AN EXPLORATORY STUDY EMPLOYING
THE EDUCATIONAL SCIENCE OF
COGNITIVE STYLE AS A PREDICTOR 4
OF GROUP LEADERSHIP WITHIN I ‘ 7
AN ORIENTATION PROGRAM .

Thesis for the Degree 0f Ph. D.
EfiECHIEAI‘I STATE UNIVERSITY
VIEWER? GUSTAVE SIGREN
2973

 

   
 
 

L [B R [It I: 1’
Michigan $72.12*:

I
I
Uni-w {3.3.17 (i

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY EMPLOYING THE EDUCATIONAL
SCIENCE OF COGNITIVE STYLE AS A PREDICTOR
OF GROUP LEADERSHIP WITHIN AN
ORIENTATION PROGRAM

presented by

Vincent Gustave Sigren

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ph. D;degreein Education
/ gt» /?
W [ll .42 #41:!- tum—m.
r Msjorprofeér/

 

Date April 12, 1973

0-7639 I

  

   

BINBING‘BY
IIIJAB & SONS’
. 800K BINDERY INL‘.

LIBRARY amoms
srnmerom. llcmu

       

ABSTRACT

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY EMPLOYING THE EDUCATIONAL
SCIENCE OF COGNITIVE STYLE AS A PREDICTOR
OF GROUP LEADERSHIP WITHIN AN
ORIENTATION PROGRAM

BY

Vincent Gustave Sigren

Pur 2086

This exploratory study was undertaken to deter—
mine whether the educational science of cognitive style
as developed by Hill and associates1 can be used as a
predictor of group leadership and to compare the
effectiveness of directive and nondirective leadership
styles in "assigned" and "build" groups within a college
orientation program. Thus, the focus of the study is
directed to the problems created by the use of small
group techniques; leader selection, style of leadership
and the manner of group construction. Collective cog-
nitive styles were determined for the thirtyvtwo leaders
by a technique described by Flanagan and comparisons

were drawn between the most and least effective leaders.

Vincent Gustave Sigren

The effect of leadership style and group construction was
evaluated by their effect upon new student satisfaction,

attendance and first-semester attrition rate.

Summary

The student sample employed in this study includes
almost all the new students of the entering 1972 fall
class of Olivet College. The leaders for the small group
orientation program were selected from approximately 100
upperclass students, who had applied for the position of
student advisor. The measures used were: (1) Leadership
profile for leader selection, (2) Cognitive style testing,
(3) Orientation group evaluation, (4) Leader self-
evaluation, (5) Observation of leadership behavior and
(6) Composite interview reaction.

Six general questions were posed in order to con-
duct the exploratory study effort. Where these questions
generated a hypothesis, the hypothesis was tested, e.g.,
when there is a difference in leadership style or group
construction, there will be a difference in (1) student
satisfaction and (2) attendance or attrition rate. The
Komolgorov-Smirnov statistical test was used to test the
null hypothesis form of the operational hypothesis at
alpha = .05 level of significance with the appropriate

degrees of freedom.

ings:

Vincent Gustave Sigren

Findings

 

The analysis of data supports the following find-

The science of cognitive style can differentiate
between the most effective and least effective
leaders. Thus, cognitive style can be used as a
basis for leader selection after an appropriate
collective cognitive style base has been estab—
lished, and also can be used to prescribe certain
programs to increase the probability of effective

leadership.

The Collective Cognitive style of the most and
least effective leaders showed differences in
all three sets of cognitive style. In the set,
symbols and their meanings, the significant dif—
ference occurred in the "most effective leaders"
group having a greater number of qualitative sym-
bolic orientations. The cultural determinants
set indicated that the family had a greater
influence on meanings for most effective leaders
while this element had less influence for least
effective leaders. The most effective leaders
group had the additional major elements of (D)
Difference and (L) Appraisal in the modalities

of inference set. These inference patterns

Vincent Gustave Sigren

refer to the ability to distinguish differences
in arriving at decisions and also to utilize all
the inferences in the process of appraising a

situation.

3. There was no preference expressed by new students
for leadership style as measured by new student
satisfaction. There was, however, a tendency to
greater satisfaction in the "build" groups. The
latter conclusion is based on the finding of

<

"placing the hypothesis in doubt" i.e., .lO _ p

f .05.

4. There was a preference for nondirective leadership
at a highly statistically significant level

(p = .01) among the leaders.

5. Leadership and group construction did not affect

the attrition rate.

6. There was no significant difference in attendance
rates between the directive and nondirective
groups. Attendance had been taken and emphasized
in the directive groups and had not been visibly

recorded or emphasized in the nondirective groups.

During the leader interviews, special group prob-
lems became evident which directly and indirectly

influenced attendance. These problems include the

Vincent Gustave Sigren

negative effect of upperclass students on new students, the
unique needs of transfer, commuter and football groups and
the length of the program.

Lastly, student leaders indicated that they bene-

fited greatly from the leadership education and experience.

 

1Joseph E. Hill, Pamphlet on the Educational
Sciences, Oakland Community College, February, 1971, p. l.

AN EXPLORATORY STUDY EMPLOYING THE EDUCATIONAL
SCIENCE OF COGNITIVE STYLE AS A PREDICTOR
OF GROUP LEADERSHIP WITHIN AN

ORIENTATION PROGRAM

BY

Vincent Gustave Sigren

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulfillment of the requirements
for the degree of

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Administration and Higher Education

1973

i Dedicated

, "A to
Linda, Eric, Krista, Beth, Lief
and

Mrs. Sigrid Forberg

ii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Sincere appreciation and acknowledgment of
assistance are extended to Dr. Walter F. Johnson, chairman
of the committee, whose guidance and counsel have been
instrumental throughout this exploratory study and to
Dr. Joseph E. Hill for his assistance and advice on the
educational sciences. Their contributions have been sub—
stantial and always given in a most gracious manner.

The author is appreciative of the help and
encouragement given by Dr. Wilbur B. Brookover, Dr. Vandel
Johnson and Dr. Eldon Nonnamaker who along with Dr. Walter
Johnson served as members of the committee.

Special thanks are extended to Mrs. Doris Harring—
ton who assisted in data collection and typing and to
the student leaders of Olivet College for their willing—
ness to share in the adventure of behavioral patterns of
leadership.

There are, of course, others who have assisted
in their special ways and to them I will always be

grateful.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter Page
I. INTRODUCTION . . . . . . . . . . . l
The Problem . . . . . . . . . 1
Background of Study. . . . . . . . 1
Educational Sciences . . . . . . 5
Leadership Styles . . . . . . . 7
Olivet College Study . . . . . . ll
Purpose of Study. . . . . . . . l4
Significance of the Study. . . . . . 14
General Questions To Be Explored . . . 16
Underlying Assumptions. . . . . . . 17
Definitions of Key Terms . . . . . . 17
Educational Sciences . . . . . . l8
Cognitive Style Mapping . . . . . l8
Cartesian Product of Three Sets. . . 19
Theoretical Symbols (e.g. Words and
Numbers) . . . . . . . . . 20
Qualitative Symbols. . . . . . . 20
Four Theoretical Symbols . . . . . 20
Five Qualitative Symbols . . . . . 21
Ten Qualitative Codes . . . . . . 22
Cultural Determinants . . . . . . 23
Modalities of Inference . . . . . 24
Major . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Minors . . . . . . . . . . 25
Collective Cognitive Style . . . . 26
Orientation Terms . . . . . . . 26
Overview of the Study . . . . . . . 28
II. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE. . . . . . 29
Educational Science of Cognitive Style . 29
Small Group Leadership . . . . . . 39
Small Group Orientation . . . . . . 54
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . 62

iv

Chapter
III. DESIGN OF STUDY . . . . . . . . .

Source of Data . . . . . .
Samples Employed by Study. . . . .

Sample of Leaders . . . . . .
Representativeness of Sample of the

Defined Populations. . . . .
Adequacy of Sample Size . . . .

Data Collection . . . . . . . .

Instrumentalities . . . . . .
Procedures . . . . . . . .

Summary of Design of Study . . . .
IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA AND FINDINGS . . . .

Analysis of Data. . . . . .
Analytic Techniques Employed. . . .

Testable Hypothesis. . . . . .
F ind ings Q C I O O O Q O O

V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . .
Findings and Conclusions . . . . .

Theoretical Symbols. . . .
Qualitative Symbols. . . .
Cultural Determinants . . .
Modalities of Inference . .
Male-Female Leadership. . .

O O O 0 O
O O O l O

Discussion and Implications . . . .
Recommendations . . . . . . . .

BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . .
APPENDICES
Appendix

A. Composite Observations of Leadership
Behaviors . . . . . . . . . .

B. Student Adviser Leader Selection Profile.

Page
64

64
65

67

69
69

69

70
74

78
81

81
81

84
86

102
104
105
106
108
109
110

113
117

120

127

128

Appendix

C.

D.

Individual-Orientation Group Evaluation

Leader Self-Evaluation

Rating Form Leadership Behavior.

Cognitive Mapping Card Sort Questions.

Interview Session-~W0rksheet Composite

Interview Reactions

vi

Page
129
131
133

135

136

L I ST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. First Semester Withdrawals, January 1971
(Pilot Study) . . . . . . . . . . . 13

2. Two Sample Komolgorov—Smirnov Statistical
Techniques . . . . . . . . . . . . 83

3. Differences in Leadership Style and Group Con-
struction of Most Effective and Least Effec—
tive Leaders . . . . . . . . . . . 89

4. Differences Between Most Effective and Least
Effective Leaders According to Sex . . . . 90

5. Difference in Preference of New Students for
Leadership Style . . . . . . . . . . 91

6. Differences in Preference of New Students for
Group Construction . . . . . . . . . 92

7. Frequency Distribution of Leadership Style and

Group Construction Preference of Leaders . . 93
8. Leadership Style Preference of Leaders . . . 93
9. Leader-Group Construction Preference of Leaders. 94

10. Differences Between Leadership and Group Con—
struction Relative to First Semester
Attrition O O C O O O O O O O O O 95

11. Frequency Distribution of Attendance Within
Categories of Leadership Style and Group

Construction . . . . . . . . . . . 96
12. Differences Between Directive and Nondirective

Leadership in Terms of Attendance . . . . 97
13. Composite Interview Results . . . . . . . 98

vii

LIST OF E IGURES

Figure Page
1.. Cognitive Map . . . . . . . . . . . 19
2. Major Elements of Student Leaders . . . . 37

23. Design Model for Measuring Effectiveness of
Leaders . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

44. Most Effective Leader Collective Cognitive
Sty1e O I I O O O O O I O I O 8 6

£5. Least Effective Leader Collective Cognitive
Sty1€ O O I O O O O O I O O I 87

(5. Differences in Cognitive Styles of Most
Effective and Least Effective Leaders . . 88

'7. Differential Influence Patterns in the

Cultural Determinant Set of Most and
Least Effective Leaders. . . . . . . 109

viii

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

The Problem

Periodically in society there is a need to select
potentially effective leaders for certain endeavors.
Once selected there is a need for the chosen leader to
lead in such a manner that he or she enables the group
to actualize its potential and receive optimum benefits.
Each summer or fall, colleges across the nation face this
problem when staffing their orientation programs. One
Of the orientation formats gaining wide usage utilizes
small group techniques which, in turn, creates the
PrOblems of leader selection, style of leadership to be
employed and the manner of group construction. The focus

Of this study is directed toward these problems.

Background of Study

Effective leader selection methods have often
been the object of search by military, government, indus—
trial and educational groups. This search has been
halt\pered by a very marked difference of opinion between

Subscribers to the trait approach to leadership and those

who :felt that the situational aspect of leadership was
the:<ietermining factor in leader selection. The latest
development, behavioral studies of leadership, focuses
upon observed behavior of the leader within a group
situation. In effect, behavioral studies of leadership
are a fusion of the psychological and sociological basis
ant: forth by "traitist" and "situationalist" advocates.
Cecil Gibbl in reviewing principles of leadership

theory indicates that the first principle is that leader—
8111;) is always relative to the situation--relative, that
ijs, in two senses: (a) that leadership flourishes only
iri a problem situation, and (b) that the nature of the
lxeauiership role is determined by the goal of the group.
A third principle is that leadership is a process of
nurtual stimulation-—a social interactional phenomenon in
Vfirich.the attitudes, ideals and aspirations of the
followers play as important a determining role as do the
inciividuality and personality of the leader. Leadership

studies reviewed by Stogdillz in 1948 and Mann3 in 1959

\

1Cecil Gibb, "The Principles and Traits of Leader-

32%;)". Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XLII (1947),
~84.

2Ralph Stogdill, "Personal Factors Associated with

Leadership," A Survey of the Literature, Journal of Psy-
Eh-Ology, XXV (1943): 35‘71°

 

3R. D. Mann, "A Review of the Relationships

Between Personality and Performance in Small Groups,"
Ifimzhologieal Bulletin, LVI (1959), 241—70.

alsc> tended to view leadership in terms of personality
traits, the situation and the interaction between the two.
In aan early study Jennings4 concluded from her investi-
gation of girls in correctional institution that both
:iscilation and leadership were found to be products of
interpersonal interaction and not of attributes residing
within persons. An exploratory study by John K. Hemphill5
indicated that a view of leadership which stresses the
situational nature of the leader's behavior gives a sound
behavioral foundation for practical programs in the
selection and training of those who are to direct group
activities. If sufficient knowledge about the relation of
leadership to dimensions of the group can be obtained,
selection of leaders can be made with reference to the
<flemnands of the situation in which they are to lead. A
stuniy by Martin, Gross and Darley6 produced findings which
led the investigators to conclude: The paucity of dif—
feI‘ences found between leaders and nonleaders tends to
negate the trait approach to leadership and suggests

\

4H. H. Jennings, Leadership and Isolation (New
York: Longmans, Green & Co., 1943), p. 24.

 

E 5John Hemphill, "Situational Factors in Leadership,‘
V\dlfi3gtiona1 ResearchoMonographs, No. 32, Ohio State Uni-
eI‘SIty, pp. v and v1.

“ 6W. F. Martin, N. Gross, and J. G. Darley,
Leaders, Followers, and Isolates in Small Groups,"
mal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XLVII (1952), 842.

the litilization of other frames of reference in the

study of leadership phenomena.

Thomas Gordon,7 however, points out that in their
haste to drop the trait theory, some social scientists
rnaaf have swung too far in the direction of emphasizing
the situation. Conceivably, the situationists may be
overlooking the possibility that at least some of the
traits predispose their possessors to positions of
leadership, or at least increase the chances of their
becoming leaders in most situations. Gouldner had also
iruiicated this position when he stated that, "by and
large, the former school, characterized as 'situationlist,‘
have won the day. . . . Uneasy rests the head that wears
the crown of science." Gouldner further suggests:

Suppose, however, it were demonstrated that all
human groups contained some elements in common, and
that these could be spelled out. It should, there-
fore, be expected that there would be some leader-
ship traits manifested commonly by all leaders.

In short, there is no reason why leadership traits
should constitute adaptions only to the diversities
of groups; they should, too, involve adaptions to
the similarities of groups. Thus, some leadership
traits, should be unique, specific to concrete
groups and situations, while some could be common
to all leaders.8

7Thomas Gordon, Group Centered Leadership (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Co., The Riverside Press Cambridge,
955), p. 49.

8A. W. Gouldner, ed., Studies in Leadership (New

Yerk: Harper Bros., 1940), p. 35.

Gordon9 points out that this position, if sound, paves
the way for an integration of the previously perceived
disrergent theories about leadership. Such an integration
wcnlld retain the important contribution of the situa-
tionists--their emphasis on the demands of the group and
needs of the members, yet it would not close the door on
tlle: possibility of discovering some traits or character-
istics of importance to leaders in most group situations.
This is hinted at by a survey of the use of student coun-
selors in 128 senior colleges and universities undertaken
1J1 11963 by William F. Brown and Vernon Zunkerlo which.
iruiicated that the five main basis for selection included
previous leadership experience, dormitory directors‘
evaluations, college grade average, faculty members
evaluation and peer acceptance ratings. Other items
used less frequently included scholastic ability test

Scores, study habits, survey scores, screening inter-

View and Dean's evaluation.

ngfiiétional Sciences
Although the above main basis of selection are

rather general, greater specificity could be ascribed to

\

9Gordon, gp. cit., p. 51.

10William F. Brown and Vernon Zunker, "Student
Ch?unselor Utilization at Four Year Institutions of
lgher Learning," Journal of College Student Personnel,
II, No. 1 (January, 1966), 41-46.

themn. One way would be through the utilization of the

Edruzational Science of Cognitive Style as developed by

Joseph Hill and Associates. Hillll indicates that the

Educational Sciences were created as a conceptual frame-
work for education (defined as the process of searching
for meaning), a system within which inquiry of significance
ftDI: the fundamental aspects of the applied field of edu—
cation can be conducted. In this context, then the Edu-
cational Sciences provide a conceptual framework and

laruiverse of discourse for the applied field of education.

The seven "sciences" are:
(1) Symbols and their meanings;
(2) Cultural determinants of the meaning of symbols;
(3) Modalities of inference;

(4) Biochemical and electrophysiological aspects

of memory-concern;
(5) Cognitive style;

(6) Teaching style, administrative style and coun-

seling style; and
(7) Systemic analysis decision-making.

'Tkua following assumptions are essential to these bodies

of information:

11Hill, 92. cit., p. 1.

1. Man is a social creature with a unique capacity
for deriving meaning from his environment and
personal experiences through the creation and

use of symbols.

2. Not content with biological satisfactions alone,

man continually seeks meaning.
3. Education is the process of searching for meaning.
4. Thought is different from language.

The Educational Sciences are continually evolving in both
theory and refinement. The fourth science relating to
'Hnennory-concern" for example, is still in its early

developmental stages .

Eadership Styles

Orientation supervisors are also faced with the
Problem of determining the method of leadership style
tC> be employed by the selected leaders. Although,
tIKEre are many nomenclatures to leadership, they can be
difirided into the general categories of directive and
ncundirective leadership. Directive leadership connotes
haSicly that the authority is leader centered while non—
directive leadership connotes the authority as being
gtubup centered. A continuum illustrative of leadership
““3uld range from autocratic leadership on the directive
extremity to laissez faire on the nondirective end.

'rhere are advocates of directive leadership who indicate

that new students for the most part are conditioned to

directive leadership from previous societal influences,

j. -e., family, school, church, and need someone who can
literally take charge in this new experience. Advocates
of nondirective leadership point out that the student is
ultimately responsible for his own destiny and is looking
toward college as being an experience different from
high school. This expectation usually includes increased
freedom in making personal choices.

