THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTS OF STRUCTURED GROUP
AND GROUP- INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING 0N SELF-
CONCEPT, STUDY- HABITS AND ATTITUDES, ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT. AND OBSERVED CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR
OF LDW- MOTIVATED MALE HIGH SCHOOL JUNIORS

Dissertation for the Degree of Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
ANN KEESE THOMAS
1976

 

        
  
 

iv

LIB g4"? ; Y
m5 K3713 3:31.73

This is to certify that the

thesis entitled

THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTS OF STRUCTURED GROUP AND
GROUP-INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING ON SELF-CONCEPT,
STUDY-HABITS AND ATTITUDES, ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT,

AND OBSERVED CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR OF LOW-MOTIVATED
MALE HIGH SCHOOL JUNIORS
presented by

MARY ANN KEESE THOMAS

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for

 

 

PH.D. d . COUNSELING, PERSONNEL SER-
egree 1n
MID—EDUCATIONAL PSYCH:
CHOLOGY
Major professor
Date "7’2 ‘-’ ...

0-7 639

 

 

 

 

 

ABSTRACT

THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTS OF STRUCTURED
GROUP AND GROUP-INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING
ON SELF-CONCEPT, STUDY-HABITS AND
ATTITUDES, ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT,
AND OBSERVED CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR
OF LOW-MOTIVATED MALE HIGH
SCHOOL JUNIORS

BY

Ann Keese Thomas

Problem: The purpose of this study was to test
the effects of two types of group counseling on the self-
concept, study-habits and attitudes, academic achievement,
and change in observed classroom behavior of low-motivated
male eleventh grade students. The experiment was a repli-
cation and an extension of research conducted by Delores
Story and Joseph Mezzano, co-researchers, who introduced
team counseling into the public school setting.

Description: The design of the study was a post-

 

test-only with control group model. The treatments were:
(1) group counseling only, and (2) group plus individual
counseling. Eighteen group sessions were conducted by a
counseling team made up of one male and one female coun-
selor. The counselors were active participants in the
group discussions. Combined affective and structured

techniques were used in each session.

Ann Keese Thomas

The amount of counselor contact time was held con-
stant. The basic hypotheses of the study were:

1. The self-concept scores of low-motivated stu-
dents who received group counseling plus individual coun-
seling would be greater at the completion of the experi-
ment than the scores of students who had either group
counseling only or no group counseling.

2. The study habit and attitude scores of low-
motivated students who received group counseling plus in-
dividual counseling would be greater at the completion of
the experiment than the scores of low-motivated students
who had either group counseling only or no group counsel-
ing.

3. The academic achievement of low-motivated stu-
dents who received group counseling plus indivudal coun-
seling would be greater at the third grading period during
the experiment and the fourth grading period at the com-
pletion of the experiment than those of low-motivated stu-

dents who had either group counseling only or no group
counseling.

4. The teachers' observed behavior rating scores
of low-motivated students who received group counseling
plus individual counseling would be greater at the com-
pletion of the experiment than the scores of students who
had either group counseling only or no group counseling.

Six criteria measures were used to determine out-
comes of the counseling experience: (1) The Minnesota
Counseling Inventory, (2) The Tennessee Self-Concept Scale,
(3) grade point averages at nine weeks, (4) grade point
averages at the completion of the experiment, (5) Brown-
Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, and (6) an
abbreviated form of the Haggerty—Olson-Wickman Behavior
Rating Scale.

Originally, 115 students from Hope High School,

Hope, Arkansas, were identified as low-motivated on the

Michigan M-Scales. Of the 115, one hundred students

Ann Keese Thomas

accepted invitations to participate in the study. Strati-
fication categories were determined according to the free
hours that the 100 students had in common. From each
category, ten students were randomly selected. Six groups
of ten individuals per group made up the experimental
groups. The six groups were randomly assigned to either
group or group plus individual counseling treatments.
Groups were also randomly assigned within each treatment.
Randomizing techniques were used to assign the pairs of
counselors to the various treatment groups. The forty
students not selected by the random procedures were desig-
nated as the control group and received no treatment.

To be included in the analyses of the study, a min-
imum of 16 sessions for either the group counseling treat-
ment or for the group-individual treatment was required.
Individual sessions were on a flexible schedule and attend-
ance was not a problem. Twenty—seven in the group-individ—
ual treatment and 28 in the group treatment of the original
30 in each of the treatment groups (55 of the original 60)
met the requirement for post-treatment analyses. Thirty-
seven of the original 40 subjects in the control group com-
pleted both the pre- and post-test measures. Proportion-
ately, the attrition rate was evenly distributed between
the treatment and the control groups.

Data for the six null hypotheses were analyzed

using the one way analysis of variance (ANOVA). For

Ann Keese Thomas

comparison purposes, the data were analyzed and reported
exactly as the analyses were reported in the Story-Mezzano
investigations. The F statistic was used to test for
significance at the .05 level.

The data analyses were then extended and analyzed
using univariate and multivariate (MANOVA) procedures to
guard against the possibility of a false rejection of the
null hypotheses. The level of significance for rejecting
the null hypotheses was set at the .05 alpha level.

Major Findings. Three major findings that emerged

 

from this study were:

1. The Conformity Scale scores from the Minnesota
Counseling Inventory (MCI) indicated a significant differ-
ence between treatment groups, but not in the direction
predicted. The other six scales did not yield significant
results.

2. The grade point average changes were not sig-
nificantly different between treatment groups. However,
the GPA means of the counseled groups increased each
grading period. The mean GPA of the control group
decreased.

3. The group counseling was effective with or
without the addition of individual counseling when coun-
selor time was held constant.

No significant differences were found to exist be-

tween the means of the treatment groups for the other

Ann Keese Thomas

three dependent measures; the Tennessee Self-Concept
Scales, the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and the
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior Scale.

The asSumption that low-motivated males would
change behavior because of a combined structured and un—
structured group counseling technique conducted by a male-
female counseling team for eighteen weeks was not upheld.

The statistical evidence did not indicate that
,students who received group plus individual counseling
developed a more positive self-concept, achieved improved
social relationships, acquired a greater degree of
emotional stability, or earned more acceptance from
teachers than those students who experienced either group

counseling only or no counseling.

THE COMPARATIVE EFFECTS OF STRUCTURED
GROUP AND GROUP-INDIVIDUAL COUNSELING
ON SELF-CONCEPT, STUDY-HABITS AND
ATTITUDES, ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT,
AND OBSERVED CLASSROOM BEHAVIOR
OF LOW-MOTIVATED MALE HIGH

SCHOOL JUNIORS

BY

Ann Keese Thomas

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

Department of Counseling, Personnel
Services and Educational Psychology

1976

C) Copyright by
Ann Keese Thomas

1976

Dedicated
With love to
Sam
Terry Ann and Jim

My Parents

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

My sincere appreciation is expressed to the many
people who have made the following possible.

To Dr. William W. Farquhar and Dr. James W. Costar,
my major advisors, for their valuable assistance, under-
standing, and personal support throughout the years of my
graduate program, and for their giving me friendship and
a feeling of respect.

To Dr. Walter F. Johnson and Dr. Dozier W.
Thornton for their sincere support on my committee.

To Dr. Dean C. Andrew for his counsel, in, about
and during each stage of my program.

To Dr. George W. Harrod and Dr. Buford Stefflre
for their encouragement and interest in my graduate program.

To Dr. Albert Stecker and Mr. David Keith for their
assistance in the analyses and the description of the data.

To Dr. Imon E. Bruce, Dr. L.A. Logan,and my office
staff at Southern State College for advice, moral support,
released time, and clerical work during the years of my
graduate program.

To Dr. Paul R. Kirkpatrick, Mr. Alvin Brannon,and
Mrs. Cody Neibergall for serving as perceptive counselors
in the study.

To Mr. Earl Downs, Coordinator of Guidance Services
for the Hope Public Schools, for his cooperation and inter-
est in the study.

To the sixty students who participated in this
study and, hopefully, gained from the experience.

To the administration, the staff,and the faculty of
Hope High School for their cooperation with this investiga-
tion.

To Mr. Leroy Pennington, Coordinator of Guidance
Services, Arkansas State Department of Education, for his
endorsement of the study and for his friendship.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF TABLES. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM . . . . . . . . . .

Statement of the Problem . . .
The Theoretical Background . .
The Hypotheses . . . . . . . .
Definition of Terms. . . . . .
Unique Aspects of the Study. .
Organization of the Study. . .

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE . . . .

Effects of Group Counseling in Producing
Behavior and/or Attitude Changes .

Effects of Group Counseling on
Underachievers . . . . . .

Effects of Different Methods and/or

Techniques of Counseling on
Underachievers . . . . . . .
Team Counseling. . . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . .

III. DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY . . . . .

Design . . . . . . .
The Population . . .
Sample . . . . . . .
Random Assignment. .
Instrumentation. . . . .

Independent Variable Measure

Dependent Variable Measures.
The Counseling . . . . . . . .
Counseling Setting . . . . . .

iv

Page
iii

vii

18
19
21
22

23

27
42

SO
64
71

79

79
80
81
86
87
87

100
101

Chapter

The Counselors . . . . . . . . . . . . .
The Null Hypothesis. . . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis One: One—Way Analysis
of Variance of the Minnesota
Counseling Inventory . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Two: One-Way Analysis
of Variance of the Tennessee
Self—Concept Scales. . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Three: One-Way Analysis
of Variance of the Survey of Study
Habits and Attitudes (SSHA). . . . .
Hypothesis Four: One-Way Analysis
of Variance of the Third Term
Grades . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Five: One-Way Analysis
of Variance of Fourth Term Grades. .
Hypothesis Six: One-Way Analysis
of Variance of the Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Scale. . . . . . . . . . . .
Statistical Treatment. . . . . . . . . .
Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

IV. ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS . . . .

Analysis of Variance of the Sub-Scales
of the Minnesota Counseling Inventory.
Hypothesis One . . . . . . . . . . . .

Multivariate and Univariate Analysis for
the Minnesota Counseling Inventory . .

Analysis of Variance of the Tennessee
Self-Concept Scores. . . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Two . . . . . . . . . . . .

Multivariate and Univariate Analysis
for the Tennessee Self-Concept . . . .

Analysis of Variance of the Brown-
Holtzman Survey of Study Habits
and Attitudes (SSHA) . . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Three . . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of Variance of Third Term
Grade Point Average. . . . . . . . . .
Hypothesis Four. . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of Variance of Fourth Term
Grade Point Averages . . . . . . . . .

Hypothesis Five. . . . . . . . . . .
Analysis of Variance of the Haggerty-
Olson-Wickman Scores . . . . . . . . .

Hypothesis Six . . . . . . . . . . . .

Page
102
103
103
104

104

105
106
107
107
111
114
115
115
123

125
125

137
139
139

142
142

144
144

147
147

Chapter
Research Conclusions from Studies
Being Replicated . . . . . . . . . . . . .
smary O O O I O I O O O O O O O O O O O O O
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION, AND

MCOMIQDATIONS O O C C C O O C O C C O O O O 0

Summary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Exploratory Examination of the Data. . . .
Observed Outcomes. . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommendations. . . . . . . . . . . . . .

LIST OF MFERENCES . O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O C

APPENDICES O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O 0

Appendix
A Special Bibliography for Chapter II. . . . . .
B Report of Basic Public School Characteristics
of Arkansas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C Report of Basic Socioeconomic Character-
istics of the Study Population in
Arkansas 0 O O O O O O I O O O O O O O O O O
D Letters 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O
E Analysis of Ratings for Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Behavior Scales: Incomplete
Sets, Raters Not Identified. . . . . . . . .
F Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior
Rating Scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
G Counseling Session Activity Samples. . . . . .

vi

Page

150
153
155
155
155
159
163
168
172

183

184

192

199

216

220

222
226

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

2.1 Literature review summarizing group
counseling outcome studies. . . . . . . . . . 74

3.1 Summary of the basic design of the
experiment. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80

3.2 Students included in the post-treatment
analyses. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82

3.3 Mean raw scores for the California Test of
Mental Maturity (CTMM), GPA means for each
group of randomly assigned students . . . . . 84

3.4 Analysis of variance of the California Test
of Mental Maturity raw scores of the
randomly assigned students. . . . . . . . . . 84

3.5 Analysis of variance to fall term grade
point averages of the randomly assigned
Students. 0 O 0 O I O O O O O O O O 0 O O O O 85

3.6 Population Reliability Analysis: Cronbach's
Alpha (a) Reliability Coefficient for
the Michigan M-Scales: tenth and eleventh
grade students. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89

3.7 Pearson Correlation Coefficients for the
Michigan M-Scales: tenth and eleventh
grade males and females . . . . . . . . . . . 91

3.8 Pearson Correlation Coefficients for the
Michigan M-Scales with Grade Point Average
(GPA) and California Mental Maturity Raw
Scores (CTMM): tenth and eleventh grade
low motivated males . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92

4.1 Analysis of variance of the Family Rela-
tionship Scale (FR) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

vii

Table

4.2

Analysis of variance of the Social Rela-
tionships Scale (SR) for the group-
individual counseling (GI). group coun-
seling (G), and control groups (C). . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Emotional Sta-
bility Scale (ES) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Conformity Scale
(C) for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Reality Scale
(R) for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Mood Scale (M)
for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups

(C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Leadership
Scale (L) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . .

Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of
Variance for the Minnesota Counseling
Inventory (MCI) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance of the Tennessee
Identity Scale for the group—individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . .

Analysis of variance for Tennessee Self-
Satisfaction Scale for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C). . . . . . . . . . .

viii

Page

. 117

. 118

. 119

. 120

. 121

122

. 124

. 127

128

Table Page

4.11 Analysis of variance for Tennessee Behavior
Scale for the group-individual counsel-
ing (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

4.12 Analysis of variance for Tennessee Physical-
Self Scale for the group-individual coun-
seling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

4.13 Analysis of variance for Tennessee Moral-
Ethical Self Scale for group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

4.14 Analysis of variance for the Tennessee
Personal-Self Scale for the group-individ-
ual counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . 132

4.15 Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Family-
Self Scale for the group-individual coun-
seling (GI), Group counseling (G), and con-
trol groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

4.16 Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Social-
Self Scale for the group-individual coun-
seling (GI), group counseling (G), and con-
trol groups (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

4.17 Analysis of variance of Tennessee Self-Con-
cept Total Positive Scores for the group-
individual counseling (GI), group coun-
seling (G), and control groups (C) . . . . . 135

4.18 Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Self-
Criticism Scales for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136

4.19 Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of
Variance for the Tennessee Self-Concept
Inventory for the group-individual coun-
seling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

ix

Table Page

4.20 Analysis of variance of Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes
(SSHA) raw scores for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G)
and control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . 140

4.21 Univariate Analysis of Variance for the
Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes (SSHA) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C) raw scores . . . . . . . 141

4.22 Analysis of variance of third term grade
point averages for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . 143

4.23 Analysis of variance of fourth term grade
point averages for the three
experimental groups. . . . . . . . . . . . . 145

4.24 Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Vari-
. ance for the third term grade point averages
and for the final grade point averages (GPA)
for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146

4.25 Analysis of variance of the Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Behavior Rating scores of the
group-individual counseling (GI), group
counseling (G), and control groups (C) . . . 148

4.26 Univariate Analysis of Variance for the
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman (HOW) Behavior
Rating Scale for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G),
and control groups (C) . . . . . . . . . . . 149

5.1 Summary of Means and Standard Deviations
from Univariate and Multivariate Analyses
of Variance for the group-individual coun-
seling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control group (C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160

Table Page

Appendix

B.1 The distribution of students in the Arkansas
public schools by grade level and by race . . 194

3.2 The number and percent of all students in
Arkansas schools by grade level . . . . . . . 195

B.3 Number of 1974 Arkansas high school
graduates by county . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

B.4 Number and percentage of the 1974 Arkansas

high school graduates by county, who
enrolled in college . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198

xi

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

Change and adaptations to it are realities coun-
selors cannot ignore. The counselors in the public
schools face many tests, wondering each year about budgets
and survival.1 Miller and Engin2 extend the following
challenges to 1976 counselors: Account for yourself. Can
you facilitate a group? Have you kept up with the litera-
ture? Are you competent? Can you demonstrate a technique
by role-playing before peers or on video tape? Janury,
1986, will you be a counselor? Competent or unemployed?
Alvin Toffler, in his keynote address at the 1975 APGA Con-
vention, described the current economic, environmental and
societal crises and emphasized the crises as problems that
are without historical precedent. Yet, society is trying
to deal with the issues by using old procedures which

worked in the past but are now ineffective. Toffler used

 

1Helen Washburn, "Vice-President's Message," Ele-
mentary School Guidance and Counseling, (December, 1975),
pp. 84-85.

2Jane M. Miller and Ann W. Engin, "Tomorrow's
Counselor: Competent or Unemployed," Personnel and Guid-
ance Journal, (January 1976), pp. 262-266.

