (4) Private homes or temporary housing afford a condition associated with the concept of illness as a reason for withdrawal in direct contrast to dormitories, coopera- tives, or fraternities, where the concept seldom.emerges, and (5) The student who does well on entrance examinations is less likely to give illness as a reason for withdrawal than the student with average or poor performance on these examinations. -3- ACKNOWLEIXI-IENTS Without the cooperation and assistance of many persons, on the faculty at both Michigan State College. and the State University of Iowa, this study would not have been possible and the writer is deeply grateful to all those who so willingly gave their assistance. ,Appreciation is due the members of the author's Doctoral Committee, Professors Walter Johnson, C. E. ‘Erickson, C. V. Millard, L. J. Luker, Charles P. Loomis and Clyde Campbell, with “special thanks to 'Dr. Johnson, Chairman, and.Dean.Erickson for their encouragement and guidance; also to Ir. Ralph Holloway, graduate student in sociology at the State‘University of Iowa, for his un- tiring assistance. To my wife much credit is due for her kindly forbearance and helpfulness. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER Page I THE raostsa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Statement of the Problem . . . . . . . . . . Importance of the Problem . . . . . . ... . Limitations of the Study . . . . . . . . . . Plan of the Study. . . . . . . . . . . . . . DermtionorTerMeeeaeeeoecoco- carnelian-atwin-4~ SWeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee‘e II REVIE'OFTELITERATUIE............11 Reports on Previous Studies Indicating the Nature Of the PI‘OblOme e. e e a e e e e e e 11 Some Soc ial-Psychological Characteristics at the Drop-Out PrOblme e e e e e e e e e 13 Psychological Traits as Indicated by Tests of Aptitude and Ability in Terms of Their Relationship to the Drop-Out Problem . . . 16 Personality Scales and Other lteasures of Adjutant.................18 Basic-Economic Status and Other Social ' Values as Related to College Enrollment and the 8010 of the Student. 0 a e e .e e e 24 811mm...................30 III PROCEDURES AND TECHNIQUES. . . . . . . . . . . as InitialPhEBOeeeeeeoeeeeecoco33 CollectionofData. . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 iii CHAPTER Page Validity of Reasons Given by Students for LCE'iHSWithmTCmBe o e e e e e e e e e e 36 Collection Procedure . . . . . . . . . . . . 3? Reliability Through Interviewing. . . . . . . 38 Procedure. for Analysis.) . . . . . . . . . . 39 Summary...................40 Iv CONDITIONS UNDER waxes? strum-mu DROP-OUTS OCCURooooooooocooooo.oooo42 Social Status and Social Conditions . . . . . 42 6 Veteran and Non-Veteran e e e e e e e e e e a 61388 111 0011080 and A80. 0 o. e e e e e e e ‘. 44 Academic Work - Grade Point Average . . . . . 45 High School Rank and Entrance mmtionsooreae see .0 e a e e e c 046 Rural'urb‘n Influenc 08 a e to e e e e e e e e e 48 Hana ing D iff 0r Ont 13.13 c e e e e e e e e o e e 49 PuQntal Education. a e e e e e c e e e o e e 50 Student Participation in Campus Organizations...............50 SW 0 e o e e e e e e e e e e e e e o e e 51 V WITHDRAWAL - FROM THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE WITHIN‘MM DROP-OUT0 e" e e e e a e e e e e e 52 The Direction of Attitudes of Within-Term Drop-Outa.................52 Illness or Health - As a Reason for Withdra'aleeeooeeeeaeeeeeees4 iv CHAPTER VI Finances - As a Reason for Withdrawal . . . Transferring - As a Reason for Iithdrawal . Personal Reasons for Withdrawal -. . . -. . . Employment - Transition from Campus to Job. Academic work - From the Student's Point ofViaI................. Family Illness - Assuming the Role of the Father.................. Rousing - As a Contributing Factor in Withdra'ale ‘ O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 Miscellaneous Reasons for Withdrawal. . . . A Summary of Reliability of the Reasons Given and the Points of View Expressed by within-Tam Dmp'mtse e e e e e e e e swam-Tana summit. as A COMPLEX or ATTITUDES AND commuons. .. . . . . . . . . The Relationship of Attitudes to Conditions surc‘mam tho Studmt e e e e e e e e 0 Analysis of Conditions Under Which the ROaaon ”11121988” Emerdee e e s e e e e e The "F m0 13]. D11 m. e e e e e e e o e a Th9 Anticipatory Transfer '0 e o e e e e e 0 Getting a JOb e a e e a e e e e e e e e e 0 Academic Work - Its Relationship to 80018]. Conditions 0 e o e e e e e e e e 0 Family Illness - A Reference Point in LQ‘Vinseeoeeeessoeeoeeee Housing - Estrangement from the Group Norms V Page 56 59 61 62 64 64 65 66 66 '70 7O 72 '77 79 81 83 85 86 CHAPTER Page A Summary of Descriptions. . . . . . . . .‘. 87 The Inconsistent Cases . . . . . . . . . . . 89 Summary...................90 VII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS. . . 3 SWeeeeeeeeeeeeeeceeeegz Interpretations and Conclusions. ... . . . . 93 Recommendations I (Hypotheses for Further - studyl I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I ' I I I 98 Recommendations II . . . . . .i. . . . . . . 100 APPENDICES A I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 103 B I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 106 C I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 108 D I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 110 BIBLIOGRAPHY I I I I I I I I I .I I I I I I I I I I I. I 123 vi TABLE ' 1. 2. :5. 4. 5. 6. 7. LIST OF TABLES Page Drop-Outs by Terms in Percentages. . . . . . . 12 Comparison of Three Studies Concerning Drop- Outs and Their Reasons for Leaving College . 15 Distribution or Mean Grades by Class BQOksround e s o e on. o o e e e e a e e e a 27 Proportion of‘lithin-TermfiDrop-Outs According to Rank in High SOhOOI e e e e e e e e o e e 46 A Comparison of the Proportion of Within-Term Drop-Outs According to Decile Rank of Entrance‘Examination Scores with Those of the General Student Population . . . . . . 4? Proportion of‘lithin-Term Drop-Outs by Categories of’RuraldUrban Background as Compared with Expected Frequencies Based on the General Hale Student Population, 1947-'49 o e e e a e e e e e e e e e e e e e 48 A Comparison of Reasons Indicated in Exit Interview with Those Given on the Quoationnairo ,0 o e e e e e e e e e e e o e 67 vii LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE ‘ Page I Comparison of the Proportion of Veterans and Non-Veterans among the Within-Term Drop-Outs with the General Male Student POPUlItion e e e e s e e e e e e e e 43 II A Comparison of Age Status and Within- Term Drop-Out Behavior According to the Number of Terms Completed, A9$7-'49 e e e e e e e e e e e e e e 45 III Comparison of Drop-Out Behavior with the Expected Frequencies in the General Hale Student Population. . . 49 viii Chapter I THE PROBLEI Statement 2; Egg m . The purpose of this study is (l) to identify and describe attributes of students who drop out of college within-terms during their freshman and sophomore years, and (2) to interpret the relationship of these attributes to the over-all functioning‘of a student personnel program _ at the college level. Specifically, the problem is con- cerned with describing the differential statuses of drop-out students at the time they leave school and the reasons they give for leaving. i meager... 'er ’th_e_ Problem ' H “ Ihile several references are available concerning drop-cuts in general, educational literature contains lit- tle information pertaining to those who drop out msg- t£m_s_. The within-terms criterion suggests that unantici- pated or anomalous factors of a strategic nature arose which in the student's conception were so significant that he felt smelled tc.leave imediately. Pressure from some- where was exerted upon the individual to substitute anew or different pattern of activity for his current academic program. Because many colleges have been concerned with the mortality rate of their student population, several have inaugurated the procedure of conducting exit interviews to secure data for analysis of the drop-cut problem. Re- ports of the exit interviewing programs do not cite the particular problems of the within-term drop-outs; instead, drop-outs are considered as a general type, irrespective of whether they left school betwun terms or within the term ‘ under the pressure of a situation which appeared mediate and demanding to them. The problem is of importance be- cause at the present time the same general interpretation of reasons for dropping out is applied to both within-term drop-outs and beheen term (or end of term) drop-outs. Ihile on the surface the symptoms for both groups may appear to be the same, the causes of mortality may differ. Specifically, the study is important from the standpoint of administrators as a possible means of increas- ing their knowledge of the relationship of this unit of stu- dent behavior to the over-all student personnel program. In turn, admission counselors, personal counselors, and others dealing with interpersonal relations might well make use of such knowledge. However important the information may be for ad- ministrators or others, its primary significance may emerge if future within-term drop-outs are aided because their cases are better understood. Noreover, paradoxical though it may seem, the ultimate importance of such a study is in terms of elimination of the within-term drop-out student either by nonsadmission, or by his continuing through to the completion of his role requirements as a student. Ihile this ultimate goal is not to be expected per as, an approxi- mation is possible only if efforts in.this direction are undertaken which are based upon reliable knowledge and un- derstanding of the within-term drop-out problem. Last, but not necessarily least, is the importance of this problem in terms of the relationships betwaen the college and the public which it serves. President Rancher (29:4) of the State University of Iowa states in an annual report: . . . it must not be forgotten that this State has no more precious possession than its human stock. And, in its state-supported University, this State possesses an institution.which is engaged in a unique fashion in the study, conservation, devel- opment, and improvement of its human resources--its men, women, and children. In this day and age industry has a personal stake in.higher education and takes a vital interest in.college and university affairs. In comparing the college drop-out problem with the problem of industrial rejects, the follow- ing statement has been.made: Using an industrial analogy the Universities c only 37 per cent of their initial products thrgfigg to the end, and 63 per cent are rejects. In industry any production unit which had such a record would be ripe for an administrative over- hauling. Universities are in exactly the same position.* One would immediately note that a college “reject" in the formof a drop-out is not of necessity a total loss, as is apt to be the case in an industry where physical objects are being molded for a specific and limited purpose. How- ever, the direction of the point taken still holds true.- particularly for students who leave prior to the completion of their second year, as is the case with the students under consideration in this study. At present only a small frac- tion of the information necessary for understanding this problem is available. Limitations 2; L113 _S_t_u_dy This study will be exploratory in that the sub- class of within-term drop-outs which will be the focal point of the investigation is, in general, a field of ex- ploration largely unanalysed heretofore. Crowder (13:3) emphasises this in his thesis when he writes: ’4 Little can be determined or suggested in the way of improvement of the University's efforts to . serve its students in the futurewithout knowl- edge of the problems or conditions which cause students to leave the school. "Taken from a panel discussion of industrialists and edu- cators. Annual Nesting, Southern College Placement 0f- . ficers Association, Gatlinberg, Tennessee, 1951. Analysis of within-term drop-cuts will be con- fined to the first and second year student population at Nichigan State College during the years 1947“ 49. lhile generalizations from one population to another increase. the range of error by an unknown amount, limiting one's in- vestigation to a specific population for purposes of inten- sive analysis in the exploratory stage of investigation is defensible. From such exploratory study this thesis will then proceed to suggest techniques for meher study and in- vestigation along this line. In any event, the postulate is accepted that new knowledge is gained by departure from convent ion. This thesis departs from the conventional ap- proach to the drop-out problem by analysis of within-term drop-outs as a special class with problems peculiar to, and therefore best understood by, such analysis. Nichigan State College operates on a four quarter basis; therefore, each student enrolls by terms. A within- term drop-out is a student who withdraws before his rela- tively imediate objective is completed, i.e., before com- plating the current term in which he is enrolled. This student, unlike the betwoen-term drop-out, leaves his fol- low students and companions behind at a time when they are remaining. In addition, he must be interviewed by several college personnel offices and he must state a reason for his unanticipated departure. The records of such personal interviess as took place at Iiohigan State College at the time of withdrawal were made available for this study. All such withdrawals were voluntary. If under twenty-one years of age, the student was required to have written permission from his parents to withdraw. The expression within-term drop-out as here used is limited therefore to those students meeting the above criteria. 2;... 9.; in am . i'he data were gathered for the description of within-tern drop-outs during the period or ism-v49 at lich- igan State College from the records previously described. Irho selection of this specific group appeared to be Justi- fiable because (1) intensive analysis of this group was pos- sible, thereby making for an accurate description from which new relationships might be discovered, and (2) examination of the elements among a number of cases having character- f istios in, common nay revealcues-for the understanding of any given case. Such a procedure is useful in providing data from which inductive generalisations can be formed. Any collection of data is of. significance only in so far as the units known or surmised to be'useml and therefore collected as data are valid and reliable. '.The question one must face is: Collecting data 9_f_ what £93; what? While it is possible that a relationship might be found between blue and brown eyed students in terms of their 7 relationship to student mortality, such fortuitous circum— stances wouldbe of little value to understanding the prob- " ion at hand. The absence of data dealing specifically with the problems of within-term drop-outs does not mean that no information is available. it the present time within-term drop-outs in many instances receive the same services as end-of-term or between-xterm drop-outs. Studies reporting on the general drop-out problem as available and will be re- viewed for purposes of abstracting 'a tentative list of at- tributes or characteristics which will then become the basis for investigation to determine their relevance for the ‘ specific class of drop-outs who withdrsn within a term. Sl'he review of the literature constitutes Chapter II of this study. . Following the review of the literature and the construction of a tentative list of general drop-out attri- butes, a comparison of the association between these items and the significant items for within-term drop-outs rill be made. A follow-up study makes use of a questionnaire to check the validity and reliability of the data as here pro- cured and analysed. i'he follow-up is based on a sample of the l1ohigan State College drop-outs. i‘hese findings are reported in Chapter V along with the results of the general study. W 9.2 2.9.2 ' The term drop-outs is used in the literature with such comparable terms as withdrawals and school-leavers. In general, these terms identify that class ofpersons sub- sumed under references to student mortality -- those who for one reason or another fail to couplets a college educa- tion at a givenschool. The general terms are often modi- fied to make up sub-classifications such as voluntary withdrawals and involuntary withdrawals. The former refer to those students who leave on their own initiative, or who leave prior to official action on the pert of the educa- tional institution which would require them to drop out. The latter term, involuntary withdrawal, refers to students expelled, dismissed, or forced to withdraw because of their failure to fulfill the minimal role expectations attached to their student status as defined by the administration of the institution. within-term or intra-term drop-outs, such as are the subjects of this study, are a sub-class vithin the general class of drop-outs referred to as a part of student mortality. The within-term drop-out, as referred to in this thesis, is a student who enrolled for a term at llichi- gan State College but discontinued before the end of that term. At Iiohigsn State College it is possible for a stu- dent to enter the institution with only one term of credit - v 0 as his immediate objective. lhile there is a possibility that some students may have planned to enroll for only part of a term, i.e., to have considered their objective to be less than a complete term, it is reasonable to assume that such persons are practically non-existent. nan-nu This study is concerned with. identifying and de- scribing attributes of'the vithin-term drop-out students at the freshman and sophomore level of college by means of an exploratory investigation for.moses of gaining knowledge which might be of aid to the college administrators, the student, and others concerned with the over-all student I personnel program at the college level. [any educators have expressed anawareness of this need, among them IacIntosh (34:d7): ' There can be little question that the matter of ' voluntary withdrawal is one which will bear further study by colleges and universities and that it is a factor which met not be overlooked in any consideration of the persistence and stability of a student body. In addition, due to the lack of previous research in this specific area, it is the aim of this study to make sugges- tions for further research which might lead to greater ad- vancements in this area. Such a study would seem to be im- portant since the conventional approach to the problem of drop-outs has neglected to take into account the possibility 10 of differential characteris'tios'bein‘g associated with the within-term drop-outs; for example, his status and role playing are not necessarily the same as that for other students. . The following procedures were included in the pro- posals for. this study: (1) A review of the literature per- taining to the problem of student mortality and drop-outs in general, including any literature, if such could be found, pertaining to within-term drop-outs; (2) The col- lection of data concerning freshmen and sophomore students who were vithin-term drop-outs at lichigan State College during the years 1947-'49, allowing for a thorough and ac- curate description of attributes and characteristics by which they might be identified: (3) An analysis of the within-term drop-out problem as distinguished from the prob- lem of general drop-outs presented in the literature; - (4) The preparation of a number of inductive generalisa- tions and recommendations for further research. 11 Chapter II REVEOPTHELW figports 23 hevious Studies My _t_h_e_ gagggg'g£,§hg Problem a review of the literature reveals mmny reports dealing either directly or indirectly with the general nature of the drop-out problem‘but none dealing specifi- callwaith the problem.of within-term.drop-outs. 0f pri- smry ccncern.has been the general problem.of student mer- tality and the studies found in the literature serve both as an.indicator of the lack of holding power of the col- logos as well as providing some general cues as to the nature of the drop-out problem. The magnitude'of the general drop-cut problem is cited by Charter (9:40l)'in a reference to a‘United States Office of Education study: stainmwwrmemsmz. forty-nine stayed until the end of the sophonere year, forty-one through the junior year, and thirty-seven through the senior year. These figures agree with.other studies which.inr dicate that the mortality rate is 50 per cent or higher during the first two years of college life. lacIntosh.