There are others who feel that institutional
objectives should be the prime consideration. One might
easily visualize directive leadership in the U.S. Marine
Corps and nondirective leadership in an institution
attempting to maximize democratic participation. Some
advocates would recommend that the leader should lead
in a style which best fits his or her personality,
While others would recommend that, as the leadership
Situation changed, the leadership behavior should also

c31'1-iz'iulge. This latter category would undoubtedly start
d'jLJZ‘ectively and as the group acclimated itself to the
new environment, become more nondirective. Regardless
of the method selected, the orientation supervisor must
make a choice or allow the decision to go by default.
In one of the classic pioneering experiments by Lewin,

white and Lippittl2 groups of lO-year-old children were
\

n] lzKurt Lewin, Ralph White and Ronald Lippitt,

atterns of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally

subjected to autocratic, democratic and laissez faire
leadership. Hostility was either greater in the auto-
cratic groups or they evidenced extremely nonaggressive
apathetic patterns and the perceived satisfactions of
leadership were greatest for the groups led democrati-
<::£ally and secondly for the laissez faire groups. Alex
Bavela313 in an experiment with W.P.A. workers showed
that it was possible to create fundamental changes in
leadership philosophy and leadership techniques within
three weeks. The experiment involved a change from
autocratic leadership to democratic leadership and
resulted in improved morale, greater productivity and
increased enrollment in programs. Both the control and
experimental samples were selected from previously
mediocre workers. Shaw and Blum14 using Fiedler‘s con-
tingency model and evaluating leadership under different
task situations found that the results of the experiment
Showed clearly that directive leadership is more effective

than nondirective when the task is highly structured;

\

CJi‘eated Social Climates," Journal of Social Psychology, X
( l 939), 271-79.

 

L 13Alex Bavelas, "Morale and the Training of
eaders," in Civilian Morale, ed. by G. Watson (Boston:
Q1-‘lghton Mifflin, 1942), pp. 143- 65.

 

Q l4Marvin E. Shaw and J. Michael Blum, "Effects
:5 Leadership Style Upon Group Performance as a Function
2E Task Structure," Journal of Personality and Social

W, III, No. 2 (February, 1966), 241.

10

'that is, when there is only one solution and one way (or

(Jnly a few ways) of obtaining this solution. . . . How-

ever, in tasks that require varied information and

.aalgproaches, nondirective leadership is clearly more

6 :ffective .

Recent literature has also emphasized the

rirrnportance of both the leaders and their respective

groups. The Hazen Report points out the fact that

the most effective teachers are the students and that

1:;lne peer group influence of friendship groups is so

<:>13vious that educators must be able to integrate it

:i.11to the educational experience. Yet, the knowledge

of how these friendship groups can contribute positively

1:;<3 the educational process is still meagre. The report

§3r<3es on to state:

We know that the trauma of leaving home for the
first time and entering the relatively impersonal
milieu of the college can be severe for young
people. But far from attempting to facilitate
the transition from home to college, we generally
act so as to reinforce the freshman trauma. 5

JQ¥3=71:hur Chickeringl6 states that a student's most important

t-'-‘E=Eicher is another student. Friend and reference groups

jESimilter and modulate the messages from the larger student

\

 

15The Hazen Report, The Student in Higher Edu—
‘E-~d;3iign, Report of the Committee on the Student in Higher
G-"-—1o::ation, The Hazen Foundation, p. 12.

16Arthur Chickering, Education and Identity (San

F b .
Ein01sco: Jossey-Bass Inc., 1969), p. 253.

11

culture. They amplify or alternate the force of the
curriculum, faculty, parental rules and institutional
regulations. They can trump the best teacher's ace and
stalemate the most thoughtful or agile dean. Thus,
relationships with close friends and peer groups, or
subcultures, are primary forces influencing student
develOpment in college. Both the Hazen Report and
Chickering l7 emphasize the importance of friendship
or reference groups and the role of the student as a
teacher (leader). Usually, the first teacher a new
student has in college is the Orientation Group (O-Group)
leader and it should follow that the leadership situation,
the leader's personal traits, the style of leadership
and the manner in which the new group is formed could
have great impact for the new student. The manner of
group formation is an extension of the directive or non—
d irective style of leadership. Directive leadership
would be enhanced by assigned groups while nondirective
leadership would allow some self—determination of the

re Spective groups .

9fliet College Study

A pilot study to determine the effect of leader—
eh - . . .
1p within the Or1entat1on Program was conducted at

Q -
:L :Lvet College in 1971. New students were randomly

\

l7Ibid.

12

assigned according to confirmation dates to four leader-

ship categories: directive assigned, directive build,
nondirective assigned and nondirective build. Build is
a term for group construction in which one student
chooses a partner, they in turn choose another pair and
they then proceed geometrically to the established group
size. Student leaders were randomly assigned to one of
the four groups and were given general instructions in

directive or nondirective techniques. A weakness in the
study was that although they were to use their assigned
leadership style, they were not given specific behavioral

actions to carry out. Members of the student orientation

groups were asked to differentiate the leaders on a five-

point scale (1, most directive to 5 least directive).

The following mean scores were noted: Directive

Assigned 2.26, Nondirective Assigned 2.33, Directive
Build 2.44, Nondirective Build 3.33. The tendency toward
Central continuum scoring was probably due to the above
noted weakness. Students, however, were able to dif—
ferentiate between groups with some discrimination.

The purpose of the pilot study was to see if the
leadership styles might have an effect on the first
SexT‘lester attrition rate and the perceived satisfaction
(>13 Students within the orientation process. There was

1%
S-s attrition in the nondirective build category. Stu—-

6Q
hts indicated on a scale of l excellent--5 poor, that

13

‘they perceived greater satisfaction in the directive
gyroups; directive build 2.6, directive assigned 2.8,
nondirective build 3.08 and nondirective assigned 3.56.
{Iihe largest number of evaluation returns, 49 of 56, were

turned in by the nondirective groups. Thus, a conflict-
ing pattern was emerging, one in which students were per-
ceiving greater satisfaction in the directive groups and
gireat attrition rate and evaluation returns favored the
ercondirective build groups. The next logical step is to
.Eaxttempt to explain these tendencies through a study based
IJIIPOD concepts that permit greater explanation of behavior
<51Lifferentiation than was possible in previous efforts.
{IPIHe emphasis on behavior differentiation returns one to
1tzlne earlier question as to whether or not effective,
(ilsirective or nondirective, leadership can be predicted

eaerd thus sets the purpose of the present study.

TIEZKJBLE 1.--First semester withdrawals, January 1971 (Pilot

 

 

 

Study)
Leadership and Group Number Percentage
Construction
\

Directive Assigned 8 - 80 10
Nondirective Assigned 9 - 56 16
Directive Build 7 — 56 12.5
Nondirective Build 2 - 56 3.6

Total 26 — 248 10.5

l4

Purpose of Study

The purpose of this exploratory study is two-fold.
{The first purpose is to determine whether the educational
science of cognitive style can be used as a predictor
(of group leadership. The second purpose is to compare
the effectiveness of directive and nondirective leader-
:ship styles in "assigned" and "build" small groups
wwithin an orientation program measured in terms of a
:seven-point scale over leadership categories. The
jLnstrument used to measure "effectiveness" will be

JLocally constructed.

Significance of the Study
The demise of the small college was predicted
in the 1960's and again in the 1970's. These predictions
.Ilave been viewed with alarm by educators who feel that
“izlua strength of higher education lies in its very
«ciaiversity. The advent of the Community College movev
Jnflfiant, demographic changes in population growth, lessen-
:iJIMg of Vietnam pressures and the questioning of the
Worth of higher education has made this latter pre-
(ii-jitztion especially threatening to the small colleges.
1:5“:3Inission prOSpects have dwindled, costs have increased
‘Ea‘lrhd young people are seeking avenues other than college
£E“=Ei an alternate route to their eventual life style.
This sequence of events has made it imperative

1tlctlat.the small college be able to minimize the cultural

15

shock felt by the incoming new students and the accompany-

ing attrition rate while at the same time attempting

to increase the holding power at all levels. The orien-

tation program offers the first opportunity for the
college to address itself intelligently to the problem.
It is generally conceded that the impact and import of
first impressions have a significance for most people
Ipeople far beyond the significance of their actual

(occurrence.
As a result of optimum orientation programs, a

greater number of students could benefit by an increased
probability of success and the accompanying psychological

and economic regards. The institution benefits via

tangible financial benefits and intangible institutional

goodwill.
The Orientation group leaders themselves are

receiving an inservice education in the art of leader-
Ship. The initial selection process via cognitive
mapping could point out differences to be investigated

and possibly initiate individual change. By the same

token, administrators may be able to distinguish dis-
tinctive cognitive styles which could lead to identifi—
Qation of potentially effective leadership in a variety

Q 1‘? situations.
The data collected could have implications

l-:egarding leadership and cognitive style within the

16

education sciences. Information collected via inter-

views should be helpful for future planning by orien—

tation directors and finally the study should serve as

laction research to improve an ongoing orientation pro-

gram at Olivet College.

Generalyguestions To Be Explored

The purpose of the proposed study will be

:realized by seeking the answers to the following

<questions:

1.

How can the educational science of cognitive
style be used in the process of predicting

effective leadership?

How do the most effective student leaders differ

from the least effective leaders?

Do new students show a preference for leadership

style and group construction?

Do leaders show a preference of leadership style

and group construction?

Does leadership and group construction methods

affect the first semester attrition rate?

Does the use of directive or nondirective
leadership affect the attendance rate of

programs?

17

The preceding questions are not of high speci-
ficity, but the conclusions of the study will be mainly

based on the responses to them.

Underlying Assumptions

 

For the purpose of this study the following

assumptions are made:
1. Expressed opinions are felt Opinions.

2. The reliability and validity of the Oakland
Community Card sort are sufficient to the pur-
poses of this study. Samples of the card sort
questions are cited in the appendix, and
information regarding reliability and validity
is available from the Director of the Diagnostic

Testing Center of Oakland Community College.

3. The determination of a leadership style for

orientation purposes is worthwhile.

The conceptual framework of the educational
Sciences is still in a developmental state. The pro-
cesses involved must be considered in that respect and
careful scrutiny should be given to understanding what

they can do and what they do not claim to do.

Definitions of Key Terms
Many of the key terms, which follow, are from

t; . . .
11£3 educational solences, as many educators are just

18

now becoming aware of this relatively new concept. The

following twelve headings contain definitions which are
associated with the educational sciences. This is

inclusive of all terms up to and including Collective
Cognitive Style.

Educational Sciences18

A conceptual framework within which inquiry of
significance for the fundamental aspects of the applied

field of education can be conducted.

Coglitive Style Mapping
An individual's cognitive style is determined by

the way he takes note of his total surroundings--how he

seeks meaning, how he becomes better informed. Is he a

listener or a reader or both? Is he concerned only with

his own viewpoint or is he influenced in decision-making

by his family or associates? Does he reason in categories

as a mathematician does, or in relationship as social
scientists do? The cognitive style map provides a
JJLHIthed picture of the diverse ways in which an indi—
Vidual acquires meaning from his environment and personal

e3"E3€riences based upon those discrete characteristics

Will—Ch can be measured.

 

18Hill, 92. cit., pp. 1—4.

19
1" (AL) T (VL) T we)!
Q (V)
= Q (T)
g Q (CT)

0' (CK)

Q' (CET) I" 1"

 

 

 

 

 

 

_. J __ .1 a J

Figure l.--Cognitive map19

Cartesian Product of Three Sets

 

The first set indicates a student's tendency to
use certain types of symbols, his ability to handle words
and numbers, qualitative symbols and qualitative codes.
The second set indicates the manner in which the student
tends to derive meaning from symbols whether it be in an
individualistic fashion, mainly in terms of his associate's
perception or on the basis of his family's ideas. The
third set indicates the manner in which he reasons or his
decision-making patterns. Does he think in categories
or in terms of differences or synthesizes multiple
relationships? The universal set is represented by the
notation, g = S X E X H. S in the notation signifies
symbolic orientations. E, the cultural determinants,

and H, the modalities of inference.

 

19Abbreviation from cognitive map, Oakland Com-
munity College, 1971.

20

Theoretical Symbols (e.g. words
and numbers)'

 

Theoretical symbols present to the nervous system
and then represent to it, something different from that

which they themselves are.

Qualitative Symbols

 

Qualitative symbols are used to derive a variety
of meanings from the environment and such personal
experiences as feelings, values and insight into self.
Qualitative symbols present to the awareness that which

the symbol itself is to that individual.

Four Theoretical Symbols

 

There are two main types of theoretical symbols--
auditory and visual-~each of which can be divided into

linguistic and quantitative elements.

T (VL) Theoretical Visual Linguistic.--Ability to

 

find meaning from words which are seen. A major T (VL)
would indicate someone who reads with a high degree of

comprehension.

T (AL) Theoretical Auditory Linguistic.--Ability

 

to acquire meaning through spoken words.

T (VQ) Theoretical VisualQuantitative.--Ability

 

to find meaning in terms of written quantities (numerical

symbols) and measurements.

21

T (AQ) Theoretical Auditory Quantitative.--Ability

 

to find meaning in terms of quantities (numerical symbols

and measurements) which are heard.

Five Qualitative Symbols

 

Q (A)_Qpalitative Auditory.--Ability to perceive

 

meaning through the sense of hearing. A major (defined
on page 25) in this area indicates the ability to dis-

tinguish between sounds, tone of music, dialects, etc.

Q (0) Qualitative Olfactory.--Ability to perceive

 

meaning through the sense of smell.

Q (S) Qualitative Savory.--Ability to perceive

 

meaning by the sense of taste.

Q (T) Qualitative Tactile.—-Ability to perceive

 

meaning by the sense of touch.

Q_}V) Qualitative Visual.--Ability to perceive

 

meaning through sight.

Q (P) Qualitative Proprioceptive.-—Technica11y

 

not sensory, but rather the ability to synthesize a
number of symbolic mediations into "automatic" thought
or programmatic action while conducting a monitoring
activity. For example, when an individual upon seeing

a sight of smoke immediately interprets it as evidence
of fire, and experiences an interplay of many sensations

including the smell of smoke, taste of smoke and

22

sensation of heat. Another example, synthesizing a
variety of sensory and kinesthetic efforts while running

and catching a ball.

Ten Qualitative Codes

 

Q (CEM) Qualitative Code Empathetic.--Sensitivity

 

to the feeling of others, ability to put yourself in
another person's place and see things from his point of

view.

Q (CES).-—Ability to enjoy the beauty of an

object or an idea.

Q (CET)QQua1itative Code Ethic.—-Commitment to a
set of values, a group of moral principles, obligations
and/or duties. This does not imply morality. Both a
priest and a criminal may be committed to a set of values

different though they are.

Q (CH) Qualitative Code Histrionic.--Ability to
deliberately exhibit a dramatic flair of emotion or tem-
perament to produce some particular effect on other

persons. This type of person would make a good actor.

Q (CK) Qualitative Code Kinesics.--Ability to
communicate by nonlinguistic functions such as facial
expressions and motions of the body (e.g., smiles and

gestures).

23

Q (CKH) Qualitative Code Kinesthetic.--Motor

 

skills, muscular coordination (e.g., involving sports

or tasks where skillful command of the hands is involved).

Q (CP) Qualitative Code Proxemics.--Ability to

 

judge the appropriate physical and social distance
between oneself and another as perceived by the other

person.

Q (CS) Qualitative Code Synnoetics.--Persona1

 

knowledge of oneself objectively in qualitative and

theoretical forms in relation to one's environment.

Q (CT) Qualitative Code Transactional.--Ability

 

to maintain a positive communicative interaction which
significantly influences the goals of the persons

involved in that interaction (e.g., salesmanship).

Q (CTM) Qualitative Code Tempora1.--Ability to

 

respond or behave according to time expectations imposed
on an activity by members in the role-set associated

with that activity.

Cultural Determinants

 

Perceptions of persons are influenced by, and
in turn influence culture. A perception is considered
here as an individual interpretation of a sensation.
In this context a concept becomes a shared or relatively

well-agreed-upon interpretation of a sensation. Cultural

24

influences on the meanings of symbols or the "cultural
determinants" may be measured through role set theory,
where a role is defined as behaviors directed toward
establishing relatively stable social relationships.

The roles that one has played in his social interactions
with his family, associates and himself (individuality)
influence symbols and their meanings. In this context,
the second set of the cognitive map is composed of the
following elements: F--indicates family as an influence
on meanings; I--indicates "individuality" as an influence
on meaning; A-—indicates associates as an influence on

meaning.

Modalities of Inference
The third set of the cognitive map shows the
primary way one reasons in inductive and deductive

fashion.

M--Magnitude.--A form of "categorical thinking"

 

that utilizes norms categorically classified and attitudes
accepted as true by the individual as the basis for
acceptance or rejection of an advanced hypothesis.

This is essential for the successful study of math.

D--Difference.--Suggests a tendency to think in

 

terms of one-to-one contrasts or comparisons of selected
characteristics or measurements. Artists often possess

this ability.

25

R--Relationship.--Indicates an individual who

 

synthesizes a multitude of relationships between two or

more characteristics or measurements.

L--Appraisal.--Indicates an individual who employs

 

all three of the above approaches giving equal weight to
each. Such individuals tend to analyze, question or

appraise an issue carefully before making a decision.

§.--Indicates deductive reasoning or logical

proof as used in geometry.

m
This means that the person scored at least as well

as half of the total group and is symbolized by a capital

letter such as "T." Thus, a T (AQ) would mean that one

demonstrated average or better ability (50th percentile

or above) to use numbers that one hears. This would

greatly facilitate work in math-for example.

Minors
This means a person is probably adequate. It

is shown as a capital letter with a prime. Thus T' (VL)
would mean that one scored below the upper half and above
the lower quarter (25th to 49th percentile). This would
imply that the person could reasonably handle an academic
discipline which required the use of written words, but
might need some extra help, especially, if it is a stiff

course .

26

If one scored lower than the 25th percentile,
no symbol would appear at all.

Cognitive styles do not acquire the label effec-
tive or ineffective until they are related to the specific

task.

Collective Cognitive Style

 

A style which represents the elements held by

the majority of leaders within their respective categories.

Orientation Terms

 

O-Group.-—Orientation Group, usually comprised

of eight new students and a leader.

O-Group Leader.--A student trained in leadership

 

methodology and selected for the orientation small group
program. O-Group leaders usually work in the residence
halls as advisors or are alternates for residence hall

positions.

Leader.--Any individual whose behavior stimulates
patterning of behavior in some group. By emitting some
stimuli, he facilitates group action toward a goal or
goals, whether the stimuli are verbal, written or
gestural.20

The most effective leader classification in this

study includes those leaders highest in combined

 

20Goldner, up. cit., pp. 17-18.

27

satisfaction as represented by leadership satisfaction,
program assistance and attendance. The least effective

leaders include those lowest in combined satisfactions.

Directive Leadership.--Indicates that the leader-

 

ship is centered upon the individual leading the group.
This style of leadership is more authoritarian and auto-
cratic and emphasizes the superior skills and knowledge

of the leader.

Nondirective Leadership.--Indicates that the

 

leadership is conducted in such a manner that it
emphasizes group responsibility and acceptance of leader-
ship functions. This style of leadership is more

democratic and emphasizes attributes within the group.