 

the economic analogy to describe the dilemma counselors

in education face today.
The need is evident for change, many urge a return to
old ways, others voice concern for the need to pro-
vide young people with the skills to cope with new
complexities. These internal problems of education,
complicated by the effects of global crises, make
educational change a monumental task.

Counselors, as a professional body, publicize
their commitment to change. However, are individual coun-
selors in practice really committed to the published com-
mitment? Do counselors merely give lip-service to finding
solutions to problems of guidance in the public schools
because they are confused, limited or bound by the old
customs, traditions, and conventional habits of school
routine?

Educators became interested in group counseling as
one way to assist large numbers of students in academic
adjustment, educational-vocational planning and personal-
social difficulties about twenty years ago. Most second-
ary school counselors were uncertain about using group
process for guidance functions; there was not enough re-
search to justify the risks they might encounter. The
problems of group methods were not completely understood;

the reported research was vague, and it had been conducted

in laboratory settings.

 

3Helen Washburn, p. 84.

By 1964, counselor educators were proponents of
the group process and there was a flood of research that
clearly defined or demonstrated the types of situations
and/or conditions for which group counseling was appro-
priate.4 Counselors hesitated to conduct group counseling
in the public schools because critics believed that group
counseling could not be justified without significant re-
search results. In 1964, Stefflre5 urged counselors to
implement creative approaches in guidance. He warned that,
if counselors waited for significant research results for
everything they did in the name of counseling, there would
be a long wait ahead and possible failure to justify their
need to remain in the public schools.

The U.S. Office of Education,in 1967, supported a
seminar to develop guidelines for future research in group
counseling as it applied to the educational environment

6 The purpose of the seminar was

with normal individuals.
to help the public schools enhance the effectiveness of

the typical school guidance program. Twenty-two

 

4Delores Story, "The Effectiveness of Two Types of
Group Counseling Upon the Self-Concept and Observed Class-
room Behavior of Low-Motivated Male High School Juniors,"
(Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University), 1967, p.
13.

5Buford Stefflre, Theories of Counseling (New York:
Wiley and Sons, 1965).

6Benjamin Cohn, Ed., Guidelines for Future Research
on Group Counseling in the Public School Setting, (APGA,
Washington, D.C., 1967).

 

consultants, nationally known for their knowledge and ex-
perience in psychological and educational fields of group
work participated in the seminar. They endorsed and en-
couraged the use of group procedures in public school set-
tings, defined group counseling, exchanged ideas pertain-
ing to group process, and identified research problems

to be considered in future research designs.7

The guidelines the conference provided and the en-
dorsement of the U.S. Office of Education gave public
school administrators the courage to allow group counsel-
ing research with students in their schools. Researchers
could then move from the laboratory to on-the-site or
field investigations.

The resulting investigations of group counseling
were directed principally toward evaluating the effective-
ness of the experience in terms of increased personal ad-
justment and academic achievement with problem students.
Researchers were more welcome in the schools to conduct
group counseling studies; however, after twenty years,
counselors still have not embraced group counseling as a
standard part of their role in school guidance programs.
The same issues of no significant research results are be-

ing rehashed over and over. Sue8 asked the profession if

 

7Cohn, p.v.

8Donald Wing Sue, "New Directions in the Personnel
and Guidance Journal," Personnel and Guidance Journal,
(September 1975), pp. 16-20.

it had researched a plateau from which it could go fur-
ther? Since 1956, two recognized goals of modern educa-
tional institutions were to discover methods that iden-
tified under-achieving high ability students and to find
ways to develop their potential to the fullest.9 Educa-
tors became interested in meeting these goals by using
group counseling as one way to assist large numbers of
students solve academic problems, personal-social prob-
lems, and educational-vocational planning. Counselors
hesitated; Corsini,10 in 1957, called group counseling the
Pandora's Box of therapy. Within it, one found a plethora
of notions about methods and techniques that ranged from
the mystic to the scientific. One recognized need was to
find a model or technique to consolidate the relationship

11

between facts and theories. Kolberg, in 1975, empha—

sized

The model for counseling practice is often unclear
because of ambiguous or contradicting assumptions con-
cerning the nature of its developmental objectives.
Without a systematic framework, counseling programs
may become a potpourri of approaches, a set of eclectic
activities oriented toward secondary prevention. The
overall goal of counseling and development is well
recognized but difficult to achieve. Counseling as

9Educational Policies Commission, Manpower and
Education, (Washington, D.C.: National Education Associa-
tion of the United States of America, Association of
School Administration, 1956).

10R. J. Corsini, Methods of Group Psychotherapy,
(New York: McGraw-Hill, 1957).

11

 

Story, p. l.

a practice and counselor education programs are at a
cross-roads in the search for an effective educational

model.12

13

Furthermore, Eysenck in 1961 challenged coun-

selor educators to produce counselors who could help more
than two-thirds of their clients. Kohlberg, LaCrosse, and
Ricks,l4 in 1971, questioned the effectiveness of counsel-
ing and psychotherapy for adolescents and young adults.
Bergin,15 in 1972, reanalyzed Eysenck's earlier conclusions

and cautiously concluded that counseling "has modestly

positive effects."

In 1975, Sprinthall16 said "change is possible if

we are willing to accept the consequences that ensue. In
the framework of science, each generation stands on the

shoulders of the previous one as the wall of knowledge

 

12Lawrence Kohlberg, "Counseling and Counselor Ed-
ucation: A Developmental Approach," Counselor Education
and Supervision, (June 1975), p. 250.

l3H.J. Eysenck, Ed., "The Effects of Psychotherapy,"
Handbook of Abnormal Psychology: An Experimental Approach,
(New York: Basic Books, 1961), p. 711.

14L.Koh1berg, R. LaCrosse, and D. Ricks, "The
jPredictability of Adult Mental Health From Childhood
Behavior," in B. Wolman (ed. ) Handbook of Child Psycho-
pathology. (New York: McGraw-Hfll, 1972), p. 1271.

 

15A.E. Gergin and S.L. Garfield (Eds.), "The Eval-
lnation of Therapeutic Outcomes," Handbook of Psychotherapy
arui Behavior Change, (New York: Wiley, 1971), p. 228.

16Norman Sprinthall, "Fantasy and Reality in Re-
search; How to Move Beyond the Unproductive Paradox,"
Ccnxnselor Education and Supervision, (June 1975), pp. 310-
322.

grows slowly and steadily." He recommended the need to
develop a model for field-based research and to conduct
the research in the school and community where the process

occurs as a part of the school operation. There must be

a commitment on the part of school systems to such work.17

Story and Mezzano created and implemented such a
model with companion research in 1965. The problems that
led to their studies could be as accurately stated as
the problems that led to the current study ten years
later. Mezzano recognized that

Most research efforts investigating group counseling
with underachievers have been expended in evaluating
the effectiveness of adjustment and academic achieve-
ment. But the type of counseling offered has received
only limited attention. The variability of content

in counseling experiences and the differential effect
which it may have upon counseling outcomes has by and
large been neglected by researchers. Although numer-
ous techniques have been tried, information concern-
ing the effectiveness of these techniques is sparse.
Due to rising enrollment in educational institutions
and a lack of trained personnel, the problem of wasted
talents continues to grow.

It is therefore of importance to further experimental
investigation in this area in an attempt to discover
methods which allow more students to be handled by
fewer counselors in a manner which also produces
significant results.18

Story understood that

Counselors are well aware of the complex problems that
face the modern adolescent, but solutions to these

 

l7Sprinthall, p. 314.

18Joseph Mezzano, "Group Counseling With the Low-
bkytivated Male High School Students-—Comparative Effects
of {Two Uses of Counselor Time," (Doctor's dissertation,
Michigan State University), 1966, pp. 1-2.

problems are less obvious. The counselor sees the
adolescents' expressions of hostility, aggression,
asocialness, and forced compliance in his behavior.
And because this behavior pattern usually inhibits
the potential development of the student and disrupts
the ordinary functioning of the school routine, the
counselor is faced with the problem of how to aid the
student within the framework of the school setting.19
The Story and Mezzano investigations were crea-
tive and there were statistically significant outcomes
to warrant replication. The model they provided for coun-
selors and educators preceded the one Sprinthall recom-
mended for current implementation. However, no further
research has been conducted in education with team counsel-
ing nor have their studies been replicated. Stefflre,20
in 1968, cautioned students against ignoring previous re-
search. He warned "counseling goals would not be firmly
identified and research findings would not be firmly estab-
lished as practice until doctoral dissertations were taken
from the shelves, dusted, and scientifically replicated."
Stefflre predicted the counseling profession would
stagnate and stumble in research efforts, prior to 1980,
unless counselor educators recognized the value of scien-
‘tifically examining past research.

Sue,21 in 1975, accused the counseling profession

(of "suffering from a stagnation in its own pool of ideas.

 

19Story, pp. 1-2.
20Buford Stefflre, vocational theory class notes,
1968.

21Sue, p. 17.

Let's stir up the waters and see what surfaces." Sue22

and Sprintha1123

conceded that the scientific approach to
research should not be abandoned or blamed for the appar-
ent "idea stagnation" or "unproductive paradox" in current
research; they advocated looking at all aspects of inquiry
and not at one narrow component. For example, replication
and extension of previous research is greatly needed in
the counseling profession if results are to be firmly
established.

The current study is designed as a replication of

research conducted by Story and Mezzano for their doctoral

studies.

Statement of the Problem

 

The purpose of this study is to assess the effects
of two types of counseling with low-motivated male high
school students upon self-concept, study-habits, and atti-
tudes, academic achievement, and change in observed class-
room behavior. Within the study, an attempt is made to
determine if the low-motivated students are more effec-
tively changed with (1) group counseling alone or (2)

group counseling in conjunction with individual counseling.

'The Theoretical Background

 

The theory underlying this investigation is that

lowhunotivated male students will change behavior through

y

22Sue, pp. 18-19.

23Sprinthall, pp. 311-315.

10

the approach of dynamic group counseling conducted by a
counseling team. The study is an attempt to determine if
the low-motivated student's behavior is more effectively
changed with group counseling alone or with group counsel-
ing in conjunction with individual counseling. The theory
underlying the study attempts to explain how behavior can
be effected through the group process.24 Because adoles-
cent behavior problems arise in social situations and of-
ten involve authority figures, one solution to the problem
may be found in group situations in which authority figures
are present and active.25 Therefore, a counseling team,
one male and one female, simulates a quasi-family atmos-

26 A social cli-

phere for the group counseling sessions.
mate results that becomes a safe testing ground for reality
because the counselors will represent parental figures

that may be perceived as facilitating and inhibiting;
families facilitate and groups create competition. Stu-
dents in high school may perceive the counselors as warm,

accepting parent figures, but they will also represent

potential authority.

 

24Story, p. 3.

25E. E. Mintz, "Special Values of Co-Therapy and
GrouptPsychotherapy," International Journal of Group Psy-
ggyatherapy, Vol. 13, (1963). pp. 127-132.

. 26J. Adler and J. R. Berman, "Multiple Leadership
.u1 (lroup Treatment of Delinquent Adolescents," Interna-

Ejl-é’llal Journal of Group Psychotherapy: X (1960) , pp. 213-
2 -

11

In addition to the simulated family structure,

the use of two counselors allows each counselor to observe

and analyze student-counselor interaction.27 In addi-

tion, two counselors provide double observance and anal-

/

yses of student-peer interactions and non—verbal behaviors.

Interacting with the group in a dynamic, direct manner

will enable the counselors to use a variety of techniques.

A partial list of techniques are:

1.

Social Modeling. Using significant peers or
adults to illustrate desired or undesired be-
haviors or attitudes.

Peer Pressures. Using reactions or statements
of valued peers as a change force.

 

Authority Pressures. Using coercion, love-
acceptance, approval-disapproval to induce
change.

 

Learning. Employing principles of learning
such as reinforcement, conditioning, general-
ization, and transfer of training to bring
about desired responses and extinguish unde-
sired ones.

Experience Control. Manipulating experiences
to provide opportunity for feedback on success
and failure or to open new awareness.

Knowledge Dissemination. Providing the indi-
vidual with new information about himself, his
environment, and his possible future.

Increasing Self-Confidence. Identifying de-
sirable elements within the self and showing
how they can lead to success.

Goal Appraising. Dividing goals into attain-
able elements or presenting new goals.

 

27

G. Konopka, "Group Work and Therapy," A Decade

of Group Work, ed. C.E. Hendy (New York: Association Press,

 

1948). pp. 39-44.

12

9. Insight and Awareness.

a. Developing understanding within the client
about how the self's defense mechanisms
work (e.g., blocks and threats such as
anger; withdrawal tendencies such as fear).

b. Exploring available alternatives of
actions and their possible consequences
for the client.

c. Providing feedback to the client concern-
ing the kind of person he is--his
uniqueness and his commonness.

d. Teaching the client to re-label experiences
with more flexible or accurate categories.

10. Relationship Pressures. Using the forces of
the counselor-client interaction to

a. give understanding to the client of his
and others' emotions,

b. undergird his confidence in receiving and
giving acceptance,

c. learn to express repressed feelings, and

d. develop selectivity in discharging certain
emotions.28

Through the use of these techniques the counselors
can actively guide, direct, and manipulate the group
members toward changed behavior.

Many approaches are necessary because although
participants may want change at one level of cognition,

change represents fear of the unknown and is usually

 

28William Farquhar and Norman Stewart, "Counseling
‘the Low-Motivated Male: A Working Paper," (mimeographed
Paper, Michigan State University), April 1966.

13

29 Fear and anxiety may

frightening and anxiety-provoking.
operate initially in the group situation to inhibit growth
and open up competition for individual support and nur-
turance from one or both of the counselors.30 To modify
the fear and anxiety and increase client self-awareness,
the investigation theorized that growth could be facili-
tated by giving the clients individual counseling as well
as group counseling. In individual counseling the par-
ticipant might feel less threatened. Hopefully, he would
transfer his new learning to the group experience.31

The individual counseling sessions would use stimulated
recall methodology (IPR) from group session tapes to

allow the participants to see themselves as observers and
thus recognize and release their defenses in a manner less
traumatic than individual or group counseling could pro-
vide separately. The use of stimulated recall from the
individual counseling sessions would yield insights ad-

ditional to those gained by delayed confrontation.32 The

 

29B. L. Kell and W. J. Mueller, Impact and Change:
A _Study of Counseling Relationships, (New York: Appleton-
Century-Crafts, 1966).

30J. Mann, "Some Theoretical Concepts of the Group
Process," International Journal of Group Psychotherapy,
V (1955): 235-242

31Story, p. 8.

32Robert H. Woody, David Krathwohl, Norman Kagan,
and W.W. Farquhar, "Stimulated Recall in Psychotherapy
Using Hypnosis and Video Tape," The American Journal of
gfiinical Hypnosis, Vol. VII, No. 3, (January 1965), pp.
4 241.

l4

introduction of the immediate recall technique will help
eliminate the time problem between counseling sessions
that Story gave as one reason for less student change
than she expected in group-individual counseling.

Once the behavior is recognized the participants
must make the decision to relinquish or to retain their
self-defeating defenses.33 For the most economical and
effective behavior changes all groups will have specific
structure and goals.34 The group sessions will be designed
to reinforce participants as they relinquish defenses and
develop stronger self-concepts. New learning will then
be transferred from the group experience to individual
classroom behavior and academic performance.

Structured counseling in the group will also pro-
vide a systematic approach to reinforce attempted changes
and to reach the inner core of the individual.35 Replay
of the selected parts of the previous group sessions will

be introduced at the beginning of group sessions to help

 

- 33Milton R. Cudney, "Elimination of Self-Defeating
Behavior," (workshop materials, Western Michigan Univer-
sity, Kalamazoo, Michigan, 1973).

34Thomas L. Feister and William W. Farquhar, "An
Investigation of the Process and Outcomes of the Elimina-
tion of Self-Defeating Behavior Workshops: A Minimum
Group Treatment for Specific College Student Problems,"
(manuscript, Michigan State University), April 12, 1973.

35Carl Thoresen, "A Behavioral Approach to Encour-
aSing College Accomplishment in Disadvantaged Youth: An
EXploratory Study," (manuscript, Michigan State Univer-
Sity, 1966).

15

overcome the time lost in recall process. The interper-
sonal recall technique will not be introduced until the

group has become cohesive enough to have developed indi-
vidual objectives and to move from the leader structure

of the first few sessions.

The continuity of interaction of the total group is

a series of shifting and alternating emotional balance
as changes occur. The group moves through a succes-
sion of emotional phases that will involve hostility,
withdrawal, irrelevance, pairing for security and/or
leadership, dependency, or combination of these.

These phases characterize the group situation and
work to support and further the goals of the group.
Whatever change occurs in the individual group mem-
bers results from the direct impact of these phases
upon him. Impact of change is reinforced through

an affective approach in which the adolescent can

find reassurance, acceptance, understanding, and self-
awareness.36

Stock and Thelen found group or group-individual
experiences and interactions to reflect clients' behavior
changes in:

(a) open self-acceptance

(b) opening lines of communication in family re-
lationships, and

(c) social relationships

(d) developing a greater degree of emotional
stability, and

(e) achieving more acceptance by teacher stand-
ards.37

 

36Story, p. 6.