(34) in a study of 655 liberal arts colleges reported a mer- tality rate exceeding 50 per cent, Iith large coeducational 12 colleges (enrollment over one thousand) having a mortality rate of 61 per cent. ' Charter (9:401) states that the most amusing fact of all is the apparent lack of knowledge on the part of the colleges and the universities as to the causes of student mortality. 'Twmty per cent were dropped for disciplinary reasons, for-the other 80 per cent the causeswere unknown." ‘ The proportion of drop-outs by term during the - first yearfiof college reveals that no single term differs significantly from other terms. This suggests that the causes for the students leaving, rhatever they are, become manifest at any time throughout the year. litchell (42:96) tabulated the first year drop-outs by terms over a three- ' year period as follows: T1335 1 near-ours sl'rhais In reassuricas Terms 1937-'38 1938-'39 lSSQ-MO During the first term 11 ll 7 fly end of the first term 43 36 7 23 By end of the second term 53 55 . 41 By and of the third term 100 ' 100 100 In an analysis of first year drop-outs by terms, Iclieely (40) found approximately the same proportions. Snyder (51) reported an even higher proportion dropping ,0“ by the—end of the first semester in a study based on a profile of drop-outs from Los Angeles City College. The above observations have relevance for this study in that among other things they demonstrate that .the problem of student mortality starts approximately with the day school begins. From here on it is apparent that my students are having difficulty with maintaining vhat one might call status-equilibrium. By a variety of experi- ences, as will be seen, some not only learn to carry out the role expectations attached to their newly acquired status of college student, but go on to the successful completion of both their insediate and their long-range objective. Others, the drop-outs, remain marginal for varying periods of time. Varying degrees of crisis may ensue, with the intensity of the crisis probably propor- tional to the degree of friction and contradiction of the . external demands and internal factors. “Dropping-out", as seen from this perspective, is by no means an accidental or arbitrary affair. _S_o_a_l_g Egg-Psychological Characteristics 95 the Pap-gal Problem ' ' In this section an attempt will be made to sketch the problem as reported in the literature in order to give a general characterization of drop-outs as seen from the l. drop-out's point of view. The characterization necessarily consistsof rather arbitrary statements since the literature is neither abundant nor comprehensive, hence, only a rough indication of the implication of these findings can be given. ‘ _ A significant study of reasons students give for dropping out is reported by litehell (42). After learning something about general status, economic, academic, family and health factors, he found that within several comparable status categories the reasons given for dropping out were quite consistent. Poor academic vork, lack of money, and lack of interest were dominant factors reported. In a comparable study at DePaul, Cumi’ngs (14) found the same three factors to be dominant, though lack of money ranked third among his subjects. a comparison by . litchell (42:97) of lcleely's'study vith two other reports is presented ianable 2 and-tends to verify the stability of this complex factor: 15 TABIB 2 GOIPAR ISORS 0F THEE STUDIES CONGENING DROP-OUTS AND . THEIR REASONS PCB LEAVING com Hichigan loleely _Ursinus 3“”? ( - - per cent of - - Lack of money 20.8 22.4 20e3 not interested, discouraged 15.6 17.6 7.3 Transferred 8.1 - -.- Toor academic vork 39.4 44.4 23.9 Illness or injury 11.1 7.6 10.6 Needed at home 2.5 ‘ 1.6 - lithin the framevork of this phase of the litera- ture, a different relationship is reported by Snyder (51) rho, employing more categories than the other writers-ci'ted, found that academic failure accounted for only seven per cent of the drop-outs while lack of money was highest among the subjects, forty-six percent giving this as their reason. No matter how important any one of these factors m be, the studies still indicate that it is a complex of elements and conditions which surround the potential drop- out student, and the reason he gives for dropping out is apt to be simply a name for the man characteristics which con- tribute to his situation. In dealing with this problem one sees that there is always the danger of generalizing on the 16 basis of one rather than another event instead of relating the events within a realistic perspective. In other words, to say that poor academic work is important in the decision of the student to drop out is not the equivalent of saying he dropped out simply because his grades were low. The other factors which limit his adaptability and persistence need to be taken into accountend one met not lose sight of the multiple nature of'this complex of. influences. So while one searches the literature to'gain a proper recog- nition of each of these factors, one is at the same time aware that an understanding of. their place in the over-all structure of drop-out influences is a necessary condition for this study. gczchclcgiccl M 53 Indicated g; M g Aptitude m Ability it; 35.2 _o_f_ 2.1.13.1: Relationship. 59 £22 gran-gut Problem ' . . A 1938 U. 3. Office of Education Report (40:112) says "Scholastic failure. is one of the chief sources of student mortality.” Swan (52 :236) states in a study of withdrawals during- 1947 at the University of Iinnesota where exit interviewing had been inaugurated: The. exit interview study found that 25 per cent of those who withdreu from school left because of academic difficulties, either voluntarily or through drop action. 1'? I liany attempts have been made to predict on the basis of I.Q., scholastic ability, or scholastic aptitude the students who will drop out of college. The usual tech- nique is to ”measure” by means of a scale the individual's position in relationhto others participating in the par; ticular dimension of behavior under study. The statistics of measurement of I.Q., scholastic ability, or scholastic aptitude are difficult to interpret unless “accompanied by a high correlation between the conditions. on which the norms for the measm'ing instruments are based and the conditions under which the behavior of the individual occurs. Sec- ondly, so long as the ”normal curve" is used for grading at the college level, a specified proportion of students ris- going to fail due to "academic difficulty" even if the top 50 per cent of those taking entrance examinations were the only ones allowed to «roll. For these reasons, if no others, the value of tests and measurements of the type re- ferred to is limited in so far as prediction of drop-out be- havior due to ability or aptitude is concerned. Presfield (24:11?) writing on the use of the Amer- ican Council on Education Psychological Examination states: It is one of the standard credos in psychology ifi‘fiefi‘nfieiiit'fiii;t33$§§.3:€?3§e£°$:132”1§. tellectual ability. Among the many qualifying factors are time and- energy absorbed by athletic :h?§:51§”3132’$.°§&°§§‘222:3;.32'3‘efi‘3'5‘; support through college, and/or participation in the many and varied extra-curricular activities. \ It is obvious that the items mentioned by Fresfield represent only a few factors which 51 me; certain conditio_z_lg contribute to poor academic work. For example, other items contributing to failure include poor health, emotional maladjustment, and lack of interest. lith this in mind it appears remarkable that test scores reach the degree of differentiation sometimes reported. Agate (2) studied the relationship of I.Q. scores to--pcrsistence‘in college and found that those who stayed in college four years‘were 23 points higher than those who withdrew during the first semestere . Freeman (26) reported that tests of college ap- titude are most likely to identify individuals at the two extremes: namely, those who are least likely to complete their undergraduate work, and those who are most likely to do so. The test scores, he stated, are likely to have lit- tle predictive value for individuals in the middle range, approximately the mid-sixty per cent. While not refuting the importance. of general in- telligence for college work, Goodenough (27:14) states: General intelligence tests have a real place in the college testing service, even though it is inpltl‘l: e e211: 1:311? agengft :33: agmfitogeifi“ Personality m 93 _chgg leasures 9; Adjustment The term personality has been variously defined because personalities are complex and inclusive of many 19 traits or behavior patterns. A definition which .is com- mendable for one purpose any not be for another. Just as some people are able to act intelligently in many situa- tions, others in only a few, sotoo a personality well in- tegrated in terms of a Hollywood career may be poorly equipped for adjustment to college life. All this has a definite bearing on the literature pertaining to the meas- urement or rating of personality at the college level, since the rating of one person by another is among the. oldest of practices -- the present rating scales being re- finements of older techniques. The phase of personality to be judged, whether specific or general, the conditions under which the behavior is to take place -- all of these have an important bearing on the usefulness of a given scale or measuring device. Their importance, however, should not be underestimated. After a comprehensive review of the general lit- erature dealing with'rating scales, lasoner (35:7) concludes that personality rating scales have considerable promise for the future. He states: It is important to note that the number of rating scales, inventories, anecdotal reporting devices, report cards for- the evaluation oflpersonality, and other measures of personality that have been developed in school systems are probably in the hundreds or even thousands. Returns from schools concerned indicate that a number of second schools regard rating as an important phase of the pupil personnel program. Rating scales or personality inventories de- signed tc deal specifically with the characteristics of drop-outs are not reported in the literature and, in so far as this writer could determine, such scales do not exist. From a logical point of view this lack of such scales is not surprising since one of the first prerequi- sites in rating scale construction is that the traits be clearly defined. This is essential so that the traits will be clearly understood by the raters or judges. Iith the present state of tenuous knowledge concerning the drop- out problem, one vould be hard put to select traits which could be assigned proper weights in regard to their associ- ation with drop-out behavior, or to define these traits as they are functionally related to the problem at hand. Ihen the above criteria are not met, one can be reasonably sure that independent judgments by raters concerning the score or rank of the subject under consideration vill be scat- tered. Since it is necessary to take the mean or some av- erage of all the judgments as representingthe nearest ap- proximat ion to the 'true' rating, the hypothetical 'true' score has little meaningfwhen a large proportion of‘these judgments deviate significantly from the average. nevertheless, rating scales have a place in the evaluation of soc ial-personal characteristics of drop-out behavior even though their use is somewhat- limited at this 21 the. The Teacher's Rating Scale for Pupil Adjustment (54) based on norms through the first two years of college lists five categories of adjustment: intellectual characteristics, social adjustment, work and study habits, emotional adjust- ment, and scholastic adjustment. The authors of this scale are alare apparently of the generalness or abstractness of their categories and a sign of their awareness is indicated by a provision for numerous supplemental data they consider necessary to ”increase the value of the scales.“ rhe‘Vineland social Iaturity scale (53) lists items supposedly representing progressive maturation by several categories: self-help, self-direction, locomotion, occupation, and socialisation. The scale is intended for use with a normal population up-to age thirty. While the results have a high correlation.with intelligence test re- sults, the validity of the test in terms of behavior pre- diction is only ambiguously reported. In general, the literature suggests many avenues of exploration by means of'rating scales. The above cited scales are only suggestive of the‘way the scales are cons ceived and serve to illustrate the fact that the elements of behavior rated are primarily general abstractions rather than concrete realities. In so far as such scales will be of aid in understanding college adjustment with reference to the drop-out problem, the job of scale construction is yet to be done. Iriting of rating scales, Garrett (26:42) states: The various tests of character and per'sonality‘have practically no value as predictors of college scho- lastic success, but the rating scales. . . on a various number of items do have possibilities as an instrument of prediction of college success. Garrett's optimism would appear to be especially true in so far as‘such characteristics as studiousness, per- sistence, ability to budget time, and characteristics of like kind are concerned. Unfortunately the relevance of these items, i.e., theyweight to be assigned them, in the over-all personality configuration as related to school ad- justment is unknown. There seems to be little doubt, how- ever, but that this will be an active field for experimenta- tion and. research in the inediate future. Personality inventories are closely related to rating scales though usually distinguished on the basis of who the rater will be. The personality inventory is in. . effect a self-rating questionnaire which deals not only with overt behavior, but also with the person's oun feelings about himself and his environment reported by means of in- trospection. The limitations of such inventories at the present time are similar to the limitations of the rating scales previously described with the additional problem of estimating variability when introspection is used. The Allport A-S Reaction Study (4), a self-rating inventory.‘ is an example. Devised for use with college 23 students to disclose the degree to which individuals tend to dominate others or be dominated by them, the test may give us an abstract conception of this element of behavior on the part of the student. On the other hand, its use- fulness for predicting general scholastic adjustment or drop-out behavior in particular is so limited that it is scarcely worth mentioning. The Bell Adjustment Inventory (6) supposedly deals with items more closely related to general college adjust- ment. It consists of questions intended to evaluate the subject‘s status with respect to home, health, social ad- justment, emotional adjustment, and occupational adjustment. one form is applicable for college students. However, the inventory has been sharply criticized on. grounds that the characteristics are not mutually exclusive and therefore the test does not measure what it is supposed to measure. While validity scores are high when compared with other adjustment inventories, validity is relatively low vhen judged by be- havior patterns on the part of students in college. While numerous other inventories might be men- tioned, the purpose of reviewing this literature was to as- certain whethcr this field of exploration might provide us with some insight into personality factors as they relate to college adjustment and, therefore, to the problem of understanding drop-out behavior. The results indicate many 24 avenues for further exploration, but leave us with the con- clusion that the instruments available at present are too general and have not been demonstrated as having particular relevance for the drop-out problem. This conclusion is not meant 'to be a critique of personality.assessment by these methods. It is simply a statement that the general purposes of personality inventories are not necessarily directly ap- plicable to the particular problem at hand although they may indirectly aid us in understanding both the complexity of the problem and its manifestations in some specific areas. S__o__cio-Economic S_t__atus an__d_ Other Social Values as Related to Collegg Enrollment _an_d_ _t_h_e_ 531.3 g_f_ Eh; Stud 2t while it is possible to conceive of a college cam-- pus as a world of its own with an independent social system and culture, and while such a concept might be useful if one were limiting a study to some specific intra-college problem, the drop-out problem does not lend itself to such an abstract viev. The drop-out is a person in transition -- a student who in most instances has only recently come from . another setting and who is returning to this former social system or some other one either by choice or necessity. He comes from a rural commity -- a metropolitan center, a social class, a home and family within a class, a wealthy family -- a poor one. In other words, to the flow of events 25 at college the student brings a cultural background of his own. Several attempts have been made to associate ob- jectively this background with college enrollment and ad- justment. An editorial in M 934 Society (49) entitled ”Educatipn as a Class Privilege” cites figures to show that many students who might profit from college training are unable to attend college at all, or to finish if they start, because of economic reasons. Agate (2), in a study of per- sistence in college, found that the children of persons in the highest occupational categories ruained in school mch longer than those in the lower categories. Osborn (46) states that the proportion of college students coming from homes in the higher soc'io-economic classes is much greater than from lover classes. Furthermore, he concludes that those from the lower classes are a highly selected segment of that group. Using father's occupation as an index of class affiliation, O'Dell (44) found no relation betwoen social class and college grades. However, Cough (28:69) found a slight relationship betueen academic achievement and socio- economic status: Intercorrelation between scores on the American Home Scale, the Brown Personality Inventory, and .various achievement tests show . . . a slight positive relation to academic achievement, while personality inventory scores have a slight nega- tive relation to achievement and status. e That colleges have their own.prestige systems which in most instances are not based on the same social values the student was familiar with in his home commity is evident. Secondly, the student coming from his senior class status in.high school to freshman status in college may be experiencing downeard social mobility for the first time. The student must learn to assimilate the college culture. outside the classroom as well as in the classroom and to adjust to the paradoxes and complexities lhich at first baffle anyattenpt at direct inquiry on.his part. The study of the conunity and of social classes has become a discipline Iithin sociology as well as other areas. Literature in sociology might provide a basis for some tentative hypotheses concerning socio-economic class as related to the college community and thereby indirectly contribute to our understanding of the drop-out problem. Eflncational sociology in its present state would be able to make the ammo type of general tentative hypotheses al- though its position in the field is somewhat uncertain at this time. The national Society for the Study of’Educa- tional Sociology vas organized in 1923 (8). Following its discontinuance in 1928, its members not as a section of the American Sociological Society until 194S‘when the section was abandoned. Brookhover (8:413) states: There is a tremendous amount of research to be done before an adequate sociology of education can be said to exist. 