Build Groups.--This is a method of selecting a

 

group using the input of the group members themselves.
After an initial socializing period a member selects
another member whom he or she would like to work with.
They, then, select another pair making four. This four-
some selects another foursome, making eight. Any
desired number which is geometric may be used. Compo-
sition of the group may be controlled by limiting the
initial choice, i.e., you are to choose a member of the
Opposite sex. Once the group members are selected, they
in turn select a leader from a pool of already trained

leaders.

28

Overview of the Study

 

This first chapter has introduced the problems,
background, purpose, significance and general questions
to be explored in the study, as well as the assumptions
and definitions of key terms. A review of the literature
occurs in the next chapter, and the reSearch design is
covered in Chapter III. The analysis of data and findings
are presented in Chapter IV, while the summary, findings,
conclusions, discussion, implications and recommendations

culminate the exploratory study in Chapter V.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE

This review of literature deals with three
selected areas: the educational science of cognitive
style, small group leadership and orientation. These
three areas are considered in relation to the purpose
of the study and provide background information for the

posited general questions.

Educational Science of Cognitive suyle

 

The construct of cognitive style is a vehicle
which can be used to diagnose individuals and prescribe
activities that provide the high probability of the
student's accomplishing successfully the educational
task confronting him. Hill21 indicates that the cog-
nitive style of an individual is a relative concept,
and depends not only upon the educational level and
cultural background of the individual, but also upon the

symbolic condition of the task to be accomplished. In

 

21Joseph E. Hill, The Educational Sciences
(Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: Oakland Community College
Press, 1971), p. 15.

 

29

30

this context, the derivation of an appropriate style for
an individual demands that the diagnostician analyze the
student as well as the substance of the educational task
to be considered, i.e., leadership. Under these circum-
stances, the construct of cognitive style provides a means
of analyzing, interpreting and evaluating educational
endeavors in a manner relatively different from those
usually employed.

Hill22 further states that the construct of cog—
nitive style which has been developed as one of the edu-
cational sciences is different from those defined and
described in the field of psychology. This construct

23 metatheory of

employs a modified form of Guttman's
facets as a model and the concept of cognitive style is
expressed as, what mathematicians call, a Cartesian
Product of Sets. In this context, according to Hill,
cognitive style can be somewhat related to Guilford's24
"dimensions of intellect." It should be noted that the

fourth set, biochemical and electrophysiological aSpects

 

221bid., p. 14.

23Louis Guttman, "An Outline of Some New Method—
ology for Social Research," Public Qpinion Quarterly,
XVIII (Winter, 1954-55), 399—400.

 

24J. P. Guilford, "Dimensions of Intellect,"
International Colloquium on Factor Analysis, Paris, 1955;
Guilford, "The Structure of Human Intellect" (paper pre-
sented to the National Academy of Sciences, Pasadena,
Calif., November, 1955), cited by Hill, 9E: EiE-v p. 14.

31

of memory are still in a highly speculative state of
development and therefore the Cartesian product repre-
senting cognitive style is presently limited to the first
three sets.

The concept of educational sciences is supported
by Gordon Allport25 when he states, "It is the duty of
psychology . . . to study the person-system, meaning
thereby the attitudes, traits, trends, motives and
pathology of the individua1--his cognitive styles, his
sentiments, his individual moral nature and their inter-
relations." He explains further:

. . . a traveler who moves from culture to culture,
from situation to situation, is nonetheless a single
person; and within him one will find the nexus the
patterning of diverse experiences and.membership
that institute his personality.26
This condition appears to be well illustrated by an
experiment by Gardner.27 Fifty subjects between the
ages of eighteen and thirty were tested in five tasks-—
an object-sorting test and a series of constancy and

brightness judgments-~in the expectation that their per-

formance would reflect consistent individual differences

 

25Gordon Allport, Personality and Social Encounter
(Boston: Beacon Press, 1960), p. 48.

261bid.

27Riley W. Gardner, "Cognitive Styles in Categor-
izing Behavior," Journal of Personality, XXII (1953),
214-33.

32

in equivalence ranges. All the experimental results
seemed to support the hypothesis that persons are char-
acterized by unique equivalence-range preferences in a
variety of adaptive tasks. Both the quantitative and
qualitative results suggest that certain control aspects
of an individual's orientation toward the outer world
(aspects which can, as yet, only be speculated upon) find
expression in tasks demanding widely different degrees of
conscious conceptualizing.

I Kelly28 addresses himself to the varying degree
of conceptualization and also the qualitative codes of
cognitive style as well, when he points out that since
all we ever get of what is outside of us is a prognosis,
what we know becomes an entirely personal matter. He
adds:

. . . I can get my stimuli from the same objects as

you do, but I cannot bring the same purposes and

experiences to that that you do. Therefore, they
are never the same to you as they are to me.

Further, it cannot be the same to me tomorrow, as

it is today, because tomorrow my whole, experiencing
make—up will be somewhat different.29

 

28Earl C. Kelly, Education for What Is Real (New
York: Harper & Row Publishers,*I947), p. 58.

291bid.

33

In addition to this point, Gagne3O points out that the
influence of the culture on the human organism, once the
individual genetic stock has been chosen at conception,
cannot be altered very much except by extreme measures.
He quickly qualifies this statement by also indicating
that members of the human society which itself is
responsible for the care of a developing person should
have a tremendous degree of control over those events
that affect his learning. He cites experience as man's
greatest teacher which means that the events the develop—
ing individual lives through--in his home, his geographi-
cal environment, in school and in his various social
environments--will determine what he learns and there-
fore to a large extent what kind of person he becomes.
In the educational science of cognitive style, it is
these cultural determinants which have an effect on
meaning in the mediation of theoretical and qualitative
symbols.

The third set of cognitive style deals with
modalities of inference and shows the primary way one

reasons in inductive and deductive fashion. Bloom31

*“

30Robert M. Gagne, The Conditions of Learning
(2nd ed.; New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc.,
1970), p. 2.

31Benjamin Bloom, ed., Taxonomy of Educational
ijectives (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1956),
p. 38.

 

34

illustrates the importance of this area when he states
that when the student encounters a new problem, he will
select an appropriate technique for attacking it and will
bring to bear the necessary information, both facts and
principles. The activity has been labeled "critical
thinking" by some, "reflective thinking" by Dewey and
others, and "problem-solving" by still others. In the
taxonomy Bloom has used the term "intellectual abilities
and skills." Within the educational sciences, these
taxonomies could be explained partially under the rubric
modalities of inference.

The works of Guttman and Guilford, and the think-
ing of Allport, Gagne, Gardner, Kelley and Bloom are
helpful in understanding the educational science of cog-
nitive style. Thus, the "emperical mapping" of indi-
vidual cognitive styles is a process of determining
elements of "style" which can be observed in the behaviors
of an individual and classified in the respective sets
comprising cognitive style on a "makes sense," or "does
not make sense" basis. Studies relating to the edu-
cational sciences have focused on collective cognitive
styles, effects of cognitive style on teacher effective—
ness, grading, learning methods and prediction.
Researchers have been especially interested in the
effects of matching or mismatching of cognitive styles
of members of a group with that of the leader of the

group, i.e., teacher, administrator or counselor.

35

A study was made by Hoogasian32 to determine
whether a "collective cognitive" style could be estab-
lished for groups of students receiving different final
letter grades in two college freshman level English
courses taught at a community college. The findings
indicated that collective cognitive styles could be
identified and related to various letter grades by stu-
dents. However, the data did not serve as definitive
predictors of final grades; rather the collective cog—
nitive styles were useful as predictors of success or
failure in the course under study.

Schroeder,33 in a related study, found that stu-
dents having cognitive styles "similar" to that of the
instructor rated the teacher to be high in effectiveness
at a level of statistical significance (p = .05). These
same students tended to be the ones who received the
highest grades. The predominant elements found for the
"similar" groups were T(VL) and T(AL) in the set of
theoretical symbols; I and (I-A') in the cultural deter-

minants set and L in the modalities of inference set.

 

32Vaughn Hoogasian, "An Examination of Cognitive
Style Profiles as Indicators of Performance Associated
with a Selected Discipline" (unpublished Ph.D. disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1970), pp. 59-85.

33Arlen V. Schroeder, "A Study of the Relation-
ship Between Student and Teacher Cognitive Styles and
Student Derived Teacher Evaluations" (unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, wayne State University, 1969), p. 8.

36

Similarly, a study by Ort34 examined the discrete elements

and totality of elements in cognitive styles of students
studying foreign language in a junior high school and
of others studying at the high school level. The discrete
characteristics influential in predicting relationship
to teacher and success in a foreign language, i.e., only
"parts" and elements of the three set cartesian product,
were found to be not significant. The analysis of
variance findings, however, indicated a relationship
and prediction capability of all the variables (teacher,
cognitive style set, like unlike relationships) to stu-
dent success as measured by grades. The fact that "unlike"
matches on isolated elements seems to have been more
associated with success indicated a need for the total
cartesian product of three sets and that all the profiles
had to be treated in place of isolated characteristics.
This finding is compatible to the need of viewing the
whole child and sheds some doubt on the practice of
"treating" students within the educational environment
based on limited data (i.e., reading level).

When the cognitive style and preferred teaching

style of the students is matched with the cognitive style

 

v v fi—

34Barbara Ort, "An Examination of Relationships
Between the Measurable Cognitive Characteristics of a
French I Teacher and the Student Success in that Course"
(unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University,
1971), pp. 62-71.

37

and teaching style of the faculty member, Lange35 found
that the matched students significantly perceive their
instructor more positively than do the unmatched students.
They also achieve higher mean scores in final course
grades. The student leaders within the small discussion

groups were required to have the following major elements:

F '1 F ‘r r '

T (VL) M
g = Q (CET) x A x D Match with
Q (CT) R small groups

 

 

 

 

 

 

._ .J -J -J

Figure 2.——Major elements of student leaders

In a study of administrators, Zussman36 found
that it was possible to identify a set of cognitive
styles, administrative styles and collective cognitive
and administrative styles for the group to which the
individual administrator belonged. From his data, he
was able to identify a significant difference between
the administrative style of the members of the one sample
group (community college) and the members of the other

sample group (public school administrators).

 

35Chrystal Marie Lange, “A Study of the Effects
on Learning of Matching the Cognitive Styles of Students
and Instructors in Nursing Education" (unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Michigan State University, 1972), pp. 117-18.

36Steven Zussman, Coguitive Style and Administra-
tive Style (Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: Oakland Community
College Press, 1971), p. 6.

 

38

DeLoach37 suggests that the phenomenon of cog-
nitive dissonance may have a significant role in the
evaluation of teaching due to differences of the evaluator
and the teacher being evaluated in terms of cognitive
style and teaching style. This study seriously questions
the method of single supervisor evaluations used in edu-
cation.

A study which may have implications for small
group leadership was conducted by Wyett.38 He analyzed
cognitive style and teaching styles of teachers with the
express purpose of examining the possibilities of using
the educational sciences as tools of analysis and pre—
diction. This was an effort to determine cognitive
styles and teaching situations which could produce a
different approach to assessing particular aspects of
teacher preparation and teacher effectiveness in
selected teaching situations. According to this early
study in the educational sciences, teachers were found
to have a predominant style, when they employ a relatively
fixed style of teaching. This "style" could be either

authoritative or permissive. Teachers using the cognitive

 

37Joseph F. DeLoach, Cognitive Style and Cognitive
Dissonance (Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: Oakland Community
College Press, 1970), p. 13.

 

 

38Jerry L. wyett, "A Pilot Study to Analyze Cog-
nitive Style with Reference to Selected Strata of the
Defined Educational Sciences" (unpublished Ph.D. disser-
tation, Wayne State University, 1967), p. 101.

39

style of the students as a departing point and adjusting
him to his mode of teaching were found to have an adjustive
style. The teacher in the process of instruction who
employed the style which appears to be optimum for the
students' cognitive style is considered to have a flexible
teaching style. wyett found that those persons in the
study who were placed in teaching situations which were
not in keeping with their style, did not perform as well
as those who were appropriately matched. Thus, the
teaching style of an individual is apparently very
strongly influenced by his cognitive style.

The leadership function of teachers, administra-
tors and counselors, thus becomes a focal point of study.
In Chapter I emphasis was given to the fact that the
first teacher of a new college student is likely to be
another student. The next section of related literature
directs itself to the leadership aspects facing the

student leaders.

Small Group Leadership

 

The number of theories seem boundless. The main
psychological, sociological and behavioral divisions
were distinguished in Chapter I, but they were not meant
to be all inclusive. This can be illustrated by

reference to an article by John F. Wharton.

40

There is alive today an ingenious thinker named

Francis J. Mott. He believes that the universal

design of creation is that shown by the atom; a

central nucleus with particles whirling about it.

He then hypothesizes that there are two classes of

peOple: the so-to-speak nucleus people and the

periphery people; the former should be the leaders--

it is part of nature's design.39

While the divergent theories are many, the

search continues for a framework which will be useful
for predicting, selecting and analyzing leadership. The
educational sciences, potentially, may be of assistance
because it considers within its conceptual framework the
individual traits, the situation and the style of the
leader. Disagreement abounds regarding trait theory,

but Gouldner4o

points out that even a field-social psy-
chologist such as J. F. Brown, oriented to the role of
the situation and its structure has implied that there
are certain traits found among all leaders. He feels
that it would be absurd to deny that two factors of semi-
biological nature are important in leadership: intelli—
gence and psychosexual appeal. Of these, probably the

most important is intelligence. The emphasis on intelli-

gence is corroborated by Jenkins41 when he found in a

 

39John F. Wharton, "The Making of Leaders,"
Saturday Review, April 13, 1968, p. 26.

 

40Gouldner, up. cit., pp. 25-30.

41W. O. Jenkins, "Review of Leadership Studies
with Particular Reference to Military Problems," Psycho-
logical Bulletin, 1947, pp. 44, 54—79.

 

41

review of leadership studies that the leaders showed some
superiority over the members of their groups, in at least
one of the wide variety of abilities. The common factor
that appeared is that leaders in a particular field tend
to possess superior general or technical competence or
knowledge in that area. Gibbs42 also states that indi-
viduals chosen by a selection authority, as having
leadership capacity, have superior intelligence and are
superior in other mental abilities. They are also better
educated and have greater similar leadership experience
in the area for which the choice is made and have a
relatively higher socioeconomic status. They also have
such personality traits as sociability, self-confidence
and adjustibility which contributes to the ease of their
social-interactional behavior.

A cautionary thought is expressed by Gouldner43
when he warns of the possibility that while there are
some traits common to all leaders, it is not to be inter-
preted that all leaders are the "same" everywhere. He
feels that there seems to be no a priori reason that

leaders, like people in general, should not be both

similar and different from others. The findings of

 

42Gibbs, 9p. cit., p. 283.

43Gouldner, 92° cit., p. 35.

Bird44

42

also indicate diversity. He analyzed trait

leadership studies and found that only 5 per cent of

the traits mentioned were common to four or more inves-

tigations.

A survey by Stogill45 categorizes the factors

associated with Leadership as follows:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

Capacity (intelligence, alertness, verbal

facility, originality, judgment);

Achievement (scholarship, knowledge, athletic,

accomplishment);

Responsibility (dependability, initiative, per-
sistence, aggressiveness, confidence, desire

to excel);

Participation (activity, sociability, c00per-

ation, adaptability, humor);
Status (socio-economic position, popularity);

Situation (mental level, status, skills, needs
and interests of followers, objectives to be

achieved, etc.).

 

44Charles Bird, Social Psygholggy (New York:

 

D. Appleton Century Co., 1940), p. 379.

45Ralph M. Stogill, "Personal Factors Associated

with Leadership: A Survey of the Literature," Journal
of Psychology, XXV (1948), 35-71.

 

43

The evidence of this study suggests that leadership is
a relation that exists between persons in a social
situation, and that persons who are leaders in one
situation may not necessarily be leaders in other
situations. This does not mean, however, that leadership
is entirely haphazard and unpredictable. Rather, the
very studies which provide the strongest arguments for
the situational nature of leadership also supply the
strongest evidence indicating that leadership patterns
of behavior are relatively stable.

In an earlier study of 112 criminal leaders, non—
commissioned officers, student leaders and their respec-

tive followers, Cowley46

found that six traits were
common to all three groups that were studied. These
traits are: self—confidence, as measured by a rating
scale; motor impulsion, as measured by the Downey test;
finality of judgment as measured by the Moore-Rice
questionnaire; speed of decision, as measured by the
Aggressiveness Mottoes; speed of decision as measured by

the Moore-Rice questionnaire and speed of decision as

measured by the Tact-Motto test.

 

46W. H. Cowley, "The Traits of Face to Face
Leaders," Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology,
XXVI (1931-32), 26, 304-13.

 

44

McGrath47

in a summary of small group literature,
which applies equally to research in leadership found
that there is very little understanding of small group
phenomena. He feels this is due to a lack of systematic
research and that this situation will continue even though
the production of research continues without abatement.
An attempt to reduce this confusion has been made by the
introduction of conceptual models such as proposed by
Fiedler.48 His theory postulates two major styles of
leadership, one of which is task-oriented, and the other,
oriented toward attaining a position of prominence and
toward achieving good interpersonal relations. He showed
that in terms of promoting group performance, the data
indicate that the task—oriented type of leadership style
is more effective in group situations which are either
favorable to the leader or which are unfavorable to the
leader. He also pointed out that the relationship—
oriented leadership style is more effective in situations
which are intermediate in favorableness. Favorableness

of the situation is defined as the degree to which the

situation enables the leader to exert influence over his

 

47J. E. McGrath, A Summary of Small Group Research

Studies, HSR/TN-62/3-GN, cited in Fred B. Fiedler (Arling-
ton, Va.: Human Sciences Research, Inc., 1962), p. 4.

 

48Fred E. Fiedler, A Theory of Leader Effective-

ness (New York: McGraw—Hill Book Co., 1967), p. 13.

 

45

group. In an experiment conducted by Shaw and Blum49 to

test the generality of this hypothesis, groups of five
persons attempted three tasks under either directive or
nondirective leadership. The leadership behavior was
manipulated by the instructor. The tasks were selected
to vary along the solution multiplicity dimension, thereby
presumed to reflect different levels of favorability for
the leader. The results indicated that the directive
leader was more effective than the nondirective leader
only when the group—task situation was highly favorable
for the leader, thus only partially supporting the
hypothesis. Regardless of the implication for the con-
tingency model, the results show clearly that directive
leadership is more effective than the nondirective type,
when the task is highly structured; that is, when there
is only one solution and one way (or only a few ways) of
obtaining the solution. Nondirective leadership is
clearly more effective on tasks that require varied
information and approaches. This could have definite
impact for orientation program structure depending upon

their formats. One further study by Eagley50 brings

 

49Marvin E. Shaw and J. Michael Blum, "Effects
of Leadership Style Upon Group Performance as a Function
of Task Structure," Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, III, No.‘2 (February, 1966), 238-41.