37Dorothy Stock and Herbert Thelen, "Emotional
(Dynandcs and Group Culture," Group Therapy and Group Func-
tion, eds., Rosenbaum and Berger (New York: Basic Books,
I933) . pp. 83-86.

16

Five assumptions underlie the theory of this
study:

1. Attitudes, self concept, and self-defeating
behaviors have developed over a period of years; behavior
cannot be modified in a short period of time. Previous
counseling of five to ten weeks has not produced signifi-

cant results; 16 to 20 weeks of intensive, dynamic coun-
seling induced some observed change. In a public school
setting it is not realistic to implement group counseling
for a longer time span of one semester as a part of the
school's service. The addition of behavioral structure

and IPR to affective counseling assumes that change can be

induced and reinforced for greater behavior change than
that shown in previous studies.

2. Client-centered, non-evaluative counseling
should induce insight that motivates the client toward
change. Research does not support this concept. Hostil-
ity, fear, anger, frustration, dejection, and "acting-
out," or withdrawal, are a part of a low-motivated stu-
dent's existence. The student will not wait for insight,
and if he is non-verbal, he cannot interact with the coun-
selor and group. The non-directive counseling can rein-
force negatively another failure in communication and can
cause increased failure. The low-motivated student
irequires structure and acceptance in a forceful relation-
ship with peers and significant adults.

3. IResearch assumes that low-motivated under-

achievers are homogeneous; but many factors are combined

17

in each individual that developed low-motivation. Many
tools must be used in a variety of ways to create change.
The underachiever may be aware of his low-motivating
defenses and use them in a masterful way in his defense
against authority.

4. Personal-social factors such as self-concept,

relationships to parents, expressions of impulses, social
adjustment, academic motivation, and anxiety levels cause
underachievement and refusal to apply academic skills.
As behavior changes occur and self-defeating defenses are
dropped, other behaviors will take their place. Improved
academic achievements will occur as a by-product of these
changes.

5. The behavior changes, the improved academic
achievements, and the group counseling will act as a cycle
of reinforcers to enable the student to internalize the
changes as motivations for permanent behavior
modification.

The theory adopted for this study is that low-
Imotivated students will change behavior through the
.approach of affective and structured group counseling
conducted by a male-female counseling team. Within the
:studyy the prediction was made that students who receive
grtnrp counseling by a male-female team in conjunction with

.indisvidual counseling by a male-female team will develop

a more positive self-concept, achieve improved social

18

relationships, acquire a greater degree of emotional sta-
bility, and have more acceptance from peers and teachers

than those students who experienced only group counseling.

The Hypotheses

 

Within this study four basic research hypotheses
were investigated:

1. The self-concept scores of low-motivated stu-
dents who received group counseling in conjunction with
individual counseling will be greater at the completion
of the experiment than the self-concept scores of low-
motivated students who had only group counseling. The
self-concept scores of the students who received group
counseling will be greater than the self concept scores
of low-motivated students who had no counseling.

2. The study habits and attitude scores of low-
motivated students who received group counseling in con-
junction with individual counseling will be greater at the
completion of the experiment than the study habits and
tattitude scores of low-motivated students who had only
group counseling. The scores of the students who had
group counseling will be greater than the study habit and
aattitude scores of low-motivated students who had no
counseling.

3. The academic achievement of low-motivated stu-

dents who received group counseling in conjunction with

individual counseling will be greater at the third grade

19

period during the experiment and at the fourth grade
period at the completion of the experiment than that of
low-motivated students who had only group counseling.
The academic achievement of the students in group coun-
seling will be greater than that of low-motivated stu-
dents who received no counseling.

4. The teacher observed behavior rating scores
of low-motivated students who received group counseling
in conjunction with individual counseling will be greater
at the completion of the experiment than that of low-
motivated students who had only group counseling. Teacher
behavior ratings will be greater for the students in
group counseling only than that of low-motivated students

who received no counseling.

Definition of Terms
For the purposes of clarification, the terms fre-
quently used in this research are defined as follows:

1. Michigan-M Scales: An objective measure of

 

academic motivation, entitled the Michigan State M Scales,
<ieveloped by William W. Farquhar and his staff under the
auspices of the U.S. Office of Education, Project No. 846

2. Low-Motivated Student: A male in his junior

 

jyear at Hope High School, Hope, Arkansas, who ranks in

time lower half of his class on the Michigan M Scales

20

3. Counseling Team: Two professionally trained
counselors, one male and one female, with experience in
both individual and group counseling

4. Individual Counseling: A learning-oriented
process conducted on a one to one basis in which the coun-
seling team attempts to help one male student share, ex-
plore, and respond to his personal feelings and experi-
ences

5. Group Counseling: A learning-oriented process
shared by a group of eight to ten male students and a pro-
fessional counseling team in which the students react to
their experiences together, sharing personal feelings
with each other and responding to these shared feelings
with new and past reactions in an attempt to better
understand themselves and each other

6. Groupflndividual Counseling: A learning-

oriented experience, defined the same as number five,
except that the students and counseling team meet as a
group every other week and on alternate weeks the counsel-

irm team meets with each group member for individual
counseling

7. Dynamic Counseling Approach: Counseling in
tmhich the counselors take an active role in interactions
arwi reinforce expressed feelings about self, attitudes
toward teachers, parents and other authority figures,
hOStile-angry feelings, and stated purposes and/or goals

while: counselors encourage free expression of experiences

21

and feelings by active participation, producing irrelevant

or defense-producing communication that is blocked by

counselor leads and reactions

8. Structure: A procedure through which topics

 

and goals are printed and given to the counseling teams
for each counseling session until the groups have become
cohesive and the students have learned to develop goals
that involve personal feelings and experiences rather than

talk about cars, movies, or other typical conversation

content

Unique Aspects of the Study

The current study is unique because counseling
teams combining affective and behavior modification tech-
niques conducted all of the counseling. The combined
approach has not been researched at the secondary level of
education and it is being implemented in an attempt to
motivate the underachieving male in less time than either
the affective or the behavior modification techniques-
used separately have produced in previous studies. Delores
£9tory38 and Joseph Mezzano,39 co-researchers, introduced
‘team counseling with group and group-individual counseling
(at.the secondary level of education. The results of their
Inesearch indicated significant grade point improvement

1mine weeks after completion of the experiment. Teachers

 

38

39Mezzano.

Story.

22

observed significant behavior changes as a result of
group-individual treatment. The researchers recommended
that the counseling sessions be extended beyond the eigh-
teen weeks of their investigation if more positive self-
concept and permanent behavior changes were to occur.

The public school semester is eighteen weeks long and it
is impractical to plan group counseling programs for a
longer time span than one semester. Replicating the Story
and Mezzano studies and extending them by combining the
affective and behavioral counseling techniques is an
attempt to overcome the time problem indicated in both of
their findings. Previously, no attempt has been made to
provide secondary counselors with a technique or model
that allows them to move between the affective and the
behavioral poles of their respective educational back-

grounds.

Organization of the Study

The general plan of the study is to present in the
following chapter a review of research which is related
to the problem of aiding underachievers through group pro-
cedures at the secondary level of education. In Chapter
III, the design of the study will be described with refer-
ence to sampling procedure, method of treatment, the null
hypotheses, and the types of analyses. The results of the
analyses will be reported in Chapter IV. Chapter V will

include the summary, conclusions, discussion, and recom-

mendations.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

Research in group counseling in college settings
grew rapidly from 1952 to 1965. The number of publiShed
articles grew proportionately with the popularity of the
study of groups. The publications were confusing because
the problems of group methods were not completely under-
stood and reported research was often vague. The reports
covered wide areas of concern and researchers used regular
laboratory methods of research that were often inappro-
priate. The research problem boundaries were too broad
and the problems were not adequately described.

Articles concerning groups in the broad areas of
education and psychology are scattered through American
professional literature. An accumulation of documented
group experiences and research is recorded from a variety
of sources: the retarded, the aged, the homosexuals, the
married couples, the alcoholics, and the delinquents.
Group methods reported in the literature range from the
psychoanalytic and client-centered to lecture and inspir-

ational methods.1

1J.W. Klapman, Group Psychotherapy: Theory and
Practice, (2nd ed., New York and'London: Grune and Strat-

ton, I959). 23

 

24

Counselor educators became proponents of the
group process in education, and their leadership gener-
ated a flood of research that defined the type of situa-
tions for which group counseling was appropriate. In
1967, the United States Office of Education identified
group counseling and defined problems to be considered
for future research in the public schools.2 A phenominal
amount of school research with groups deluged the journals.3
The influence of counselor educators, the endorse-
ment of the United States Office of Education, and the
embryonic development of group work as a scientific inves-
tigation generated so many articles that from 1947-1971
publishers founded five new journals devoted to major
specialization fields of group work. The characteristics
of the publications increased the complications of any
literature review because, in general, "periodicals
devoted to group work appear to be less research and
theory-oriented, more applied, and more readable than
many periodicals primarily devoted to individual counsel-

ing and psychotherapy."4

2Benjamin Cohn, Ed., Guidelines for Future Research
533 Group_Counseling in the Public School Setting, APGA,
Washington, D.C., (1967).

3William L. Mermis, Jr., "Bibliography of Group
Literature," American Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol.
49. (April 1971Y7*pp. 652-653.

 

4Richard W. Warner, Jr., "Research in Counseling,"
Personnel and Guidance Journal, Vol. 53, No. 5, (January
1975), p. 382.

 

 

 

 

 

25

Richard W. Warner, PGA Research Editor, appeared
to encourage the submission of articles that were in the
form of subjective thought. He also encouraged inves-
tigators to report research that was not based upon
objective evaluation.

In his comments in the January, 1975, PGA Journal
research column, he stated

This column is based on the belief that research
can provide meaningful data to the practicing
counselor. While individual studies may not
provide sufficient data on which to act....

This column will provide that data by reviewing
current research in a specific area and the
emphasis will be on implications for the coun-
selor, so there will be little if any information
on research design or statistical procedures.
Readers who desire to have results of their
research and/or innovative approaches considered
for review....send to....Warner.5

Warner6 must have encountered problems when be
reviewed the articles submitted for publication since he
contradicted his earlier statement by published detailed
procedures for selecting reasonable research goals and
objectives in his September column. Warner further stated
that he would emphasize the questions of appropriate

evaluation and research design in future research

columns.

 

51bid.

6Richard W. Warner, Jr., "Planning for Research
and Evaluation: Necessary Conditions," Personnel and
Epidance Journal, (September 1975), pp. 10-11.

 

—+r — 1 A 11..- 1-..
-

26

The current review is based upon publications for
the past nine years. Story7 and Mezzano,8 companion
researchers in 1965, were among the first to conduct a
group experiment in the public school setting and the
first to introduce team counseling in that environment.

The current investigation is a replication of Story‘s

work and an extension of Mezzano's. The empirical research
they reviewed prior to 1967 was not reviewed in this study.
Only empirical research studies from 1967 through 1975

that related directly to group work with secondary high
school students were included.

A bibliography of studies conducted in schools
other than secondary is included in Appendix A.

Story and Mezzano summarized the literature that
was related to students and group counseling for the
purpose of motivating underachievers.

Story9 employed two subsections in her review

1. Studies investigating the effect of group

counseling in producing behavior and/or
attitude change

2. Quasi-experiments investigating the
process of group counseling

 

7Story.

8
Mezzano.

98tory, pp. 13-14.

27

10 . . . .
Mezzano used four subsections 1n his rev1ew
1. Factors associated with academic motivation

2. Outcome studies that have investigated the
effects of group counseling on underachievers

3. Comparative studies that have investigated
the differential effects of different methods
and/or techniques of counseling of under-
achievers

4. Team counseling

For this study, the Story-Mezzano subsections were

combined into four categories:

1. Effects of group counseling in producing be-
havior and/or attitude change

2. Effects of group counseling on underachievers

3. Effects of different methods and/or techniques
of counseling on underachievers

4. Team counseling
Effects of Group Counseling in Producing
Behavior and76r AtEitude Changes
One of the investigations conducted almost simul-
taneously with the Story research was completed by Van
Stewart.11 The purpose was to study the effects of what
he labeled the Perceptual Modification Model (PMM) of

group counseling as a method of modifying the behavior of

failing tenth graders. Students, randomly selected

 

10Joseph Mezzano, p. 11.

11Ronald Van Stewart, "The Effects of Group Coun-
seling on Acceptance of Self, Acceptance of Others, Grade
Point Averages, and Teacher Rated Behavior of Failing
Tenth Grade Students," (Doctor's thesis, University of
Tulsa, 1969).

 

28

for the study, were each failing one subject and had an
I.Q. of at least 90 on the Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence
Test. The subjects were again divided into one control
group and four experimental groups, the latter being
exposed to eight sessions using the Perceptual Modifica-
tion Model treatment method.

Tests were given to the groups of students and
data collected in an attempt to measure similarities and
differences within the groups. The Acceptance of Self and
Others scale was administered to the students. Grade
point averages were obtained from classroom teachers at
the beginning of the study and from official school rec-
ords at its conclusion. Classroom behavior was measured
by the use of a locally devised teacher rating scale.

The study was designed to test for significant dif-
ferences between the failing tenth grade students who re-
ceived the PMM counseling treatment and those of the con-
trol group who did not receive counseling on (1) accept-
ance of self, (2) acceptance of others, (3) academic grade
point averages, and (4) teacher behavior ratings.

The Estest was used to test for differences be-
tween the experimental and control groups for acceptance
of self, acceptance of others, and grade point averages.
SPhe results were significant at the .05 level of confi-
dence for one of the four experimental groups on grade

Ixaint.average. The Mann-Whitney U test was used to test

29

for differences between the treatment and control groups
for teacher rated behavior. The analysis was significant
at the .05 level for one experimental and the total of
the four experimental groups. None of the other experi-
mental groups or total experimental groups for behavior
in class, attitude toward authority, attitude toward in-
struction, or general enthusiasm were significant at the
.05 level.

There was significant indication that the group
treatment did lead to improved study habits.

Factors in Van Stewart's study which probably
contributed to the negative findings were the selection
of groups that were not homogeneous, the short period of
counseling, and the lack of a follow-up study.

Rader12 examined the effects of group counseling
on secondary school underachievers who had had three or
more negative contacts with disciplinarians. Subjects and
counselors were volunteers. Rader invited counselors from
15 schools to administer biographical data forms, Behavior
(FIRO-B), and the Adjustive Check List (ACL) to 238 under-
achievers. Ten counselors in nine schools within three
states conducted the research with 125 subjects (85)
divided into nine groups. Counselors divided the 85 into

68 experimental (Es) and 57 controls (Cs) according to

 

. 12Florence C. Rader, "Group Counseling with Second-
ary School Norm Violators," (Doctoral dissertation, Rut-
gers-State University of New Jersey, 1971).

30

available periods on schedule cards. Es received group
counseling for 12 weeks and Cs were promised treatment at

a later time. Following pre-testing and 12 weeks of treat-
ment of Es, the FIRO-B and the ACL were administered to

all 85 at the 13th session.

Analysis of variance of the pre-test indicated
that the Es and Cs came from different populations. Anal-
yses of co-variance were computed with the post-test
scores; pre-test scores and IQ scores were used as oo-
variates to adjust for initial data differences. The null
hypothesis of no significant differences between Es and Cs
following treatment on the six scales of the FIRO-B and on
the self-confidence and self-control scales of ACL were
not rejected. Subject grades were not examined.

The following factors may have contaminated the
Rader results: control groups were used,but outside vari-
ables influence and inter-action could not be controlled.
Randomization was included in the design but was aban-
doned because of fixed class schedules. Control groups
tvere not comparable to the volunteer experimental groups.
(Counselor interpretation and execution of their role with
‘the groups was not examined. Twelve weeks did not allow
time for treatment change to occur. Samples from the nine

scdmools were pooled into total Es and Cs and may have ob-
scured significant changes between Es and Cs within in-

dividual schools .

—-_-Q-_.

 

31

Harrison13 replicated the Rader experiment, but
she extended the treatment time to 24 weeks. She inves-
tigated the role of the counselor, assured randomization
by working with the administration of the schools for
scheduling, studied the process variables, and added
other instruments for statistical analyses.

Harrison examined the effects of 24 weeks of group
counseling on secondary school norm violators who had
had three or more contacts with disciplinarians. After
12 weeks of treatment for experimentals, all subjects
took the Fundamental Interpersonal Orientation Behavior
(FIRO-B) and the Adjustive Check List (ACL). Both mea-
sures were readministered during the 13th week and again
during the 25th week following 24 weeks of treatment.

Analysis of covariance, using pretest scores and
103 as covariates to adjust for initial differences be-
tween experimentals and controls, was Computed for post-
test scores of subjects on FIRO-B and ACL after 24 weeks
of counseling. Differences significant at the .05 level
were found in the interaction effect on only one FIRO-B
scale, expressed inclusion. No significant differences
‘were found between experimentals and controls on the other
five scales of FIRO—B and the self-confidence and self—

control scales of ACL.