27 Brockhover notes a new and increasing interest in this area and reinforces the idea that sociological analysis as a means of understanding schools and the edu- cational processes is apt to prove fruitful in the future. Zeleny (57) cites the need for educational sociologists to broadenthir scope to include practical problems of edu- cation as well as the laboratory and library. In spite of the paucity of research in educational sociology, one does find in the sociological literature of the community several references to calamity school sys- tems and social class. In Elutown'; 1222' Holliugshead (32) reports the lower one's social class position the more ' likely he is to receive poor grades. This is sumarined in the following table taken from Bollingahead's report: rant: 5 DISTRIBUTION OF IRAN aninas B! crass Bicxnaounn h Glass ' 100-85 84-70 . 88-50 I. II 51.4 ' 48.8 8.0 ' III 35.5 85.2. 1.5 ‘xv - 18.4 88.2 12.4 'v' 8.5 66.7 25.0 Total -‘23.8 - 66.3 9.9 28 In terms of social role definitions, Hollings- head (32) states that for the members of the lower classes ”growing up means quitting school, getting a Job, escaping adult control, doing as one pleases.“ Upper to middle class homes, on the other hand, are reported as stressing the things that formal education.has to offer -- book learn! ing, manners, associates, preparation for a career, etc. In other words, while upper and middle class backgrounds reinforce and stress the ideals and practices leading to a college career, at the lower class levels the situation is the opposite. V Iriting in the area of the sociology of education, cook (11:42) speaks of . . . . . . the major difference between students who go on to college and those who drop out of school . . . are income of parents (plus parental attitudes) and interest in school work. Cook stresses the point that motivation for a career requiring college training it primarily an acquired characteristic, acquired from.a variety of environmental sources. Snyder (51é52) concludes that home‘background or parents! interest is a potential force in keeping a student in college while at the same time she shows no outstanding difference between the education of parents of the with- drawal group she studied and that of the colleges as a whole: 29 Only 25 per cent of the withdrawal cup as compared with 28 per cent of the co legs as a whole state their father's education terminated in the elementary grades. In effect, any difference noted could be attri- buted to chance, otherwise the direction would favor the withdrawal group. Twenty-two per cent of this group indi- cated some college work on the part of their father in oompuison to 20 per cent of the college as a whole. Edu- cation of mothers showed the same tendency. I In general, socio-economic status scales are con- structed on the basis of a variety of factors. Gomon' elements are income, wealth, residence, education, occu- pation, etc. From our review of the literature‘in this area, it is indicated that these factors may all in some way be related to personal-social adjustment in‘the college commity. In addition to these objective indices one needs _ as well to consider social class identification in the form of attitudes toward college and occupational goals. 'hile ostensibly the opportunity to go to college irrespective of class position, wealth or income, and similar factors is intended in our society, the opportunity is more apparent than real. It may well be that the major barrier to equal opportunity stems from this attitudinal background derived from social class differentials. Bell's account in my; 2.2;; M £22.21 (7) is a sumary of considerable factual research in this area which would support this hypothesis. 30 Perhaps the most provocative report along this line comes from Iarner, Havighurst, and Loeb in m ;_;__Shall__ g3 _E_dg- m (56), a sumry dealing. with the realities of class differentials in the educational system containing sub- stantial factual material gathered by the authors and their staff in support of their theory. Sim From the foregoing literature there is evidence that the formation of drop-cut behavior is the consequence of numerous factors, and we have seen the difficulty which comes from attqting to label drop-outs according to a specific trait, as though all drop-outs were the result .of a single unitary variable. in given characteristic as- sociated with drop-out behavior does not operate in a vacuum. Ihile some of the characteristics such as family background, housing, and some aspects of social status ap- pear to be less directly related than scholastic ability or achievement, the critical point to remember is that the potential drop-out brings a cultural background to the cam- pus with him as well as‘ the specific traits and attributes which relate themselves directly to his academic potential. The educator, and perhaps more directly, thestudent per- sonnel worker, is in a position .to see this complex of factors as they operate in the form of a continuing process. 31 As Pressey (48:509) reports: A student may be able to stand infected tonsils, a relatively low level of intelligence, opposition from his family to his plans, or a desperate love affair, or poor eyesight, or a lack of any voca- tional objective, but he cannot stand all of them simultaneously. ‘Eokert (19:71) feels that . . . . . . enough differences were discovered ( in her study) in personality traits, social attitudes, recreational interests and vocational objectives to warrant the statement that the superior stu- dent has a different outlook on life and or- ganizes his thinking and activities to somewhat different ends than does the poor student. Snyder (51:27) sees this difference in terms of the per- spective as follows: One characteristic of the drop-out is they do not think in terms of five years hence. They see merely that their imediate desires and hopes are being frustrated by longer education. The reportsfrom the literature and research have helped accumulate a great deal of useful descriptive data which are relevant to the problem of the analysis of drop- out behavior, but despite the scope‘of the data, further investigation is needed in order .to understand the rela- tionships among these factors. llcElheny (36:2) states tun: ‘ 'hile the spheres of guidance and counseling, admissions, and examinations have received ex- tensive recognition and investigative treatment, such other spheres as student housing, orienta- tion procedures, student aid and placement, and extra-curricular activities have been virtually overlooked. 32 While earlier studies attempted to deal with isolated fac- tors, more recently the approach to the problem has been broadened with the development of counseling centers and the technique of exit interviewing. The concepts of stu- dent mortality and drop-out behavior have been applied in studies which take into consideration the relationships among factors. Relevant data from psychology, sociology, education, and other areas all contribute to this. approach to the problem. It remains for the educator, and particu- larly those working in the field of educational personnel to apply this information to the concrete problem that is of special concern here, i.e., a functional analysis of within-term drop-out behavior. 33 Chapter III PROCEDURES AND TECHNIQUES Initial P_h_a_s_e_ The idea to study I'during the term drop-outs“ took form as a result of much concern expressed in the. Counselor for lion's Office over the reasons given by stu- dents for withdrawal from lichigan State College. The rea- sons were given during exit interviews, .required of all students withdrawing during a school term. Of particular concern was (1) the accuracy of the reason given by a stu- dent, (2) the personal-social adjustment of the student at the time of withdrawal, and (3) the conditions under which the withdrawal took place. After discussing the problem at some length with the Director of the Counseling Center, the Registrar, Dean of Students, Dean of the Basic College, Director of the In- stitute of Counseling, Testing and Guidance, and other stu- dent personnel officers, plans for a survey of within-term drop-outs were initiated. The value of such a survey on an exploratory level was agreed upon, and the initial phase of the proposed study as a thesis project was completed and approved. Following further discussions and preliminary in- vestigation, a tentative outline of the thesis was prepared 34 and approved by the comittee. This proposal limited the survey to male within-term drop-outs during the academic years lSd’I-MS. This period represents the first two years for which records of students in the Counselor for Men's Office and records, of exit interviews could be compared since the exit interviewing program had only been initiated . in 1947. a second phase of the study included an extensive search of the literature in several areas concerning studies which had either direct or indirect relationship to the within-term drop-out problem. Two factors were especially in evidence as a're‘sult of this phase of the study: (1) the proposed study had not been done previously -- in fact, no studies of within-term drop-outs per se were reported in the literature, and (2) studies concerned with the general drop- out problem or the problems of student mortality were limited .in scope at the college level. Following the review of the literature further consideration was given to the over-all plan of the study and the details of procedures to be used and techniques to be followed were completed and approved. The operations are described in the following pages. Collection 3; 932., Since the study was planned as a survey of reasons given by students for dropping out within-terms and a sur- vey of the conditions under which this behavior occurred, 35 two sources of data were found most useful. Official records from the Office of the College Registrar, the Of- fice of the Counselor for Ian, and the College Housing Of-' fice were available. From these sources information was . collected concerning the following items under which the drop-out behavior occurred: (1) grade point average, (2) entrance examination scores, (3) the lumber of terms the . student was enrolled at Iiohigan State College, (4) age, (5) veteran status, (6) rank in high school class, (7) rea- sons the student gave. for withdrawal at the time an. exit interview, (8) type of housing -- dormitory, fraternity, private home, cooperative, or quonset, (9) last known ad- dress of the student after leaving college. The above data were selected (1) because of their presumable relationship to the problem at hand as indicated . by the review of the literature and research reports which were presented in Chapter II, and (2) as a result of con- ’ sultation with student. personnel workers, administrators, and other staff persons at lichigan State College where the study took place. . A second source of data was a questionnaire sent to the student after his withdrawal. The questionnaire was a source of additional information regarding the extent of participation in campus organizations by the student, as well as an instrument 'for checking the validity 'of the rea- sons given for withdrawal at the time of the exit interview. £3)“ .4 36 Validity 9; Reasons Given by Students £93; Leavi_ng Within '_r_e__rm__s_ Checking the validity of the reasons given for leaving at the time of the exit interview involved the preparation of a questionnaire in which the advice and con- sultation of staff members in the Department of Sociology and members of the Institute of Counseling, Testing and Guidance were solicited. Careful consideration to both form and content was given under their direction. It was determined that the questionnaire should be designed to elicit responses in as brief form as possible on the as- sumption that a number of the former students would not have as intense personal loyalty to lichigan State College as they might have had if they had completed their college career. Consequently, the questionnaire consisted of one page which waspsrtinent and to the point.1 The adequacy of the questionnaire was judged by several criteria: (1) Ten faculty and administrative per- sonnel who were familiar with student personnel problems were asked to take the role of the student withdrawing from school and to express their judgments concerning the design and content of the questionnaire. (2) Twmty-seven stu- dents coming to the Office of the Counselor for lien for an 1. See Appendix B, p. 107. 37 exit interview were asked to complete the questionnaire. After the establishment of rapport and a brief explanation of the purpose of the questionnaire, they were directed to project themselves a year. or two hence as they completed the questionnaire. (3) Several campus leaders -- non-drop- outs -- were also requested to fill out the questionnaire on a role playing basis. 1 final term of the questionnaire, using the above criteriaz'as a guide, was given technical approval by staff members of the Department of Sociology andthe In- stitute of Counseling, Testing and Guidance. __ Since the above criteria included the establish- ment of rapport, the development of a letter. to accompany the questionnaire was necessary.2 Technical advice and as- sistance were again solicited in somewhat the same manner as with the questionnaire. Collection Procedure During July 1950, the questionnaire, accompanied by the cover letter, was mailed to all male students who had dropped out within-terms from lichigan State College during the years llSd'I-MS. This allowed an interval of fromone e. two years betwoen the time of. withdrawal and the time of mailing the questionnaires. During August 1950, 2. See Appendix A. p- 104. 38 a-f-cllow-up letter3 was sent to those who had not replied previously. Two weeks later a final letter was sent to the remaining non-returns. The percentages of return in terms of the total group answering the questionnaire were: First letter _§_7_ per cent Second letter __:I_._2__ per cent Third letter 1- per cent Reliability T422251}. Int erviewigg As. one more‘step in checking the reliability-of the questionnaire, and to be assured that the respondents understood it, a sanple of thirty-four within-term drop- outs were interviewed. - Among the thirty-four, . six were from cities of over 200,000 population: seven from cities of 50,000 to 200,000; ten from towns of 5,000 to 50,000; five from comunities under 5.000; and six from. farm areas. In all instances the reliability of the questionnaire was judged to be high on the basis of the interviews and, ' in addition, more detailed information was usually elicited. Such information did not contradict the questionnaire but in effect substantiated its briefer content. 3. J See Appendix A, p. 105. 39 . Procedure £3 Analysis The design of this study as compared with the previous studies in the literature is more inclusive in that a larger mnnber of specific items have been taken into consideration. These factors, numerous though they may be, are classifiable under two general categories: (1) the social conditions under which withdrawal behavior occurs, I i.e., external forces and pressures which may be associated with drop-out behavior, and (2) social-psychological fac-‘- tors -- selected attitudes of the student who withdraws. By attitudes is simply meant the'tendenoy __to behave in a given way as verbally expressed in exit interviews and in response to the previously mentioned questionnaire. Any systematic study needs to classify reliably its: data, with further analysis being-dependent upon ac- curate classification. A first step in analysis will there- fore be descriptive in that (the social conditions will be classified according to a number of logically valid cate~ gories as derived from the literature and from consultation with student personnel workers. A second step will be the conceptualization and classification of social-psychologi- cal data by means of content analysis. The replies of withdrawal students as abstracted from the questionnaire will be analysed with the theme of the response serving as a unit for classificatory purposes, the theme representing 4O the.student's point of view. In other words, if "financial”. is given as'a reason for withdrawal, what attitude is ex- I pressed? Content analysis is a method for classifying the "meaning” of the symbolic expression ”financial", i.e., of locating the empirical reference of the symbols_and their place in the student's hierarchy of values. In order to establish the tenability of any given complex of social conditions and attitudes, a general analy- sis cf the association between conditions and attitudes will follow. The procedure for this analysis will be pri- marily that of analytical induction to establish generali- cations on a logical basis with two resulting primary func- tions: (1) the conclusions,.based on exploratory study, become data for applied student personnel action on a tentative basis, and (2) a number of hypotheses for fur- ther research are suggested. One might well note that here, as in any explora- tory study, what are considered to be the conclusions mey become the main topic of investigation for another study. §2§E§£I Two primary sources of information were used in this study. Official records from various student personnel offices at Michigan State College were made available and provided a basis for collecting data pertinent to the per- sonal-social background of the within-term drop-outs and 41 the conditions under which this behavior occurred at the time of withdrawal. A second source of information was the drop-out student in person after at least one year had elapsed since the time of his withdrawal. Information was obtained from these former students by means of a ques- tionnaire which had been checked'for both validity and re- liability by means of several outside criteria, including judges, trial runs, and interviewing. The questionnaire was designed to elicit the “reasons for dropping out' as expressed by the student after he had shifted his status position and had acquired a different role than his role as a student at sichigsn State College. The data thus col- lected provided a basis for analysing the reasons given at the time of withdrawal from college. and the conditions under which the drop-out behavior occurred. 42 Chapter IV CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH lITHIN-TRKDROP-OUTS OCCUR M M .a_n_d m; Conditions The term status refers to the position one occu- pies in relation to others. .lhile status may be either ascribed or achieved, in either instance it refers to. an anchoring point" or point of reference by which one may be identified. Social conditions are similar in that they refer to conditions under which behavior occurs and is identified 3 therefore, housing, home background, or member- ship groups, etc.,‘ may all serve as reference points to classify a person or an event. _ This chapter concerns itself with social status and social. conditions under which within-term drop-out be- havior occurs. ‘Of concern here is the student as he has been identified and classified according to selected status positions or conditions in the college social struc- ture. This chapter does 923: refer to self-status, i.e., the position the student conceived of himself as holding or of the conditions as seen by the student. These latter factors are considered in the next chapter which deals with reasons the student gave for withdrawal from college. One never deals with all the positions or con- ditions which exist during a given period of time. The 43 essence of analysis is to abstract a selected number of characteristics which are assumed to be relevant to the problem at hand on the basis of previous study and logical analysis. The selected characteristics here studied are those assumed to be important factors as found in the re- view of the literature and from other sources previously indicated. Veteran and Non-Veteran The following differentials were found to exist among within-term drop-outs when they were identified ao- c'ording to their veteran or non-veteran status. Veterans » Non-vets 57$ 63% General kale Student kale Within-Term Drop- Population out Population Figure I: Comparison of the Proportion of Veterans . and Non-Veterans among the 'ithin-Term Drop-Outs with the General kale Student Population. 