 

 

50Alice H. Eagley, "Leadership Style and Role
Differentiation as Determinants of Group Effectiveness,"
Journal of Personality, XXXVIII, 509.

 

46

together the concern with role differentiation by Bale
and Slater and the emphasis of Fielder on personality as
determinant of group effectiveness. This study explored
the relationship between the leadership style of both
task and social-emotional leader and group effectiveness.
The findings confirm generally, the ability of the
leadership style variable to account for variance in
group effectiveness and indicates that when role dif—
ferentiation occurs, the relationships between the
leadership style of the task leader and group effective-
ness are less important than those involving the social-
emotional specialist. This study indicates that group
effectiveness is a function of neither role only nor of
personality only, but of the interaction of role and
personality.

The successful leader, according to Tannenbaum,51
and associates, is one who is keenly aware of those forces
which are most relevant to his behavior at any given time.
He accurately understands himself, the individuals and
group that he is dealing with as well as the social
environment. Secondly, the successful leader is one who
is able to behave appropriately in the light of these
perceptions. If directiveness is in order, he is able

to direct; if considerable participative freedom is

 

51R. Tannenbaum, I. Weschler, and F. Massorik,
Leadership and Organization (New York: McGraw Hill,
1961), PP. 78-79.

 

47

called for, he is able to provide such freedom. This
view is supported by Argyris52 when commenting on evidence
which seemingly supports the concepts of autonomy as
espoused by both Skinnerians and non-Skinnerians: He
commented that perhaps these two technologies can work
equally well because the subjects--human beings--may be
quite flexible regarding the route they will take to
better themselves. His experience implies that people
who are ready to be helped (i.e., are ready to take
initiative for their growth make two demands: the first
is that the expert [leader] genuinely care for them and
thus not knowingly lead them to harm and the second is
that the route must have some probability of success).
This implies competence on the part of the expert to
lead them through the unknown territory. This is sub-

stantiated by a study of Peltz.S3

'The objective of the
study was to determine how measures obtained on super-
visors are related to the workers they supervised in a
large electric utility. The findings indicate that the
leader will be accepted by the members to the extent that

he helps them to achieve their goals. An elaboration of

 

52Chris Argyris, "Essay Review," Harvard Edu-
cational Review, XLI, No. 4 (1971), 550-67.

 

 

53P. C. Peltz, "Leadership Within an Hierarchal
Organization," Journal of Social Issues, VII, 49-55.

 

48

this point is made by Hemphill54 when he poses the
question, "Could greater progress toward this goal be
made if training were oriented toward recognition of

the differing leadership requirements of differing
situations?" He goes on to state that these problems
might be less baffling if we knew how toappraise the
characteristics of a leadership situation in a manner
that would permit one to predict the required qualities
of the successful man in the situation. The plan of his
study was to develop means of describing group situations
in terms of the degree of specific characteristics they
possess. The characteristics held in common were regarded
as group dimensions and they were examined in terms of
their utility of understanding what differing situations
require of a successful leader with regards to behavior.
The results of the study lend encouragement for the idea
that a means may be found to estimate within predictable
limits the requirements of leadership in a situation of
known general characteristics. This posture is accented

by Gouldner55

as he points out that in employing the
leadership corps as the unit of study, it was possible

that a minimum l'core" of personality characteristics of

 

54John K. Hemphill, Situational Factors in Leader-
ship (Ohio State University Studies, Bureau of Educational
Research, Ohio State University, 1949). p. 45.

 

55Gouldner, QB: cit., p. 45.

49

leadership could be isolated. The "core" noted for each
leader would not necessarily contain psychological char-
acteristics found in each leader, but would rather be a
composite of some of their personality features. This
lends credence to the idea of employing a collective cog—
nitive style within the educational science for use in
leadership study. Gouldner56 goes on to state that once
determined and validated, such group personality cores
may be useful for leadership selection. Eaton57 has
expressed the belief that no test can hope to fully
measure the unique qualities of each personality--the
unknown and perhaps unknowable factors which provide an
exception to any social regularity. However, he further
states that leadership tests which could separate the
extreme cases-~those very likely to succeed or fail as
leaders—-would be an important scientific achievement.
This idea is consistent with work by Flanagan58 as he
utilized the upper and lower 27 per cent of the dis-

tribution items and found the results to be satisfactory

 

56Ibid.

 

57Joseph W. Eaton, "Is Scientific Leadership
Selection Possible?" in Studies in Leadership, ed. by
Alvin Gouldner (New York: Harper & Bros. Publishers,
1950), p. 642.

 

58John C. Flanagan, "General Considerations in
the Selection of Test Items and a Short Method of Esti-
mating the ProductvMoment from the Data at the Tail of
the Distribution," Journal of Education Psychology, XXX
(1939), 674—80.

 

50

approximations to the biserial coefficients. The chart
utilized was based on Kelly's findings that upper and
lower groups containing 27 per cent of cases were optimum
for certain related estimations. Two other studies give
credence to an attempt to predict leadership. Carter59
used a battery of tests for selection purposes for foremen
and assistant foremen in two mental fabricating plants.
Ratings by fellow supervisors were used as criteria of
supervisory ability. The results indicate that at least
in some instances supervisory ability can be measured
fairly accurately by psychological tests by selecting

the best predictors from a relatively large number of
likely indices (twenty—nine in this study). The second
study by Dugger60 utilized the grade point average and

the autonomy and social extroversion scales of the Omnibus
Personality Inventory to discriminate between leaders

and nonleaders and found the results to be significant

(p = .001).

 

59Gerald C. Carter, "Measurement of Supervisory
Ability," Journal of Applied Psychology, XXXVI (1952),
393-95.

 

60June Armistead Dugger, "A Study of Measurable
Personal Factors of Leaders and Non-Leaders Among Uni-
versity Freshman Women," Dissertation Abstracts Inter—
national, XXX, Nos. 4-6 (1969) (The Florida State Uni—
versity, 1969), p. 1,817A.

51

Williams and Leavitt61 view with caution the
implications of the works reviewed by Jenkins and also
the previous works cited. They state that for practical
purposes, leadership predictors will have to be tailor-
made and not just taken from a grab-bag of accumulated
aptitude tests. In a follow—up study of junior officers
in the Marine Corps, most of whom became combat platoon
leaders, they found that a sociometric group opinion was
a more valid predictor both of success in Officer Can—
didate School and of combat performance than several
objective tests.

An additional facet of leadership has to be con-
sidered when one recognizes the import of living in a
democratic society during an age of unprecedented
rapidity of change. The problem is posed by Kelley when
he states:

There seems to be ample evidence that the autocratic
nature of our society is unsatisfactory to the people
concerned, both those giving orders and those

receiving them. . . . For education, it must mean
a new set of patterns, built from cooperative,

rather than the punitive and competitive point of
view. It must mean the accomplishment of purposes

through cognizance of and adjustment to the purposes
of others.62

 

61Stanley B. Williams and Harold Leavitt, "Group
Opinion as a Predictor of Military Leadership," Journal
of Consulting Psychology, No. 11 (1947), 283—91.

 

62Kelley, 9p. cit., pp. 103, 112.

52

This view is supported by Lewin when he states that on

the whole there is ample proof that the differences in

behavior in autocratic, democratic and laissez-faire

situations are not brought about by individual dif—

ferences. He explains:
There have been few experiences for me as expressive
as seeing the expression in children's faces change
during the first day of autocracy. The friendly,
open and cooperative group, full of life, became
within a short half hour a rather apathetic-looking
gathering without initiative. The change from
autocracy to democracy seemed to take somewhat more
time than from democracy to autocracy. Autocracy
is imposed upon the individual. Democracy he has
to learn.63

Supporting the observations of Kelley and Lewin is a

64 which focused on the extent to which

study by Snodowsky
communication structure modifies the effects of task and
leadership variables on group performance and satis-
faction. He found that members of the democratic—led
groups were more satisfied than members of authoritarian—
led groups. As a result of his findings, he recommends

that democratic leadership behavior be exercised for both

simple and complex problem-solving situations.

 

63Kurt Lewin, Study on Leadership, ed. by Alvin
A. Gouldner (New York: Harper, 1950), pp. 416-17.

64Alvin M. Snodowsky, "Group Effectiveness as a
Function of Communication Network, Task Complexity and
Leadership Type," Dissertation Abstracts International,
1969 (The City University of New York), p. 2,155A.

53

The element of change is emphasized by DeCecco65

in a survey made in the spring of 1969 of 670 junior and
senior high school students in the New York and Phila-
delphia area which indicated that decision-making was
overwhelmingly the first choice in describing the type

of conflict engaged in or witnessed by the reporting
student. He feels that adults fail to consider the
activities with which students are concerned. These
involve increased interest in discussing and participating
in decisions affecting their conditions; political dis-
cussions and participations; the exchange, writing and
distribution of their articles; the informality of dress
and manners that enable them to concentrate on more
productive matters; the ability to engage in and resolve
conflict and more strikingly, the help they give each
other in lieu of institutional help. He attributes this
myopic view of adults to the fact that they are imprisoned
by their memories and the classroom. A constructive view

offered by Brameld66

which would capitalize on these
interests presents the basic purpose of education as
teaching people how to become their own masters in

practice as well as theory——in short to take control of

 

65John P. DeCecco, Regeneration of the School:
Decision Making in a Democracy (New York: Holt, Rine—
hart and Winston, Inc., 1972), pp. 229-35.

 

66Theodore Brameld, Education as Power (New York:
Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965), p. 8.

 

54

the local, national and international community, rather
than to let the community take control of them. Seem-
ingly, the question that arises then is whether the
apparent change in high school student bodies, who will
shortly be in college, should be a factor in orientation
programming and also whether the orientation situation
calls for a specific type of leadership. The third
portion of the related research devotes itself to these

questions.

Small Group Orientation

 

Orientation is defined as a process of finding
out the actual conditions and putting one's self in the
right relationship to them. Within an orientation pro-
gram itself, Mueller67 indicates that two of the main
objectives are persuading freshmen as soon as possible
to assume responsibility for themselves and for the
institution to find out as much as possible about the
freshmen themselves. The specific areas of concern as
seen by Hoffman and Plutchuk68 include (1) the place of
education in life; (2) increased self-knowledge; (3)

increased social awareness; (4) increased self-confidence;

 

67Kate H. Mueller, Student Personnel Wbrk in
Higher Education (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company,
1961), p. 224.

 

68Randall Hoffman and Robert Plutchuck, Small
Group Discussion in Orientation and Teaching (New York:
G. P. Putnast, 1959), p. xi.

 

55

(5) the improvement of academic skills; (6) development
of leadership skills and (7) the awareness of college
facilities.

Orientation programs are a relatively new inno—
vation and were in part motivated by the high attrition
rates which occur during the initial year of college.

The diversity of programs is illustrated in a study by
Kronovet,69 which encompassed 1,378 colleges where
orientation programs are available. Her findings showed
that 31.2 per cent offer programs that last one week
before classes get underway; 14.6 per cent extend one
semester to the full academic year; less than 1 per cent
offer summer programs; 17.77 per cent cover less than one
week which includes a freshman camp program; 19.8 per cent
combine meetings before classes begin with regular meetings
spread over the freshman year and 1 per cent run programs
through the first week of classes for one or two days.
Attendance was required for these programs at the
majority of these institutions (78.3%) and only 9.7 per

cent actually indicated that attendance was optional.

 

69Esther Kronovet, "Current Practices in Freshman
Orientation," Improving College and University Teaching,

56

Fitzgerald and Busch70 suggest that perhaps the
most essential element of the creative orientation program
is the completion of an institutional self-study upon
which are based the current institutional reflections and
the projections of the future. They indicated that in
the final analysis, the institution must decide upon its
focus for new student orientation and they also advocate
the use of faculty members while shifting away from
student planning and reducing the involvement of admin-
istrative staff. The trend toward a more academic or
intellectual approach through the use of faculty is
evidenced by Grier71 as he notes that practitioners
seem to agree that if the intellectual approach can be
handled through small groups, it has the value of getting
at the individual through the vehicle of the small group.
He cites a recent experience with seventy-eight faculty
members leading small group discussions on classroom pro-
cedures which brought enthusiastic participation by both
faculty and students. The importance of this participation

is acknowledged by Sanford as he states:

 

7OLaurine E. Fitzgerald and Shirley A. Busch,
"Orientation Programs: Foundation and Framework," Colle e
and University Business, XXXVIII (April, 1963), 270-75.

71Daniel J. Grier, "Orientation--Tradition or
Reality?" Journal of National Association of Student
Personnel Administration, XXX, No. 3 (January, 1966),
37-41.

 

57

. . . if the faculty is ever going to have close

and influential relationships with students, these

relationships must be established at the beginning

of the Freshman year. The main purpose of the

Freshman year in any college should be to win the

freshman to the intellectual life. In most cases

this cannot be done except by the faculty.72

Looking at college from the student's vieWpoint,

Goldsen73 notes that when they are pinned down, students
hold three fairly clear "philosophies" above all others:
an academic philosophy, that a basic education and the
appreciation of ideas are important in and of themselves;
a vocational philosophy, that vocational training and
skills are necessary for effectiveness in one's career;
and an interpersonal philosophy, that the ability to get
along with different people contributes to a satisfying
life. The small group orientation format lends itself
especially well to the first and third "philosophies."
Tautfest's74 study of orientation interests, as reported

by prospective students, through mailed questionnaires

revealed an emphasis on academic preparation and program

 

72Nevitt Sanford, "Recent Research in the American
College Student," in Orientation to College Learning, ed.
by Nicholas C. Brown (washington, D.C.: American Council
in Education, 1961), p. 25.

 

73Rose K. Goldsen, “Recent Research in the American
College Student," in Orientation to College Learning, ed.
by Nicholas Brown (Washington, D.C.: American Council of
Education, 1961), p. 27.

 

74Patricia B. Tautfest, "An Evaluation Technique
for Orientation Programs," Journal of College Student
Personnel, III (October, 1961), 25-32.

 

58

planning, becoming familiar with the campus, handling
finances in college, student organizations and intramural
sE>c>rts. A later study by Ivey

increase the academic and intellectual emphaSis of the

5 found that efforts to

orlentation programs did not appear to Win recognition
by freshman students. The three-year study showed that
freshmen responded best to social or informational

A series of meetings with residence hall

activities.
counselors appeared to be the best received feature of

each Freshman week program.

Regardless of emphasis, the utilization of small

groups seem to be increasing in orientation programs.
The study of Hoffman and Plutchuck76 of orientation

c‘:>‘--‘-I.J:‘s.es at other colleges as well as their own exper—
iences have convinced them that the purposes of orien-

t'a-‘C.i._<3n are best realized through a small group approach

with teachers employing a group-centered method of

leadership. Ninety-eight per cent of the students
agreed or strongly

e

Valuated in a study by Pappas
a

greed that small group orientation seSSions

\
"A Three Year Evaluation of a

75
l hlege Freshman Week Program," Journal of College Stu—

\Personnel, V, No. 2 (December, 1963), 113-18.

76Hoffman and Plutchuck, up. Clt., p X1.

 

 

"Student Reaction to a Small—

77
John G. Pappas,
"119 Orientation Approach, " College and University,

it Q
II 84- 87.

II

‘

 

59

(eaight-twelve students) are more desirable than orien—

ta tion meetings where large numbers of students are in
It is suggested in a similar study by Miller

attendance.
78

and Ivey

that because of the consistent favorable
rxzsslponse of students to small group meetings and indi—

vidual sessions, regardless of the type of program, that

 

perhaps shortened programs emphasizing small groups would

be the ideal precollege orientation.
As previously stated, college authorities insti-

ttitzee: orientation programs in an effort to decrease
Research in this area, however, is generally

a. 1: tr ition.
One positive finding is reported by

no t promising .
79 Freshman students who met voluntarily in

ESIrijLitiln.
Small group sessions throughout their first semester

kjL51C3- <3n1y an 8 per cent withdrawal rate at the end of the

Seruester, as compared to a 24 per cent rate for a control

group and 31 per cent for experimental group members who
However, Kopecek80

"Structure

 

(Eift21CLGEztjded fewer than three meetings.
_‘____________
IQ‘EE 78C. Dean Miller and Allen E. Ivey,
SQ Spcnnse to Three Types of Orientation Programs," Per-
““-353£ELS§1 and Guidance Journal, XLV (June, 1967), 1,025-29.
79Smith, "Higher Education Programs," 1963, cited
lle, Vincent Harris, and Carolyn Dragger, "Orien-

in
tatEarl Ko
1Nr<:> i3~<>n Programs," Review of Educational Research, XXXVI,
‘ 2 (April, 1966f, 243.
"Freshman Orientation Pro-

80Robert J. Kopecek,
A Comparison," Journal of College Student Per-

:61“
(:3’Jr: £3:
\\“““‘~35£Sal, VIII, No. 5 (September, 1967), 51-52.

60

found that voluntary withdrawal and academic dismissal

are not affected by orientation programs. This study

utilized three different approaches to orientation:

small-group nondirective and nonauthoritarian, authority

centered and mailed material. The program covered 180

randomly selected students at a resident two-year tech-
nical college in rural New York State. A similar result
I

 

 

in a community

‘3‘» .

obtained by Rothman and Leonard

was
During the summer of 1965 they constructed a

col 1 ege.

"good" semester-long orientation program to meet the
needs as indicated by a previous questionnaire. Three

small group meetings and one large presentation meeting

Were held each month. Twelve sessions were held and
groups were randomly selected and assigned. The results
of the study showed that control and experimental groups

not differ significantly in grade point average

d id
during either the first or second semester. Similarly,

there was no difference found between the two groups in
In his study focusing

a“t‘t-thition rate for either semester.
found that

or)
academics rather than attrition, Pappas
t
11:) Se students who completed either the "directive-

fa
Q"ilial" approach or the "small—group" approach of

 

" E 81Leslie K. Rothman and Donald G. Leonard,
ffectiveness of Freshman Orientation," Journal of

Q
Q
3 Qllege Student Personnel, VIII, No. 5 (September, 1967),
‘04.

82Pappas, 22' cit., pp. 84-87.

t

61

additional college orientation, demonstrated significantly
higher academic achievement than those who participated
only in the pre-college program. There was no significant
difference, however, between the "factual" and "small-
gro up" approach.
The role of the student as leader, adviser or
Counselor, has increased as the size of Freshman classes

have become larger each year and as orientation has

 

become impersonal in its approach. Grier supports k
this increased emphasis as he comments on the accepted
technique of using upper-class students as counselors:

ZIf the emphasis is to be on life adjustment, the
Iase of upperclassmen makes some sense, since they
eare closer to the new student than the faculty or
iadministrator. However, we must have considerable
areservation about how well in-service training
Iprograms for student counselors really work. At
loest, they may be more useful to the student coun—
sselor than to the new student.33

84

Brown and Zunker in a study cited previously found that

the main basis for selection of student counselors
included previous leadership eXperience, dormitory
directory evaluation, college grade average, faculty
1In‘a‘113ers' evaluation and peer acceptance ratings. They

a
1 so found that 84 per cent of the respondents felt that

81:
13*d-ents made an effective and positive contribution to

\

83Grier, 92. cit., pp. 37-41.