 

13Margaret Kirk Harrison, "Group Counseling with
Secondary School Norm Violators," (Doctoral dissertation,
Rutgers-State University of New Jersey, 1971) .

 

32

Chi-square values of the change in the number of
disciplinary contacts of Es and Cs over the 24 treatment
weeks were calculated. No significant differences were
found.

Analysis of covariance was computed to test the
significance of the differences between grade point aver-
ages of subjects preceding and following group counseling.
No significant differences were indicated.

Participating counselors took the Minnesota Teacher
Attitude Inventory (MTAI) and the Strong Vocational In-
terest Blank (SVIB) at the beginning of the study. Scores
obtained from the Es and Cs were used to analyze changes
in 88 scores associated with counselors' scores. Counsel-
ors' scores were designated "high" or "low" according to
their scores on the MTAI and the SVIB. A nonparametric
sign test was used and Chi-squares computed to analyze
changes in subjects' scores. Differences in subjects'
scores in groups led by counselors who were "high" and
"low" on the MTAI were significant at the .01 level on
FIRO-B variable of expressed affection. Differences were
not significant on the other five FIRO-B scales or the two
scales of ACL. Scores of subjects led by counselors'
"high" and by counselors' “low" on the SVIB were signifi-
cant at the .01 level on FIRO-B, wanted affection, and the
.ACL, self-control, scales. The null hypotheses were

rurt rejected for the other five scales of FIRO-B or for

the self-confidence scale of ACL.

33

A number of dimensions in the Harrison study may
be criticized. Subjects' contacts with others were not
controlled. Counselors encountered difficulty finding
time to complete the research requirements. Counselor
skill variables were not explained. The differences
between schools may have been obscured by the design
which pooled all Es and Cs.

DeEsch,l4 in a dissertation directed by Merle
Ohlsen, investigated the effects of group counseling for
ten percent of the Pennsburg School District students who
had been frequently referred to the disciplinary offices
of their schools during the first ten weeks of school.

The study included students in grades seven through ten

and was of a cross-section of socio-economic levels. Sub-
jects who met the criteria were randomly assigned to either
the Treatment Group or to the Delayed Treatment Group.

Each subject was committed to group counseling following a
'presentation and intake interview. Any potential subject
who had not made a commitment was terminated from the
Study.

Within each major group, the research subjects were
Placed in counseling groups at the counselors' discretion

and within the guidelines prescribed by Ohlsen. Pre- and

‘

14Jesse Barry DeEsch, "The Use of the Ohlsen Model
Of Group Counseling with Secondary School Students Iden-
tified as Being Disruptive to the Educational Process,"
(DOCtoral dissertation, Indiana State University, 1974) .

 

34

-post measures were administered prior to and following
ten weeks of treatment. Analysis of variance with re-
peated measures was used to test data results.

The purpose of the research was to examine the
effects of group counseling upon (1) specific disruptive
school behaviors, (2)-changes in self-concept, (3) achieve-
ment of idiosyncratic goals, and (4) changes in academic
achievement. Five criterion measures were used to deter-
mine outcomes of the experience: a Pupil Behavior Inven-
tory, an Idiosyncratic Goal Rating Scale, the Tennessee
Self Concept Scale, a grade-point-average index, and the
frequency of referrals to the discipline office.

Five null hypotheses related to change within the
group and five related to comparing the Treatment Group
with the Control Group were investigated.

The five null hypotheses tested for differences
within the Group Treatment resulted in four significant
levels of change at the .05 level. Self-concepts improved;
grade point averages improved; self form scales improved;
and the number of discipline referrals decreased. No
change occurred in teacher rating scores.

The five null hypotheses tested for differences
between the Treatment Group and Delayed Treatment Control
Group resulted in one producing a significant difference
at the .05 level. The referrals to the discipline office

decreased for the Treatment Group and increased frequency

35

for the Control Group. No statistical differences were
indicated between the groups on the other measures. The
scores for the treatment groups increased on the self-
concept measures and on the grade point index enough to
recommend further research. Little difference was found
between teacher or self rating scores between the control
and treatment groups. Both groups exhibited change on
the Idiosyncratic Goal Rating Form.

DeEsch's study did not specify sample size or the
length of each session. The skill of the counselors was
ignored or omitted in the specifications of the design,
and the research conditions were scanty in description.
However, these criticisms are minor in nature. In gen-
eral, DeEsch conducted one of the better pieces of re-
search related to group motivation of low achieving stu-
dents.

Taylor15 attempted to assess the effects of group
counseling on the self-concept and on the academic achieve-
ment of high school sophomores in required health classes.
Fifty-one individuals were exposed to ten weeks of group
counseling while 43 control subjects were being given ten
lectures on health. Pre- and post-data were examined by

analysis of variance. There were no significant

15Theodore David Taylor, "Effects of Group Coun-
seling on Self-Concept and Academic Achievement of
Selected High School Sophomore Health Classes," (Doc-
toral dissertation, Oregon State University, 1970).

 

 

 

36

differences in the Tennessee Self-Concept Scales nor in
the grades of the subjects at the .05 level of confidence.

Weaknesses of design and methodology were: vacil-
lating group size, undefined counselor role, limited time
of sessions, insufficient time allowed for treatment
change to occur, unreported description of techniques, and
ignored randomization.

16 evaluated the effects of group en-

Cirigliano
counter experiences upon the self-concepts of high school
students from a Long Island suburban community. The de-
sign was that of an experimental control, pre-test-post
test, extended post-test design. For five months, each
encounter group consisting of from ten to fourteen stu-
dents and a school psychologist met twice a week for 45
minutes per session. The time involved was considered
part of the students' daily educational schedule. The
experimental and control groups each contained 56 students.
Both groups were given the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale at
three different time intervals: immediately preceding the
group encounter, immediately after the encounter ended,
and three months after the encounter ended. Three other
variables were analyzed besides the control and experi-

mental groups: sex, IQ, and age of the subjects. A four

way analysis of variance with a factorial design of

 

16Rocco Joseph Cirigliano, "Group Encounter Ef-
fects Upon the Self-Concepts of High School Students,"
(Doctoral dissertation, St. John's University, 1972).

37

2 x 2 x 2 x 2 was computed for all six sets of scores.
An F test of variance was computed to compare the two
categories of each variable on each of the six sets of
scores and to examine the differences in variance that
existed in self-concept scores when the experimental group
was compared to itself in the three testing situations.

There were no significant results in the Cirig-
liano study:

Cirigliano's design controlled for treatment and
time effects. There was no description of treatment con-
tent or process. The psychologist's experience and role
were not reported. The sampling methods were vague and
randomization was ignored.

In the suburban Pittsburgh high school, Martinl7
studied the effects of group counseling on eleventh and
twelfth graders who had exhibited negative attitudes and
behaviors toward teachers, had poor school attendance, and
had frequent office referrals.

The experiment consisted of two experimental and
one control group. The experimental groups were under
the direction of two counselors. The treatment groups
met twice a week for 45 minutes per session for a five

month period of time. Each session was recorded so the

 

17Samuel D. Martin, "The Effects of Group Coun-
seling on Selected Senior High School Students Who Demon-
strate Negative Attitudes and Behaviors," (doctoral dis-
sertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1973).

 

38

goals, techniques, and results of each session were held
constant. Results of each session were carefully re—
corded from the counselors' viewpoint and from the stu-
dents' perceptions via a feedback instrument.

The Wilcoxon signed and summed rank test of sta-
tistical differences was used to analyze the K.D. Delin-
quency Proneness Scale, the Cohn Teacher Inventory, actual
number of days absent, and the total number of office re-

ferrals during the treatment period.

The results of the study did not show statistically
that group counseling produced more positive results for
the experimental groups than for the control group.

Counselor and student reactions to the study indi-

cate definite, affective modifications in the experimental

groups as a result of group counseling: (1) the students

had a perception of personal problems that caused diffi-
culty in school; (2) they were able to express these prob-
lems more easily with other group members; and (3) they
had a more pronounced willingness to have their attitudes
and behaviors scrutinized by the other group members. The
Martin study may be criticized because of: vague sampling
methods, lack of follow-up evaluation, and lack of time
for‘ treatment change to occur. The focus of the group
sesssions was on the collection of data rather than on the

atthtudes, beliefs, and behavior of the students. The

 

m ..——. .—,-_.,____ V‘- q

39

design was not described; therefore, replication with
other populations would not be possible.

18 study was to determine

The intent of Murphy's
the effects of group counseling with chronically absent
sophomores on the variables of attendance, achievement,
and behavior.

From a population of 1400 sophomores enrolled in
four Maryland county high schools, 120 students were iden-
tified as chronically absent. From each school, 30 stu-
dents were randomly selected and assigned to one of two
groups: one control and one treatment.

Practicing, experienced high school counselors
with similar training conducted eight weeks of non-direc-
tive group counseling, one session per week,each lasting
46 minutes. The students in the control group received
no counseling. All sessions were recorded in three
schools; none were recorded in the fourth school. Random-
ly selected tapes were analyzed to verify that non-direc-
tive counseling had been used. Data were analyzed using
p-tests.

Statistically, students who received group counsel-
ing had significantly fewer absences than the control

group had at the .01 level. The data available could not

__

18Francis Joseph Murphy, "A Study of the Effects
Of Group Counseling on Attendance at Senior High School
Level," (Doctoral dissertation, The George Washington
University, 1975).

 

 

40

be analyzed to make conclusions about grades or office
referrals.

Sampling and random assignments were made more
precisely than in other studies reviewed. The design for
data collection and analyses was not planned to control
for internal validity. The description of treatment vari-
ables was vague. Time was not allowed for follow-up nor
for treatment changes to occur.

A study of the effects of different lengths of
group counseling duration in relation to attendance,
grades, and study habits was conducted by Chase19 at Oli-
ver Ames High School.

The chronic absentee was defined as any student
who had been inexcusably absent 18 or more days during the
1967-68 academic year. The tenth, eleventh, and twelfth
grade students made up the population from which 52 stu-
dents were identified and invited to participate in group
counseling.

The participants were randomly assigned to either
a control or to an experimental group composed of 26 stu-
dents. The experimental group was then randomly divided

into five counseling groups. Two of these groups were

19Bradford Stevens Chase, "A Study of the Effects
Of the Duration of Group Counseling on the Study Habits
and Attitudes, Absenteeism, and Achievement of Chronically
Absent High School Students in Easton, Massachusetts,"
(Doctoral dissertation, University of Wyoming, 1971).

 

——"'" ‘ " ' ‘ “mu—Hana

41

counseled for a duration of eight weeks; two were coun—
seled for 16 weeks; and one group was counseled for 24
weeks.

A pre-test-post test design was employed to ana-
lyze the following measurements: absence frequency, grade
point averages, and the total score on the Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits. Post-session measures were
obtained simultaneously at the end of the 1969-1970 school
year. Pre-session data were examined for differences
through the use of a E-test. No significant differences
were found at the .05 level of significance between either
experimental or control groups, or between experimental
groups of equal duration, or between participants and non-
participants. Analysis of covariance was used to detect
treatment differences within each dependent variable.
There was a significant difference between group means on
the Study Habits Survey; Scheffé's procedure showed that
the treatment groups attained higher scores than did the
controls. Chase concluded that the eight-week duration
was the most Optimal treatment; attendance did not improve,
but the grades of the experimental groups tended to be
higher, and the grades of the control groups dropped. The
results of the study indicated that group counseling had
potential for improving study habits and attitudes.

The Chase study was one of the most scientific

experiments reviewed. However, replication would be

42

difficult because the counselors' technique and the mate-

rials used for the treatment sessions were not reported.

Effects of Group Counseling on
Underachievers

 

Finney and Dalsem20 reported an investigation of
the effects of group counseling on gifted underachievers
who fail to live up to their potentials. The unique aim
of this study was the evaluation of large samples of stu-
dents using a number of different groups and counselors
over a two year period to allow the maximum opportunity
for group process to be effective. Four groups of sopho-
more females and four of sophomore males were randomly
assigned to counseling, and four of each sex were assigned
to control groups. The groups averaged 12 students per
group. The students and counselors participated from six
high schools of the Sequoia High School District. Coun-
selors' experiences with group work ranged from zero to
nine years each. The groups met once per week for one hour
for four semesters (two years). For training purposes,

14 counselors in the district met weekly in training sem-
inars led by a psychologist who was experienced in group
counseling.

At the end of the study, data on 69 of the coun-

seled students were compared with data on the control group

0f 85 students.

¥

20Ben C. Finney and Elizabeth Van Dalsem, "Group
COunseling for Gifted Underachieving High School Students,"

43

There were no differences or improvement in GPA,
on scores of the California Study Methods Survey, or in
student ratings by teachers on improved c00peration in the
classroom. Student absenteeism decreased, but there was
no significant difference in the number of behavior re-
ferrals.

On the California Psychological Inventory (CPI),
an 18 scale inventory, there was a significant difference
for the treatment groups on the Capacity for Status,
Sociability, Social Presence, Tolerance, Achievement via
Conformance, Achievement via Independence, and Psycholog—
ical-Mindedness Scales. There were also significant dif-
ferences on the factor scores "Social Poise" and "Capacity
for Independent Thought and Action."

The Finney-Van Dalsem study was the most sophis-
ticated and longitudinal one reviewed. The following lim-
itations of this study may be noted: non-traditional
underachievers were reluctantly included in the study in
order to have a large sample. Group leaders changed during
the two year treatment period. Some leaders attended
training seminars; others did not. Techniques and their
effects on the group were not reported. Students in treat-
ment groups were identified by both teachers and peers be-

cause participants were excused from class for group

*

figurhal of Counseling Psychology, (January 1969), Vol. 16,
PP- 87-94.

 

 

44

counseling. The class absences and the teachers' know-
ledge about the research might have contaminated teacher
ratings and grades. Attrition was high because of the
long duration of the study. The elaborate design was
impressive to review but impractical to undertake in a
public school situation.

The most outstanding outcome of the study was the
acceptance of group counseling by the teachers and admin-
istrators of the six schools involved in the research.

Tang21 studied specific treatment conditions in
group counseling that would induce academic achievement
among male high school underachievers.

The male eleventh and twelfth grade students whose
grade-point averages earned in the tenth and eleventh
grades were more than one standard error of estimate below
their predicted grade-point averages on a standardized test
of mental ability were randomly assigned to three groups:
the experimental groups, the aware control group, and the
unaware control group. Seventeen sessions were held twice
a week. Planned topics related to motivations for achieve-
:ment,and effective study habits and skills were introduced
in each session. The counselor used specific non-verbal

and verbal cues to reinforce achievement, favorable

 

21Kendel Sunico Tang, "Inducing Achievement Be-

havior Through a Planned Group Counseling Program,"
(Doctoral thesis, University of Hawaii, 1970) .

45

attitudes toward school, or favorable responses made by
students in reference to study, grades, and attendance.

The aware control group was composed of subjects
informed of their potential but who declined to partici-
pate in the group counseling program. The unaware con—
trol group was composed of subjects who had neither been
informed of their potential nor invited to attend the
group counseling.

The results revealed that the experimental group
was significantly better than the aware and unaware con-
trol groups on motivation criteria at the .05 level of
significance. The experimental group had a significantly
higher GPA than the unaware control group but it was not
significantly different from the aware control group for
GPA. No significant differences between the three groups
on school attendance was indicated. No significant dif-
ferences were apparent between the aware and the unaware
control groups on any of the study criteria measures.

The reported results of the Tang study indicate
that structured group reinforcement counseling was effec-
tive in improving motivation to achieve better study
habits and skills and higher grade point averages of male
high school underachievers. The detailed description
Tang reported for the treatment would allow replication

of the study with other student populations.

46

A doctoral study by High22 assessed the effects of
group counseling on underachievers who volunteered for
counseling. From the volunteers were selected 54 tenth
grade students who met the following criteria: each had a
grade point average of less than 2.0 for the previous
semester and stanine scores of six or higher on the Verbal
Reasoning and Numerical Ability section of the Differen-
tial Aptitude Test. The students were randomly assigned
to either of three treatment or three control groups that
met 40 minutes, bi-weekly, for nine weeks.

The Mooney Problem Check List was administered at
the end of nine weeks to all groups and the grade point
average for all groups was computed at that time. The
same data were obtained in follow-up testing nine weeks
after treatment.

Data were analyzed,using the E-test for standard-
ized test scores and grade point average. The Mann-Whitney
U test was used to analyze data from the Mooney Problem
Check List. The counseled group compared to the non-coun-
Seled group did not perform significantly better at the
.05 level on standardized test performance, academic per-

formance, or fewer problems reported.

__

22Belva Howle High, "Group Counseling With
Underachieving Tenth Graders," (Doctoral dissertation,
University of South Carolina, 1970).

47

The purpose of a study by Cordell23 was to eval-

uate the effectiveness of group counseling using a struc-
tured approach of reinforcement in reducing absenteeism
among students. The study was designed to investigate the
effectiveness of the treatment in improving self-concept
and academic achievement.