44 While veteran or non-veteran status is not to be considered necessarily a cause of within-term drop-out behavior, such status does serve as an identifying characteristic in that a significant difference is readily discernible between the two categories. llhile being a veteran and not dropping out are strongly associated, not being a veteran meant the stu- dent was more apt to discontinue his academic program and to leave within-terms. Class in Collge and £53 The rate of within-term drop-out behavior de- creases as'the number of terms completed increases. There- fore, one would expect few juniors or seniors to drop-out within-terms, a larger mamber of sophomore students to drop out, and the largest number leaving to be freshmen. Pur- th~er. breakdown shows that within any given college class the rate decreases according to the number of terms com- pleted. For example, among freshmen, the highest within- term drop-out rate will be found among those who have not completed a term, the second highest rate will be among those who have completed only one term and are in their second term, etc. Ihils the rate of within-term drop-out behavior decreases with the number of terms completed, the age of those who drop out increases within the remaining drop-out groups, i.e., a sophomore who drops out within a term is 45 apt to be one of the older members of his class. Again this may be analyzed in categories based on the number of terms completed. A comparison of age and within-term drop-out behavior by terms using three categories for each follows: Terms at Michigan State College ,_l_or_lssa_, ,___JL;LJ1__, are No. of Within- Term Drop- outs During the Period lQ47-‘49 ::] l———~ll———-.-.-sl———-——a 17 - 18 19 - 20 21 or more ' Age Figure II: A Comparison of Age Status and Within-Term Drop-out Behavior According to the Number of Terms Completed, 1947-‘49. Academic Work - Grade Point Average While academic failure was not in and of itself sufficient to account for general drop-out behavior, the within-term drop-outs did relatively poorer work than the general male student population during the two year period 46 of this study. The grade point average for within-term drop-outs was 2.18 as compared with 2.37 for the general male student population. The grade point for the within- term drop-outs ranged from those who were complete failures , on the one hand to students with 'a 5/ average or' better. m m 322.15 gag Entrance Examination £22122! Rank in high school was not associated with within-term drop-out behavior. In fact, it was found that approximately the same number of within-term drop-outs came from the top one-fourth of their high school class as came from either the second or third quartiles, but that rela- tively few came from the fourth quartile. This latter fac- tor may be accounted for in that few students in high school who ranked in the bottom quartile of their class. enrolled at lichiganState conege. The proportion of within-term drop-outs according to high school rank is indicated in Table 4: .rasm '4 PROPORTION. OF errant-mm DROP-OUTS. Accoanmc . resin: 11! nmascsoop Rank . - Per Cent of Drop-outs IFO'NP 0| 1.; 47 lhile high school rank is taken into considera- tion as a factor in admission to Michigan State College, .more important perhaps are the scores on selected en- trance examinations. The two general aptitude tests ana- lyzed here are the.American.Council on.Eduoation.Psycholog- ical Examination, 1947 edition, and the Cooperative Test of Reading Comprehension, Form 8, 1947 edition. It should be noted that the norms for these examinations were local norms for students at Michigan State College. Compared with the general male student population, 'within-termfdrop-out students did somewhat poorly. How- ever, when the within-term.drop-out population was divided according to veteran and nonpvetcran status, differences did obtain. Forty-three per cent of the non-veteranstere in. thefilower.5' deciles of the examinations and only 29 per cent of the veterans fell within this classification. TABflE 5 A COIPARIBON_OF THE PROPORTION OF WITHIN-TERN‘DROP- OUTS ACCORDING TO DECILE BANK OF ENTRANCE EXAMINATION SCORES WITH THOSE OF THE GENERAL STUDENT POPULATION Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent Per Cent of of RoneVet. of Veteran of Total Gen. Student Rank Drop-outs Drop-outs Drop-outs Population LOB 43 29 35 30 1 ( agiies) ‘ 40 47 44 40 2 (“agents - 17 24 21 30 3 (UpngiIes) 48 gyyglfiggbgg Influences Michigan State College draws students from all parts of the state representing a continuum from rural to urban areas. While the largest proportion of students comes‘ from cities of 50,000 to 200,000 population, a sig- nificant number comes from each of the other areas. So too, within-term drop-outs were found to be represented in all five of the population categories used in this study. A slightly positive association betwun rural background and drop-out behavior was noted: however, the question of the degree of significance one might attach to the differ- ences obtained would be answerable only upon further in- vestigation, which is considered to be beyond the scope of this study. The actual proportions of within-term drop-outs and the expected frequencies based on an analysis of the general male student population are as follows: TABIE 6 PROPORTION OF WITHIN-TERI DROP-OUTS BY CATMORIES OF RURAL- URBAN BACKGROUND AS COMPARED WITH EXPECTED FREQUENCIES BASED ON THE GENE’iAL HALE STUDENT POPULATION, 1947-‘49 Rural-Urban Per Cent of Per Cent of Ex- Continuum Drop-outs pected Frequency Difference 200 ,000 or more 19 21 -2 50,000 to 200,000 50 30 , 0 5,000 to 50,000 19 24 -5 Towns under 5,000 15 13 -2 Farm background 17 ' 12 -5 49 Defining rural as constituting either a farm or small town background, further explorations along this line are indicated. scusi__ng Differentials Type of housing proved to be one of the strongest differentials noted for identifying the conditions for within-term drop-out behavior. Five types of housing were considered: male students living in dormitories, fraterni- ties, cooperatives, private homes, and quonsets. The drop- out behavior pattern is-clearly evident in F 5 III. Dormitories Fraternities Cooperatives Private EomesQuonsets .No. expected to drOp-out END. of actual drop-outs Figure III: Comparison of Drop-out Behavior with the Ex- pected Frequencies in the General Male Student Population. 50 From Figure III one might well conclude that liv- ing in a private home or quonset is a decided disadvantage, living in a dormitory provides average conditions, and liv- ing in a fraternity or cooperative housing unit is advan- tageous. lhether there is a causal relationship, however, has not been established in this investigation. Parental Education ‘ An analysis of parental education on the basis of whether neither, one, or both parents attended college re- vealed that parents of approximtely two-thirds of the within-term drop-cuts had not attended college. About one- fourth had parents one of whom had attended college, and the remainder came from families where both parents attended college. In the general college population, 42 per cent of the students' parents completed one or more years of col- . lege' according to 11ch and Hughes (41). The findings in the writer's study were somewhat consistent with these pro- portions -.'. a difference of only 7 per cent being indicated. Ihile no specific conclusions can be drawn from this data, it seems probable that an intensive study in this area might reveal whether significant differences exist. Student Participation in Cm Organisations” An analysis of the extent to which a student par- ticipated in campus organisations was limited to the mimber 51 of- organizations in which he participated. ' A previous study by the Office of Counselor to lien of participation in student organizations for the year 1947-‘48 had indicated an average of 1.2 organizations per male student in the gen- eral student population. Data collected from within-term drop-outs revealed an average of .6 organisations per stu- dent. On the basis of this evidence, it-‘appears that, con- trary to some reports in the literature, participation in campus organisations is not a handicap. Presumably, the student who is well adjusted in his college life is one who is participating in at least one ‘or more activities, there- by gainingthe benefits of shared behavior and group mrale. _&1_ma_ry This analysis of the conditions under which within- term drop-out behavior occurs suggests that the most signif- icant influences are associated with the type of housing in which the student lives, veteran status, class in college, participation in campus organisations, nutter of terms completed in college, age, and academic achievement. Rural influences in the home background indicated some positive association with within-term drop-tout behavior, but were not as conclusive as entrance examination scores. llo sig- nificant association with parental education or rank in high school was indicated. . Chapter V amateur. - mom was some or vrsw OF THE mam-ms . ' . DROP-OUT :93 Direction 9; M-m Err-292 Attitudes In the previous chapter a number of factors de- scribing the conditions under which drop-out behavior oc- curred were presented. In the present chapter it is pro- posed to describe drop-out behavior from the former student's point of view, i.e., what are the attitudes of the former drop-out student: in retrospect, what factors were so psychologically real to him that they became the primary reference or anchoring points in his evaluation of his reason for withdrawal. The description of this attitudinal reality to be presented here is derived from two sources, the exit inter- views at the time of withdrawal and the follow-up ques- tionnaires. The exit interview data provides a means of classifying the drop-out student according to the reason for withdrawal given at the time he .left school. The ques- tionnaire provides a means of checking the reliability of the first reason given as measured by a period of' at least ' 'one year, this amount of time having elapsed betw8en the time of withdrawal and the questionnaire survey. On cer- tain specified grounds it is proposed that the questionnaire 53 data is more valid. The basis for this proposal is that at the time of reply, by means of the questionnaire, the former student was detached from the pressures and status aspirations of the college comminity, i.e., he was in a position to give more objective consideration to his rea- son for withdrawal and free to express himself without the chance of personalised identification. This proposal, in the form of an assumption, is based on logical grounds and in part was supported by follow-up interviews. However, its acceptance is to be taken primarily on an axiomatic basis rather than on the basis of alpirical evidence. For this purpose the within-term drop-out student is classified according to the reason given at the time of withdrawal, using as categories those employed by the Counselor for Men's Office at Michigan State College. Un-. der each category. the statements made by the members of that category in their response to the questionnaire are analyzed, checking for the agreement between reasons given at both the time of withdrawal and at the later period. In the analysis of the questionnaire responses a content analy- sis will serve as the means of identifying the references of the within-term drop-out as they pertain to his reason for withdrawal, including any contents he may have volunteered concerning social conditions at Michigan State College as be perceived them. 54 Fran the above analysis it should be possible, therefore, to derive a numerical proposition concerning the reliability-of the reasons given for withdrawal, and to derive the ”meaning” of the categorical reasons for withdrawal, i.e., the meaning of financial, illness or health, employment, housing, etc., when given as reasons. By "meaning” is simply meant that the symbol used has em- pirical reference, 1. e., refers to some concrete, observ- able reality, or to an identifiable psychological reality from which behavior can be inferred. Thus, of concern in this chapter is what the within-term drop-out student con- sidered to be the reason for his withdrawal -- this is the former student's point of view. Illness o_r_ M - _A_s_ .A_ Leggy. gc_r Withdrawal Illness or health, as a reason for withdrawal with- in-terms, appears to be one of the most reliable reasons given by students for withdrawal. The percmitage of agree- ment between responses given at the time of withdrawal and in response to'the questionnaire was .85. Of the with- drawal students during the two year period of this study, 22 per cent gave this as the reason for dropping out. Among the reliable responses in this category, the 85 per cent for which agreement was obtained, three sub- categories were identifiable, as follows: 55 Per Cent Nervous condition or insecurity l7 Injury 17 Illness 66 For the remaining 15 per cent, those students who gave illness or health as a reason for withdrawal at the. time Of the exit interview but made no reference to this a year or more later, the reasons given in response to the questionnaire were varied. ' Reference was made to academic difficulty, dislike of the Basic College, the schoolbeing too large, finances, and illness in the family. When asked for suggestions as to how Michigan State College might help new students, only two. respondents made suggestions concerning illness or health. One of these, a handicapped person, was critical of the physical ‘ facilities, stating that he had difficulty getting to and from classes and suggesting that handicapped people be given more general consideration: the other, a student injured in boxing, felt that examinations at the health center should be more inclusive. In general, the inference can be drawn that ill- ness or health, when given as a reason for withdrawal, has direct reference to a condition about which the student is aware and which in his evaluation is a sufficient and necessary condition for withdrawal. In some instances it 56 was indicated that this awareness came directly from the recommendations of the health center, an indication as well of the validity of the response. In other instances the source of the student's evaluation is not given directly; however, responses such as "had to have several operations“, l'x-ray revealed T.B.", ‘broken collar bone“, etc., suggest on their face value that validity is high. On the basis of the above description, it is evi- dent that a health center on the campus is of service to both the student and the college. or interest to this study is the implication that such a facility offers the student a realistic means of evaluating the condition and of de- riving a reliable Judgment concerning his potential drop- out student status. The high percentage of agreement be- tween reasons given at the time of withdrawal and at aflater date indicates the facilities offered contribute to a reli- able understanding of this aspect of withdrawal behavior. The writer infers from the above that the withdrawal stu- dent's attitudes in this area are formed in close associa- tion with the health services available. One of the most frequent reasons given for drop- ping out and at the same time one of the most ambiguous reasons is "finances” or insufficient funds. Actually, the 57 concept, finances, is too abstract when detached from the value system of the student giving this as a reason. For some students, funds are considered sufficient 1: basic needs are met, i.e., food, clothing, shelter, etc. For others, finances are sufficient if some other specific ad- ditional items are included, a problem involving_the-ac- tual standard of living the student maintains and his as- piration level. For example, the student may consider his problem to be financial because he doesn't have the funds necessary to live in a fraternity, or to buy a car, or to dress in.the current campus style. His aspiration level may be mch higher than his resources, and yet his resources may be greater than those of other students who are content to stay in school without a car, new clothes, or belonging to a fraternity. In other words, other students under the sums financial conditions may decide that their limited re- sources are not a sufficient condition for withdrawal. I The percentage of agreement between responses in the exit interview classified as financial and the responses to the questionnaire classified in flhis way was compara- tively low, 60 per cent. The reason for this seemingly low figure is understandable in terms of the relativity of financial status and the ambiguity of the concept when it is used as a general classificatory term» Included in the 60 per cent for which agreement was obtained are such responses as "financial - to keep up 58' a car", ”financial - was getting married“, or ”had a family to support". Since many students remaintin school without a car, without getting married, or remain and support their family, these conditions per so do not necessitate with- drawal except in conjuntion with the value system of the student, i.e., in accordance with the relative position he attached to financial factors. . The insight obtained from a description of the responses may be of more value for our purposes where dis- agreement did occur. Following is a list of reasons given on the questionnaires by respondents who were classified as having withdrawn for financial reasons at the time of the exit interview: Didn't like instructors (2 times) Classes too large, felt he was a number instead of an individual Didn't like Basic College (2 times) Housing problem To be married . Didn't like Quonset Village Dislocation of arm Unable to decide upon course to study Veterinary medicine field overcrowded Wasn't qualified for course picked out Didn't like attitudes of students in general Social activities over-ride educational activities at Michigan State College Living off campus - Discouraged with school work While “it is possible that a housing problem or the dislocation of one's arm is related to financial matters to a degree that financial hardship results, the majority of the above reasons do not have any direct reference to 59 financial status. Again, by inference, it may be assumed that financial is a ”reason for withdrawal" only within a broader context. The fact that students did anchor themselves to the concept, as a reason for withdrawal, suggests that counseling and guidance services might well be extended to students who feeltthat their problems are financial. Such students might profit from insight into the status of other students in a similar financial position who do not con- sider their problem to be financial -- in fact, do not have a financial problem at all even though they are living at a comparable level to the withdrawal student. . When asked to comment on how new students might be helped at Michigan State College, these respondents made reference to loans or other financial aid in less than 6 per cent of the cases. Apparently, in retrospect, the stu- dent who left for what he thought were financial reasons, does not anticipate that others will face the problem in the manner he did. Transferring - _A_g 3 M22 39; Withdrawal Remembering that this study is concerned with the drop-out student who leaves within a term, the concept of~ transferring gives an inadequate and incomplete account of the students' reason for withdrawal. 60 Following is a list of statements made by within- term withdrawals who, at the time of their leaving, stated they were transferring to another school, and who, in their response to the questionnaire, made no mention of trans- ferring to another institution: Did not like Basic College Inadequate housing School too large Lack of funds To Join wife Felt he was discriminated against because of race 1 ”#01903 Other respondents who by their answer indicated that they did enter another school. gave the following rea- sons: . To be nearer home . 4 Received a scholarship at another institution 1 To enter business college (because he could get through’in less time 1 From the above it is logical to infer that the within-term drop-out student who proposes to transfer is for the most part no different than the student who withdraws for other reasons, i.e., his reason for withdrawal and his ' reason for transfer are one and -the same, and such reasons fall within the other categories which represent the rea- sons for .withdrawal without transferring. Since the survey was conducted during the summer months, the question of how many of these students were ac- tually enrolled in another school could not be ascertained. 