84Brown and Zunker, EE- cit., pp. 41-46.

 

62

the total guidance program of their institutions. The

information on small-group orientation is best summed up

by Patty,85 who observes that there is very little

written on the training of freshman advisors, and for

that matter, on the use of experienced graduate students

as freshman advisors. His concern voices the concern

that there is absolutely nothing in the literature on

the evaluation of existing orientation programs at indi-
vidu a1 institutions and on research that explores whether

or not a particular institution is compatible with an

individual freshman. This statement along with the pre-

sented evidence of conflicting findings re-emphasizes

the need for additional research on small-group orien-

ta 1:. ion programming .

Summary

This chapter has presented research on the
J'3‘e-3—a.ted areas of the Educational Science of Cognitive
StYl e, Small Group Leadership and Small Group Orientation.
IE: has emphasized the concepts and supporting theory
11an which the educational science of cognitive style is
ba- sed, presented the controversy regarding leadership
thecry and provided both research and recommendations

E Q
1|: small-group orientation programs. In the next

85Austin H. Patty, "Freshman Orientation:

Q'b
Q"Wing Concern," Improving Collgge and University

'3?
‘53:
W, XIV (Summer, 1966), 184-88.

 

A

 

 

63

(:Imapter, the design of the study is considered in respect
't<> the general questions raised in Chapter I and also

‘tliee related research presented in Chapter II.

 

 

CHAPTER III
DESIGN OF STUDY

Source of Data

This study involved the new students of the

 

entering 1972 Fall class of Olivet College and the

upper-class orientation leaders.
Olivet College is located in Olivet, a city of

approximately 1,000 inhabitants in south central Michigan,

thirty-five miles southwest of Lansing,'the state's

Cap ital. The College is a four-year co-educational

liberal arts institution of approximately 800 students.

The faculty student ratio at the time of the study was

1 3 = IL. Students represented thirty states and fifteen

fereign countries. The northeastern United States was

e S p ecial 1y well represented .
Olivet was founded in 1844 and is a member of

the American Council of Education, Association of
Mexican Colleges, Association of Independent Colleges
and Universities of Michigan, Council for Higher Edu-
Qation of the United Church of Christ, Michigan Academy

Q28
EScience, Arts and letters, Michigan Association of

64

h

65

Colleges and Universities, Michigan Colleges Foundation

and Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association. It

is accredited by the North Central Association of

Colleges and Secondary Schools. The Teacher Preparation

Program is approved by both the Michigan State Department

of Education and the National Council for the Accredi-

ta tion of Teacher Education. Olivet has a relationship

to the Congregational Church and the United Church of

 

Cl‘irist, although its organization is that of an indepen—
dent, private college directed by a Board of Trustees.
OIL ivet College has a faculty of approximately sixty-five

metnbers of which approximately 30 per cent possess their
doctorate.

Samples Emplpyed by Study
The population of Students for the study include

a1 1 new students of the fall term, 1972, who had been

con firmed for admission prior to the deadline date for

College entry. This universe includes freshman,

transfer, commuter and residential students. The only
Q'a-":egory not included would be that of students return—
ing to Olivet after a period of absence. The original
:6 igure for group division purposes of the defined popu-
a“e“‘tion was 256 students. However, as a number of stu-
a‘Ql'lts had confirmed at several colleges, the actual

e
altlple size for the study was somewhat smaller.

h

66

Students forming the sample for the study were randomly
assigned to their respective groups. After the deadline

date, late entering students were arbitrarily assigned

to disjunct groups.

The sample of students included in the measures
of the study involving most effective and least effective
groupings comprised 50 per cent, i.e. 128 students, of
'the above group. The sample group showed characteristics
liighly similar to those of the defined population, i.e.

c>f the total class.

Characteristics of the 1972 incoming class86

kaased on percents include the following:

(1) 52.5 per cent are male and 47.5 per cent are

female;

(2) 92 per cent are included in l8-l9-year—old bracket;

(3) 95.6 per cent are White/Caucasian;

(4) 50 per cent of their fathers had attended

college;
(5) 40 per cent of their mothers had attended
college;

(6) 64.4 per cent came from small or moderate sized

towns;

86American Council of Education, Summary of Data

EE}_JEntering Students, Olivet College, FalI, 1972.

(7)

(8)

(9)

(10)

(ll)

(12)

(l3)

(14)

67
78 per cent graduated from classes of less than
500 students;

57 per cent are Protestant and 13 per cent are

Catholic;

53.8 per cent ranked at the tOp quarter of their

high school class;
96 per cent attended public schools;
40 per cent came from distances of over 100 miles;

30 per cent expressed interest in fine arts as a
major, 11 per cent in education, 11 per cent in

social sciences;

58 per cent classify themselves as middle of the

road in current political preference;

22 per cent are undecided as to possible career

occupations.

Sample of Leaders

The Leaders for the small group orientation

Program were selected from approximately 100 upperclass

students, who had applied for the position of student

adviser .

Each spring semester, an attempt is made to

encourage as many students to apply for the position of

adViser as possible. The 100 applicants represent

approximately 25 per cent of the upperclass students

68

living on campus and include students who represent the
academic, vocational and social aspects of the campus.
There are approximately twenty-seven actual positions
available, but all candidates completing the program are

rank ordered to provide for both a selection and an

alternate selection list. Additional orientation group

leaders are selected from the alternate list.
During the evaluation process, potential advisers
Jreceived a comprehensive generalized leadership training

Iprogram. This included a job description review, par-

t:icipatory decision-making in regulations, human relation-
:ship training, drug information sessions, small group

vnork on case problems and individual work on potential

ruesidence hall situations. The program lasted for ten

weeks and served to act as a screening device for those

applicants who were not highly motivated. The final

evaluation was accomplished through the use of a leader-
Ship profile (see Appendix B) which includes ratings on
aSJ€3~class-experience, academic standing, attendance,
Eiéi\fisors' ratings, interview and testing. After selection,
J-eiéidems were randomly assigned to the various categories
<:’IE leadership for the exploratory study and were given

£31F>€ecific behavioral instructions in their category of

l e adership .
Thirty—two advisers and alternates were selected

f0): orientation leadership positions (sixteen male and

69

sixteen female). Data on sixteen or 50 per cent of the

student leaders was utilized in the portion of the study

dealing with.most effective and least effective leadership.

Representativeness of Sample of
the Defined POpulations

With the exception of a few students, the entire
‘population comprises the sample for data collected for
certain of the exploratory general questions and is
*therefore highly representative of the population.
{Those students who enrolled after the deadline date
.and necessarily missed the majority of orientation
Iprogramming were not included in the data.

The sample used for the most and least effective

lxeaders involved approximately 50 per cent of the leaders

and students. Thus, this sample also is highly repre—

sentative of their respective defined pOpulations.

Adequacy of Sample Size
The study was designed to examine the data at

till£a exploratory study level of consideration. Therefore,

Small sample theory could be employed. The number,

.r1 _§ 30, of leaders is adequate under the terms of small

£3iaumple theory and for exploratory study efforts.

Data Collection

The instrumentalities and the procedures used for

‘tille collection of the data employed in the study are as

1E(allows:

70

Instrumentalities
The instruments used to collect the data in the

study were (1) Leadership profile scores; (2) Cognitive

Style testing; (3) Orientation group evaluation; (4)

Leader self-evaluation; (5) Observation of leadership

behavior and (6) Composite interview reaction sheet.
The Leadership Profile provided a composite score

for leadership potential and was utilized for selection

of both advisers and alternates. The basis for measure-

ment included age-class-experience, academic standing,

attendance, advisor ratings, interview and testing. All

measurements were converted to a four-point scale. In

the age-class-experience category, applications were
reviewed and two of the four points were ascribed to
Exrevious counseling experience and two points were
ascribed to current chronological age and class standing.

The academic standing refers to the cumulative grade

point average to date. Attendance at selection meetings

Was converted to the four-point scale. In the adviser

ratings, a list of all applicants was submitted to the

then current student advisers. They were asked to simply

cfleck yes or no or no knowledge as to whether a candi-

<iate has good potential for an advisership. A ratio was

e~?»*l:ablished and conversion made to the four-point scale.

The interviews were conducted by the head residents and

S“tudent personnel staff members. These interviews are

 

 

71

conducted in groups of six and ratings made on a four-
point scale in reference to leadership potential. The
testing utilizes actual campus experiences and answers
were scored on a best, next best and worst basis. The
composite score reflects the profile and was based on a
four-point scale. Items are weighted equally, however,
lmarked deviations were noted and in case of similar
.scores the adviser rating scale was used for differen-
‘tiation. The Leadership profile with some periodic
:revisions has been utilized for seven years with success
(see Appendix B).

The Cognitive Style Testing Battery produced
:information that resulted in a computerized print-out
c>f a.cognitive style map for an individual. Thus the
process of "mapping" a student‘s cognitive style not
<Drlly depends on testing results, but on the translation

(>1? these results into elements found in the "map."

This instrument employed is in effect a card
S5<>rt composed at Oakland Community College covering the
tzllltee sets of cognitive style: symbols and their mean—
jLI‘sys, cultural determinants and modalities of inference.
A total of 216 responses were secured to gather data
iEJEWDm which the cognitive style map of three sets of
Li‘I‘dfonmation was produced. (The card sort was adminis-.
taxed at Olivet College and the results sent to Oakland

QQImmunity College for scoring and processing.) Cognitive

and

Cer

in

CO

IE

(I)

72

style testing utilizing the regular battery, and also
the card sort techniques, have been given to approxi-
mately 35,000 students at Oakland Community College.

Reliability and validity indices on these instruments

and procedures are available from the Diagnostic Testing

Center of the College. Sample questions are illustrated

in the Appendix F.

The Orientation Group Evaluation was a locally
<:onstructed instrument designed to glean information
:regarding leader behavior and student reactions to the
Lleadership behaviors and orientation programming for this
astudy. It was especially designed to provide a cross
<1heck on specific leader behavior and to provide data
vwhich were not available in the pilot study made in 1971.
Students were also asked to indicate their satisfaction
regarding leadership, group construction, program effec-
tiveness and attendance on a seven-point continuum (see

Appendix C).

The Leader Self-evaluation was also constructed
JL<3<3ally. It served the purpose of specifying the various
ID‘EIJaviors desired in the leadership patterns as a
leadership training device and also recorded the
J“Qader's observations regarding himself and his satis—
Zifiamction with his leadership assignments, the method of

gt‘(Jup construction and his evaluation of the program's

a‘Sszistance to new students. In addition, the leader

 

73

reported the type of leadership role and group con-
struction which he felt would be best for his or herself
(see Appendix D).

The Observation of Leadership Behavior form
paralleled the two previously mentioned forms and served
as a cross check also for verification of leader behavior.
Its use was confined to the professional observers. The
Student Counselor, Associate Dean of Students and Dean of
Students served as the observors. Each evaluated the
groups independently and on more than one occasion.
Specific behaviors were recorded, as well as a desig-
1nation made of a leadership rating based on a seven-point
continuum (see Appendix E) .

The Composite Interview Reaction Sheet was con—
sstructed after completion of thirty-minute individual
.iJlterviews with leaders. They were conducted upon the

<3c>nclusion of the orientation program. Comments and
£31mggestions that had some frequency were categorized and

resubmitted to the student leaders. They were asked to
agree or disagree with the written statements and to
make any further suggestions desired. The Composite
j~lirterview reaction is a variation of the technique of
" brainstorming." The purpose of the interviews was to
9a in information regarding leader feelings and per-
Q'eptions. The leader self-evaluation was used as an

:i4r1itiating tool for the interview and the student leaders

 

74

were encouraged to make evaluative judgments, as well
as suggestions. A special emphasis was made to determine
preference for leadership style and group construction.
A complete list of the responses is available in
Appendix G.

The locally constructed instruments were designed
to complement each other and to arrive at data specifi-
cally for this study. The procedures in implementing

these instruments follow in the next section.

.Procedures

 

The main procedures of data collection employed

:in the study are as follows:

1. Applications were taken and processed for leader
positions. This included campus-wide notification
of the coming selection process and securing
nominations from the current advisory staff.

The nominees were then invited to join the
selection process. Every attempt was made to

secure the largest possible number of applicants.

2. A general inservice training program was con-
ducted for all candidates. This included case
studies, human relations training, Specialty
topics, job description review and sample testing.
The program was conducted by the student personnel

staff members under the direction of the Dean of

75

Students. Make-up sessions were available for
students who missed meetings due to the schedule

conflicts or illness.

Upon completion of the inservice training pro-
gram, students were assigned to adviser or alter-
nate positions by their composite profile score.
The professional staff had the opportunity to
change any rankings so desired. For the second
successive year, no rankings were changed.
Assignments were completed prior to the end of

the college year (June, 1972).

During the fall inservice training program, the
student leaders were informed of the design of
the leadership study to be conducted within the
orientation program. They were appraised of the
inconclusive results of the previous study and
the importance of carrying out the behavioral
characteristics of their particular leadership
category. Part of this appraisal included a
legitimizing of each of the methods to be used
in the leadership study. They then took part

in the random selection of leadership assignments.

Specific behavioral training of directive and
nondirective leaders was given separately. The

leadership behaviors listed on the leader

76

evaluation sheet were emphasized and examples

and demonstrations used where necessary.

New students were randomly assigned to their
respective groups. The build groups were
assigned to a general pool while the assigned
groups were assigned to either a directive
assigned or nondirective assigned group at random.
The general pool was necessary to allow for the
"building" sequence which was to follow. Stu-
dents receiving assigned groups received an
orientation letter to report to the gymnasium
while students in the build classification
received notice to report to the Collegiate
Center. Upon arrival at their respective assign—
ments the students were encouraged to socialize
with each other via a socializing technique
based on the occult sciences. This allowed for
the arrival of late comers and the usual last-
minute mix-ups. Parents at this same time were
being hosted by administrative officers at a
program in the Mott Auditorium. After the
socializing period of approximately thirty
minutes, the students in the gym were brought
together and briefly welcomed. They were then
told that the orientation program was a require—

ment for all new students and turned over to

77

their respective student leader. For the duration
of the program, attendance was emphasized in the
directive groups and no further mention was made‘
in the nondirective groups.v

The groups assigned to the Collegiate Center
followed the same socializing format. However,
after being brought together and the same
attendance announcement made, they participated
in "building" their own groups and selecting their
own leaders. Both groups followed the same pro-
gram format which consisted of both small and

large group activities.

Initiation of the Orientation Program began with
a concentrated three and one—half days (morning,
afternoon, evening) sessions and once each week
for seven weeks thereafter to coincide with the

mid-term marking period.

Observations were made independently of the
leadership styles by three professional observers
(Counselor, Associate Dean of Students and Dean
of Students). The Counselor and the Associate

Dean of Students were new to the campus.

Leaders were cognitively mapped using the Oakland
Community College Card Sort and the computer

facilities of Oakland Community College.

78

10. During the seventh week of the program, the

Orientation Group Evaluation sheet was administered.

11. During the eighth week, the leader self-evaluation

sheet was administered and the interview conducted.

12. During the ninth week, the Composite interview
sheet was constructed and distributed to the
student leaders. The responses were then col—

lected and tabulated.

Summary of Design of Study

This is an exploratory small sample study search—
ing for indications and implications of the posited general
questions. One of the main purposes is to determine
whether the educational science of cognitive style can
indicate differences in most effective and least effec—
tive leadership and if so, what might these differences
be. Thus, collective cognitive style for most effective
and least effective leaders will be ascertained by sur-
veying each of the cognitive maps of the individual
leaders. Predominant elements within maps served to
form a collective cognitive style and these styles were
then compared for differentiating elements. The next
step was to pose some possible alternatives in the use
of cognitive style in predicting effectiveness of

leadership or probable style of leadership.

79

The effect of directive and nondirective leader-
ship, as well as method of group constructions is of
importance and this was measured by the Komolgorov-

Smirnov statistical technique.

 

 

 

 

Non— Non-
Directive Directive Directive Directive
Assigned Assigned Build Build
MEsnl (X)
LESn2 (X)
Maximum
Deviation

 

 

Fnl (x) - Sn2(x)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3.--Design model for measuring
effectiveness of leaders

Likewise, the leadership style and method of group
instruction will be compared with the attrition rate and
the significance of required attendance investigated.

The responses to the Composite Interviews were
tabled and a general summary statement composed from the
findings. This should be of assistance for the continuing
research on the Olivet Orientation Program.

The design of the study is such that it is to
provide information for intelligent adjustments to an

ongoing program and to provide some investigative

80

possibilities as well as lend support to existing theory.
A model of the statistical technique used and the find—

ings follow in the next chapter.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF DATA AND FINDINGS

Analysis of Data

 

The data yielded by the study were those of (l)
the descriptive, qualitative type statements; (2) the
nominal scale of measurement; (3) the ordinal scale of
measurement; and (4) the interval scale of measurement.
Descriptive-qualitative data are of primary importance
in answering the first two general questions of the study.
The remaining data which deal with ratings of leaders'
personal preferences, attrition rate and attendance were
distributed over the nominal, ordinal and interval scales
of measurement. Cognizant that the majority of the data
collected is of the nominal and ordinal level of measure-

ment, nonparametric tests have been employed.

Analytic Techniques Employed

 

The statistical measurements utilized in this
study were primarily directed at the most effective and

least effective leaders. This is a modified technique

81

82

consistent with the report of Flanagan87 concerning
satisfactory approximation to the biserial coefficient
through the use of upper and lower groups. The chart
utilized in the procedure was based on the findings of
Kelly88 that upper and lower groups containing 27 per
cent of the cases were optimum for certain related esti-
mations.

Individual cognitive maps were surveyed to deter-
mine a collective cognitive style for both the most
effective and least effective leader-categories. After
determining collective cognitive maps for both cate-
gories, they in turn were surveyed for differences which
might attribute to leader effectiveness. Testing the
styles of leadership in terms of most and least effec-
tiveness was accomplished by the use of the Komolgorov-
Smirnov two-sample test, which compares the distribution
of relative frequencies over the stated categories. It
is a test of whether two independent samples have been
drawn from the same population (or from pOpulations with
the same distribution). This process is described by

Siegel:

 

87Flanagan, gp. cit., pp. 674-80.

88T. L. Kelly, "The Selection of Upper and

Lower Groups for the Validation of Test Items," Journal
of Educational Psychology: XXX (1939), 17-24.

 

83

. . . The two-tailed test is sensitive to any kind
of difference in the distributions from which the
two samples were drawn——difference in location
(central tendency), in dispersion, in skewness,
etc. . . . If the two samples have in fact been
drawn from the same population distribution, then
the cumulative distributions of both samples may be
expected to be fairly close to each other inasmuch
as they both should show only random deviations
from the population distribution. . . . When com-
pared to the t-test, the Komolgorov-Smirnov test
has high power efficiency (about 96%) for small
samples. . . . seems to be more powerful in all 89
cases than either the X2 test or the median test.