Eleventh grade subjects who had missed 15 or more
days of school were randomly assigned to either one of
two treatment groups: counselor—structured, verbally-
reinforced experimental or control counseling.

One male or one female counselor conducted ten
sessions of 50 minute duration. Each counselor had two
seven member groups, one experimental group and one con-
trol group. Counselor training sessions were held prior
to and during the investigation; emphasis in training ses-
sions was on structured group exercises.

The Tennessee Self-Concept Scales (TSCS), attend-
ance records, and grade point averages were used to deter-
:mine the differences in attendance, self-concept, and
achievement. The TSCS was administered before and after

the counseling experience to both the experimental and con-

trol groups.

 

23Lonnie Gene Cordell, "The Effect of Structured
Group Counseling on the Self-Concept, Attendance, and
.Achievement of Absentee-Prone High School Students,"
(Doctoral dissertation, The Ohio State University, 1973).

48

Data were analyzed using the two-way analysis of
variance. The level of significance was set at .05.

Cordell's analyses indicated significant changes
occurred at the .01 level for self-concept and attendance.
Grade point averages were not significantly different for
students in the structured group counseling sessions.
Further statistical analyses indicated that structured
group counseling seemed equally effective regardless of
the sex of the student.

A planned follow-up allowing time for treatment
process was not included in the design to further analyze
academic achievement. The Cordell study was one of the
most carefully controlled investigations reviewed.

24 used the Self-

In an exploratory study, Shirts
Consistency Principle of Behavior Change and the Retro-
flexive Reformation process of group counseling to deter-
mine relative effectiveness in producing academic achieve-
ment and behavior change in ten deviant high school stu-
dents.

. The theory of the self-consistency principle fo-
cused upon eliciting behavior change in a person by chang-

ing his actions,which once changed would lead to change in

his attitudes. The principle was unique because the

 

24Elmo Shirts, "Effects of the Self-Consistency
Principle of Behavior Change and the Retroflexive Refor-
mation Process of Group Counseling on the Academic Achieve-
ment and Behavior of Selected High School Students," (Doc-
toral dissertation, Oregon State University, 1971).

49

current emphasis in group and individual counseling was
directed toward changing a person's attitude,which then
led to changed actions.

The practical application of the study was cen-
tered around the adage; "You learn best that which you
teach." The high school students, judged by teachers to
be deviant in their behavior, were used as co-therapists
(retroflexive reformation).

Each student was assigned to work with an elemen-
tary school behavior problem student in an effort to im-
prove the younger child's behavior. The high school coun-
selor provided traditional counseling sessions to supple-
ment role and status changes of the high school deviant
(co-therapist). Shirts theorized that the emphasis away
from "introspection sessions" and toward "real life" ex-
periences tended to avoid many of the traumatic hurdles
traditionally associated with and preceding change in coun—
seling and psychotherapy. Behavior improvement as judged
by parents and teachers was reported for seven of the ten
participants. The same seven showed significant improve-
ment in academic achievement and grade point average at
the ten percent level of probability.

Shirts' unique approach should be replicated. He
reported the technique and theory in sufficient detail
for additional research of his new idea. Minor criticisms

of the study are: one counselor was depended on for the

50

"talk sessions" and the study appeared to be weighted in
favor of the "co-therapist" role. The motivation of the
, participating students to be involved in the study was not
reported.
Effects of Different Methods and/or
Techniques of Counseling On
Underachievers

Hess25 investigated the comparative effects of
group counseling and individual counseling on the self-
adjustment and social adjustment of 15 year old males iden-
tified as potential dropouts. The results of a Pupil-
Holding Power Data Form were used to identify 55 potential
dropouts. The identified students were randomly assigned
to five groups: group counseling, individual counseling,
group tutoring, individual tutoring, and no treatment.

The counseling was conducted over a six month per-
iod. The California Test of Personality was administered
pre- and post-treatment. The pre- and post-test change in
self-adjustment and social-adjustment was examined by the
one-way analysis of variance.

Analyses of the results indicated: (1) Group coun-
seling and individual counseling treatments resulted in

higher gain between pre- and post-scores of three of the

 

25Hess Tyler, "A Comparison of Group Counseling
with Individual Counseling in the Modification of Self-
Adjustment and Social Adjustment of Fifteen Year Old Males
Identified as Potential Dropouts," (Doctoral dissertation,
University of Virginia).

 

 

51

ten social adjustment variables when compared with the
control groups. (2) There was little distinction among
the five groups when changes in self-adjustment were ex-
amined. (3) The overall results of the study were statis-
tically inconclusive; however, student and faculty reports
indicated that selected group counseling procedures would
help potential dropouts in positive modification of per-
sonal characteristics.

Several observed weaknesses of the Taylor study
might have contributed to the negative outcomes. The stu-
dents' motivation for assistance was not reported. The
level of the one counselor's experience and training in
relation to the tutor's training and experience was not
examined. No replication of treatment was included in the
design; no follow-up evaluation was conducted, and no time
was allowed for treatment change to occur.

Hanley26 completed a doctoral study in which the
self-concepts, academic achievement, and vocational ma-
turity of underachievers receiving group counseling were
compared with the same variables of underachievers receiv-
ing individual counseling. The subjects were tenth and
eleventh grade underachievers of average or higher ability.

Hanley assigned students randomly to treatment or to

 

26Dennis Eugene Hanley, "The Effects of Short-Term
Counseling Upon High School Underachievers' Measured Self-
Concepts, Academic Achievement, and Vocational Maturity,"
(Doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, 1970).

 

 

52

control groups, to one of the two counselors, and veri-
fied the homogeneity of the groups for ability, grades,
and sex. Individual and group subjects participated in
six 50 minute counseling sessions and one structured
discussion concerning values and attitudes.

The Vocational Development Inventory (VDI), The
Self-Concept Ability Scale (SCA), and Grade Point Index
(GPI) were used to assess vocational maturity, self-con-
cept, and academic achievement. The VID, SCA, and GPI
were administered pre-, post-, and six weeks following the
counseling treatment.

In analyzing the results, Hanley found change over
treatment was reflected by statistical significance in
post-experimental measurements on the VDI and on the GPI
within the three factor analyses. Further, E-test analy-
ses of the means of the counseled and control group member
responses to the VDI, SCA, and GPI demonstrated that short-
term group or individual counseling did not change either
the high school underachievers' self-concept of ability
or their academic achievement, or did it increase their
vocational maturity.

The following minor criticisms are relevant to the
Hanley study: (1) the sample size was inadequate and (2)
the techniques used by the counselors were not described.
Overall, the investigation was carefully designed and

conducted in a scientific manner.

53

Myrick and Haight27 investigated the comparative
effects of group counseling and individual counseling on
the grades and absenteeism of 427 underachieving students
from grades nine through twelve in 11 schools. Each coun-
selor from the 11 schools identified 36 students who met
the underachieving criteria and randomly assigned the stu-
dents to one of three experimental groups. Three addition-
al groups of 11 students received group counseling since
this was the primary variable of interest. Each counselor
met with his group and his individual counselee bi-weekly
over a period of four weeks; meetings were 50 minutes
long. All counselors followed a basic personal growth
group counseling model designed for the study.

The criterion measures for evaluation were pre- and
post-grades and school attendance records. A group coun-
seling evaluation form was administered to the participants
and teacher evaluations were solicited.

Students evaluated the group experience positively;
teacher evaluations of individual students were positive
toward group counseling.

Myrick and Haight analyses based on teacher and
student evaluations indicated that the group counseling
approach used in this study had a positive impact on under-

achieving students. However, analyses of grades and

 

27Robert D. Myrick and Donald A. Haight, "Growth
Groups: An Encounter with Underachievers," The School
Counselor, (November 1972), 20:2, 115-121.

54

absenteeism measures indicated that group counseling was
no more effective than the individual counseling approach.
The conflicting outcomes of the Myrick and Haight data
could be interpreted to imply that class attendance and
grade point averages were not effective for evaluating
group counseling. The results appear to support the be-
haviorist theory that increased attention must be given

to both behavioral outcomes and self-reports as opposed to
global measurement criteria. Global criteria might be in-
sensitive to steps in individual change processes.

There are several weaknesses in the Myrick and
Haight design that might have led to the negative results.
No mention was made in the report concerning the motiva-
tion of the students assigned to the groups. Homogeneity
in the selection of the subjects was not mentioned. No
socio-economic descriptions of the 11 schools from which
the participants were selected were reported. No informa-
tion was reported that verified the validity of either
the teacher or the student criterion measures.

Detailed descriptions of the content and process
for the group counseling sessions were reported; the con-
tent and process for the individual sessions appeared to
have been left to chance. The weaknesses cited loaded the
design in favor of the group counseling method and the

statistical results of this study are to be questioned.

55

The theory has enough merit to warrant further investi-
gations.

Hodge28 explored the difference in intensive
group counseling and individual counseling on failing
I Chicano males. The variables considered were attendance,
failing grades, classroom behaviors, and verbal intelli-
gence.

Sixty Chicano males from the tenth and eleventh
grades were identified by teachers as failing. The stu-
dents were randomly divided into four groups: (1) inten-
sive group treatment, (2) individual counseling, (3) infor-
mal control group, and (4) control group.

The individual counseling technique was of a prob-
lem-solving nature and concentrated on academic failure.
The group counseling technique used was intensive encounter,
concentrated on self-examination.

Pre- and post-data were collected on attendance,
failures, classroom behavior, and verbal intelligence.

The analysis of variance, two-factor mixed design with re-
peated measures,was used to examine the data.

Hodges reported statistical significance at the
.05 level, indicating that intensive group procedures pro-
duced more positive change in failing Chicano males than

did individual counseling in attendance, failures, and

 

28William E. Hodges, "The Effects of an Intensive
Counseling Process on Failing Chicano Males," (Doctoral
dissertation, University of Utah, 1975).

56

classroom behavior. The results indicated that no
statistical significance was demonstrated between verbal
intelligence scores.

The study sample size was small; motivation of
subjects selected was not mentioned; homogeneity of sub-
jects assigned to groups was assumed. The experience and
training of the counselors were varied: no in-service
training was reported. The factors listed tended to
contaminate the study outcomes.

Gourley29 investigated the effectiveness of three
different methods of treatment to help high school under-
achievers improve academically: (1) individual counseling,
(2) group guidance, and (3) verbal reinforcement.

The population selected for treatment consisted of
48 ninth and 48 eleventh grade underachievers as deter-
mined by discrepant scores in achievement and aptitude.

Differences in the group treatments were analyzed
for achievement by pre-post-test scores on The Sequential
Test of Educational Progress and the School and College
Ability Test. The data were treated by analysis of co-
variance. Study habit and attitude tests were adminis-
tered after 18 weeks of treatment. The data were treated

by one-way analysis of variance.

 

29Martha H. Gourley, "The Effects of Individual
Counseling, Group Guidance, and Verbal Reinforcement on
the Academic Progress of Underachievers," (Doctoral disser-
tation, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, 1970).

57

Gourley reported analyses of the data which
revealed that neither individual non-directive counseling,
group guidance, nor verbal reinforcement had helped the
academic underachiever improve on academic measures.
Individual non—directive counseling seemed to help improve
study habits and attitudes of underachievers.

Gourley did not report design controls that would
prevent inconsistent findings. The following were lim-
itations noted: (1) pre- and post-testing had produced
consistent practice effects that could have been prevented
in another design; (2) the process of counseling was not
explained for replication purposes; (3) the content of the
treatment was not stated; (4) student motivation was not
reported; and (5) neither the homogeneity of students
assigned to the groups nor the homogeneity of the counsel-
ing methods employed was reported.

The effects of two group counseling approaches on
the anxiety, self-concept, and the study habits and atti-
tudes among high school seniors were compared by Birming-
ham.30

Teachers referred 40 of 96 seniors who were ran-
domly assigned to four, ten member groups: three experi-

mental and one control group. Prior to and immediately

 

30Donald R. Birmingham, "The Effects of Counselor-
Led Group Counseling and Leaderless Group Counseling on
Anxiety, Self-Concept, and Study Habits Among High School
Seniors, (Doctoral dissertation, North Texas State Univer-
sity, 1974).

58

after ten weeks of treatment, the Tennessee Self-Concept
Scale, and the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes were administered to all subjects.

Group I subjects received counselor led counseling
from an experienced group counselor who used a group cen-
tered approach. Group II received ten weeks of leader-
less counseling, facilitated by programmed audio tapes
prepared for the personal growth groups. Group III was
exposed to ten weeks of audio—taped music. Group IV did
not meet.

Birmingham's data indicated: (1) leaderless group
counseling did not significantly affect anxiety, self-
concept, or the study habits and attitudes of high school
seniors; (2) counselor-led group counseling did not affect
the anxiety, self—concept, or the study habits and atti-
tudes of the seniors in the treatment groups. The ana-
lyzed data did not indicate significant differences
between the four groups on any one of the three instru-
ments used to measure subject behavior.

Even though more controlled than most of the
studies reviewed, the limitations in Birmingham's design
could have had an adverse effect on the results. The major
limitations were: (1) failure to report the motivation of
the students selected for treatment, (2) identification
by teacher recommendation of students to receive treatment,

(3)reliance upon the competency of one counselor failed to

59

provide for replication of treatment, and (4) failure to
test for homogeneity of the assigned groups.

Garrison31 conducted a comparative investigation
to assess the effectiveness of three types of behavioral
group counseling for modifying deficient study skills,
attitudes, and achievement of selected tenth grade stu-
dents.

Three variations of behavioral group counseling
were used: (1) counselor reinforcement, (2) a combina-
tion of counselor reinforcement and peer models, and (3)
peer models alone.

Four schools participated in the study; the coun-
selors involved received training in behavioral counseling.
The same treatment was used by one counselor for each
school following a thorough discussion by all counselors
in the training sessions.

Robinson's SQ3R method and items from the Brown-
Holtzman Survey of Study Skills and Attitudes (SSHA)
formed the basis for goal attainment measurement.

The sample was drawn from students'scoring in the
lower quartile of the SSHA using national norms. Five
groups were formed through random assignment of subjects:

three behavioral counseling groups, one placebo, and one

 

31Clifford B. Garrison, "A Comparative Investiga—
tion of Behavioral Counseling Group Techniques Used to
Modify Study Skills, Attitudes and Achievement of Selected
High School Pupils," (Doctoral dissertation, State Univer-
sity of New York at Buffalo, 1971).

60

control group. The groups met once a week for six ses-
sions plus one final,post-counseling,testing session.

The goals were identified to the students and
agreeable to them. The counselor reduced goal attainments
to a series of clear increments of change so the incre-
ments could be positively reinforced whenever they were
displayed.

Garrison reported no significant differences in
the three treatment group means. Three comparisons were
found to be significantly different: (1) the SSHA means
were significantly different between the counselor rein-
forcement group and the placebo group. The fourth quarter
grade point averages were significantly different between
(2) the three combined reinforcement groups and the pla-
cebo group and (3) the models alone reinforcement group
and the placebo group.

No significant differences occurred among the three
behavior counseling groups for each of the three measure-
ment criteria: the SSHA, the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale,
and the fourth quarter academic average.

Garrison used adequate sample, and provided for
process control and static control. The design provided
for replication and established counselor uniformity.

A criticism relevant to Garrison's study was that
the number of sessions held was possibly too few for the

'essential differences in counseling treatment to have a

61

significant effect. The homogeneity of the assigned
groups was not reported and could have affected attitude
change. The pre- and post-test measures could have pro-
duced consistent practice effects which might have been
avoided with another statistical design.

The differences in effect between group or group-
individual counseling on the achievement and self-concept
of students in Coordinated Vocational—Academic Education
(CVAE) programs were investigated by Siebenthall.32

The subjects ranged from 14 to 17 years of age.

The Cattell Culture Fair Intelligence Test was administered
to 81 subjects, 43 male and 38 female. Ranked from the
highest to the lowest by intelligence scores, the students
were assigned to three ability levels.

Students in the three levels were randomly assigned
to form two treatment groups; the two groups were randomly
subdivided into four smaller groups. Four equally trained
and competent counselors were randomly assigned to the
treatment sub-groups and to the control groups. Procedures
were outlined and discussed with the counselors during one
pre-training session.

Group counseling met for ten, forty minute

sessions; group-individual sessions met for seven, forty

 

32Curtis Alan Siebenthall, "The Effect of Group
and Group-Individual Counseling on Achievement and Self—
Concept with Coordinated Vocational-Academic Education
Students," (Doctoral dissertation, North Texas State
University, 1972).

62

minute group sessions and three 35 minute individual ses-
sions. Pre-test and post-test scores from the ITED Assess-
ment Survey were used to compare the achievement variables,
and the Davidson-Long Adjective Checklist scores were used
to compare self-concept variables. Analysis of co-vari-
ance was employed with pre-test scores as the covariant.

Siebenthall concluded that (l) group-individual
counseling should be provided as an approach to aid CVAE
students to become more effective in their academic
environment, (2) fewer group sessions should be used, and
(3) group-individual counseling should be used to help
CVAE students to function more adequately in the school
environment.