61 In so far as enrollment during the sumer was concerned, none indicated that he or she was at that time enrolled in another school. Personal Reasons £93; Withdrawal _ When a student proposes to withdraw from school within a term he becomes "different” from his fellow class- mates -- he is leaving not only the campus and college com- mnity, but friends and associates with whom he has been in everyday contact, he is withdrawing from the regular re- occurring social interaction of college life. Some stu- dents in this process of transition consider their reasons for leaving to be ”personal“ -- no longer are status, social participation, or dttitudedto be exposed to critical evalu- ation by others. Twenty-three former students who withdrew for “personal reasons” during the period of this study re- sponded to the questionnaire and restated their reasons for withdrawal. In all cases the "reason in retrospect" was no longer considered personal but had reference to a condition or attitude about which the respondent spoke freely. Of the twenty-three who originally considered their reason for withdrawal to be personal, nine new stated their withdrawal was due to a lack of interest in college work, some of these attributing this to their dislike of the Basic College, and others to a lack of vocational plans. 62 other reasons once considered personal but later freely expressed were sickness at home, finances, employ- I ment, housing, and family problems. Again, as with the transfer-drop-out, the reason originally given for withdrawal undergoes a transformation in the mind of the former student. His perspective changes and he now identifies his former attitude with some spe- cific condition seen as a non-personal factor to which he anchors his reason for withdrawal. mama - __Trmition __n-o- Ems .22 .322 Employment, as a reason for withdrawal, is best understood as a means of achieving post-college adjustment, but not as a reason for withdrawal. This view is supported by two types of data: (1) the occupation of the former stu- dent, and (2) the reason for withdrawal given in the questionnaire. - Following is a list of the typesof occupations held by students who gave employment as their reason for with- drawal-at the time they left school: laborer (skilled or unskilled) . service occupations (chef, policeman, etc.) 5 clerical (bookkeeper, stock clerk) 3 farmer . 1 technical (draftsman) 1 managerial (credit mgr., ins.) 1 student Twelve, or 50 per cent, of the within-term drop- H outs giving employment as their original reason for es withdrawal were laborers. On the questionnaire they gave as their reason for withdrawal such items as illness in the family, insufficient funds, inadequate housing, poor grades, etc. Of the remainder, those with positions other than laborer, only 8 per cent stated that their reason for with- drawal was to accept the employment offered, in each case this being a family affair in which the. father or .a rela- tive had offered the student a position. From the above, it can be inferred that the con- cept of employment when applied to within-term drop-outs refers to a conclusion the student reached as a result. of his decision to withdraw rather than as a reason for with- drawal. Once having decided to leave school (for any one of a number of reasons -- such as: no particular ambitions, did not consider myself a student, had grades, to be mar- ried, too large a school, etc.), the student concluded that he needed employment, and this now became the reason for withdrawal from his point of view. ‘ lhen asked how new students could be helped, vari- ous responses were given, such as the machinist stating I that “students should belong to organisations“, or the tur- ret lathe operator saying ”there is a need for more ade- quate housing‘and study facilities”, or a bookkeeper stat- ing that "students should decide on their vocation before entering college". Jame ; 64 Regardless of the adequacy or inadequacy of their "reasons”, the purpose here has been to describe the within- term drop-out's point of view. lhen he considers employment to be his reason for withdrawal, one might well conclude that at a later date he will focus his attention on some condition at the college, and will drop the concept of em- ployment from his frame of reference. The percentage of agreement obtained between reasons given at the time of the exit interview and the reason given on the questionnaire was .07, the lowest of any category here described. Academic Lark - Lam the Student's M o_f_ View Few students leave lichigan State College within terms with the belief that they are unable to make the grade in their academic work -- at am rate, only 7 per cent of the within-term drop-outs covered by this study considered this to be their reason for withdrawal. My; ms... - Assumgg 1:33 mg 2; 322 m The findings of this investigation revealed that if a male student's father becomes ill the student may, de- pending on other conditions, drop out to support the family. 0f eight students leaving because of family illness, ill- ness of the father in the family was reported four times. One student referred to his mother's illness, and two re- ferred to illness in the family" without reference to the 65 particular family member concerned. Only one drop-out gave illness at home as the reason for his withdrawal at the time of the exit interview while later reporting that he withdrew because of financial reasons and dislike of the Basic College. The percentage of agreement between re- sponses as a whole in this category. was therefore high, .88, suggesting that family illness as a reason for withdrawal within-terms, while not frequent, is a relatively reliable reason when given. V Such drop-outs accounted for 6 per cent of the total number of male within-term withdrawals over the. two year period of this study. Drop-outs in this category failed to offer sug- gestions as to how new students might be helped at Michigan State College. Since their reason given for withdrawal had reference to a condition at home rather than in terms of the college commity, their lack of suggestions is readily understood. Logging - As a Contributing Factor in withdrawal In a few cases, about 1} per cent, housing was given as the reason for withdrawal within terms. From the student's point of view, however, housing was more often considered as a factor directly related to poor grades, health, need for employment, or as a personal matter -- these latter being given as the reasons for withdrawal. so Housing is, therefore, considered by the student as a con- tributing factor, but not a direct reason for withdrawal. The Quonset Village was most often mentioned as the center or undesirable housing but again this was referred to pri- marily in terms of study conditions prevailing there and only indirectly as a reason for withdraws}. While the number of cases in this category was small, the percentage of agreement was .76 as to the inade- quacy of housing as seen at the time of withdrawal and later on at the time of the survey. Miscellaneous Reasons for withdrawal Other reasons given for withdrawal during this period were: to enter service, dissatisfied, married, could not, get proper courses, schedule difficulty and work trouble. Because they were relatively infrequent, or be- cause they were not describable due to the limited data available, they have been placed under a single category here and while they represent views of 3 per cent of the within-term drop-outs during this period, they are neither consistent nor identifiable in terms of a concrete social or psychological reality. a A M 93 Rgliability 2f the Reasons Given an the Points 2;: View Egress“! by Within-Term Drop-Outs Of the 246 within-term drop-outs whose replies to the questionnaire were adequate and sufficient for 67 descriptive purposes in this chapter, the following table summarizes the consistency of their "reason for withdrawal”. Where possible this_summary has been stated in numerical terms indicating the proportion of students within each category of reasons given, and the reliability of reasons given within.that category. I ' mm 7 commalson or REASONS minim) IN EXIT mum WITH THOSE GIVEN ON THE QUESTIONNAIRE Reason for withdrawal ‘ Per Cent of Per Cent of Agreement Given at the Time the Total Male with.Reasons Given in Student Left School Drop-Outs .Questionnaire Illness 22 85 Financial 21 60a Transferring l? "b Employment ‘ l6 7 Personal 1:5 12° Academic 3 86 Family illness 3 33 Housing - 2 ‘76 'Miscellaneous 3 ~- a. Data as to whether the former student had actually A enrolled in another school was not available. b. While all respondents were employed, their responses indicated that only two had actually left to accept a specific Job offer. .lhat were originally considered to be ”personal” reasons were later reported in a different perspective. The above table suggests on the whole that male within-term.drop-out students do not consider their with- drawal due to their own inadequacy or lack of ability to 68 do college work. From their point of view, the dominant reason given for withdrawal is health or financial need, or, at the time of withdrawal, employment or a-personallfac- tor later to be considered in the light of external forces or pressures. From their consents it is indicated that they feel their situation is one about which something can be done, and they (in retrospect) suggest more counseling and guidance. They, express a desire for more adequate housing, more personal attention, a more thorough orientation pro- gram: and a dislike for the Basic College, large classes, and a large school. . This, within the limits of this study, is re- vealed to be the psychological reality the student person- nel worker and school administrator face. in understanding and working with the within-term drop-outs. The problem posed presents many difficulties since some "reasons for withdrawal” are not meaningful unless seen in a much broader context. When a student withdraws for what he con- siders to be a personal reason, or to transfer, ordto get i a Job, the counselor can be relatively sure that the pic- ture is incomplete, or if‘the student withdraws for fi- nancial reasons, the meaning of financial is relative to the living standard and aspiration level of the student. On the other hand, personal illness, illness in the family, or academic difficulty, when given as the 69 reason for withdrawal, are apt to be reliable reasons as indicated by the data here described. Housing, while not reported frequently as the primary reason for withdrawal, is often considered by the student to'be a contributing factor in his withdrawal. _ The above description pertains to the within-term drop-out's point of view -- the psychological reality of the’reasons he gives for withdrawal. It may or may not correspond to the conditions that exist as seen through the eyes of others. Nevertheless, it. is'to be reckoned with and constitutes a part of the problem of understanding within-term drop-outs. In the following chapter conditions under which this psychological reality occurs are considered. 70 Chapter VI WITHIN-TERI murmur. as A COMPLEX or ' ATI'ITUDES AND CONDITIONS The Relationship 2;: Attitudes 332 Conditions Surroundiflg the Student Up to this point the emphasis in this study has been on two classes of phenomena considered asparately. On the one hand a number .of- selected conditions have been de- scribed under which drop-out behavior occurs as abstracted from official college records. Following this a descrip- 'tion of the verbalized attitudes of the drop-out has been provided in terms of his expressed reason for withdrawal at the time he left school and later in response to a ques- tionnaire. Theae steps have given a descriptive background. The writer is not, however, presenting descriptions based on unrelated elements for it is recognized that withdrawal consists of a complex of activity. An attempt will be made in this chapter to de- scribe the conduct of the within-term drop-out in terms of an on-going process. Ihile observations are of necessity confined to verbalized statements made by the drop-out, written records, or descriptions of social acts, these com- ponents are to be considered in terms of their place in in- dividual and group activity -- where the student lives, '71 what aspirations he maintains, his reference group be- havior in terms of his family, friends, social participa- tion, membership groups, classroom activity, activity in the college community, or his references to general status such as a Job, etc. These remarks have to do with the final phase of this stud -- emphasis on the within-term drop-out's atti- tudes in their natural setting. Early in this study, Chapter I, it was stated as a basic premise that the within- term drop-out was responding to pressures exerted upon him to substitute a new or different pattern of activity than that accompanying his status in the acadmnic program and the college comnity. Of particular concern then in this chapter is the endeavor to describe the conditions which exert such pressures and their association with the reasons given by students for withdrawal. To accomplish this end each category of drop-outs (classified according to the reason given for withdrawal) shall be examined in relation to those conditions found to be most significant in the analysis described in Chapter IV. It is conceivable, in- deed probable, that there are significant aspects of the problem which have not been touched upon in this study: but if the review of the literature upon which the tentative selection of factors took place is considered, it will be noted that the factors studied constituted a starting point 72 based on the evidence at hand which indicated that such a selection-of factors as were made should prove useful. This, in an exploratory study, constitutes the procedure by which.recommendations for further study as well as a tentative general understanding of'withinrterm.drcp-outs could be formulated. The analysis which follows is offered as descrip- tive and makes no claim for proving a specific hypothesis. It is hoped, however, that some understanding has been achieved whereby the concept of withinpterm drop-out can be identified with greater empirical content and the way paved for further analysis and study. Analysis 2; Conditions under which the Reason “Illness” IEmerged _ . I The following analysis is not to be interpreted . . as an analysis of what made the student ill. In fact, in many instances it is not known whether he was ill (or in- jured) but it is known that he gave illness as the reason for his withdrawal. The purpose of the analysis is to de- scribe the conditions associated with the person giving illness as a reason for withdrawal -- where he lived, his academic status, etc. . The strongest association between illness and type of housing occurred within the group living in.the 73 Quonset Village. It would have been expected that 14 per cent of the village residents might give this as their reason for leaving, based on a theoretical proportion .de- rived from their frequency in the general male student popu- lation. However, it was found that 23 per cent of the within-term drop-outs were from the village, 9 per cent more than expected. In the same-positive manner those living in private homes exceeded their expected frequency of 39 per cent, the actual percentage being 46 per cent, or '7 per cent more than expected. Among dormitory residents an even stronger association in the opposite direction was dis- covered, 19 per cent less than expected. Fraternities and cooperatives had no onelin this category although their theoretical proportion was 11 per cent. Data were not available concerning the housing of ll per cent of the sub- Jects in this category. _Ig essence _t_h_gg _t_hg _d_a_t_§ suggests EEE student residences, _su___ch _s_._s_ private £252 _o_r_ 29.122223! housing (annset Village) afforded _a condition associated with the concgt of illness 53 g 2222‘: for withdrawal. This is _ig M contrast 32 dormitories, cooperatives, gr fraternities, 1223.12 th__e concgt seldom emerggg. According to age status the younger group, those 17-18 years of age, were more apt to give illness as a reason for withdrawal than would theoretically be expected, 17 per cent stating illness as a reason compared with a 74 theoretical proportion of 10 per cent. The 19-20 year old group was about as expected, with 28 per cent giving this reason as compared with a theoretical frequency of 50 per cent. For the older students, those 21 or over, while the expected frequency was 62 per cent} only 48 per cent gave this as their reason for withdrawal. Data were not avail- able for 2 per cent of the cases in this category. The data indicates that age is associated with within-term drop- out behavior at the two extremes, i.e., the younger stu- dents are positively identified with illness as a reason for dropping out while older students are negatively identi- fied in this manner. Illness as a reason for leaving within terms did not vary from.its expected pattern according to the number of terms completed by the student at the time of with- drawal. The proportions were within 1 per cent of their expected frequency in all cases. So, too, with urbanprural background serving as a reference differential except that the percentage of disagreement was 3 per cent, a small dif- ference here interpreted as not significant. .lhile the grade point average of within-term drop- cuts as a whole was 2.18, and for the general male student population during the period of this study 2.37, the average for those falling within the illness category was 1.7, an extremely low figure by comparison, suggesting that grade _ point average is strongly associated with illness as a 75 reason for withdrawal. The author does not offer 5 propo- sition concerngg the naturg 2; this association, _i._g., 5 low gpade point average causes illness, other than 33 state that these are apparently not 319 independent phe- nomena. Runembering that the category of illness included whether illness causes a low grade point avergge pg whether "nervous fatigue” and ”insecurity”, the twa-way relation- ;ihip is readily understandable. Entrance examination scores were negatively re- lated to illness as a reason for withdrawal among those in the upper third on the examinations, 14 per cent giving this as a reason compared with the expected proportion of 33 per _cent. A positive relationship to the middle third was in- dicated by 54 per cent in this category, while 61 per cent of an expected 33 per cent in the lower third was obtained. Entrance examinations, therefore, may be considered as a differential for the student who does well, i. e., _t_h__e _a_tg- .d_gi_l§ _w_t_ip_d_ge_s__w_e_]_._l9_n gptrance examingtiong 33:35; gpppp gap illness _a_; p m £93; withdrawal phgp 23 student gig-Eh avergge pp p295 performance pp $9.12 examinations. Apparently the student identified as ill (in- cluding the injured, nervous, or insecure) doesn't partici- pate in social organizations, or if so, to a very limited degree. lhile the within-term drop-outs as a whole only participated in an average of .6 organizations as compared 76 with 1.2 for the general male student population, within- term drop-outs within the category of illness as a reason for withdrawal participated in only .2 organizations. Ihile recognising that this study does not indicate the degree of participation except in terms of the' master of organisations participated in (without considering offices held, semit- tees, etc.), the differential figures obtained do suggest In summary, evidence has been presented to show that within-term drop-out behavior identified with illness as the reason for leaving is associated with a number of conditions. The drop-out is, relatively speaking, the young student, living in a private home or temporary hous- . ing, who had a low grade point average, did'not rank high on entrance examinations, and usually failed to participate in campus organizations. Critical research rust, of course, go beyond the findings of this study with its exploratory limits. The implications of these findings are not of lesser importance because of this, but rather they present a description which through further study might help to il- luminate the processes by which such a'configuration of drop-out behavior occurs. 