The difference in the one sample test is that it compares
the distribution with the theoretical relative distri—
bution rather than that of another sample. The following

table illustrates the method used in the study:

TABLE 2.--Two sample KomolgorOV-Smirnov statistical tech-

 

 

niques
. . . . Non- Non-
gggicfiége Dlgfiiiéve Directive Directive
g Assigned Build
Most
. l 2 7 8
Effective —§—- .§_. _§_. .5.
S (x)
81
Least
Effective —§— —§— —§— —%—
S (x) 8 8 8
82
DeMi‘fit’Efi‘fi 4 .3... 1 _0_
V 8“ 8 '§" 0

Snl(x)-Sn2(x)

 

 

89
Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for

Behavioral Sciences (New York: McGraw Hill Book Co.,

 

1956). pp. 127-36.

 

84

Testable Hypothesis

 

The statistical inference process employed was

as follows:

1. Null hypothesis: HO:RF = RF2 i.e.; in

1
statement form--the expected relative frequencies of the

 

most effective leaders nl are equal to the expected rela-
tive frequencies of the least effective leaders n2 for
the k categories covering the range of leadership styles.

The statistical alternative hypothesis is H :RFl # RF

1 2’

i.e. the expected relative frequencies of the most
effective leaders is not equal to the expected relative

frequencies of the least effective leaders.

2. Statistical Test: Two small independent

 

samples of equal sizes (n =n =8) are to be compared on a

l 2
categorical basis, hence the Komolgorov-Smirnov two—

sample test is an appropriate one.

3. Level of Significance: (a) The level of

 

significance is .05.

4. Sampling Distribution: A complete table of
90

 

critical values is listed by Siegel.

5. Critical Region: Since the null hypothesis

 

HO and the statistical alternative hypothesis H1 do not

 

90

Ibid., p. 278.

 

85

predict direction, a two-tailed test is used. The null
hypothesis is rejected if the value for KD for the maximum
deviation is of such magnitude (equal to or larger than
the appropriate KD in the table) that the probability
associated with its occurrence, if no is supposedly true,
is equal to or greater than the critical values found for

D if a = .05.

6. Compute the value of the statistic: The

 

value of KD with which this form of the Komolgorov-
'Smirnov test is concerned is the numerator of the maximum
deviation D which appears in the bottom row of each indi-

vidual table (in the sample form it is 4 from D = —%—u

7. Decision concerning H0: Since the critical

 

value of KD for n = n = 8 under the two-tailed test

1 2
employed at the a = .05 level of significance is: KD = 6
and the value of KD yielded by the sample data is KD = 4,
the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.

Additional data deemed to have import for the
study have been reported in descriptive forms and in
tables of nominative data which are presented in the
response to the general questions of the study. The

following findings are listed in order of the posed

questions.

Findings

 

The findings regarding the first two general

questions are presented together as they are related to

each other.

1. How can the educational science of cogpitive

86

These questions are:

 

style be used in the process of predicting

 

effective leadership?

 

2. How do the most effective leaders differ from the

 

least effective leaders?

 

The collective cognitive style for the most effec-
tive leaders constructed from the eight most effective

leaders using a modified technique described by Flanagan91

is as follows:

(AL)
(V)
(T)
(S)
(0)
(CT)
(CS)
(CP)
(CK)
(CH)
(CET)
(CES)
(CEM)
(A)

oooooooooooooe'

 

 

.. .1

Figure 4.-—Most effective leader collective
cognitive style

 

 

91

-

AI

1!

 

J

 

ml

Flanagan, gp. cit., pp. 674-80.

D

ml

 

J

87

The collective cognitive style for the least
effective leaders selected in the same fashion is as

follows:

T '(u)u.) '1" (AQ) T (VL) '1" we) r J F

T
(S)
(0) I R
(CT)
(GS) X F' x D'
(cx)
(CET) A' M.
(CES)
(CEM)
(CKH)
_ _. L. J ._ J

Figure 5.-—Least effective leader collective
cognitive style

LQ
ll
00000000006

 

 

 

 

 

 

The differences within the first set of symbols
and their meanings occur in both the theoretical and
qualitative symbols.'

The least effective leaders have either majors
or minors in all four theoretical symbols while the most
effective category has a minor in T' AL.

The most effective category has the following
qualitative symbols not evidenced in the least effective
category--Q (V), Q (CP), Q (CH), Q (A). The least effec-
tive category has a Q (CKH) not evidenced in the most
effective category.

In the second set of cultural determinants the

difference lies in the I rotating from the major position

88

in the least effective group to the weakest minor

position in the most effective group.

I FA

F' A|

A' I'
Least Effective Most Effective

In the third set of modalities of inferences the
difference lies in the fact that the most effective group
has a major D and an L while the least effective group
has a minor D.

Thus, the differences are noted below with the

least effective group distinguished by underlining:

' 1 _. - r -
T' (A0) T (VL) T' (VQ) ,

Q (V) F _I_

Q (CP) x A' g; x D L
Q (CH)

0 (A) (QCKH) 1' a;

D!

L. .J _ o _._- J

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 6.--Differences in cognitive styles of
most effective and least effective leaders
In addition to the comparison of collective cog-
nitive styles the most effective and least effective
leader samples were compared over the randomly assigned
categories of leadership.
The following statistical results are presented

using the Komolgorov-Smirnov two sample statistical test.

89

In each of the tables the null hypothesis states that
there is no difference between most effective and least

effective leader categories.

TABLE 3.--Differences in leadership style and group con-
struction of most effective and least effective leaders

 

 

Directive Directive Non- Non-
Assi ned Build Directive Directive
g Assigned Build
Most
Effective _Z_ 3 6 8
581(X)
Least
Effective _§_. 4 5 8
532(X)
Maximum
. . l 1 l 0
DeViation —§—- —§— _§_ _§_

Snl(x)-Sn2(x)

 

The numerator of the largest deviation is l. The
Table of Critical Values of KD in the Komolgorov-Smirnov
two-sample test indicates a value of 6 is necessary at
the a level of .05. Therefore, the null hypothesis cannot
be rejected.

With regard to the differences between male and

female leadership, the following table is presented:

90

TABLE 4.--Differences between most effective and least
effective leaders according to sex

 

 

 

Male Female
Most
Effective —1— —§—

8 8

831(X)
Least 0 8
Effective —§— —§—-
532(X)
Maximum 7* 0
Deviation 8 —§—

Sn1(x)’5n2(x)

 

The numerator of the largest deviation is 7.
The Table of Critical Values indicates that this value
is highly significant at the a level of .01 in a two-

tailed test. The null hypothesis is rejected.

The third question asks: Do new students show a

 

preference for leadership style and group con-

struction?

 

Leadership style was rated on a seven-point con—
tinuum with seven, very satisfactory; five, satisfactory;
three, somewhat satisfactory; one, unsatisfactory. The
sample of thirty—two groups, sixteen in each category
represent all of the new students in the study.

The following table presents the mean satisfaction

of groups by leadership style:

91

TABLE 5.--Difference in preference of new students for
leadership style

New Student Satisfaction
Leadership Style

 

 

6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5
Non-Directive l 6 10 14 16
5161 (X) l6 16 I6 I6 16
Directive 2 6 ll 15 16
5162 (X) 16 16 l6 16 16
Maximum Deviation l 0 l l 0
Sn1 (X) Sn2 (X) 16 16 16 16 16

 

The numerator of the largest fraction in the
Maximum Deviation column is l and the Table of Critical
Values calls for a value of 8 when n = 16, a = .05, two-
tailed. Thus, the HO: Snl = Sn2 cannot be rejected.

Group construction satisfaction was rated on a
similar continuum of seven, very satisfactory to one,
unsatisfactory and also includes all groups. The table
shown on the following page presents the mean satis-
faction of groups with regard to group construction.

The numerator of the largest fraction in the
Maximum Deviation column is four and the Table of

Critical Values establishes a value of eight when n = 16,

a = .05 two-tailed. Thus, the HO: S = S

cannot
nl ——-———

n2
be rejected.

The fourth question is: Do leaders show a preference

of leadership style and group construction?

92

TABLE 6.--Differences in preference of new students for
group construction

 

New Student Satisfaction

 

Group Construction
6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assigned 2 5 l9. 14 14 15 15 15
8151 (X) 16 16 l6 l6 l6 l6 16 16
Build 4 9 13 15 16. 16 16 16
5152 (X) 16 l6 l6 l6 16 16 l6 16
Maximum Deviation 2 4 3 l 2 l l 0
Sn1 (X) - Sn2 (X) l6 16 16 16 16 16 16 16

 

The responses indicate the preference of leaders
for leadership and group construction according to their
randomly selected categories. The findings are presented
in Table 7 and include all leaders.

Using the Komolgorov-Smirnov one-sample test,
the following statistic (Table 8) is computed for leader-
ship preference, N = 32.

The Maximum Deviation is 9/32 which is .281.

Table E92

shows that for N = 32, D Z .281 has an
associated probability under Ho of p = .01. Thus, the
HO ig rejected at the a = .01 level.

Using the one—sample test, the following statistic
(Table 9) is computed for Group Construction Preference,

N = 29.

 

92Siegel, gp. cit., p. 251.

93

TABLE 7.—-Frequency distribution of leadership style and
group construction preference of leaders

 

 

 

 

Leadership Preference Group Construction
Preference
Directive Non- No
Leader- Directive Assigned Build Prefer-
ship Leadership ence
Directive
Assigned 3 5 3 3 2
Non-
Directive
Assigned 2 6 4 3 l
Directive
Build 3 5 0 8
Non-
Directive
Build 1 7 l 7
Totals 9 23 ~ 8. 21 3

 

TABLE 8.--Leadership style preference of leaders

 

 

 

 

Directive Non-Directive
Leadership Leadership
9 23
F (X) 1_8 .32
° 32 32
S (X) 9 32
32 3'2‘ 32
F (X) - s (X) _g* 0
° 32 32 3'2

 

94

TABLE 9.--Leader-group construction preference of leaders

 

 

 

 

Assigned Build

8 21

F0 (X) 14.5 14.5
29 29
s (X) 8 29
29 '2'9 ‘29"
F (X) - s (x) 6.5 0
° 29 29" 2'9

 

The Maximum Deviation is 6.5/29 which is .234.
Table E shows that for N = 29, a = .05, the value called
for is circa .24. At the a = .05 level the Ho cannot be
rejected although it could be rejected at the a = .10
level. This situation of .10 5 5 .05 places the

hypothesis in doubt.

Question Number Five: Does leadership and group
construction methods affect the first semester

attrition rate?

The Komolgorov-Smirnov one—sample test is used
to measure the attrition rate over the categories of
leadership and group construction. The reported numbers

are indicated in the following table.

95

TABLE lO.—-Differences between leadership and group con—
struction relative to first semester attrition

 

Leadership and Group Construction

 

 

 

 

 

 

Directive Non- Directive Non-
Assi ned Directive Build Directive
g Assigned Build
Attrition
Frequency 8 5 4 7
Frequency _2 12 £9 £3
Under H0 24 24 24 24
S24 (X) _3. L2 _l_7_ a
24 24 24 24
Maximum
Deviation _g _L l 0
FO(X) - 824 (X) 24 24 5;- fl—

 

The Table of Critical Values93 of D in the
Komolgonov-Smirnov one-sample test establishes the values
for N = 24, a = .05 to be circa .27. The computed value
of the Maximum Deviation is 2/24 or .085. Thus the

H : DB = NDB = DB = NDB cannot be rejected.

Question Number six: Does the use of directive or
nondirective leadership affect the attendance rate

of programs?

 

Attendance was rated on a seven-point continuum

with seven representing all orientation meetings; five,

 

93Ibid., p. 251.

96

most; three, some and one, none or very few. The table
reveals attendance within the categories of leadership

style and group construction.

TABLE ll.--Frequency distribution of attendance within
categories of leadership style and group construction

 

Group Attendance Means

 

6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0

 

Directive Assigned 0 2 l l 2 2 0 0
Directive Build 1 0 2 4 l 0 0 0

Non-Directive
Assigned 0 1 3 3 1 0 0 0

Non-Directive
Build 0 0 3 l 2 l O l

 

A comparison of directive leadership in which
attendance was visible and emphasized with nondirective
leadership in which attendance was not emphasized and
not visible is reflected in Table 12.

The numerator of the largest fraction in the
Maximum Deviation is two. The Table of Critical Values
calls for a value of eight for N = 16 a = .05. Thus,
the null hypothesis cannot be rejected.

Complete results of the composite interview
responses are included in the appendix. In Table 13 are

listed those responses relating directly to the study.

97

TABLE 12.--Differences between directive and nondirective
leadership in terms of attendance

 

Group Attendance Means

 

 

6.5 6.0 5.5 5.0 4.5 4.0 3.5 3.0
Directive _1_ _3. _6. 1.1. 1.4. 16 1.6. 3.9
Sn16 (X)l 16 16 16 16 16 l6 l6 l6
Non-Directive _0 _1 '41 ll 14 15 15_ 16.
Sn16 (X)2 16 16 l6 l6 16 16 16 16
Maximum Deviation _l _2 _l _0 0 _l. _1‘ _Q

16 16 16 16 1—6 16 l6 l6

Snl(X) - Sn2(x)

 

98

TABLE l3.--Composite interview results

 

 

 

 

Responses
Statements
Agree Disagree
1. The Leader should size up the group
needs and go according to their needs
always looking for the group to
take over. 30 2
2. Start Directive in leadership and end
Non-Directive (Situational Leadership) 25 3
3. Directive is best as that's what they
are used to. 5 25
4. Since students are eventually going
to be on their own, they should
have the experience of non—
directive groups. 20 13
5. I was successful in going according
to the specific behavioral objec-
tives. 18 ll
6. I feel the inservice training given
prior to the O-Group experience was
adequate. 24 7
Groupronstruction
7. Students would prefer to be members
of build groups. 27 10
8. I feel eight plus a leader is an
ideal size group. 25 6
9. There is less confusion in assign—
ing the groups. 23 9
10. There should be one football player,
one commuter, and one transfer
student in each group. 5 26
ll. Equalize the sexes in the groups. 25 6
12. Have interaction between O—Groups. 32 0

99

TABLE l3.--Continued

 

 

 

 

 

Responses
Statements
Agree Disagree
Attendance
13. Stress the Attendance-—more reluc—
tance, but they enjoy it when
they are there. 16 ll
14. Required attendance is the only
way to go. 5 22
15. Students have a feeling, "unless it
goes on my record, it's unimportant." l4 l7
l6. "Optional and good" is the secret -
to programming. 22 5
Length of Program
17. There is value in having the program
go until midterm. l7 14
18. The program is too long. Have it
twice a week for three weeks. 18 13
19. Meet fewer times but have some sub-
stance to the meeting. 22 10
20. The meetings should be bi—weekly,
alternating with the Convocation
Program. 19 ll
21. Set up a special night and time for
O-Group meeting to eliminate hassle
of deciding the meeting dates. 22 9
22. Start the Orientation Program early
for those who come early. 13 17
23. Initially have four days rather than
three-~spread out activities with
more free time. 26 4
24. Go three or four weeks and then have
a "reunion" at midterm. 25 7
25. Get the program to end on a climactic
note, rather than downhill. 31 l

100

TABLE l3.--Continued

 

Responses
Statements

 

Agree Disagree

 

Special Group Problems

 

26. Coming early by Football and Music
students affects their attitude nega-
tively toward the Program. 21 9

27. Upperclassmen affect new students'
attitudes toward orientation nega—
tively. 25 7

28. There should be a separate program

for commuters. 26 6
29. There should be separate programs for

music students. 13 19

30. There should be separate programs for
football players. 20 ll

31. Separating groups out will destroy
a sense of community. ‘ 12 19

32. There should be separate programs for
transfer students. 30 l

33. Orient transfer students to a dif-
ferent school rather than to college. 25 7

34. Program should be shorter for transfer
students. 27 4

Leader Benefits

 

35. I learned a lot about myself as a
result of O—Group experience. 27 2

36. The experience has given me new
confidence. 23 7

37. I have become more sensitive in my
relationship with peOple. 29 3

38. I now have several close, freshman
friends. 26 4

39. I felt that all of a sudden I was
supposed to act five years older. 9 22

 

101

As was noted in Chapter I, specific behavioral
actions for the leadership styles had not been specified
in the pilot study. This was remedied in this study
and a chart appears in Appendix A indicating the evalua-
tive scoring of observors, leaders and orientation groups
on specifically designated leadership behaviors.
Observors' scores, of necessity, had to be taken in
the first three days of the program when directive
leadership was more likely to occur. In cases of dis-
crepancy of leadership style, each specific behavioral
action was rechecked in the interview. The conclusion
is that student leaders are able to lead groups in styles
which can be clearly differentiated and did so in this
study. Chapter V which follows presentsthe summary and

conclusions to the data presented in this chapter.

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Leader selection and leadership methods have been

the object of intensive study, particularly since the end

of WOrld War II. The controversy between the "traitists,"

"situationalists" and "behaviorists" continues unabated
and the search for effective methods of leadership pre-
diction is still a priority item for managers and deans
alike. One of the purposes of this study was to deter-
mine whether the educational science of cognitive style
could be used to predict effective leadership. A second
purpose, still focusing on effectiveness, was to compare
the directive and nondirective leadership styles in
"assigned" and "build" small groups within an orientation
program.

This study involved almost all of the new stu—
dents of the entering 1972 Fall class of Olivet College
and the upperclass orientation leaders. The new students
(n = 256) consisted of resident, commuter and transfer
students. The upperclass leaders (n = 32) were chosen

from approximately 100 student adviser candidates.

102

103

The measures used in the study were (1) Leader-
ship profile for leader selections; (2) Cognitive style
testing; (3) Orientation group evaluation; (4) Leader
self-evaluation; (5) Observation of leadership behavior
and (6) Composite interview reaction. All instruments,
except the cognitive style testing battery for this study,
were designed by the investigator. The cognitive style
testing battery was composed at Oakland Community College
and the instrument used was in effect a card sort. The
results were sent to Oakland Community College for
scoring and processing.

Six general questions were posed for exploration
and they are listed under the rubric of findings and
conclusions. Where these questions generated a hypothe-
sis, the hypothesis was tested: e.g., when there is a
difference in leadership style or group construction,
there will be a difference in (1) student satisfactiOn
and (2) attendance or attrition rate. The Kmolgorov-
Smirnov statistical test was used to test the null
hypothesis form of this operational hypothesis a = .05
level of significance with the appropriate degrees of
freedom.

The emphasis on leadership and group construction
has been a part of an action research program at Olivet
College for several years. The objectives of this

program are to chart and explore new ideas for improving

104

an existing orientation program and to eliminate alterna-
tives which seemingly have little chance of increasing
the effectiveness of the program. The focus on the
exploratory nature of the study will be evident in the
findings, conclusions, discussion, implications and
recommendations.

The specific findings of the study are stated

immediately after each question and are presented together

with the inferred conclusions for ease of reference and

continuity.