Relevant to the Siebenthall study, three criti-
cisms were observed: the number of sessions was too few
for the differences in treatment to have a significant
effect on self-concept; no follow-up was reported; and the
subjects' motivation to be involved in counseling was not
considered.

In his doctoral study, Easterwood33 compared the
effectiveness of group counseling to group plus individual
counseling (1) at different times of the day (a.m. versus

p.m.), (2) upon the sexes, and (3) upon the races.

 

33Harold B. Easterwood, "An Investigation of the
Effectiveness of Group Versus Group-Individual Counseling
‘with Potential High School Drop-Outs," (Doctoral disserta-
tion, University of Southern Mississippi, 1973).

63

Students from 32 senior high schools were randomly
selected from 174 pupils identified as potential dropouts
to become subjects in the study. By stratified randomiza-
tion, the subjects were divided into two counseling groups
of eight pupils each and one control group of 16 pupils.
The groups were one-half male and one-half female; one-
half black and one-half white.

The counseling groups met twice weekly, one hour
each session, for 18 weeks; one group (G1) met Tuesday and
Thursday mornings; the other group (G2) met Tuesday and
Thursday afternoons. The control group (G4) received only
the standardized testing, but met at no other time. Group
three (G3) was composed of nine students who voluntarily
went to the investigator for individual counseling and
agreed to attend either G1 or G2 group sessions in addi-
tion to the individual counseling.

The investigator-counselor used loosely-structured
discussions that centered around tOpics of mutual interest
to individuals in the group. The eclectic approach was
used in each session and the counselor maintained a neu-
tral position as the group facilitator.

The Tennessee Self—Concept Scale and the California
Test of Personality were administered four times to all
subjects: Pre-test (Tl), Action Period (T2), Post-test

(T3), and Post-wait Period (T4).

64

Conclusions were based on three-way analysis of
variance with an F level of .05 for significance. The
analyses comparing the mean scores for the groups that
received group counseling only with the groups that re-
ceived group plus individual counseling revealed the
group plus individual treatment had more positive gains.

The total positive concept scores indicated sig-
nificance at the .05 level for the races in G1 at the end
of the post-wait period. The total adjustment scbre means
were significantly different for the races in G2 at the
end of the post-wait period. Significance at the .05 level
was found between grade point averages for GZ treatment at
the end of the action and post-wait periods. Comparison
of morning and afternoon groups (G1 versus G2) revealed‘
more positive gains in criterion mean scores from T1 to T4
for students who belonged to the morning group (G1).

Criticisms relevant to the Easterwood study were:
(1) one counselor-investigator might have biased the re—
sults; (2) no provision was reported for testing group
homogeneity; (3) testing four times in such a short time
span produced consistent practice effects that could have

contaminated the study.

Team Counseling

 

The review of literature related to team counsel-

ing with groups involving academic underachievers at the

65

high school level revealed no studies since the Story and
Mezzano investigation.

However, two therapists working as a team con-
tinued to attract increasing attention in other group sit-
uations. Dual leadership has been reported as an effec-
tive group technique to use with the aged, drug-abusers,
delinquent adolescents, schizophrenic patients, and with

homosexuals.
Mintz states

....that in combining their insight, technical abil-
ities and other assets, two therapists can offer more
to a group than either could offer alone; that a sit-
uation cloSe to the primary family is created, pro-
viding patients an especially good chance to work

out reactions toward both parent figures; that patients
of both sexes are offered a like sexed therapist with
whom to identify; and that special difficulties in
relating to either male or female authority figures
can be worked out by patients who would have been
unwilling to choose a therapist of the more threaten-
ing sex. 4

Pfeiffer and Jones believe co-facilitating a

group is superior to working alone. They discussed the

following major advantages:35

1. Co-facilitators complement each other's styles.

2. One facilitator can work with the person exper-
iencing significant emotionality, while the
other facilitator assists participants in

 

34E.E. Mintz, "Special Values of Co-Therapists in
Group Psychotherapy," International Journal of Group Psy-
cotherapy, 13 (1965), pp. I27-l32.

 

35J. William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones, "Co-
Facilitating," The 1975 Annual Handbook for Group Facili-
tators, University Associates Publishers, Inc., LaJolla,

CaIifornia, (1975), pp. 219-222.

66

dealing with their reactions to the situa-
tion.

3. Co-facilitating offers each partner support for
his personal development.

4. Co-facilitating can generate a synergistic effect
through the personal and professional interchange
resulting from working toward a common task.

5. Co-facilitating provides behavioral models of in-
dividuals coping with their own life situations
and it also offers a model for meaningful, affec-
tive two-person relationships.

6. Co-facilitators share leadership and the depend-
ency problem that often develops in groups is
somewhat dissipated.

7. Co-facilitators can check each others' timing of
events and provide some respite from the detailed

monitoring necessary to provide meaningful inter-
ventions.

8. Co-facilitating can offset biases of each facili-
tator and issues can be focused more sharply.

36 recognized some disadvantages

Pfeiffer and Jones
of co-facilitating leadership with groups, but the disad-
vantages might be obviated if facilitators recognized the
possible danger spots, shared an orientation with similar
kinds of group situations, and regularly solicited feed-
back from each other to check on behavioral perceptions.
If co-facilitators would be honest with each other, Pfeif-

fer and Jones believe the advantages outweigh any potential

problems or dangers in a dual leadership model.
Mezzano37 investigated the effects of two types of

counseling on self-concept, study habits and attitudes,

 

361bid., pp. 219-222.

37Mezzano.

 

67

behavior, and academic achievement of low-motivated male
high school students. One treatment was group (G) coun-
seling; the second treatment was group counseling and in-
dividual (GI) counseling in conjunction. In both treat-
ments, the group counseling was conducted by a team con-
sisting of a male counselor and a female counselor. Coun-
selor time was kept constant for each treatment because

of the implications for practicing counselors.

Ninety-six students were identified as low-
motivated on the Michigan M-Scales. Of the 96 identified,
74 students accepted the invitations extended to them to
participate in the study. Stratification categories were
determined according to the free hours the 74 students had
in common. From each group that was free to participate
in group counseling, seven students were randomly selected
to be members of the six experimental groups, and the
others were assigned to the control group. The six groups
were randomly assigned to either group (G) or group plus
individual (GI) counseling treatment. Randomizing tech-
niques were used to assign the pairs of counselors (the
counseling teams) to each experimental group. The
unassigned students were designated as the control (C)
group and received no treatment.

For students to be included in the final analysis,
attendance was compulsory to 80 percent of the group ses-

sions; 16 sessions for the G counseling treatment, or eight

68

sessions for the GI treatment. Individual sessions were
on a flexible schedule and attendance was not a problem.
Eighteen students in each of the two experimental groups
met the minimum requirements for post-treatment analysis.
Twenty-eight students were in the control group for the
post-treatment analyses.

All students involved in the study were low-moti-
vated,as measured by the Michigan M-Scales; however, a
number of the students could not be classified as typical
underachievers,as measured by grade point average. For
the purpose of the Mezzano38 study, an underachiever was
operationally defined as a student who scored at 100 or
above on the Otis Test of Mental Ability and whose grade
point average for the first term was 5.00 or less (5.00 =
C- on a 12 point scale). Using those criteria, nine of
the G counseling subjects, nine of the GI subjects, and
11 of the C group subjects were classified as under-
achievers. In order to equalize the groups, two students
from the control (C) group were randomly excluded from
the analysis.

A one-way analysis of variance was performed to
test the nine null hypotheses of his study. The F statis-
tic at the .05 level was used to test for significance be-
tween the treatment groups. Change in counseled students

was assessed by comparing them to the control students on

 

38Mez zano .

69

four criteria: (1) GPA, (2) study habits and attitudes,
(3) self-concept, and (4) behavior ratings.

The results of the study indicated that group
counseling,when conducted with low-motivated male high
school students,did produce a significant and positive
change in grade point average,when compared to a no—treat-
ment control group. With underachievers, both G and GI
counseling did produce a significant and positive change
in grade point average when compared to a no-treatment C
group. The results were delayed; the data indicated that
the effects of group counseling were dependent on a period
of incubation before newly gained insights were transferred
to academic improvement.

Story, 39 co-researcher with Mezzano, investigated
the effects of two types of group counseling upon the
self-concept and observed classroom behavior of low-moti-
vated male high school juniors. The theory underlying the
study attempted to explain how behavior change was effected
through the group process.

I The design of the study was a post-test only with
control group model.

In order for subjects to be included in the final
analysis, they must have attended 80 percent of the ses-

sions,or 16 for the G counseling treatment and eight ses-

sions for the GI treatment. Eighteen students in each of

 

39Story.

70

the two treatment groups, or 36 out of the original 42,
met the minimum requirements for past-treatment analyses.
Twenty-eight of the original 32 subjects were in the C
group for post-treatment analyses. The proportionate
attrition rate was evenly distributed between the counsel-
ed and non-counseled groups.

Change in counseled students within the treatment
groups was assessed by comparing them to the control stu-
dents on eight criteria: seven Minnesota Counseling
Inventory sub-scales and the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman
Behavior Rating Scale, abbreviated form.

The analysis of variance technique was used to test
the two null hypotheses of the study. The F statistic at
the .05 level was used to reject the null hypotheses.

The two basic hypotheses of the study were:40

1. The self-concept scores of students who re-
ceived both group and individual (GI) counseling in con-
junction would be more positive at the completion of treat-
ment than the self-concept scores of students who had
either group (G) counseling or no group counseling.

2. The teachers' ratings of behavior scores of
students who received combined GI counseling would be more
positive at the completion of treatment than the behavior
rating scores of students who had either G counseling

alone or no counseling.

 

4oStory, p. 9.

71

The Minnesota Counseling Inventory was used as
"the dependent measure of self-concept and an abbreviated
eight item form of the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior
Rating Scale was used as the dependent measure of observed
classroom behavior.

The major findings which emerged from the study

were:41

1. With exposure to treatment time held constant,
group counseling was effective with or without the addi-
tion of individual counseling for self-concept and ob-
served behavior change.

2. GI counseling exceeded G counseling alone in
generating more positive perception of the student's abil-
ity to cope with reality.

3. GI counseling exceeded G counseling alone in
producing teacher estimates of more conforming behavior
in the classroom.

4. No differences were found among GI counseling,
G counseling alone, and the control group on changes in
coping with Family Relationships and in self-perception of
Conformity to social standards;[two of the seven Minnesota

Counseling Inventory sub-scales].

Summary

The review of literature relevant to group coun-

seling with low-motivated secondary students emphasized:

 

41Story, pp. 62-63.

72

(1) the effects of group counseling in producing behavior
and/or attitude change, (2) the effects of group counsel-
ing on underachievers, (3) the effects of different methods
and/or techniques of counseling on underachievers, and
(4) team counseling.

Evidence justifying the effectiveness of group
counseling was inconclusive.

The majority of the research reviewed on group
counseling with low-motivated high school students had
weaknesses in design and methodology that might have pre-
vented consistent findings. The common limitations were:
(1) inadequate sample sizes, (2) improper or vague sam-
pling methods, (3) no control for motivation, (4) poor
sampling techniques, (5) lack of control for counselor
training or bias, (6) failure to provide treatment of
reasonable length for change to occur, (7) no control
groups, (8) inadequate reporting of treatment variables,
(9) lack of follow-up evaluations, (10) inadequate or
missing descriptions of the content and process of the
treatment, (11) total reliance upon the skill and person-
ality of one counselor, (12) failure to reduce variance
among subjects because of no control over number of
sessions attended, (13) failure to report the length of
time per session, (14) weak statistical procedures, (15)
weak or missing design control for internal validity, and

(16) sex of subjects or counselors in groups seldom

reported.

73

The use of groups in therapy, counseling, and
guidance dates back to the early 1920's when Adler
employed "collective counseling." Group therapy and
counseling practice focused on correction, remediation,
or crisis intervention. Research in the public schools
continued that emphasis. Field research efforts became
trapped between the humanistic and the scientific phil-
osophies of the last century.

Practitioners, counselor educators, and social
psychologists in the 1970's began to employ creative
techniques in field research. Counselor educators
recognized that evidence to support group counseling
effectiveness remained problematic.

A summary of the major characteristics of the

various studies may be found in Table 2.1.

74

cm: ou< .oa .xem

am: uaucaou Lawn
commencUh pee munzawca Heuucou .m> noucaouca asouu anodes n Amped.
~a>houca usuu coup» wceaum:50u Queue ecu zaxoua moaah uuaovauo Hoonoo 5w“: oaauamuuu

an: ucu£~>aazuu ouaovauu see

ads: vauusuumcou Lugosi» mouucou .m> unusumoe. mvmmmau guano; Acumav
om: uaoucoo uuum commences uc««~mc20u azouc m=0wmmum OH ooauw :uoH usom uoahah
em update usaaeausee
cu ouauuuuuu bucuavuuu
omz <mc
omz oaaum
uauucoo Caom ooaouccup mucwauoasc comano ouuuwo aaaaawuaav
cmz shoe aacuu unusuaouu vo>u~ov o» vouuouuu nouuo
undue“ aaoo uwuuuuc>¢owo~ .n> aaouu ucoauwouu upon uauuaua we now Aenmav
omz >u0uco>cu uca>nsom “was; wcuaon:=Ou nacho macawnwm oH earn novuuu gunman
omz <mu
omz uuuoucou
oaaanuuawv «o henna:
amz. uuoom Houucoo usom aaoonaa m
amz odaom ouaovuunou uaom qo< uuuonuu oaaaaauuuv
cowozauna vac-ouauo I om o>uuuwua cues no n Adhmav
nod-u- o>uu u nmz uoauom Hum nucxam Houucou .m> mcwaoacsou aaouo uncannom on cue: cuauonun unavaOuom ucawuunu
uaoonuu o
omz oadum Houuuou uaom ouuooou nauaawuuav
«anew ounovuuuou uaom AU< u>uuqmoa uses no m nova Aanmav
amz nuance Hun aroma“ Houucoa .o> uaumoucsou abouo accenoou «a canons»: unavaouom uonnm
nudes:
cyan-m Avaum i am avsum vo>uouao uasuaoh
omz oanum ovsuwuu<luoa>nnom
omz secuuuaau new
venom m5 and uonucuu.
omz ownuu>o unwed ovuuu
cmz oH-um auuruo Aouuaoo .o> Haves newumuauavos monotone Amomav
a uaom mo uuaauauuu< assuauuuoa wean: mcuaoccuoa nacho acoummoa w vodka sued wauaaam uouUum nub

oucqnu ovsuwuu< uo\vau acu>anon
unuustum ca «cuuoonaou naouc mo uuuguum

 

Iwgdh HIUquwulum IONS-3 £00030 Danuwuumwfls Hagué 3H uiuflflhh. gduaA—Ofl “30h;

 

.mmwosum weouuno mewaoacsou macho acanwumaesm 3mfl>wu $55.30qu a.” a

75

am
am

nwz
Gm

uses new I am

you» can I am
omz
amz
use» paw I am
omz

unusuauuu Huaauao

any axon: w I omz

cm

condone Houuaou vo>ouna«

nooauw unusuaouu I am
amz

nmz

sz

am
o>wuwuom
nmz

9m!