7? m'Financial Dilema" . The relativity of the concept "financial", in terms of its relationship to the student's value system, has already been indicated. Having acknowledged this limi- tation, the drop-out was considered within this category and with the same selected conditions applied in the preceding category. Once again, as with illness, the student giving finances as his reason for withdrawal is strongly identified with residence in a private home, the relationship being an ' actual proportion of .60 as compared with an expected pro- portion of .38. The student living in the wonset Village showed a slight relationship in this direction, .14 as com- pared with an expected proportion of .18. Dormitories, co- 7 operatives and fraternities are negatively related. y; pg pg inferred £29.15. pressures exerted pp 339, student Egg E 5 private h_om_e M p; ig pm pp maintain h_ip student mgmmsésmlsiaflune e___1comun1t 52.9 m 9.9.9. g_a_r_i_._e_§, 3133 ”financial dilemma" M 293 Egg manifestation. Age was not a significant differential in this area, a slight positive association being related to the 17-18 year old group, this being offset by the 19-20 year old group, withthe older students presenting the expected proportion for their category. The same was true for the '78 number of terms completed except that the tendency was in the opposite direction, i.e., the more terms completed the greater the tendency to attribute withdrawal to finances. Students coming from urban residential back- grounds were more apt to consider their reason for dropping out to be finances than were students from rural backgrounds. The urban students exceeded their expected proportion by 7 per cent, the rural asserting this as a reason 6 per cent fewer times than expected. Data were not available in 2 per cent of these cases. 223 o_n_ly inference 333:3 _i_s_ derived from logical grounds and flggests p gypothesis ELK further stud , namely that the aspiration level derived from thg _u_r_b_a__n community; 13.2.33 py_s_t_e_m 9—1232 more pressure 2.313 mm p_f_ desire 32 m pppig-economic nobiligz, thereby makipg Q3 2 $92692 ggp between achieved .s_t_a_tp.p _ap_d pp- piieg status. _8_u_cl_l p mothesis is testable 2d verifiable (or remtable as the case may be), pp; exceeds £133 Limit; 2.1: 32.1.8 sessi- lhile within-term drop-outs in this category did better in their (academic work on the average than those withdrawing under the illness category, their grade point average was still less than that of the general within-term drop-out or that of the general male student population, a difference of [.31 and {.5 being obtained by the latter two categories mentioned above. As previously suggested, a 79 -! hypothetical value system is inferred, with the value system of the drop-out, as part of an interpretive schema, neces- sary for understanding the financial drop-out's rationale. For drop-outs within this category examination scores do not serve as a significant differential. This is true also of social participation. The within-term.drop-out' giving finances as a reason for withdrawal is like the gen- eral male student pOpulation in regard to his participation in activities. He has not withdrawn or remained isolated but plays a number of active roles the same as any other student. It should be noted that the description of this category of within-term.drop-outs is of necessity based on interpretive concepts rather than a singular relationship. to the data at hand. ‘Except for housing, where a signifi- cant relationship with private home residenoe did obtain, it must be assumed that “W“ .a_s_ 5 39539;: gipgp £93 ‘ withdrawal 3.; related'pg m3; diverse Mai»; ‘53;- titudes Lhat a d____irect relationship 322.922 _tgg m 3;- The ppticipatogy Transfer ' Although the anticipation of transferring schools may be considered acceptable by the students in gtneral, ap- parently this attitude is most strongly associated with some types of housing as a background. At the risk of sounding repetitious, and to the point of reporting the data at hand, "transfer", like I'illness" or ”finances", is considered a Justification for withdrawal among within-term drop-outs living in private homes, and acceptable too as a reason among the expressions of those living in quonset‘ type. housing. The expected proportions were exceeded by 18 and 10 per cent in each group respectfully, with other housing showing a strong negative relationship. Age and the number of terms completed were ob- served in their expected proportions but rural home back- ground as compared with urban exceeded its expected fre- quency by 13 per cent, a ~10 per cent being observed for the urban. Anticipatopy transfer students grep 5 E3}. environ- M m m gpp 2 consider Michigan W College 3:32 2.9232 s 921.12.; an 322 233$: this as. has 2__1r1m __condiuon contributhg _t_g M 9351.33 £21; _a_ transfer. As was noted earlier, the data does not necessarily suggest the student actually did transfer, but that he gave “transfer” as the reason for his withdrawal within-terms. That such. students were more eligible for satisfactory transfer of their credits is indicated by their general grade point average of 2.0, a higheruaverage-than that found in any of the previously mentioned categories. On the whole such students did not achieve high scores on their entrance examinations, 81 i.e., were not in the upper third: their distribution in the lower two-thirds was about as expected. Social par- ticipation was limited among the potential transfer stu- dents. They belonged to an average of .33 social organiza- tions as compared with .6 for the general within-term,drop- out population, and 1.2 for the male student population in general. ‘ The data suggest that the anticipatory transfer student had only loosely identified himself‘with the extra- academic activities associated with his student status.-‘;p pg 2 323; pg m E; M 213 student alienates h_i_m- _s_eli_‘ 3.9.1! 3.3;! college g M 93 i3 enrolled _i__s dgpendent 1_lp_c_r_l _t_1_l_e_ 9.9.53.2 32 M 1_l_e_ identifies himself pith another school. Gettipg 5 Job The individual who leaves to get a Job-is not un- like the drop-out who gave illness, transfer, or finances, as his reason for leaving in so far as college residence is concerned. The expected or theoretical proportions were ex- ceeded by 21 per cent in the private home category and by 6 (per cent in the Qucnset Village group. Again, dormitories, fraternities, and cooperatives contributed relatively fewer drop-outs than anticipated. ‘Withdrawal to accept employment is predominantly a function associated with increase in age regardless of the 82 number of terms completed prior to withdrawal, particularly so among rural within-term drop-outs. Members in the rural category exceeded their expected proportions by 19 per cent. It is possible, of dourse, that these students didn't leave to take a Job, a hypothesis already suggested by preceding analysis and the extremely low reliability figure of only 7 per cent agreement between employment as an anchoring point at the time of’withdrawal and reference to employment in the questionnaire responses.. lore intensive study must be done before one can say this is indeed the case. Supporting evidence is indirectly derived, however, by an analysis of the grade point average of the group, their average of 1.6 being extremely low, and the fact that this group did poorer on the entrance examination scores than any group heretofore described. Participation in campus activities was also relatively limited. To this point, then, it is found that within-term drop-outs'stating they are leaving to find employment have a reason precipitated by poor academic work, associated with poor aptitude for scholastic work, originating from a rural orientation, and associated with private home or quonset type housing. Though much remains to be said, it could be gen- eralized that the student falling within this category was a poor prospect from the beginning. One other item of descriptive data lends credulity to this point of view. An analysis of the Jobs held by these students during the second year of their post-college employment indicated they were predominantly laborers, clerical workers, or in a service occupation, i.e., predominantly in the lower, or in the lower-middle socio-economic bracket. Their per- formance level here was commensurate with their level of performance in the college commity. This gggests p a- tent function possibly performed p1 emlcypent: 1.3 m serve 32 coppensate $93: the relatively $9; standipg 2;; ph_e_ potential drop-out _ip £1.13 college community. Academic Work - Its Relationship 32 Social Conditions In this category, as with family illness and housing which are yet to be considered, the low frequency of cases makes our description a tenuous one. At the same - time an analysis of their contribution to a general under- standing of the within-term drop-out problem may be sig- nificant because, while they are not often mentioned as primary reasons for leaving, the evidence indicates that they do serve as underlying contributing factors far beyond the recognition given them by the student. is has been noted in the preceding descriptions, poor academic work was closely related to employment, fi- nances, and .illness, as a reason for withdrawal. But, even if generally true, this did not indicate the nature of the 84 relationship. y; M 3333 pointed 293,. however, p933 yin-_- 9.2%! 3:32 considered 1922; academic leg; _a_s_ pp; £21.22 _t_‘pp withdrawal m functioni_pg .1! £133 522 approximate L212}. .13. 3.1.1.229. gm illness, finances, p_r_ mloment _a_g t_h_e__i_x; £25393 £9; leavi_ng. The levels of their respective av- . erages are as follows: Employment 1.6 Academic . 1.62 Illness 1.7 Financial 1.87 ‘ It seems that a student can state he is in need of finances, of a job, or he can state he is ill or in poor health, but he cannot state he is a poor risk academically. What needs to be uncovered is the process by which this pattern emerges. For one thing those students who gave academic dif- ficulty as the reason for their withdrawal did not rank high on entrance examinations; .on the other hand, they did not in general represent the lower third either, three times as many having scores near the mid-point as in the lower cate- gory. They were not socially inactive, having the highest social participation score of any group, an average of 2.0 as compared with 1.2 for the general male student popula- tion and of .6 for within-term drop-outs as a whole. They were not predominantly rural or urban, and age or number of terms did not appear to be a significant factor. They 85 did, as with the majority of the other categories, come predominantly from private homes or quonset type housing. At best only a tentative formulation of a propo- sition can be offered concerning the within-term drop-out who considers acadanic difficulty to be his reason for withdrawal. First, as the study reveals, such drop-outs are rare; and secondly, poor academic work is known to be closely related to other reasons for leaving. M 323 g- dividual pkg 2223 22.11.! g pip academic 32315 eriences, Emmanummfimmrmlmmmmm. £13311 33 consider academic difficult; _a_ 3%, £221.22 flap 3 ppm 2; gig problem. However, _w_h_e_p 233.133; ggpgi- pippg gr_e_ favorable (when he is busy in campus activities, considers his finances adequate, etc.), pg 1.9.; M 32!- drawal _i_f_ his gades are low. \ Lani]; Illness - é Reference £31.35 _i_z_1_ Leavipg Family illness, as a reason for withdrawal, is primarily associated with the older age group. As sug- gested in Chapter V, the predominant complex here involves the status of the father, his apparent inability to meet his former role demands because of illness, and his subse- quent replacement in this role by the son away at college. This is particularly true for students coming from a rural 86 background, regardless of whether he is living in a pri- vate home, quonset, or dormitory. . The incompleteness of the data in this category makes the description of this complex rather narrow, and limits generalizations to a minimum. It seems probable that if special inquiry were concentrated‘on this area of activity, the problem would have many extensions leading over into social status, financial resources, occupational level of the father, size of family and its composition, etc. Our brief analysis provides intimations to this ef- fect. We have no indication that grade point averages are related to this activity. Housi_n_g - Estrggement from the Groups Home It will be recalled in the discussion of housing as a contributing factor in withdrawal (page 65) that only about 1} per cent of the'total percentage in the study gave dissatisfaction with housing as the reason for leaving. Withdrawal attributed to inadequate or unsatisfactory hous- ing is limited to students who resided in private homes or the‘Quonset Village. These students were all older stu- dents, i.e., twenty-one years of age or over, and young in terms of their existence on the campus, none of them com- pleting a full year's study. They could not be identified as predominantly from rural or urban backgrounds, their 8'7 academic work was poor ‘( average of 1.7), they did extremely poorly on entrance examinations (in the lower third), and were not active in campus organisations. In nearly every respect this student is describ- able as a deviate from the general campus norm. It might be tentatively assumed that, since his group relationships did not develop, or deteriorate, as his academic work lag- ged, he would orient himself toward the values of some . other community than the campus, a. eventually dropping out of school. Within such a set of conditions it is little wonder that "everything is bad -- including the house I live in". A My 93; Descriptions .Thegoal in the preceding descriptions has been to identify with greater empirical content and in a systematic manner a number of selected factors as they are associated with within-term drop-out behavior. Of concern were not isolated segments of phenomena, but complexes in which re- lationships were described, thus paving the way for ana- lytical interpretation and the construction of hypotheses for hirther study. In some cases the breakdown by categories did not yield differential processes. With reference to housing as the condition under which withdrawal occurred, it was shown that this condition when identified with private homes _is 88 with one exception always a factor to be considered. It is impossible to differentiate as to "why" a student with- draws by taking into consideration his school residence. A different type of implication is, however, important be- cause of this. ~In fact, where this factor fails to dif- ferentiate'pggpip the drop-out group, it becomes one of the most clear-cut differentials between drop-outs and non- drop-outs, and an hypothesis for further research concerning the process by which housing influences operate to produce within-term withdrawal‘is provided. In a similar manner housing, illness, finances, and employment are all closely associated with poor aca- demic work. This complex is not so much an academic status differential within the drop—out group as it is a uniformity within the group. It is also a differential between within, u. term.drop-outs and the general male student population undo; the specified conditions associated with illness, housipg, finance, and epploypent. . Previously other differentials which were found in the drop-out classifications have been described. The de- scriptions took the form of abstractions concerning the stur dent who conceived himself ill, or anticipated transferring to another school, or taking a Job. In the large school with its complex social milieu, such as Michigan State Col- lege, it can be assumed that all the relationships 89 described may be influential at any given time, enforcing or reflecting to the potential within-term drop-out the role he will play. 'These conditions serve as reference points whereby the drop-out defines the situation and an- ticipates his role in relation to that of others. .5352 Inconsistent .G_as_ep ' I It was noted in Chapter VI that there were a num- ber of cases where reliability was not established. It was not the intention to analyse all of these cases, but rather to select a number which might be of aid in understanding the peculiarities, if any, of the unreliable case. On logical grounds the unreliable cases associated with ill- ness and with insufficient finances were chosen. The rea- soning in selecting these two categories was as follows: (1) In both instances there were slough reliable cases to suggest that there was some persistent pattern from which the unreliable case was a deviation. In other words, 86 per cent of the cases in the illness category were consistent in giving their reason for withdrawal, and 60 per cent of the cases in the financial category did likewise. How did the inconsistent response differ? ' - In many instances the pattern of conditions re- - mained the same. The drop-out who was inconsistent in I stating his reason for withdrawal came predominantly from private home housing, withdrew early in his college career, 90 did poorly (but no more poorly than other within-term drop- outs) in his academic work, and was not a very active par- ticipant in campus organisations. Three factors did stand out as identifying characteristics of the unreliable cases: (1) They were definitely students who at the time of with- drawal were older than the average student of similar aca- demic status; (2) They came almost exclusively from urban home‘backgrounds; and (3) They did poorly on.entrance examinations. The author simply describes the unreliable case as an older student (older at the time he began his college career and older than others in his class at the time he withdraw) who is relatively poorly suited for academic work and who has as a background the social system of the larger community, a background usually considered to be hetero- geneous and interwoven.with a complex of alternative and contradictory social roles. Summapy The data reported here concerning the consistency or inconsistency of relationships between within-term drop-outs'stated reasons for leaving school and the con- ditions selected for comparison in this study reinforce the idea presented in the initial phase of this study that within-term.drop-out behavior was a complex of activity identifiable and describable in its natural setting. Without 91 1 previous studies of within-term drop-outs with which to make comparisons, the, descriptions presented have been in every sense exploratory. It may be that these descriptions will take on new meaning when other college studies are available. The interpretation and the theoretical formu- lation of the findings leading to hypotheses for further study follow in the next chapter. 92 Chapter VII SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS 8m: 1. 2. 5e 4. A review of the literature revealed that studies pertaining to within-term drop-outs were lacking. Related studies concerning both within-term and between-term drop-outs as a general class were fre- quent and suggested a number of variables or factors for investigation. An exploratory study was then designed to provide for the analysis of' a‘wide range of data which on the basis of the literature or consultation with administrators and student personnel workers were assumed to be relevant to the problem at hand. Data were obtained from two primary sources: of- ficial college records and directly from male within- term drop-outs. The latter information was collected by means of a questionnaire which had been succes- sively reformulated through a series of protests. Validity of the questionnaire was established by se- lected follow-up interviews. The data were then analyzed with reference to the conditions associated with within-term drop-out be- havior, and the frequency and reliability of the rea- sons drop-outs gave for their withdrawal from college. 5. 6. 7. 8. 