Findings and Conclusions

 

Question 1: How can the educational science of cog-
nitive style be used in the process of predicting

.effective leadership?

 

This study has shown, through the use of the
technique described by Flanagan that the science of cog-
nitive style can differentiate between the most effective
and the least effective leaders. These differentiations
are indicated and discussed in question number two.

Thus, two distinct possibilities are readily
apparent for the use of the educational science of cog-

nitive style:

1. Cognitive Style can be used as a basis for
selection after an appropriate collective cog-

nitive base had been established.

105

2. Cognitive Style can be used to prescribe certain
programs to increase the probability of effective
leadership, i.e., an individual lacking the
element Q (CEM) might be assigned to a human
relations unit prior to assuming the role of

leadership.

By utilizing the collective cognitive style to
represent the elements needed for effective leadership
in a particular situation, it becomes apparent that a
“blend" has occurred between the theories advocated by

the "traitists," "situationalists” and "behaviorists."

Question 2: How do the most effective student leaders

differ from the least effective leaders?

The elements differentiated within the collective
cognitive style of the most effective and least effective
leaders occur in all three sets of cognitive style:
symbolic orientations, cultural determinants and modali—
ties of inference. Within the symbolic orientation of
the collective cognitive styles of least effective
leaders, a greater number of theoretical orientations
appear, while in the most effective leaders a greater

number of qualitative orientations occur.

Theoretical Symbols

 

While both categories of leadership exhibited a

T' (AL), Minor Theoretical Auditory Linguistic, ability

 

106

to acquire meaning through spoken words, the least effec-
tive leadership category also exhibited a T' (AQ), Minor
Theoretical Auditory Quantitative, ability to find mean-
ing in terms of quantities (numerical symbols and
measurements you hear), and T (VL), Major Theoretical
Visual Linguistic, ability to find meaning from words
you see, and a T' (VQ), Minor Theoretical Visual Quanti-
tative, ability to find meaning in terms of quantities
(numerical symbols and measurements you hear).

The conclusion drawn here is that these extra
theoretical elements were not necessary to effective
leadership in this situation. Two of these elements

are quantitative in nature.

Qualitative Symbols

 

The most effective leaders' collective cognitive
styles contained four qualitative symbols not evidenced
in the least effective leaders‘ collective cognitive
style. They include:

Q (A) Qualitative Auditory, which is the ability
to perceive meaning through the sense of hearing, par-
ticularly as it might apply to nondiscussive symbolic
forms of sound.

This would indicate that the most effective
leader is more alert to these sounds and can interpret
them in a meaningful way for the benefit of the group

members.

107

Q (V) Qualitative Visual, which is the ability
to perceive meaning through the sense of sight.

Thus, the effective leader has the ability to
immediately visualize the group processes in such a
manner that he can recall and piece together at a future
time, past events which have meaning for the group at a
particular point in time.

Q (CP) Qualitative Code Proxemics, which is the
ability to judge "critical" physical and social distances
between himself and others in the act of communication.

The effective leader does not alienate his group
by misjudging social distance. He can uniquely judge
the "comfort" quotient of both the group and himself.

Q (CH) Qualitative Code Histrionics, which is
the ability to deliberately exhibit a dramatic flair of
emotion or temperament to produce some particular effect
on or evoke responses from other persons.

In short, the most effective leader is a good
actor, able to give to the leadership role that quality
which is often described as charisma.

The qualitative symbol evidenced in the least
effective leader's collective cognitive style and not
listed in the most effective leader‘s style is:

Q (CKH) Qualitative Code Kinesthetics, which
relates particularly to motor skills and muscular coordi-
nation in which following form is considered of prime

importance.

108

Thus, a person with Q (CKH) as a major element
is apt to be conscious of emulating a leadership form,
without an awareness of its effect upon the group. The
emphasis on the process of emulating can lead to a lack
of congruence upon the part of the leader and this is
quickly sensed by the group. The difference is between
"being the leader" and "playing the role" of the leader.
Too often, the leader playing the role is perceived by

the group as being very mechanical.

Cultural Determinants

 

The comparison of the collective cognitive styles
shows a marked difference between the most effective
and least effective leaders in the cultural determinants
set. This difference indicates that the family is the
major influence on meaning for the most effective leaders
while the individual himself is the major influence for
the least effective leader. These positions are reversed
in the least effective category of leadership.

This influence is a fluid state and it shifts as
roles change throughout life and at certain times a par-
ticular determinant may play a greater or lesser part
in the influence brought to bear on one‘s perceptions
and subsequent meanings to symbols. At this point in
time, however, the influence of the cultural determinants

of the most effective and least effective leaders in this

109

situation differ in the respective amounts of influence
brought to bear by the cultural determinants. This can

best be illustrated by the following figure:

Family

Most Effective Least Effective

 

Figure 7.--Differential influence patterns in the cultural
determinant set of most and least effective leaders

The reversal of the relative importance of the
cultural determinants of family and individuality is the
significant difference. The most effective leader is
much more apt to treat his group as an extension of his
familial orientation while the least effective leader
is more strongly dominated by a sense of individuality.
This strong individual orientation could lead toward
satisfying leader needs rather than group needs, thus

serving as a barrier to group satisfaction.

Modalities of Inference
The most effective leaders have two additional
elements in how they reach a decision through inductive

reasoning.

110

(D) Difference, which suggests a tendency to
think in terms of one-to-one contrasts or comparisons of
selected comparisons or measurements.

Thus, the most effective leader is one who is
able to differentiate the members of his group, treating
them in one—to-one relationships and considering their
individual needs.

(L) Appraisal, which indicates that the most
effective leader tends to analyze, question or appraise
an issue carefully before making a decision.

This type of thinking leads to effective decision—
making and increased confidence by the group in the
leader. The general conclusion is that there are marked
differences in each of the sets of cognitive style
between the most effective and least effective leaders.
These differences lend promise to future research in

predicting leadership through the use of cognitive style.

Male-Female Leadership

 

One additional difference noted between the most
and least effective leaders is that males are signifi—
cantly more effective as leaders than are females. This
difference is highly significant (p = .01).

This finding will have to be interpreted care-
fully in the light of the differences in cognitive
styles noted above. The differences of cognitive style

may have some relationship to the male-female element

111

as there is only one crossover of sex in the most and

least effective leader groups.

Question 3: Do new students show a_preference for

leadership style and group construction?

There was no preference exhibited for leadership
style as measured by new student satisfaction. There was,
however, a tendency to greater satisfaction in the

"build" group, but it was not statistically significant.

Question 4: Do leaders show a preference for

leadership style and group construction?

There was a preference for nondirective leadership
at a high level of statistical significance (p = .01)
among the leaders. The leaders also showed a preference
for "build" groups at a lower level of statistical sig-
nificance (p = .10).

Thirty of thirty-two leaders in the composite
interview felt that the leader should size up the group
needs and go according to their needs, always looking
for the group to take over. A vast majority (90%) felt
that the optimum way would be starting the group direc-
tively and ending up nondirectively. The leaders felt
that there was less confusion in assigning groups, but

that new students generally preferred "build" groups.

112

Question 5: Does leadership and group construction

affect the first semester attrition rate?

Leadership and group construction did not affect
the attrition rate. In fact, a tendency toward less
attrition in the nondirective build category, which was
in evidence in the pilot study was not in evidence in

this study.

Question 6: Does the use of directive or nondirective

leadership_affect the attendance rate?

There was no significant difference in attendance
between the directive and nondirective groups.

During the orientation program, attendance in
the directive groups was emphasized and visibly recorded.
In the nondirective groups it was not emphasized nor was
it recorded. Leaders in the latter group did, however,
covertly keep a record of attendance.

During the leader interviews, special group
problems became evident which directly and indirectly
affected attendance. One of these problems was the
general feeling that upper class students had a negative
effect upon new students concerning orientation. Other
special problems included groupings for transfer and com-
muter students as well as for football players to

increase attendance probability. This support, however,

113

did not hold true for music students reporting to the
campus for early rehearsals.

Student leaders also do not feel that required
attendance is the only way to go, yet more than half of
them feel that they would stress attendance despite the
negative overtones it might create.

The length of the program has some bearing on
the attendance and leaders concluded that increased
earlier programming and some modification of length might
be beneficial. The leaders also felt that the orientation
program for transfer students should be modified to orient

them to a different college rather than to college,

 

 

generally.
Lastly, student leaders indicated that they
benefited greatly from the leadership education and

experience.

Discussion and Implications

 

The marked difference between the cognitive styles
of the most effective and least effective leaders would
imply that the educational science of cognitive style
could be a useful tool in predicting effective leadership.
Care would have to be exercised in order to be certain
that the method of collective cognitive style measurement
is isomorphic to a predictive leadership pattern. For

example, the problem of weighting elements could be a

114

crucial factor, as well as the relative significance of
each of the three sets and eventually the fourth set of
memory—concern. In addition to predicting effective
leadership in a given situation, it would be possible
through the matching of an individual's cognitive style

to the collective cognitive style, to determine areas of
potential leadership weakness. Leader education programs
could therefore tailor their instruction to these specific
areas to insure greater probability of effective leader-
ship.

The differences in the collective cognitive
styles of the most effective and least effective leaders
definitely emphasized the qualitative aspect of effective
leadership. The increased number of qualitative symbols,
the familial cultural determinant and the onus on dif-
ferences as well as appraisal processes in the inductive
approaches to decision-making all indicate that "con-
sideration" of group members appears to be a unifying
thread throughout the pattern of differences. The
analysis of data shows that whether the group is led
directively or nondirectively is unimportant, but that
the leader's feeling of true concern is all-important.
Evidently, the new student has sufficient motivation
and the flexibility to adapt to either a directive or

nondirective process.

115

The first and foremost implication is that the
purposes and objectives of the orientation program must
be well planned, delineated and rank ordered according
to priority. If the effectiveness of the program is the
prime consideration, then initial selection is vital and
the results of this study would indicate greater use of
male leaders. If the orientation process is also con-
ceived of as an educational venture seeking to present
equality of opportunity and self-improvement of leaders,
then assessment and education for leadership would be of
all importance. Normally, an orientation program is
established to decrease the attrition rate. However,
if this cannot be statistically substantiated and a
certain amount of information must be assimilated by
new students, then another possibility which is a little
more progressive would be to utilize the program as an
educational device for those deficient in leadership
skills, i.e., in this study, greater opportunity for
women.

This study indicates that it is immaterial whether
a leader leads directively or nondirectively so the stu-
dent should be allowed to lead in the manner that best
fits his own personality. However, the leadership edu-
cation program should present the facets of both
directive and nondirective leadership so that the stu-

dents are aware of the dimensions of each style, as well

116

as the elements which contribute to effective leadership.
The program should definitely attempt to eliminate areas
of potential leadership weakness. The strong support by
leaders of a situational type of leadership in which
they start directively and end nondirectively should be
explored.

Although not indicated to be statistically sig-
nificant, there was a definite trend toward greater

satisfaction in the "build" groups. This also was evi-

 

denced in the composite interviews of leaders. Fifty
per cent of the new students were not members of "build"
groups and therefore did not share the experience. Stu-
dents expect their college experience to be different;
they expect to participate in decision-making and build
groups contain both elements. The tendency toward
greater satisfaction in the "build" groups would imply
additional experimentation with build groups in terms

of size and composition.

Kronovet's94

study had indicated that 80 per cent
of the institutions required attendance at orientation
programs. In essence, this study would favor the
abolition of emphasized attendance in favor of an initial
statement of "expectancy of attendance as a student

seeking a college education." At this initial meeting,

the purposes and objectives of the orientation program

 

94Kronovet, pp. cit.

117

would be clearly defined and the benefits from the program
enumerated. The program as designed would have to be
meaningful to the student and it is hypothesized that
his motivation at this particular time plus a meaningful
program structured within small groups would insure
satisfactory attendance. The data in this study support
this hypothesis.

Implication for future research would include
ascertaining collective cognitive styles for a variety
of situations in which selection is a necessity, and then
testing the predictive effectiveness of the collective
cognitive style with the individual candidate. Another
study could ascertain the cognitive styles of individuals
and match them with a previously defined collective cog-
nitive style. Then, using control and experimental
groupings, a leadership education program could be
administered with a subsequent remapping of the cognitive
style to determine changes. Differences in effectiveness
could then be measured between the groups. A specialized
study could be one to investigate the backgrounds of the
most and least effective leaders in respect to F (family)
and I (individual) majors in the cultural determinants

set.

Recommendations

 

This has been an exploratory study in the use of

the educational science of cognitive style as a predictor

118

of group leadership within an orientation program. As

such,

it has indicated that effective leadership has a

strong relationship to the qualitative elements that

represent a leader's cognitive style. In view of the

results of this study, the following recommendations

are made:

1.

A related study using a similar population base
should be undertaken to test these findings in

a predictive situation.

A leadership education program should be created
based upon the evaluation and subsequent re—
evaluation of an individual's cognitive style

toward increased effectiveness in leadership.

Special leadership training and experience for

female students should be made available.

The emphasis for effective leadership in an
orientation program should focus on consideration
and concern, i.e., human relations. The idea of
starting directively, when the initial impact

is overwhelming to a new student and gradually
becoming nondirective as he becomes more secure
has the ingredients of a situational leadership
style which is the method most preferred by
student leaders and could serve as the starting

point of a leadership education program.

8.

119

The emphasis on required attendance should be
modified, a simple statement indicating that

students are expected to assume responsibility
for their attendance should suffice as long as
the purposes and objective of the orientation
program are clearly presented and small group

techniques used.

Special programs should be instituted for special
groups, i.e., commuters, athletes, and transfer
students. This latter group should be oriented

to a different college rather than to college as

 

are other new students and this process should be

of shorter duration.

A recommendation which stems from the literature
is that a faculty member should be included in
the structure of the small group. This could be
initiated on an optional basis and inservice
training in small group leadership provided for

the faculty member.

A day, if needed, should be added at the beginning
of the program and the bulk of the orientation
process completed prior to the arrival of upper

class students.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Allport, Gordon. Personality and Social Encounter.
Boston: Beacon Press, 1960.

 

Argyris, Chris. "Essay Review." Harvard Educational
Review, VIII, No. 4 (1971).

 

Bavelas, Alex. "Morale and the Training of Leaders."
Civilian Morale. Edited by G. Watson. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1942.

 

. "Communications in Task Oriented Groups."
The Police Sciences. Edited by D. Lerner and
Lt. D. Lasswell. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford
University Press, 1951.

 

Bellows, Roger. Creative Leadership. Englewood Cliffs,
N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1969.

 

. Psychology of Personnel in Business apg
Industr . 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Prentice Hall, 1954.

 

 

Bird, Charles. Social Psychology. New York: D. Appleton
Century Company, 1940.

 

Bloom, Benjamin, ed. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives.
New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1956.

 

Bales, R. F., et al. "Channels of Communication in Small
Groups." American Sociological Review, XVI
(1951).

 

Brameld, Theodore. Education as Power. New York: Holt,
Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1965.

 

Brown, William F., and Zunker, Vernon. "Student Counselor
Utilization at Four Year Institutions of Higher
Learning." Journal of College Student Personnel,

 

VII, No. 1 (January, 1966).

120

121

Cartwright, D., and Zander, A. Group Dynamics. Evanston,
111.: Row Peterson & Company, 1953.

 

Chickering, Arthur. Education and Identity. San Fran-
cisco: Jossey-Bass, Inc., Publishers, 1969.

 

 

Cowley, W. H. "The Traits of Face to Face Leaders."
Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology
(1931-32).

DeCecco, John P. Regeneration of the School: Decision
Making in a Democracy. New York: Holt, Rinehart
and Winston, Inc., 1972.

 

DeLoach, Joseph F. Cognitive Style and Cognitive
Dissonance. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: Oakland
Community College Press, 1970.

 

Dugger, June Armistead. "A Study of Measurable Personal
Factors of Leaders and Non-Leaders Among Uni-
versity Freshman women: The Florida State Uni-
versity 1969." Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
national, XXX, Nos. 4;6 (1969).

 

 

Eagley, Alice H. "Leadership Style and Role Differen-
tiation as Determinants of Group Effectiveness."
Journal of Personalipy, XXXVIII, 509.

 

Eaton, Joseph W. "Is Scientific Leadership Selection
Possible?" Studies in Leadership. Edited by
Alvin Gouldner. New York: Harper & Bros. Pub-
lishers, 1950.

 

Fielder, Fred B. A Theopy of Leader Effectiveness.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1967.

 

Fitzgerald, Laurine D., and Busch, Shirley A. "Orien-
tation Programs: Foundation and Framework."
College and Universipy Business, XXXVIII (April,
1963).

 

Flanagan, John C. "General Considerations in the
Selection of Test Items and a Short Method of
Estimating the Product-Moment from the Data at
the Tail of the Distribution." Journal of
Educational Psychology, XXXII (December, 1939).

 

 

Gagne, Robert M. The Conditions of Learning. 2nd ed.
New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1970.

 

Gardiner, John W. Excellence: Can We Be Equal and
Excellent Too? New York: Harper & Rowe Pub—
lishers, Harper Colophon Books, 1961.

 

 

122

Gardner, Riley W. "Cognitive Styles in Categorizing
Behavior." Journal of Personality, XXII (1953).

 

Getzels, J. W., and Guba, E. B. "Social Behavior and
the Administrative Process." School Review,
LXV (Winter, 1957).

 

Gibbs, Cecil. "The Principles and Traits of Leadership."
Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology (1947).

 

Gibbs, Jack R. Dynamics of Leadership, Defensive and
Emergent. Chicago, 111.: 22nd National Con-
vention on Higher Education, March 7, 1967.

 

 

Goldsen, Rose K. "Recent Research in the American
College Student." Orientation to CollegeiLearning.
Edited by Nicholas Brown. washington, D.C.:
American Council of Education, 1961.

Gordon, Thomas. Group Centered Leadership. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company, The Riverside Press
Cambridge, 1955.

 

Gouldner, A. W., ed. Studies in Leadership. New York:
Harper Brothers, 1950.

 

Grier, Daniel J. "Orientation--Tradition or Reality?"
Journal of National Association of Student Person-
nel AdminIStratIOn, III, No. 3 (January, 1966).

 

 

Guilford, J. P. "Dimensions of Intellect." International
Colloquium on Factor Analysis, Paris, 1955.

. "The Structure of Human Intellect." Paper
presented to the National Academy of Sciences,
Pasadena, California, November, 1955.

 

Guttman, Louis. "An Outline of Some New Methodology for
Social Research." Public Opinion Quarterly,
XVIII (Winter, 1954-55).

 

Halpin, Andrew W., and Winer, B. James. "A Factorial
Study of the Leader Behavior Descriptions."
Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement.
Edited by Ralph.M. Stogdill and AIVin E. Coons.
Columbus: Ohio State University, 1957.

 

Hemphill, John K. Situational Factors in Leadership.
Monograph No. 32‘TColumbus: Ohio State University
Studies, Bureau of Educational Research, Ohio
State University, 1949), p. 45.