9m:
nmz

uauaauuuuu wean-asoo
.Hawsm a eases aesum
usuasuuucu waaaouasoo
o>ownun on coauapuuox
ovuouou oocuvcouu<
<mo

moaned a Abouau>aH
aauwonozoemm awaMOwaano
nwcuuuu uosoaoa
<mu
maouuouou oawuaaumwo
unnuuouwu uuuaomo<
>u>u=m
posed: sesum casuoeaaso

ovuouom «unavaUuu<

sovsuauu< ens deepen spasm

mo >o>uam amauuHOMIahoun

<mu
huausaouu uuauup<

ouwwuo
oswaauunwv ou Huuuouum
avowuoa
weaves» can a ea~ «do
ovuouou cosmonauu<

some suanooou uaooaum
«anyhowou ouwuwo we wanna:

undue. chap no non-BI
muouauaau Hosanna ance any

macaw
uuouoaoum huudsvauaon .a.u

douusou owning: .o> Houuaou ouani

.o> anon» Huuauaauoauu you

vousuusuua I unuaoquucaou Hanuu>
wanomcsoo asouu

uuowuaoo he
uxuuz

«an: a can m

yew maxoua ouwau

Houucou .n> abouw
waeaoncuou nacho

munch N you
x003 nun coco

nuo>uusuuuovcb no wcuaomaboo macho mo nuuuumm

axoua «N
Houucou .o> u>auuouuvlaoa axooa ea
wauuunnuou nacho axon: o

douuaou
.o> analogouu.o>«uuou«viaoa
wawaomauoo nacho

uxoofl m wow
#00: non .awa ca

.300: ca
Houuaou .09 uauauqouu can on
wawdooasou nacho mason: ovens

uuo>owauouovas afiaovuuu
«Has «one» sees a shoe

ouo>ownuuuova= uwaovnuu
seesaw «use» shag

OOOUOUODG .

caucusu upon»
puma .nuad .auo~

nouuaoons aaaauwaouno
ouaovSuo «ovum sued

Oddfluwuul
o>uu¢a¢u sud:
choc-um Anna and Juan

remade
many

Ammaav

somaao au>
can beacon

Aahmav
ocean

Amnmao
known:

Ameaao
33¢:

 

handguns anuguuauaum

monsoon: espouse

uaouuavaou Hduauawuoaufl

an. “is;

saga-Haney

wanna-cou-

7(5

Gm
Om
Om

sz
sz

sz

Omz
moaaoo anew a“ omz

moamum mouzu a“ am
sz

am
am
am

sz
am
am
sz
sz

sz
sz

amz

umaauaus «nuauuwuuum

meadow n
meadow OH ucoaunsnv<

who
<Um
HD>

UCOBUOOHU HUUUQ ”3003 O

AHKUV KUVGH UCHOQ QUfiuU

A<Umv oaaum

seaseh< Co eduosootuaom use

AHQ>V auOuCu>au

unusaon>ua anneauwoop

ucaua=H¢>m uo«>a:om unsucow

<mo

usuaumnfiou Haaoom

uHum huaaacOmuom
we amok oHcMOuwauo

oH\s <eo
oH\n nuauumn
oa\n uuosuuou
>9 mwawuau now>gnon

(mu
uoauum

unooaou uaom uomooanoa

EUHOUOH 00Gfl0§00u<

unusuaouu anon exams «can
I amok uaoau>oanu< vacucuuw

uuueuuuuu
noon axon: ones I <mu
uauauouuu on» I <mu

name: a

I awed xuonb auanoua hogan:

fiflfl

I uawq xuonu auapoum honed:

QOH=0¢dx O‘DOHSO

mafiammcsou
Hmaufi>aoca .m> wcfifiomcaou aaopu

ucoauumuu on .Houucou

.m> wcuuoupu aapvw>wvca .u>

maquunu macaw .m> waaaomnsou
Haaoa>wvcu .u> waanumcaou nacho

mxooa xqm uOL

xmos pod

mouacwa ow

menace 0 new
xoo: you use

uuo>oanunuovab do maddunasou we nonvwanuuh
uo\vaa noosuux uaououuwo uo mucouum

maououa o>wuuauouuou
wawaumcaou aaouu

Houunou .n> anon»
uaoaouuowaaou Hunuo>
wsfifiomasou osouw vuuauuauum

Houuaoo .n> upon»
waqauua50u guano

unbauwvaoo Haunaauuuauu

oa

unucoa n

axons
now saxoua

coco nuances mm

.3003

a you base»:
uuwau nuances oe

made uauauqoua

muo>uanuauoucs
edema»
asses shad see neon

muse aouv

mu voeuuuaooa
momma vac pooh ma

uoa>qzun aw uaofi>ov
momma Hoonuu swan any

mooucoons
oecouu ovuuw nuHH

.uo>o«nu¢u0vn5
edema» oases sues

abuuaaaaom

Achmav
swans:

Amomav
who:

Adhmav
ouuwnm

Amuse.
Haeeeoo

Aeneas
as":

nonuu-oonu

77

uuowcoo.
unavw>wvou noun»
you nuances
I555 vo-
oooaooou ou>oo
you oouaaai hunou

 

omz uuaaaoosu Hoavu>wvowloaouo uaouwoun
«>«uoonv< wadAIoOQod>on nowuouovo ofisooooo
uooao>ousoo some a >o>u=m annoy» Houuaou cooaouoo sou Iaooouuooo>
333s ”sauce 3 a? unassoeuiam: .2. wfiaoegou 33933 you sound? Show 5 queues». $3:
uoaao>oasu< Insoumc .a> waaaouosoo evoke noouo oHo you» NH 0» cu aaonuaonaem
Houunoo owuuuo van uuwnam
Houuaoo opoooaa .o> woods svsum uo >o>uom
oaoool noon .0» canvas uooa unluuaomInbOHQ
omz duo nouuoso suuaom can uouaoUHOuoaou uoaoonnoo Gnu mo uaauuoog
omz uaouooo meow oooooanoa .o> uauaooMONawou uoaoonfloua exam? New Huaoa nu oououo on: Aanmav
amz <mmm aaanunomInboum wnwaoaosoo noon» aouoH>onom now sou: you mono nuouvouo oooum nuoa aomuuuou
nova uoc vac
uonu muuonpsn Houucou .o> uamaa
omz movaueuu< can guano: zoaum vonmquaoom moan: noon» Houucou
mo >o>unm amanuaochaoun .o> momma cacao wcuma wcwaomanou
omz «Houm uaoocou uaom ommoccoa oaouw mmuauoooou .m> wcaaomcoou mxooz sou muaoooum Avnmav
om: «doom suouxn< H<mH annoy» voHIuoHomasoo ecu xooz non ooco maoaxom ovmuw nuNH aonwcfiaufim
am dad movauauu<
am as has heaps: sesum
mo zo>usm ooanuaozIpzouma
omz Hfi amok macaw
omz m huwawn< owoaaou vow aoozom Houuuou .u> aoouw ucoaoouOuowou nuu>uwnuouooco
omz AH mmuuwoum Hanna? .m> ooooowsw naouw .u> mxwoa ma urwfiun Rehmav
am: a .om uo amok Houucosvom «wcwaomasou Honou>aoaa o>auoouaoIcoz no“ xoo3 you ouco oomuw soda vow sum moauooo
anoum Houucoo .w>
nouauoo wsa>H0mIaoHoouov
waaaomcaoo Hmsvu>aocw
om <mo .n> aaouw Houuoou .m> umom H moans ocooazu wcwaaou Amhmav
am nououou ooaoocouu< wcaaooasou noouw wouasoucw paw Rom: you coco ovouw :uHH a nuoa mowvom
o>wuwuom occuuusao>m nosoouh
«>«uwoom canon noduoauo>m uauooum oxuoa knew .thdv
omz nououou ooaovoouu< waaaumonou you nuances on uOu ooooum sand I duo unwwom
omz <mu Husuw>wvou .u> waaaomosoo cache 3003 you mouse aouu auo>owsoouovob can Joan»:
owouuawm auuwunuuoum oouonoo: oaoouao occuuwoaou Haucoawuoaxm oaaa usuaunouu noduoasnom nogouoonmu

 

'7t3

nmc

awn
nmz

omz
amt

Dwz

sz

sz
omz
omz
9mg

ems

venom naubonom
oulxunaIcouHOIhunowuoz
venom huwaaom

oaaoum New >n0u=o>ch
wcudoacoou ouoooacwx

(xmm nuINuHozInzonn
nous
Iuoonu nouuo axooa one: <pu
«ocunoa woavonw
nunoou was vnnnu no <mu
venom unuucou uaom noonoccou

<mo

canon» masco0uuunu

oonovoouuo sundae
unwaoooonom

mo nous owcnouuaou

unouoou unom uonmoauua

noon» Honucou
.o> unuaoansou «u:v«>«oa«
Innonwc .w> 9.30233 noonw
Anoauucsoo manaou
oaoIoHoa ucov wanaomcsou Book

noon» Honuooo

.n> wcwnunaooo -=v«>«oca
Iaoonaa .u> wnwaou:=Oo noonwc
Anofloocuou «Hosea
0:0Iuaoa ucov wowaoonooU amok

manuoudsoo luau

ucuauoouou Hoaoa>nvnn
Inoonwa .a> wuaaoocnou noon»
sameness uwuooaum

axon: ma
nOu :00: non coco

axon: ma
new soon non coco

axon:
noounwuo now noon
oco new x003 oowah

ano>owsoonovoa
«Hue ovunu Anna

nufl>0u£0dh0v§
onus dean» sunn

huuawna

saw: conclaonv
unannouom .Nan
uaoonu :« unannoum

.onsmome no cofiunocoo ucoonuwcvamc

Anomae
knoum

Amomav
accuse:

Amwaae
vooanououu

 

onenesnn naunuendsem

ounauouz osoouoo

maowuuvsoo Houauannoaum

«awe nouauqone

aouuodsnom

noaonuooou

CHAPTER III

DESIGN AND METHODOLOGY

The primary purpose of this research is to test
the effects of two types of group counselinqusing the
same amount of counselors' time on the self-concept, study
habits and attitudes, academic achievement (GPA) and
teacher rating of observed classroom behavior. Randomiza-
tion, replication, and control are incorporated in the ex-

periment to meet the three essentials of modern design.

Design
The design of this study was a post-test-only con-
trol group model. Campbell and Stanley1 emphasize that
such a design has no definite weaknesses in the control of
sources of invalidity. Kerlinger concurs.2
The six counseling groups were randomly divided
between the two pairs of counselors and the two types of

counseling: group-individual and group. The experimental

 

1Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley, Ex er-
imental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research (Chl-
cago: RandchNaIly and Company, 1963).

2Fred N. Kerlinger, Foundations of Behavioral Re-
search (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc., 1964).

79

80

subjects' exposure time to counseling was one hour per week
for 18 weeks. Those students assigned to group counseling
only held group sessions once a week. Students assigned

to group-individual had group sessions alternating with
individual counseling or group sessions every other week.
Replication was obtained by duplicating the counseling
methods. The third level of the design, the control

group, received no treatment. Change in the experimental
subjects was obtained by comparison with the control sub-

jects. The design is summarized in the following table.

Table 3.1.--Summary of the basic design of the experiment.

 

(hxmp

hruvhhml Gnmii .

C IeUhg Omnmelnx; NO<kmmsahng
Men 3 Medrfl. Omuzol

 

Counselors A & B 2 groups 2 groups

Counselors C & D 1 group 1 group

Total 3 groups 3 groups 1 control group

 

The Population3
A lot-motivated male, as operationally defined in
this study, was a junior attending high school during the

academic year 1973-74 at Hope High School, Hope, Arkansas.

 

3See Appendix B, data on population.

81

The male ranked in the lower half of his class on an ob-
jective measure of academic motivation, the M-Scales,4
administered late in the fall term to the entire popula-
tion of the sophomore, junior and senior classes.
According to the above criterion, 115 male junior
students were classified as low-motivated. The students
were invited by letter (Appendix D) to participate in
group counseling. A11 invitations were extended by the
four individuals who were the counselors in the experiment
and the counselor coordinator of the school. The 100 stu-

dents who accepted the invitation and decided to partici-

pate became the subjects of the study.

Sample

Before describing the characteristics of the 92
students used in the analyses, it is appropriate to
account for students who were initially included in the
groups, but not included in the analyses. In order for
students to be included in the final analyses of the study,
they must have attended the minimum of 16 sessions for the
group counseling treatment or the minimum of 16 sessions
for the group-individual counseling treatment (80 percent
of the sessions). The minimum number of sessions was

assumed to be adequate for treatment and was chosen as a

 

4The M-Scales are more fully described in the
following sections.

82

baseline to allow for illness or other unavoidable ab-
sences. Since individual sessions were on a flexible
schedule, attendance was not a problem.5

By referring to Table 3.2 it will be noted that
five students did not meet the requirement: three from
the group-individual treatment and two from the group

treatment.

Table 3.2.--Students included in the post-treatment
analyses.

 

 

Original Left Less Than Final
Sample School Minimum Sample
Size Attendance Size
Group-

Individual 30 3 0 27
Group only 30 l l 28
Control 4 0 2 l (refused 3 7

taming)
Total 100 6 2 92

 

Twenty-seven students receiving group-individual
counseling from counselors A and B and students receiving
group-individual counseling from counselors C and D met
the minimum requirements for post-treatment analyses. Of
the original thirty, three dropped out of school. Twenty-

eight students receiving group counseling from counselors

 

5Mezzano and Story.

83

A and B and students receiving group counseling from coun-
selors C and D met the minimum requirement for post-treat-
ment analysis. Of the original 30 students, one dropped
out of school and one did not attend 80 percent of the
sessions. Each of the two experimental counseling groups
contained students from the post-treatment analyses.

Forty students were designated to the control
group at the beginning of the study. Of those students,
one refused to complete the testing and two had moved from
the city. Therefore, 37 students were in the control
group for the post-treatment analyses.

Since subjects were randomly assigned to counsel-
ors and treatments, it was assumed that they were homoge-
neous in terms of selection criteria. To lend support to
this assumption, raw scores obtained on the California
Test of Mental Maturity were averaged for each group and

6'7 Data

compared by means of an analysis of variance.
in Tables 3.3 through 3.5 support the assumption of homoge-
neity of groups.

I Inspection of the data in Table 3.3 reveals slight

differences among the three treatment groups on the Cal-

ifornia Test of Mental Maturity (CTMM).

 

6Allen L. Edwards, Statistical Methods for the Be-
pgvioral Sciences, (New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
1963).

 

7D.T. Campbell and J.C. Stanley, Handbook of Re-
search on Teaching, (Chicago: Rand McNally and Company,
1963).

 

84

Table 3.3.--Mean raw scores for the California Test of
Mental Maturity (CTMM), GPA means for each
group of randomly assigned students.

 

 

 

Group-Individual Group Control
N=30 N=30 N=40
CTMM 52.26 52.80 52.87
GPA 1.70 1.82 1.84

 

The results of the analysis of variance of the CTMM
scores are summarized in Table 3.4. The null hypothesis
of no difference could not be rejected and it was con-
cluded that there were no significant differences in
academic aptitude between the experimental groups.

Table 3.4.--Analysis of variance of the California Test of

Mental Maturity raw scores of the randomly
assigned students.

 

 

 

 

Means GI = 52.26 G = 52.80 C = 52.87
Source of Variation S.S. d.f. M.S. F
'Between treatments 14.62 2 7.31 0.02
Within treatments 29913.12 98 305.23

Total 29927.75 100

 

Necessary: F .05:_3.09 to reject HO

85

A second consideration in determining the pre-
experimental equivalence of the groups is the fall grade
point averages (GPA). The mean fall term grade point av-
erages for each group reported in Table 3.3 reveals only
slight differences among groups.

The results of the analysis of variance of GPA are
summarized in Table 3.5. The null hypothesis was not re-
jected and it was concluded that there were no statis-
tically significant differences among the three groups on
grade point averages.

Table 3.5.--Analysis of variance of fall term grade point
averages of the randomly assigned students.

 

 

 

Means G1 = 1.70 G = 1.82 C = 1.84
Source of Variation S.S. d.f. M.S. F.
Between treatments 0.35 2 0.17 0.45
Within treatments 38.42 98 0.39

Total 38.78 100

 

Necessary: F .05 13.09 to reject HO

Apparently the slight differences that do appear
in Table 3.3 were of a magnitude that could be expected by
chance.

An F value of 3.09 is necessary for 2,98 degrees of
freedom before significant differences between groups can

be concluded at the .05 level of confidence.

86

Random Assignment

 

A number was assigned to each population member
who decided to participate in the counseling study. Stra-
tification categories were determined according to the
free hours that the subjects would be available to parti-
cipate in group counseling. From each of these groups,
ten individuals by identification number were randomly se-
lected to be members of the experimental groups and the
other individuals were assigned to the control group. In
this manner, six experimental groups having ten members
each were formed. The six groups were randomly divided
and assigned to the three group-individual counseling
treatment and the three group counseling only treatment by
flipping a coin. The same method was used to assign
groups within each treatment to the counseling teams.

Those students who were unassigned were designated
as the control group and were informed they could not par-
ticipate in counseling during the term of the study
because of the large number of responses and the limited
staff available. They were provided with booklets8 to
assist them in improving their study skills and all
subjects, both experimental and control, were assured of
an interview at a later date for the purpose of test

interpretation.

 

8Thomas F. Staton, How to Study (P.O. Box 6133,
Montgomery, Alabama, 1968).

 

87
Instrumentation

Independent Variable
Measure

The Michigan M-Scale used as a selection instru-
ment for this research relates task characteristics, self-
concept, adult attitudes, and personality traits to aca-
demic motivation.9 Farquhar, et. al., developed four
scales for inclusion in the instrument.10

1. The Word Rating List was developed to measure
self-concept.

2. The Human Trait Inventory was constructed from
items which differentiated between discrepant
achievers.

3. The Generalized Situational Choice Inventory
was developed to assess academic achievement
motivation.

4. The Preferred Job Characteristics Scale was
developed to determine high or low occupa-
tional motivation.

With regard to the validity and reliability of

the M-Scales, Farquhar states:

 

9William W. Farquhar, "Motivation Factors Related
to Academic Achievement," Cooperative Research Project
846, (East Lansing, Michigan: Michigan State University,
Office of Research and Publication, 1963).

10W.W. Farquhar, D.A. Payne, and M.D. Thorpe, "The
Michigan State M-Scales," (U.S. Office of Education,
1961).