93 Further analysis involved the description of con- -ditions related to drop-out behavior and their as- sociation with several categories of reasons for withdrawal as expressed by the drop—out students. It was found that several differential patterns within the intra-term.drop-outs could be described, as well as differential patterns between.within-term drop-outs and non-drop-outs. ‘The patterns were interpreted to indicate that the drop-out students maintain a number of relationships both onpcampus and off-campus which serve as effec- tive differential reference points in their withdrawal. ‘ The need was cited for further study of a comparative nature which.would evaluate the implications of col- lege community and off-campus relationships as they relate to withdrawal. I Inteppretations and Conclusions ,The interpretations and conclusions in this study, like any exploratory study, are not to be considered final but rather lead to the formulation of tentative conclu; sions which in turn become the preliminary formulations or hypotheses for further study. The interpretation and theo- retical formulations leading to a rationale for further in- vestigation follow: 94 At the outset of this study reference was made in Chapter I to the fact that within-term.drop-outs have been considered as belonging to the same general class as any drop-out student. It was then suggested that while this might be the case, an explanation for the withdrawal of within-term drop-outs might be found in an analysis of the conditions which.appeared immediate and demanding to them; situations so significant to the potential drop-out that within the term he decided he had to leave more or less immediately. After examination of a number of se- lected conditions and an analysis of reasons given for with- drawal the problem can now be restated. . Within-term.drop-outs are officially members of the college community prior to their withdrawal. At the same time they participate either directly or through per- sonal identification in the many-faceted life of society with basic loyalties and demands extending to their home community, to sub-groups within the home community, to their family, or to general status positions -- occupational, fi- nancial, etc. Hence, their reference points off the campus are manifold in both content and intensity. within the college conmmnity the potential within- term drop-out fails to participate on a par with others in campus organisations. The requirements of academic disci- pline are likewise more of a casual anchoring point for him, 95 while his housing, health, personal matters, and finances stand in the foreground. The tangentially important values, the values about which he is concerned in either a positive or negative frame of reference (either for or against butin either case primary objec'ts of attention and evaluation), serve as diversions from meeting the prerequi- sites of social and academic participation in the college as a community of interacting persons with mutual and recipro- cal role expectations. It should be noted that this interpretation rests upon the hypothesis that social cohesion and morale do pre- veil in the general student body. while this study did not concern itself with an index of general student morale, that such morale is a reality at kichigan State College can be qualitatively established by reference to the activities and pursuits of the general student body. There is an ' . identification by the student with the institution with a set. of generalized predispositions to meet role obligations and a readiness to acknowledge the demands of the institu- tion in nmlmerou's particular situations. Similarly, the evidence does find the within-term drop-out directing his interests or focusing his attention away from the institutional demands. He is less ready to acknowledge the legitimacy. of the institution's role ex- pectations in the numerous particular situations which 96 exist and, therefore, from the drop-out's point of view, he is less obliged to fulfill these role requirements. The key to interpretation then becomes the com- parative significance of off-campus conditions and rela- tionships (home, friends at another school, housing) or general status categories (job, occupational goal, fi- nancial status) in contrast to social and academic par- ticipation within the campus community as they operate Jointly to shape prevailing attitudes among potential within- term drop-outs. The implications of this interpretation and for- mulation are many. Studies of students have been concerned with academic success, social participation, achievement, health, social adjustment, personality characteristics, student leadership, to mention just a few. These are re- ported in the literature. Comparative studies, however, in which the above are considered in relation to the off- campus community -- one's home background, socio-economic status, off-campus housing, differentials in rural and ur-- ban background -- We 53231.22 2213223 raisins- 2922.! as 9:9. as! 3.122 2221.! is 5.1.1.01 22.0.1222 W 322 £9.12 __attmdea 2.2m 292-2222. 22 reams- There are a number of grounds on which objections to the above retrospective interpretation.might be based. First of all, it is difficult to state in precise terms or 97 concepts how these factors are presumably related without introducing further variables. Secondly, analysis in- volving interpretative concepts is at least one step re- moved from the empirical data upon which.we base our in- terpretation. To justify the conclusion that comparative studies which cross the life of the college community and off—campus activities or identifications are necessary, even though they may be difficult to conceptualise at this time, an earlier affirmation that this is a legitimate stage at the level of exploratory study may be repeated. In the early stages of investigation when rigid empirical tests are lacking, gaps must be filled in by a system of concepts and tentative formulations which become the hy- potheses for further investigation. These tentative for- mulations aid in discovering what factors have previously been overlooked, or what additional factors must be de- scribed and taken into account. This is perhaps the dif- ference‘between exploratory and experimental study in terms of the purpose for which they are designed. The purpose in this study has been to explore and to describe, and thereby to conclude with suggestions and recommendations for fur- ther study as well as to make a few tentative suggestions concerning the practical problem faced in.understanding the within-term.drop-out at this time. It is recognized, how- ever, that continuity in any area of investigation requires 98 that some generalizations in the form of an interpretation such as here presented be included. These then become the central theses about which there is doubt. These theses, in the form.of specific hypotheses, can then be subject to further investigation. ‘Reccmmendations I (Hypotheses for further study) 1. 2. 3. 4. Private homes or temporary housing afford a condition associated with.the concept of illness as a reason for withdrawal in direct contrast to dormitories, co- operatives, or fraternities, where the concept sel- dom emerges. ‘ Illness and a low grade point average are not inde- pendent phenomena: however, the nature of.their as- sociation, i.e., whether illness causes a low grade point average or whether a low grade point average is a cause of illness is in need of further exploration. The student who does well on entrance examinations is less likely to give illness as a reason for with- drawal than the student with average or poor per- formance on these examinations. Seclusiveness or withdrawal from.campus activities is a significant aspect of the behavior one might anticipate among students who consider withdrawal for which they give illness as the reason. 99 5. Off-campus housing presents the student with.a fi- nancial dilemma, real or imaginary, which makes it difficult for him to maintain his student status and carry out his role obligations in the college .community. 6. The aspiration level derived from.the urban communir ’ty's value system exerts more pressure in the form of desire for upward socio-economic mobility, there- by making for a large gap between achieved and as- pired socio-economic status, this latter serving as an index of potential withinpterm drop-out behavior. 7. Students from a rural environment are more likely to consider Michigan State College as too large a school and to give this as a primary condition contributing to their desire for transferring. 8.. The degree to which a student identifies himself with another school results in a corresponding alienation from the college in.which he is enrolled. 9. ‘Employment as a goal prior to the completion of one's college career is a compensatory factor for one's relatively 1's. standing in both acadanic and social activities on the campus. . 10. Poor academic work is acknowledged by students as a reason for their withdrawal only when some other rea- son is lacking, i.e., as a last resort. 100 11. Students who consider illness, finances, or employ- ment as reasons for withdrawal will be functioning academically at the same level as students who recognize academic difficulty as their reason'fcr leaving. Recommendations g This study has posed several ’questions related to the present student personnel program at Michigan State College and the efforts now being made to understand and work with potential within-term drop-outs. While the de- tails involved in the application of any recommendations made here would involve the professional insights and train- ing of administrative personnel and counselors on the job, the general scope of the recomendations which follow is aimed at suggestions which, (carried through to the applied level, might aid in reducing the number of within-term drop-outs in the future. Al. One of the crucial factors which must be faced, difficult though it may be to work out in terms of a detailed program, is off-campus housing. Two alternatives appear feasible which are in line with better control and improvement of the off-campus housing problem: One approach would be to assign one or more persons the specific responsibility to . inspect off-campus housing and to maintain a close 2. 101 working relationship with students living in such units. Just as the dormitory, fraternity, or co- operative maintains a close working relationship to the student personnel program, so too some means of communicating the problems of the off-campus units to the student personnel offices is necessary. A second approach, one less cumbersome although sommwhat limited in scope, would be to require all freshmen students to live on campus during their first year at kichigan State College. lhile this approach would not reach the student who enters Michigan State by way of transfer, it would over a period of time mean that most students would have experienced at least one year of supervised and campus oriented student participation. From general remarks and comments made in response to the questionnaires used in this study, remarks which cut across the different categories of within- term drop-cuts as here analysed, it is suggested that the content of the general orientation.prcgrmm for new students place more emphasis on the func- tion of the Basic College in relation to the stu- dent's training in whatever area he may contemplate choosing for specialization. 3. ‘lhile any student personnel program.must be flexible and adjust to the needs of the students, the 4. 102 .structure of the counseling program needs to be well- defined and its specific resources made available to the student in the sense that he is aware of the help available to him. While counseling services may be broad in scope at Michigan State College, there is some evidence that these services are not necessarily known to the student at the time he de- sires or is in need of counseling. lany students either directly or indirectly infer that they would have made use of counseling facilities, if such.were available. On the other hand, it is known that in many cases the facilities were available, but ap- parently not known to the student. In line with the preceding recommendation, it is sug- gested that a concerted effort be made to establish a closer working relationship among those personnel offices interested in living situations, academic advisory services, extra-class activities, student health, and the professional counselors. 103 APPENDIX A 9’." MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE 10‘ / East‘ Lansing Office of the Counselor for Men July 20, 1950 Dear Sir: The Office of Counselor for Men at Michigan State College would like to ask your assistance in solving a problem that confronts us. A number of students who start their college careers withdraw before the completion of their course. Although this number is not large, we feel it is signifi- cant enough to study carefully in order to assist other stu- dents with similar problems. Our major concern is to discover the reasons for withdrawals during the freshman and sophomore years. Since you withdrew from flichigan State College during that period, I would like to ask your cooperation in completing the accompanying ,ques- tignnaire so that we may gather some information which "will be helpful for future use in counseling and 'advising'other students. The questionnaire is brief and will only take a few minutes of your time. This information willzbe kept in strictest confidence and your name will not be used at any time. Is would like to have‘the information ready for fall. Therefore, it._would be appreciated if you would complete and return this question- naire immediately. An addressed and stamped envelope isen- closed for your convenience. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation in helping us to help other students, I remain. Sincerely yours, L. Dale Faunce { Counselor for [en LDF : jm 3110]” 105 MICHIGAR STATE COLEEGE’ East Lansing of Office of the Counselor for Men August 20, 1950 Dear Sir: Some time ago this office wrote to you requesting your as- sistance in solving a problem that confronts us. we feel sure that you did not receive the letter or inadvertently misplaced it so we are again writing and requesting your kind indulgence. A number of students who start their college career withdraw before the completion of their course. Although this number is not large, we feel it is significant enough to study carefully in order to assist other students with similar problems. Our major concern is to discover the reasons for with-, drawals during the freshman and sophomore years. Since you withdrew from kichigan State College during that pe- riod, I would like to ask your cooperation in completing the accompanying questionnaire so that we may gather some information which.would be helpful for future use in coun- seling and advising other students. The questionnaire is brief and will only take a few minutes of your time. This informntion.will be kept in strictest confidence and our name will not be used at any time. [a would like to vs the information ready for fall. Therefore, it would be appreciated if you would complete and return this ques- tionnaire immediately. An addressed and stamped envelope is enclosed for your convenience. Thanking you in advance for your cooperation in helping us ‘to help other students, I remain. Sincerely yours, D. Dale Faunoe Counselor for Men LDF:jm EhOls 106 APPENDIX B 45 107 6/ MICHIGAN sum 0 OLIEGE “East Lansing 10 “we 2. Present address Etreet Town §tate 3. After leaving I.S.C. did you transfer to any other school? Yes No What school? Did you graduate? ‘ 4. will you please describe briefly the work you are doing‘ at present? 5. In a brief statement would you explain the reason or reasons you had for withdrawing from.l.8.c.? (Please be frank as this will be of’help to us in working with fu- ture students. If there happened to be some base of college life you did not like, please say so. 6. Please list any organizations or activities to which you .belonged or in which you participated while attending n.s.c. (This would include campus or community groups.) Religious Recreational Departmental Social Professional Fraternal Athletics 7. If you have any suggestions that would assist us in help- ing new students, p ease list them below. (If you do not have sufficient space, please use the reverse side of this sheet . ) 108 APPENDIX C 109 Data showing the frequencies of questionnaire answers according to the reason given for withdrawal as related to selected Data in College records. as? e a? 110 “’1?me n 111 SUMMARY OF REASONS GIVEN FOE WITHDRKWAL AT TIME OF EXIT mmvm, TOGETHER WITH REASONS AND COMMENTS GIVEN ON QUESTIONNAIRE Financial Reasons Given Reasons Given 29 Commgnts on at questionnaire Q§EEEIBEEgIFQ Exit Interview . Family illness Financial No comment Financial Financial No comment Financial Financial and lack No comment . of adequate housing Financial Financial No comment Employment Financial No commmnt Financial Didn't like instructors Get new instruc- ; . tors Financial . Unable to attend classes-Urge first term . permanently disabled - students to financial Join organi- ' cations Illness in family Financial No comment Financial Glasses too large, No comment . lost individuality - Illness Financial - health Favorable comment Wife's illness Financial work out study . plan for married students Financial Didn't like Basic Students should College be asked to Join ~ activities Financial Financial lore loans Financial Financial (married) No comment Illness Lack of interest and No comment ‘ finances No comment t Personal_ To acquire.encugh money New students to get divorce should partici- f pate in all so- cial activities Personal Financial No comment Financial Housing problem No comment Employmmnm Financial - Father's No comment ~ death Financial To be married - couldn't College should do keep up with studies more than Just send out proba- tion notices 4-? J”; £321? 112 Reasons Given Reasons Given 23 Cements on at . Eesflennaire 311353.15. Exit Interview Illness at home Financial - dislike No comment ‘ of Comps. - Transferring Financial - and credits Do away with Basic . didn't transfer from College West. Michigan Transferring _ Housing and financial No cement Transferring Financial - didn't get No cement expected scholarship Too big a school Financial Ne cement Entering Navy Financial - couldn't de- Favorable cement cide on a career Financial Financial _ Set up aid fund _ fer out-ef-state . veterans Financial Laeked money and peace He cement . of mind - Family illness Financial Favorable cement Going into business Financial No cement Support family Financial - lother's Ne cement illness . Employment Financial No cement Personal Financial Ne cement Financial Disliked Quenset Vil- Simpler registra- lage, too large school tion program and don't overcrewd the campus Father's illness Financial - family No cement ‘ illness 7 Financial Dislocation of arm No cement Financial Unable to decide upon More personal help ' ' course of study from teachers ' and counselors Health Financial No comment Personal . Financial Ne cement Financial Financial Find some may to _ . assist new stu- ‘ dents Financial Financial Ne cement Transferring Financial Need for more counselors Entering service Financial and uncertain Do away with comp. of major . system for grading Transferring Financial, and unde- Lower room rates . sirable housing for G.I. 'e, and more social gatherings ’Reasenst Given 'Bxit Interview Financial Plans to reenter Insufficient funds Financial Financial None given Personal Financial Financial Financial Financial Financial. Financial Financial Financial Financial Personal Financial 113 Reasons Given'gg Comments on as onnaIre QuestionnaIre Financial No cemmmot Financial No comment College out for stu- Give small town dent's money kids a break in - athletics Vet. Med. field ever- Show no partiality crowded to msn.sith ath- letic scholar- ships lasn't qualified for Entrance ex for all and more capable teachers Financial - both parents No comment ill - farming Financial - couldn't Give vocational make friends aptitude tests to entering stu- dents ‘ Financial - lack of in- Give more help to terest and no goal ne-pref. students Reorganization of lo cemmmnt Father's business Dislike of instructors Increase staff so instructors could spend more time with indi-. vidual student course he chose 'Housing and financial Reuse students ac- cording te income Attitudes of students in Stress more educa- general - social activi- tion than social ties stressed more than activities education _ Financial - no particularNe cement interest Financial No comment Class schedule cen- No comment flicted with employment Dislike of Basic College More concentration and grading system. on education and less on grades Family illness - finances More personal coun- seling help and employment aid Discourage stu- dents who require indiv. recegnitiegzy .