 

123

Hemphill, John K., and Coons, Alvin E. "Development of
the Leader Behavior Description Questionnaire."
Leader Behavior: Its Description and Measurement.
Edited by Ralph M. Stogdill and Alvin E. Coons.
Columbus: Ohio State University, 1957.

 

Hill, Joseph E. The Educational Sciences. Bloomfield
Hills, Mich.: Oakland Community College Press,
1971.

 

Hofmann, Randall, and Plutchuck. Small Groups in Orien-
tation and Teaching. New York: G. P. Putnam's,
1959.

 

 

Homans, George C. The Human Group. New York: Harcourt,
1950.

 

Hoogasian, Vaughn. "An Examination of Cognitive Style
Profiles as Indicators of Performance Associated
with a Selected Discipline." Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Wayne State University, 1970.

Ivey, Allen E. "A Three Year Evaluation of a College
Freshman Week Program." Journal of College
Student Personnel, III (October, 1961), 25-32.

 

 

Jenkins, William 0. "Review of Leadership Studies with
Particular Reference to Military Problems."
Psycholggical Bulletin, January, 1947.

 

. "Review of Leadership Studies with Particular
Reference to Military Problems." Psychological
Bulletin, 1947, pp. 44, 54-79.

 

 

 

Jennings, H. H. Leadership and Isolation. New York:
Longmans, Green & Co., 1943.

 

Kelly, Earl C. Education for What I§ Real. New York:
Harper & Row Publishers, 1947.

 

Kemp, Clarence Gratton. Perspectives on the Group Pro-
cess. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1964.

 

Kimura, Doreen. "The Assymetry of the Human Brain."
Scientific American, CCVIII, No. 3 (1973), 70.

 

Kopecek, Robert J. "Freshman Orientation Programs: A
Comparison." Journal of College Student Perspn—
nel, VIII, No. 5 (September, 1967), 51-52.

 

124

Kronovet, Esther. "Current Practices in Freshman Orien—
tation." Improving College and UniversitygTeach-
ing, XVII (May, 1969), 204-05.

Lange, Chrystal Marie. "A Study of the Effects on Learn-
ing of Matching the Cognitive Styles of Students
and Instructors in Nursing Education." Unpub-
lished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State Uni-
versity, 1972.

Lewin, Kurt; White, Ralph; and Lippitt, Ronald. "Patterns
of Aggressive Behavior in Experimentally Created
Social Climates." Journal of Social Psychology, X
(1939), 271-79.

. "The Consequences of an Authoritarian and
Democratic Leadership." Studyion Leadership.
Edited by Alvin A. Gouldner. New York: Harper.

 

Martin, W. F.; Gross, N.; and Darley, J. G. "Leaders,
Followers, and Isolates in Small Groups."
Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, XLVII
(1952), 842.

 

McGrath, J. E. A Summary of Small Group Research Studies.
‘ HSR/TN-62/3-GN. Cited in Fred E. Fiedler.
Arlington, Va.: Human Sciences Research, Inc.,
1962.

Mueller, Kate H. Student Personnel Work in Higher Edu-
cation. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1961.

Miller, C. Dean; and Ivey, Allen B. "Structure Response
to Three Types of Orientation Programs."
Personnel and Guidance Journal, XLV (June, 1967),
1,025-29.

 

Munn, R. D. "A Review of the Relationships Between Per-
sonality and Performance in Small Groups."
Psychological Bulletin, LVI (1959), 241-70.

 

New York State Regents Advisory Committee on Educational
Leadership. Leadership for Education, 1967.

 

Ort, Barbara. "An Examination of Relationships Between
the Measurable Cognitive Characteristics of a
French I Teacher and the Student Success in
That Course." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1971.

125

Pappas, John G. "Student Reaction to a Small Group Orien-
tation Approach." College and University, XLIII,
84—87.

 

Patty, Austin H. "Freshman Orientation: A Growing Con-
cern." Improving College and University Teachipg,

 

Peltz, P. C. "Leadership Within an Hierarchal Organi—
zation." Journal of Social Issues, VII, 49-55.

 

Pigors, Paul. Leadership or Domination. Cambridge,
Mass.: The Rivergate Press, 1935.

 

Rothman, Leslie K., and Leonard, Donald G. "Effectiveness
of Freshman Orientation." Journal of College
Student Personnel, VIII, No. 5 (September,

 

Sanford, Nevitt. "Recent Research in the American
College Student Orientation to College Learning."
American Council in Education. Edited by
Nicholas C. Brown. Washington, D.C.: 1961.

 

Schroeder, Arlen V. "A Study of the Relationship Between
Student and Teacher Cognitive Styles and Student
Derived Teacher Evaluation." Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, Wayne State University, 1969.

Selznick, Phillip. Leadership in Administration. New
York: Harper & Row Publishers, 1957.

 

"Personal Factors Associated With Leadership;
A Survey of the Literature." Journal of Psy—
chology, XXV (1948), 35-71.

 

Shaw, Marvin E., and Blum, J. Michael. “Effects of
Leadership Style Upon Group Performance as a
Function of Task Structure." Journal of
Personality and Social Psychology, III, No. 2
(February, 1966), 241.

 

 

Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for Behavioral
Sciences. New York: McGraw Hill Book Co.,
1956.

 

Smith. Cited in Earl Kolle, Vincent Harris and Carolyn
Dragger. "Orientation Programs." Review of
Educational Research, XXXVI, No. 2 (April, 1966),
243.

 

 

 

126

Snodowsky, Alvin M. "Group Effectiveness as a Function
of Communication Networks, Task Complexity and
Leadership Type." Dissertation Abstracts
International. The City University of New York,
1969.

 

 

Stodgill, Ralph M. "Personal Factors Associated With
Leadership: A Survey of the Literature." The
Journal of Psychology, XXV (1948).

 

Tannenbaum, R.; Weschler, I.; and Massarik, F. Leader-
ship and Orggnization. New York: McGraw Hill,
1961.

 

Tautfest, Patricia B. "An Evaluation Technique for Orien-
tation Programs." Journal of College Student
Personnel, XXX (October, 1961), 25-32.

 

 

The Hazen Report. The Student in Higher Education.
Report of the Committee on the Student in Higher
Education, The Hazen Foundation.

 

Wharton, John F. "The Making of Leaders." Saturday
Review, April 13, 1968.

 

White, Ralph, and Lippitt, Ronald. "Leader Behavior and
Member Reactions in Three Social Climates."
Group DynamicsLiResearch and Theory. Edited by
Darwin Cartwright and Alvin Zandeffi Evanston,
111.: Row, Peterson & Co., 1953.

 

Williams, Stanley 3., and Leavitt, Harold. Journal of
Consulting Psychology, No. 11 (1947), 283-91}

 

 

Witken, H. A. "Differences in Ease of Perception of
Embedded Figures." Journal of Personalipy,
XVIIII, 1-15.

 

Wyett, Jerry L. "A Pilot Study to Analyze Cognitive
Style with Reference to Selected Strata of the
Defined Educational Sciences." Unpublished Ph.D.
dissertation, wayne State University, 1967.

Zussman, Steven. Cognitive Style and Administratigp_
St 1e. Bloomfield Hills, Mich.: Oakland Com-
munity College Press, 1971.

 

 

APPENDICES

 

APPENDIX A

COMPOSITE OBSERVATIONS OF

LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS

APPENDIX A

COMPOSITE OBSERVATIONS OF
LEADERSHIP BEHAVIORS

Leadership Observations

 

Scoring is derived from assigning values of 5, l, 3 to specific r—

behaviors listed on evaluation sheets.

 

Directive Behavior Nondirective Behavior

 

 

1 34 27 20 11

4
11:5 38 -_
II 37
‘g; 32

U1

48

 

It:

mwmobmt’ int-(Um
b
m
3)
It": rs:
.5
w

\oooqcxmc-www

“I“!
\00
IA
\0
h
U1

229 32
9 35 30
8
9

H
N
b
\D
k
U1

34

 

H
U"
«hub
00
u
U1

 

H
\J
N
ox
ti
{3
UZ

N

O

N

U1
I: SM:
SI SI

N

.b

w

m

N
mwmcz’mr

29 33 27'

 

31 49 36 29

 

 

 

 

l:
:11

 

Legend: X Mean Score, three observors of Leadership Behaviors

Leader self-evaluation of behavior

XI

X

Mean Score of group members of Leadership Behaviors

1427

 

 

APPENDIX B

STUDENT ADVISER

LEADER SELECTION PROFILE

APPENDIX B
To:
From: Dean Sigren
Re: Student Adviser Application
A committee made up of Head Residents and the Director
of Housing have evaluated your application and as a result
you have been assigned to the following classification.

( ) Student Adviser--pending semester grades

( ) Alternate status--pending openings and rankings
of alternates.

Here is your profile.

 

Age--C1ass--
Experience

 

Academic Stand-
ing

 

Attendance--
Selection Meeting

 

 

Adviser Ratings

Head Resident
Ratings--Inter-

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

view
Testing
4.0 3.5 3.0 2.5 2.0 1.57 1.0 Comp051te
Remarks:

 

 

Thank you for your participation in the selection program.
We hope you have gained some understanding of both your-
self and the program. If you are an underclassman, we
invite you to apply again next year.

128

APPENDIX C

INDIVIDUAL-ORIENTATION GROUP EVALUATION

APPENDIX D

LEADER SELF-EVALUATION

 

Your Name

Circle the number of the phrases which best represents
your behavior as the O-Group Leader.

1)
2)
3)
4)
5)

6)

18)

referred to group as
"my" group

referred to group as
“our" group

not observable

assigned the meeting
place

group decided meeting
place

not observable

sat at the head of the
group

blended into the group
not observable

took attendance
did not take attendance
not observable'

leader announced
schedule

group members announced
schedule

not observable

group meetings followed a
definite pattern

group meetings were very
informal

not observable

19)
20)
21)
22)
23)
24)
25)
26)
27)
28)
29)
30)
31)

32)

33)

leaders settled conflicts
in group

allowed group to settle
conflicts

not observable

leader assigned responsi—
bilities

group decided on assign—
ments

not observable

leader made decisions
group made decisions
not observable

encouraged members to
participate

allowed members to par-
ticipate as they desired
not observable

Made frequent suggestions
and provided information
made suggestions and pro-
vided information about
the same as other group
members

not observable

Circle the X on the following continuum which best repre-
sents your position as the O-Group leader.

X X
Personally took Leader,
charge of group

X

the group

131

but more
as a member of

X X
Became just The group

a regular actually
member of took charge
the group

 

130

Circle the X on the following continuum which best represents
your feeling about the manner in which your group was led.

 

X X X X X X X
Very SatiSfactory Satisfactory Somewhat Unsatis—
Satisfactory factory

O-Groups were either assigned or self-selected. Circle the
X on the following continuum which best represents your
feeling about how your O—Group was formed.

 

X X X X X X X
Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Somewhat Unsatis-
Satisfactory factory

Circle the X on the continuum which best represents how you
feel the O-Group Program has assisted you in starting your
first year on the Olivet Campus.

 

X X X X X X X
Very Satisfactory Satisfactory Somewhat Unsatis-
Satisfactory factory

Circle the X on the following continuum which best represents
your attendance in the O-Group sessions.

 

X X X X X X X
All Most Some None or
very few

WOuld you recommend the O—Group experience for new students
next fall? ( ) yes ( ) no

Please add any comments you might have for additions or
improvements to the O-Group program, as well as suggestions
for the leader and manner of leading. Use reverse side.

OVER

 

 

APPENDIX E

RATING FORMS LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR

APPENDIX E

RATING FORM LEADERSHIP BEHAVIOR

Observor

 

 

Date

 

O-Group Leader Time

 

Location

 

 

O-Group #

Circle Number which applies or N.O. (Not Observable)

Meeting Place

 

N.O. l. Assigned place of meeting
2. Group decision of meeting place

Seating

N.O. 1. Sat at the head of the group
2. Blended in with group

Initiation of Action Within the Group

 

N.O. l. Visibly recorded attendance
2. No visible recording of attendance

N.O. l. Referred to group as "my" group
2. Referred to group as "our" group
N.O. 1. Leader announced schedule
2. Group announced schedule
N.O. 1. Group meetings followed a definite pattern
2. Group meetings very informal
N.O. 1. Leader settled conflicts in the group
2. Allowed group to settle conflicts
N.O. 1. Leader assigned responsibilities
2. Group decided on assignments
N.O. 1. Leader made decisions
2. Group made decisions

N.O. l. Encouraged group to participate
2. Allowed members to contribute as they desired

N.O. 1. Made frequent suggestions and volunteered infor-
mation
2. Made suggestions and volunteered information only
as a regular member of the group and after others
had an opportunity

133

134

Circle the X on the following continuum which best
represents the above Group Leader.

 

X X X X X X X
Personally took Leader, but more Became just The Group
charge of group as a member of a regular actually

the group member of took charge

the group

 

 

APPENDIX F

COGNITIVE MAPPING CARD SORT QUESTIONS

APPENDIX F

COGNITIVE MAPPING CARD SORT QUESTIONS
Oakland Community College

The following questions are marked usually, sometimes, or
rarely. There are eight questions in each of twenty-seven
categories and a total of two hundred and sixteen questions.

Samples of questions

 

Theoretical Symbols

T (AL) - I find it easy to add spoken or dictated numbers
easily.

T (VL)

I score high on achievement tests which emphasize
reading comprehension.

T (AQ) - I find it necessary to write down a telephone
number as soon as I hear it or I cannot remember it.

Cultural Determinants

I - When given a job to do, I prefer to work on it myself.
A - I like to share ideas with friends and associates.
Qualitative Codes

Q (CS) — I can anticipate accurately how well I will do in
a new situation.

Q (CH) — I can act attentive and interested even though
bored when listening to a teacher or supervisor.

Q (CET) — I would give up a monetary gain to avoid a com-
promise of principles.

Q (CT) - I am able to persuade people in disagreement to
strive for agreement.

Modalities of Inference

R - I have no difficulty in understanding how to put
puzzles together.

K - I avoid probability statements in solving problems.

L - I take longer than others in coming to a conclusion,
because I want to know more about an issue than others
do.

135

APPENDIX G

INTERVIEW SESSION--WORKSHEET
COMPOSITE INTERVIEW REACTIONS

Eh

 

£4

APPENDIX G

INTERVIEW SESSION--WORKSHEET--COMPOSITE REACTIONS

O-Group Leaders, December 1972
"How Can The Orientation Program Be Improved"

Please place an (A) for agree next to those items which
you feel would enhance the Orientation Program. Place a
(D) for disagree next to the statements which would not be
beneficial to the program.

 

General

A D

21 §_ The program is great at the beginning, but becomes a
hassle later on.

31.19 Students would prefer to be members of build groups. 7

20 i3 Since students are eventually going to be on their
own, they should have the experience of nondirective
groups.

_5 £5 Directive is best as that's what they are used to.

£3 2_ There is less confusion in assigning the groups.

££.§_ "Optional and good" is the secret to programming.

'_§.g2 Required attendance is the only way to go.

_fl_21_The program pace was too fast in the beginning.

39 2_ The Leader should size up the group needs and go
according to their needs always looking for the
group to take over.

ighiZ_Students have a feeling, "unless it goes on my
record, it's unimportant."

2£_Z__The Painting Exercise—-Project Alpha was excellent for
getting students out of their shells.

i1_ii There is value in having the program go until midterm.

2i_9_ Coming early by Football and Music students affects
their attitude negatively toward the program.

25 l_ Upperclassmen affect new students attitudes toward

orientation, negatively.

136

137
_2_i__Separating groups out will destroy a sense of com-
munity.

‘2_‘3_ Start Directive in leadership and end Nondirective
(Situational Leadership).

Brainstorming allows for hitchhiking on other ideas. Please
add any suggestions or comments.

Personal

 

A D
31 g_ I learned a lot about myself as a result of the
O-Group experience.

I now have several close, freshman friends.

I—‘ N
m ox
re A
[—1

I was successful in going according to the specific
behavioral objectives when leading.

35 6_ I feel eight plus a leader is an ideal size group.
£§.Z_ The experience has given me new confidence.
29';_ I have become more sensitive in my relationship
with people.
9 22 I felt that all of a sudden I was supposed to act
five years older.
24 Z_ I feel the inservice training given prior to the

O-Group experience was adequate.

Please indicate any ways in which the O-Group Opportunity
did or did not add to your leadership skills.

Suggestions

 

A D

30 2_ An individual sheet for each member on activities so
they can read and discuss rather than the O-Group
leader read off.

 

£§.£_ Drop the summer reading On Becoming an Educated Person.

20 ii Structure work sheets so that students can work at
their own speed. Have just a final turn—in date.

24 §__Tie the initial program in with the Convocation

Program.

 

I)“
\O

N
O
l-‘
(.3

IF

6- \o H
O

to I"
\1

la

N
ON

(a H
m 1»
H
b

[-4
DJ

N
'00

g...-
0

Ix]

N
l‘” |°‘

u
N
lo

138
The meetings should be bi-weekly, alternating with
the Convocation Program.

There should be a separate program for football
players.

There should be separate programs for transfer
students.

There should be separate programs for music students.
Eat together for the first dinner and breakfast only.
Set up a different library sheet for each member of
the group. Thus, they can work on their own or as

part of the group.

The comp test could be separated into parts and made
more specific.

A new format is needed for Sunday. Perhaps sports
activities, games, recreation, etc.

There should be a separate program for commuters.

There should be one football player, one commuter,
and one transfer student in each group.

Have a program on the History of Olivet College.

Stress the attendances—more reluctance, but they
enjoy it when they are there.

The program is too long. Have it twice a week for
three weeks.

Sunday brunch was a bomb—-drop it.

Meet fewer times, but make more substance to the
meeting.

Go three or four weeks and then have a "reunion"
at midterm.

Have inservice academic advising for O—Group leaders.

Set up individual conferences for O—Group academic
advising.

Have interaction between O—Groups.

 

N N
w H
loo

N H-

m \J

H ox (a
.5

I"
(o

(JJ
1"

N
H
IH
O

l-‘kO
w

NN
U1\l

lb

lxo

IH

l—‘N KO
bl"

l“ I“

139
Initially have four days rather than three-—spread
out activities with more free time.

Have a tournament of O-Groups on Sunday-~Consolation
brackets, prizes, etc.

Have a scavenger hunt, like getting the inscription
off Father Shipherd's grave, the name of the printing
press, etc.

Have a treasure hunt.

Equalize the sexes in the groups.

Start the Orientation Program early for those who
come early.

 

Get the program to end on a climactic note, rather
than downhill.

Set up a crossword puzzle to get across pertinent
information.

Set up a Special night and time for O-Group meeting
to eliminate hassle of deciding the meeting dates.

The hassle is what it's all about.

Have Orientation assigned as part of the scheduling
process and switch leaders around accordingly.

Program should be shorter for transfer students.
Orient transfer students to a different school

rather than to college.

Your additional ideas.