- Zér“ ‘ Lived off campus - discouragement 114 Reasons Givg Reasons Given 31 Ce nts on at as onnaIre fie— e Exit IKEerview Financial Had a family to support Get Gov' t. checks to veterans on time Financial Had to maintain car - No cement Aunt's illness , Transferring Financial No cement Financial Financial No cement Financial 3: persenalFinancial No cement Mother's illness Financial lie cement Financial Financial Should feel he could confide in counselor Employment Financial lo cement Personal Personal Didn't care for subjects lo cement offered . Personal Dislike of Basic College Abolish Basic and running around too . College much Personal Net applying self to Re cement study up to capacity Personal Offered fine position Individual stu- which is present em- dents should be - ployment considered more Personal Illness in family He cement Personal Inadequate background Ne cement for college Personal Could not become adjustedSmaller classes after arm life - Personal Inadequate preparation Should. prepare . for college ' student in high ' school for cel- ' lege Personal Sickness at home and More personal finances counseling and aid in securing part-time employ- ment Personal Unsure of course to Doesn't favor Basic follow College; provide more opportunity for analysing adaptability and aptitude Reasons Given at Exit Ifitervies Personal Personal Personal Personal Personal Personal V Personal Personal Personal Personal Personal _ Personal Personal 1Employment _ Employment Employment Reasons Given 22 ea onnaIre No interest, Quenset Village too‘large. lack of individual attention‘ in classes Financial Lack of interest in field where enrolled Financial; couldn't make friends Qnonset not con‘ucive to study; overcrowded classes Misinfermed concerning athletic scholarship Felt five year forestry course entailed too large a sacrifice for future it afforded Wanted to get married Insufficient funds Study difficult after breaking engagement To acquire money to ob- tain divorce Had had three years at previous college so . didn’t feel need for more Couldn' t decide upon field to enter; Basic College Emploment - Bad grades, crowded classes Unsettled about career Left to operate uncle's farm 115 Comments on Questionnalre ‘ More personal and individual help for incoming students No comment No comment Give vocational tests to entering students .Brief students on how to arrange 'classes No comment No comment No comment Ne-comment Favorable comment New students should participate in all social-activities Doesn't think college degree necessary . Need more couns selers, more per- sonal student- teacher relation- ships Need more instruc- tors (general construction work) Students should de- cide on vocation before entering college (laborer) No comment (mgr. of“? 500 acre farm) 5‘ 116 Reasons Given Reasons Given 93 at git IFEerview Cements en es ofifie QuWe Employment Business opportunity Give students seemed attractive more personal attention (book- keeper at bank) - Employment Needed imediate em- Favorable cements . 131°me , (telephone co.) Employment Didn't consider himself a No cement (letter student; thought he should carrier) take Job offer Employment Left to Join police force No cement (police- man Employment Left to do work he enjoyed Read Reader's 2i- sest. p. 75'." July 1950 (eng. drafting) Employment To be married, offered Route man for position Coca Cola ‘ Employment Veteran and didn't want No cement (laborer) ' to take one year ROTC Employment Offered present Job No cement (book- . keeper - milling ce.. Employment To take present Job No cement (mana- ‘ ging father's gas ' station) Employment Not well and had family No cement (I.S.C. to support dairy dept.) Employment. Lived off campus, no par- No cement (oper- ticipation in organisatims ates confectionery) no particular ambitions Employment Bad to work, couldn't keep Exceptions should be up with studies, too made regarding large a school rules (credit mgr., insurance company) Employment Living in Quonset Village Need more adequate, not conducive to study, housing and study etc. facilities (turret ‘ lathe operator) Employment Insufficient funds No cement (ship- ping clerk) Employment Illness in family, dis- No cement (laborer) ' satisfaction with selec- tion of courses, lack of consideration on part of Deans, Counselors, etc. Employment Couldn't manage working No cement (proof- and studying reader) Reasons Given at“ EXit IRerview Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment Employment Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring 117 Reasons Given on Cements on est onnaire— QuestionnaIFe New job prohibited con- No cement (chef- tinuing in school steward) Financial No cement (gen. maintenance man in hospital) Lack of interest, no one More adequate prepa- vocational choice ration in hi school (student) Only enrolled for one day No cement Didn't get along _well in Students should be- studies long to organisa- tiens (machinist) To join police dept. No cement (police department) Family illness No cement lab. tech.) Couldn't make adjustments No cement laborer) after Navy, hopes to re- turn Financial No cement (welder) Transferring Basic College; didn't More counselors and have enough G.I. time more personal stu- dent-teacher rela- tions needed Lack of funds No cement Wanted to go to school No cement in home town Entered service from stateNo comment and wished to be near home after dischar e College too large; ill Smaller and more per- health sonal classes Basic College, system of No cement handling student housing Wishes of parents; school Give vocational exam- too large; ill health inations to entering students Unsettled as to plans; Need more counselors; had to study in Q. V. abolish Q. Village To be married No cement School too large, had to No comment live too far from campus «as -' Wesson tGiven Exit Ifiterview Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Transferring Illness ’Illness Reasons Given en es ionnaIre_ Dislike of Basic Col. Financial Housing and financial Financial Disliked Basic Col., too large Liv conditions 'Schoo too large 118 Cement s on "33£ISEE£IF¢ No comment Abolish Basic Col. No comment No comment Better living con- ditiens, jealousy 'of other housing Abolish Basic Col. No comment Received scholarship to Find more convenimt University of New York way for students to withdraw Poor housing ; didn't like deter housing fa- football set-up To join'wife in Cal. Felt personal racial discrimination Felt he could get same schooling in business college, no basic college Financial Wife's health, school too large Thought he was going in- to pharmacy, new in accounting Called home by parents housing Too troubled living .conditions School too large Dissatisfaction.with Basic Col., could finish school in lass time at business col. Because of wife Illness (Health) Dislike of Basic Col- lege; climate Illness cilities - Quon. Establish refresher course for vets. No comment . No comment School too large Do away with over- crowded classrooms No comment . No comment Insufficient funds; poor Lower room rates for G.I.‘s; more so- cial.gatherings No comment No comment No comment No comment No comment More thorough indoc- trination program in {ah-ii“, 119 Reasons Given Reasons Given 29 Comments on at QuestionnaIFO uestIenna15e Exit Ifiterview . Illness Illness No comment Illness Insufficient college No comment preparation; one class ‘ held religious conflict .fer him' ‘ Illness Hospitalized by V.A. No comment Recommendation of Living conditions; 111- No comment Dr. Holland and ness and too long in Dean Strother school Recommendation of Nervous fatigue Students should Health Service ' regulate their time for study v. and play Health ' Financial No comment Health life's health, school Eliminate over- too large crowded class- ‘ ' rooms Illness Invalid - had diffi- Handicapped peo- . culty getting to and ' ple should be from classes shown more con- ‘ sideration Health Had to transfer to a No comment warmer climate Health ' Ill health No comment Health Couldn't do-required work Favorable due to bad le Illness Became ill dur regis- No comment tration week . Illness Lack of understanding of No comment theoretical and practi- ‘ cal education, inseority Illness Illness - No comment Illness Illness No comment Illness ‘ Illness Don't encourage ~ students to drop out if they get behind in their . ' work Health Dislike of Basic College Try to show new stu- dents reason for Basic College No reason given Illness ‘ No comment Health, Nervous condition - No comment Health‘« Illness, x-ray revealed No comment TB ' Reasons Given at Exit Interview Injured in boxing Injured Health Health Illness Illness Illness Medical reasons Transferring Illness Illness Academic a poor health Illness Health Illness Health Health Health Health' -Health Reasons Given 29 est onnaIre Required several opera- tions Injured in deer hunting Had TB - 15 months in hospital ' Housing fac ilit ies , illness Broken collarbcne while playing football 120 Comments on 3137;535:334: lake complete check of student's health when he goes to health center for treatment No comment No comment No comment Each student should have faculty counselor Had trouble with college No comment algebra; had to drive to and from.achool Killed June 9th Had to have operation Wishes of parents; school too large; ill lake'counselore more readily available Give‘vocaticnal examinations because of Q.V.‘heating to entering stuimts Ill health -Deceased, April 1949 Illness - sinus trouble Financial, health Illness Lack of interest and finances Accepted at Hotre Dame Nerves - recommended leave by physician Illness and parents moved to Wisconsin Mental health Deceased No comment No comment No comment Favorable comments No comment No cement No comment Teachers have bet- ter understanding of students No comment Studmnteshould study what he is .best suited for; join at least one organization No comment BeasonstGiven a Exit Interview Dissatisfied No housing Course too difficult Father's illness Dissatisfied Needed at home Academic academic Work trouble Schedule difficulty Death of Father Evicted from homhg Housing and sched- uling Father's illness Father's illness Dissatisfied Scholastic Married Miscellaneous R asons Given o_n éuesfiionnaire Didn't think chance of getting job in four years too great Poor housing, school too large Couldn't become adjusted to college life after service . Father's illness, had to go home every weekend; ades low D dn't like Basic College or life on campus, too crowded Too far from home, campus too large Had been out of high school too long Dislike Basic College No particular field of interest , Housing and studying conditions Father' s death Lack of housing fa- cilities Living conditions Father's illness Father's illness Dislike of Basic College Requested to witdraw, tried to carry too much work, insufficient back- ground Entered pre-med., marks ’r‘i’fiah’nigrfia ous fa- cilities ing 3 couldn't 121 Comments on est cnnaIFe No comment More counselors More adequate housing, No,comment More personal at- tention, felt too much like a number No comment Students just out of high school should be kept in separate classes from those out six to eight years Let Basic College be optional. Compulsory aptitude tests and counseling No comment Favorable cements No comment ' Request students to visit NBC before enrolling Should take more interest in indi- vidual students No comment No comment Take min. work first term; instructors should report on failing‘students every two weeks; more counseling , No comment Reasons Given at Exit Interview Illness at home Not qualified to do Not able to settle down college work To work a year, .unsettled Reasons Given gg ues oEEEIFe Financial; dislike of Basic College 122 Comments on use onnaIFe No comment No comment Didn't like basic English;Nc comment. failed course Couldn't get proper Dislike of Basic College Now can see theory OO‘UI'BOB Too large a school Financial Employment Illness at home Financial Insufficient manpower at home Support his family Financial; Mother's Too large a school, Couldn't get down to work illness Dissatisfaction wifihPoor sleeping quarters, living quarters Father's illness Dissatisfied Father's.illness Academic Employment. Scholastic Academic Course difficulty Too busy Mother's illness Dissatisfied Dissatisfied no place to study; not enough time between classes- Family illness & finances Jump from small to large - college too great Father's illness Living.conditions in Q.V.; lasy at studying Living conditions Wanted to get intO‘dif- ferent type of work behind Basic College No comment No comment No comment No comment Students should all live on campus No comment No comment Students should be- come acquainted with buildings be- fore they attend No comment Do away with QfV. Better housing pro- ject for married students ‘ No comment Grades too poor to trans- No comment fer to hotel ad. Had no particular voca- tion in mind Additional help at . registrat ion time Too busy with other work; Discipline lack of respect of teach- ers for students Finances ' No comment School-too large, too imp No comment personal, no goal innund Offered football scholar- Doesn't think whole ship at Tulane; didn't like comps. year's grade should depend on comps. LI V ’ ' 123 BIBLIOGRAPHY l. saronicg; H.885, iLgck of Money and the Veterans With- rawa on o 00 School and Society Vol. 69 January 1949, pp. 28-31. ’ ’ ,2. Agate, Grace 3., "Persistence in College as Related to Intelligence, Economic Background and Present Occupap {$2§.' Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Louisiana, 3. Allen, R. D., ”Counseling_Program for the Voluntary Withdrawals," High School Journal, 22, Hay 1939, pp. 183-193.. 4. Allport, G. I. and F. H., All ort A-§,Reaction Stud , Houghton kifflin Co., New YorE, I932. _ 5. Amori, J. A., ”Why Junior College Students Withdraw," gggigg-Collgge.Journal,_Vol. 12, September 1941, PP- ‘ 0 . "6. Bell Ad ustment Invento , Stanford University Press, Stanfor , . . 7. 3911, Howard 11., Youth Tell Their Sto , Uashington, D. C., American Council on Education, 938. 8. Brookhover, N. B., "Sociology of Education - A Defi- nition,“ American Sociolo ical Review, Vol. 14, No. 3, (June 1945!, pp. 457-413. 9. Charter, w.-w., ”Student Mortality," The J urnal 2;, Higher Education, Vol. 9 (1938), pp.. -382. 10. Coffey, W}, Jr., I’llortality and Academic Careers of Two Groups of College.Students," School and Societ , Vol. 52, September 28, 1948, pp. 269-2 . In. Cook, Lloyd Allen,‘é Sociological ApEroach gglEducation, thraw-Hill Book Company, ew ork, 9 . - 212. Cornelius, 8., ”School Lehving," Schogl‘ggg Societ , V01. 63’ Jami”, 4, 19‘1" pp. 29‘ e 13. i4. 15. 16. 1'7. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 124 Crowder, Troy F., "A Study of Withdrawals from the State University of Iowa's Liberal Arts College Dur- ing the l950-‘51 School Year," Unpublished Master's Thesis, State University of Iowa, August 1952, p. 3. Cumings, Edgar 0., "Causes of Student Withdrawals at DePauw University,” School and Societ , Vol. 52 (September 1949), pp. 152-1537 Dillon, Harold J., Earl School Leavers, New York National Child Labor Committee, 1939. - Dressel, P. L., "Liberal Arts Students Advised to Withdraw," Journal of ther Education, Vol. 14, Janu- ar'y' 194:5, .p—Tp. ~452- Dwyer, Paul S., ”The Correlation Between Age at En- trance and Success in College," Journal of Educational Psychology, Vol. 30, April 1939, pp. 251-526 . Eokert, Ruth E., “Analysing the Superior College Stu- dent," School and-Societ , Vol. 41, 1935, pp. 69-72. Eckert, Ruth e., and Marshall, Thomas 0., when Youth Leave School, New York, NcGraws-Hill Book Company, 1938. Erickson, Clifford e., and Smith, Glenn 2., o:- anisation and Administration o_f Guidance Services, New York: NcGraw-HIII Book Company, 15c" . Erickson, Clifford e., editor, A Basic Text for Gui- dance Workers, New York: Prenticml, 150., 1517. Feder, Daniel D. , ”Factors lhich Affect Achievement and Its Predictionat the College Level," Journal 55 the American Association g_1_' Coll iate Reg strars, V31. 15, January 1545, pp. 1 - l . Freeman Frank s.‘ The Theo and Practice of paz’oho- logica1,Testi , New York: Benry m Emmy, 1950. Fresfield, Irving 8., "0n the A.C.E. Psychological Exam," School and Societ , Vol. '70, #1809, August 1949, pp. 117-118. Garrett, Harley F., "A Review and Interpretation of Investigations of Factors Related to Scholastic Suc- cess in Colleges of Arts and Sciences and Teachers Colleges," Colorado Ph.D., 1948. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 125 Garrett, Henry H., Statistics _i_g Ps cholc and Edu- cation, New York: Longmans, Green Company, 1537, Second Edition. Goodenough: Florence L., Mental Testigg, New York: Rinehart and Company, 194 . Cough, H. G.,- ”Factors Relating to the Academic. Achievement of High School Students ," Journal _o_f Edu- cational Ps cholc , Vol. 40, 1949, pp. 55-78. Hancher, Virgil H., ”Animal Report for the Iowa State Board of Education," State University of Iowa, Novem- ber 1948, p. 4. Hilton, Wallace A., and Carpenter, W. H., "Persistency of Students," Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 14, April 1939, ppm - 2'7": ........__._. Hoffman, I. 8., "Methods Used to Arrive at Student Mortality Need Careful Analysis," Journal of American Association 13% Coll iate Re istraF—Tls, o .‘Ii‘T‘Tf', pr , pp. 2 3 . . Hollingshead, August 8., Elmtown'g Youth, New York: Wiley, 1949. Loomis, Charles P. and Beagle, J. Allen, Rural Social S stems, New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., T9557 NacIntosh, Archibald, ‘Behind the Academic Curtain, New York: Harper and Brothers, 1948, pp. 57-5. ‘ Nasoner, Paul Henry, "A Critique of Personality Rat- ing Scales," Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Univer- sity of Pittsburg, June 1949, p. '7. McElheny, walker T., ""An Investigation of Correlates of Male College Students' Satisfaction with Dormitory Living,“ Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, State Univer- sity of.Iowa, August 1948, p. 2. NcNeely, John H., "Why Students Leave College,” School Life, Vol. 24, January 1939, pp. 115-117. . NcNeely, John H., "Students Leaving College Before Graduatidn," School Life, Vol. 23, larch 1938, pp. 258-259. ~ _ 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47, 48. 49. 50. 51.‘ 126 McNeely, John H., "College Student Mortality Studies,‘ gggfgal.gf the American gasociation of Coll iate Re strars, Vol. 15, January , o57'1152fgit“1 McNeely, thn H., "College Student Mortality,” Wash- ington: U. S. Government Printing Office, 1938., . McVey, Frank L., and Hughes, Raymond M., Problems‘gg Colle e and Universit .Administration, Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State CoIIege Press, 1952, pp. 181. , Mitchell, Fred e., "Why Freshmen Leave College," The %ourna1.2£9Hi er_Education, Vol. 13 #2, February, 9 2, ppe ' e . O'Brien, F. P., "A Six Year Study of Selection, Per- sistence-and Achievement in High School and College,I The JOurnal 2f Higher Education, Vol. 1, 1930, p. 99. OFDell, Charles Wt, “Predicting the Scholastic Suc- cess of College Freshmen,” University of Illinois Col- lege of Education, Bureau.of‘Educationa1 Research Bul- letin #37, Urbana, 1927. O'Dell, Charles W., ”Predicting the Scholastic Suc- cess of College Students,” University of Illinois Col- lege of Education, Bureau of Educational Research Bul- letin #52, Urbana, 1930. Osborn, Frederick, Preface £2 Eggenics, Harper and Brothers, 1940, pp._55:55: Pierson, R. R., "Age vs Academic Success in College ' ‘ Students," School and'Societ , Vol. 68, August 1948, pp. 94-95. Pressey, Luella Cole, "A Class of Probation Students," Ihg Jburnsl 2; Higher‘Eduoation, V01. 2, 1931, ppe 1'. School and Societ I'Education as a Class Privilege " 001. 58, ylfiaitorul), pp. 276’2770 ’. Schwebel, Hilton, "Guidance for the Withdrawing Col- lege Student," Occu ations, Vol. 25, April 1947, pp. 381-382. Snyder, Louise Nay, " Do They Leave?,' The Journal 2; Higher Education, Vo . 11, 1940, pp. 26:32. 52.‘ 53 . 54. . 55. 56. I 57.. 127 Swan, Robert J., ”The Exit Interview for Veterans Withdrawing from. the University'of Minnesota," School and Societ , Vol. 68, #1702, October 1943, pp. 5523539. Vineland Social Maturit Scale, Doll, 3. A., Vineland, New Jersey, The a Scficol, 1936. Teachers Rat Scale for Lugi% Adjustment, Freeman, F. fie, 8n " , fie, .UnIvera. > y 0 C 0380 Press, 1957. Wallace, w. L., FDifferential Prediction Value of the A.C.E. Ps chological Examination,” School 593 Societ , V01. 70, 1803, July 1949, pp. 23-25. Warner, Havighurst, and Loch, Who Shall go Educated, New York: Harper and Bros., 1m. - Zeleny, Leslie, .'New Directions in Educational Sociol- ogy and the Teaching of Sociology,"‘Amerioan Soci- ‘ I 01031031 R071”, V01. 15,. m. 1948, pp. 356.315 uiiiiiiiii