88

Reliability of the M-Scales. Using a sample of 240,

a Hoyt's analysis of variance reliability estimate

of .94 for 139 male cross-validated items was ob-
tained. A female sample of 240 yielded a comparable
.93 reliability estimate on 136 cross-validated items.
For the most part, the reliability estimates for the
sub-scales and various defined group of achievers
attain a satisfactory level (r = .68 to .92 for males
and .60 to .93 for females). Validigy of the M-Scales.
Based upon a sample of 254 males and 261 females, the
validity estimates of the total M-Scales against
grades was .56 and .40 respectively. The cross-vali-
dation estimates were .49 and .48 for males and fe-
males. The correlation (GPA) follows the same pattern
with the female correlations lower in magnitude than
the males. The range was .27 to .42 for females and
.32 to .51 for males.11

 

To estimate the internal consistency of the Michi-
gan M-Scales for this study, a sample of the Hope High
School tenth and eleventh grade student scores was anal-
yzed using Cronbach's Reliability Coefficient Alpha.12
The results are summarized in Table 3.6. Using a sample
of 209 male students, a reliability estimate of .92 was
obtained for 159 items of the Male Form b-V2. The female
sample of 178 yielded a comparable .93 reliability esti-
mate on 149 items of the Female Form b-VZ. For the most
part, the reliability estimates for the sub-scales of the
defined sample attain a satisfactory level (r = .70 to
.87 for males and .67 to .90 for the females).

The correlation coefficients13 were obtained to

analyze the estimates between each of the M-Scale

 

11Farquhar.

12Special Program for the Social Sciences (SPSS),
Version 6.0, available at Michigan State Computer Center.

13Ihid.

89

musmssem no nmnsaz I z
usmnonnnmoo sunnnhennmm I s

 

 

rams mm. Immno so. Issac .mm. remne mm. Imene mm. pecansou mmomno

sucm>mam a spade

lems mm. Rome me. rose _Hm. Amos om. Ammo me. domno aucm>mnm

Ines we. Ammo em. lees em. Ammo mm. lees me. opens suede

men an mm mm em pdsHmem medun .oz
mundane

IONHV mm. Issac _oe. roenv em. Imomv em. lawns as. omsnnEOU mmoeno

nucm>mam a suede

Ammo om. less as. Ammo em. lems em. Ammo ms. mpmno susm>mnm

Ammo me. lose we. Imus mm. Issac om. Imono as. mpeno shame

amn He mm om me pmdndem .oz
mega:

z s z s in s z s z s
Hence mnsomuz e mnmumtz m mnmomns m mnsomtz H endomuz

 

I

.mucmosum momnm zucm>mam can spawn

>nwawnofiamm Adv onmad m.noonconu

“mensomIs chanson: as» non usmnonnnmoo
umflmwaocd wuwaflnowamm cofluoasmomIIm.m manna

90

sub-scores and the M-Scale total scores by grades. The
summary is given in Table 3.7. The total score coeffi-
cient was .71 for tenth grade males and .73 for the fe-
males. The combined tenth and eleventh grade male coef-
ficient was .75 and the combined female coefficient was
.83. For the most part, the estimates between the sub-
scales and the total score attain a satisfactory level.
Scale three had a questionable level for the tenth grade
females. The female correlations are somewhat lower than
the male correlations.

Using a sample of 200 tenth and eleventh grade
low-motivated males, the Pearson correlation of the sub-
scales with the grade point criterion (GPA) yielded ac-
ceptable correlations at the .001 level of significance.
The summary is given in the tenth grade total of Table

14 M-Scale estimate with GPA was .60, with CTMM .37.

3.8.
The eleventh grade total M-Scale estimate with GPA was .52
and with CTMM .34. The correlation of the tenth grade
sub-scales with the GPA was .42 to .54; the eleventh

grade GPA correlation with the sub-scales range was .42

to .48. ,The correlation for the sub-scales with the CTMM
does not follow the same pattern with the tenth grade cor-
relations lower in magnitude than the eleventh. The range

was .21 to .43 for the tenth and .00 to .44 for the elev-

enth grade for sub-scales one through four. The tenth

 

14Ihid.

91

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3.7.--Pearson Correlation Coefficients for the Michigan M-Scales: tenth and
eleventh grade males and females.
. TENTH GRADE
Scales 1 2 3 4 Total
1 -- .65' .61' .53* .84'
(101) (74) (87) (64)
2 .31 -- .59* .39* .76'
(56) (73) (87) (64)
S=.010
3 -.76* -.14 -- .63' .90*
(46) (44) (67) (64)
S=.182
4 .01 .20 .35 -- .78'
(59) (55) (45) (64)
=.470 S=.067 S=.010
Total -.21 .35 .74* .73* --
(41) (41) (41) (41)
S=.095 S=.012
ELEVENTH GRADE
Scales l 2 3 4 Total
1 -- .67* .54* .45* .80*
(82) (61) (67) (54)
2 .48* -- .40* .40* .63‘
(92) (65) (73) (S4)
3 .48* .18 -- .40* .81'
(57) (56) (56) (54)
S=.098
4 .44* .23 .57* -- .75“
(84) (85) (54) (54)
Total .82* .60* .85* .74* --
(50) (50) (50) (50)
COMBINED TENTH AND ELEVENTH GRADES
Scales 1 2 3 4 Total
1 -- .66* .58* .48* .83*
(183) (135) (154) (118)
2 .74* -- .47* .33* .69*
(148) (138) (160) (118)
3 .05 .ll -- .52* .86'
(103) (100) (123) (118)
S=.318 S=.129
4 .64* .52* .45* -— .75*
(143) (140) (99) (118)
Total .75* .76* .61* .83* --
(91) (91) (91) (91)
Note: Intercorrelations above diagonal are male and below the diagonal are

female.

*
.001 (one-tailed test) level of significance.

S

U

Number of students.

Level of significance if not

.001 (one-tailed test).

92

Table 3.8.--Pearson Correlation Coefficients for the Michigan M-Scales with Grade

Point Average (GPA) and California Mental Maturity Raw Scores (CTMM):
. tenth and eleventh grade low motivated males.

 

 

 

 

 

M- M- M- H- M-
GPA CTMM Scale Scale Scale Scale Scale
1 3 4 Total
GPA -- .56* .42* .53* .54* .42' .60*
(92) (98) (102) (102) (102) (102)
CTMM .57* -- .21 .43* .37* .19 .37*
(92) (92) (94) (94) (94) (94)
S=.020 S=.003
M-Scale 1 .42* .22 -- .67* .46* .46* .78*
(98) (92) (102) (102) (102) (102)
S=.020
M-Scale 2 .37* .33* .57* -- .52* .38* .73*
(98) (92) (98) (102) (102) (102)
M-Scale 3 .48* .44* .55* .44* -- .63* .87*
(98) (92) (98) (98) (102) (102)
M-Scale 4 .30* .00* .52* .42* .40* -- .76*
(98) (92) (98) (98) (98) (102)
=.487
M-Total
Scale .52* .34* .81* .72* .83' .70* --
(98) (92) (98) (98) (98) (98)
COMBINED TENTH AND ELEVENTH
M- M- M- M- M-
GPA CTMM Scale Scale Scale Scale Scale
1 2 3 4 Total
GPA 1.00
CTMM .46* 1.00
(186)
M-Scale 1 .44* .25* 1.00
(200) (186)
M-Scale 2 .44* .35* .62* 1.00
(200) (186) (200)
M-Scale 3 .51* .38* .50* .48* 1.00
(200) (186) (200) (200)
M-Scale 4 .36* .ll .48* .39* .50* 1.00
(200) (186) (200) (200) (200)
=0062
M-Total
Scale .56* .34* .79* .72* .85* .72* 1.00
(200) (186) (200) (200) (200) (200)
Note: Intercorrelations above diagonal are male and below the diagonal are female.

*.001 (one tailed test) level of significance.

SLevel significance if not .001 (one tailed test)

()Number of students.

93

grade correlation range for the total M-Scale score with
the four sub-scale scores was .70 to .83; the eleventh
grade .73 to .76. The combined tenth and eleventh grade
low motivated sample yielded correlations a little greater
in magnitude and all estimates significant at the .001
level. The total M-Scale correlation with GPA was .51;
with CTMM was .34. The four sub-scales correlation with
the total M-Scale range was .751x3.85; with the GPA was
(.44 to .36; with the CTMM was .11 to .38.

The Michigan M-Scales and the California Mental
Maturity Test (CTMM) were administered during the third
week of the 1973-1974 school year. The M-Scale total
score was used to identify the low-motivated students.
CTMM total raw scores were used to determine the homoge-
neity of the groups for aptitude.

Grade point averages computed from the academic
course grades earned prior to the eleventh grade were
used to determine the homogeneity of the students in the

experimental groups for achievement.

Dependent Variable Measures

 

Five instruments were used as criteria in this ex-
periment:

(1) Measures of self-concept were obtained by the
Minnesota Counseling Inventory (MCI). The MCI was used
as one of the measures of self-concept and identified

areas in which students were adjusting positively or

94

negatively. Scores on the Family Relationships (FR),
Social Relationships (SR), and Emotional Stability (ES)
scales were used. The four scores used of the MCI that
provide information more directly related to methods stu-
dents employ in making adjustments were those of the Con-
formity (C), Adjustment to Reality (R), Mood (M), and
Leadership (L) scales.

The concepts underlying the development of the
MCI were based on the needs of the adolescent and the ed-
ucator in the school setting. More specifically, the pur-
poses of the MCI were:15

a. To sensitize teachers and counselors to rele-
vant personality characteristics differentiat-
ing students.

b. To identify students in need of therapeutic
attention.

c. To assist in understanding students as they
attempt to achieve more mature self-under-
standing and integration between themselves
and their environment.

d. To provide a means for determining the effects
of educational experiments upon relevant per-
sonality characteristics.

15Ralph Berdie and Wilbur Layton, Minnesota Coun-

EEiégQg Inventory Manual (New York: PsychologicaI Corpor-
-t1°n. 1957) .

 

 

 

95

Two types of reliability data were reported by

16 for the scales of the MCI: Coeffi-

Berdie and Layton
cients of correlation between scores on odd-even numbered
items, corrected by the Spearman-Brown formula; and reli-
ability, as estimated in the test-retest studies done at
Austin and North High Schools. For boys, the average re-
liability coefficient of the Validity (V) scale was .67;
for girls it was .64, a lower value than for the other
seven scales because of the brevity of the scale (14 items).
(2) Behavior rating--eight selected items from the
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior Rating Schedule (see Ap-
pendix F) were evaluated by the students' teachers' obser-
vations to obtain measures of behavior change. The con-
tinuum range was from poor to acceptable behavior. The
scale consists of eight items which are related on a five
point descriptive continuum that ranges from poor to ac-
ceptable behavior. The authors reported reliability of
total scores at .86 for elementary children. Using an
abbreviated scale with senior high students, the reliabil-
ity of a single rating was .92 obtained from the correla-
tion between halves of the scales with a prediction for
the total. Analysis of results of the use of the scales
reveals a tendency to emphasize behavior of an aggressive

type and to miss emotionally disturbed, non-aggressive

types.

 

16Burdie and Layton, pp. 14 and 22.

96

To estimate the internal consistency of the

abbreviated eight item scale, the Ebel17

formula for reli-
ability was applied to the ratings made for this study
because the number of ratings per pupil was uneven and

the raters were not identified. A reliability coefficient
of .46 was obtained.

Unless the test items are highly homogeneous, the
coefficient will be lower than the split-half reliabil-
ity.18

A case can be made for reliability of the above
magnitude. When a scale with few items is designed to
measure change, a low reliability coefficient would be
the proper expectation,19 provided it is not so low that
no consistency exists at all. The obtained coefficient
supports this concept.

(3) The Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and
Attitudes (SSHA) was used to assess attitude changes

'between the experimental and control groups. The SSHA asks

subjects to indicate how often they feel as each of the

 

17R. L. Ebel, "Estimation of the Reliability of
Ratings," Psychometrika, 16 (1951), pp. 407-424.

18Ann Anastasi, “Test Reliability," Psychologi-
cal Testing (New York: Macmillan Company, 1961).

19R. L. Thorndike and Elizabeth Hagen, Measure-
ment and Evaluation in Education (New York: Wiley and
Sons,’l961).

 

 

97

75 items suggest. Brown and Holtzman20 report the split
third reliability of the SSHA for men to be .92. Test-
retest with a two week interval produced a reliability
coefficient of .95. When grade point averages and SSHA
scores were correlated, an average validity coefficient
of .42 was computed. On the other hand, correlations be-
tween the SSHA and the ACE Psychological examination, a
test of scholastic aptitude, were consistently low. Brown
and Holtzman felt that a low correlation with measures of
scholastic aptitude and an appreciable relationship of
academic success made the SSHA a most useful tool to re-
search counseling since it measured non-intellectual fac-
tors which significantly influence academic achievement.
(4) The Tennessee Self-Concept Scales and total
scores were used as a second measure of self-concept. The
scale consists of 100 self descriptive statements on which
the subjects rate themselves on a five point scale.
Fitts21 reported that a reliability coefficient of .92 was
obtained by test-retest with a two-week interval and that
Scores of the Scale correlate with MMPI scores in ways
. that would be expected from the nature of the scores.

Sub-scores used to distinguish between the self-concepts

 

20W.F. Brown and W.H. Holtzman, Brown-Holtzman
§p§vey of Study Habits and Attitudes: ManuaI (New York:
The Psychological Corporation, 1956).

21W.H. Fitts, Tennessee Self-Concept Scale:
Manual (Nashville: Counselor Recordings and Tests, 1965).

98

of the experimental and the control groups described by

Fitts follow:22

Physical Self. The individual is presenting his

 

view of his body, his state of health, his physical ap-
pearance, skills, and sexuality.

Moral-Ethical Self. This scale describes the self

 

from a moral-ethical frame of reference--moral worth,
relationship to God or lack of it, feelings of being a
"good" or "bad" person.

Personal Self. This scale reflects the individ-

 

ual's sense of personal worth and adequacy apart from his
body or relationship to others.

Family Self. This scale reflects one's feelings

 

of adequacy, worth, and value as a family member. It re-
fers to the individual's perception of self in reference
to his closest circle of associates.

Social Self. This scale is also "self as per-

 

ceived in relation to others" but in a more general way.
It reflects the person's sense of adequacy and social in-
teraction with people in general.

The Self Criticism Score (SC) is composed of ten
items, the mildly derogatory statements most people admit
as being true for them. High scores indicate normal,
healthy openness for self-criticism. Low scores indicate

defensiveness.

 

22Ihid.

99

The Positive Identipy scores are the "what I am"

 

items; the individual describes what he is as he sees
himself.

The Positive Satisfaction scores are the "how I

 

accept myself" items; the individual describes how he
feels about the self he perceives.

The Positive Behavior scores are the "this is what

 

I do" items; it measures the individual's perception of
his own behavior.

The total positive (P) score reflects the overall
level of self-esteem.

These scales were used to distinguish the self-
concept of the treatment and control groups.

The four dependent measures were administered the
week following the 18 experimental group sessions.

(5) Grade Point Average (GPA) on the 4.0 grade
scale for the third and fourth marking periods were used
to provide an assessment of treatment effectiveness during
both the period of the experiment and at the end of the
experiment. Only the grades of the academic courses such
as English, Mathematics, History and Science were used to
compute GPA. Grade point averages were compiled as part
of Mezzano's23 research. GPA for the third and fourth
marking periods were calculated and used to provide an

assessment of treatment effectiveness during both the

 

23Joseph Mezzano.

100

experimental period and again ten weeks following the ex-
periment. There was no significant difference until a
time lapse, but the prediction of this study is that the
structured treatment will cause GPA improvement between
the treatment and control groups in a shorter time due to

structured treatment in the counseling sessions.

The Counseling

 

The approach used in all of the counseling sessions
stressed areas concerned with personal problems and per-
sonality dynamics thought to be the underlying factors
causing low-motivation. The approaches used in all of
the counseling sessions were ones in which the counselors
provided types of leads and reinforced those responses
which were concerned with feelings and experiences about
self, school, teachers, parents, future goals, and expres-
sions of anger-hostility. Sessions were structured so
group members were led to discuss their experiences and
feelings about these topics. The members were reinforced
for using their own vernacular.

The counselor often interceded by clarifying,
summarizing, and directing when necessary to facilitate
group process. Counselors served as models for the mem-
bers to increase awareness of the ways in which behavior
patterns were interrelated.

Replication was an essential element of this

design so it was necessary for the two types of group

101

counseling to be conducted in the same framework by both
teams of counselors. To ensure the teams would Operate
in the same manner, the investigator conducted an inten-
sive workshop for the four counselors in December, prior
to the opening of the second semester. Cudney workshop
materials, Kagon IPR training tapes, Mager's and Popham's
objective writing materials, and systematic behavior coun-
seling materials were employed as the instructional aids.
Each counselor was given a complete packet of ma-
terials to study during and after the workshop. Identi-
cal materials used with the students at each structured
session were distributed at weekly sessions to the four
counselors.25 During these sessions, a review of the
tapes and procedures was conducted to ensure the consis-
tency of methodology by the counselors within the exper-
imental groups. The counselors agreed on timing to
introduce the recorder and video recall sessions so the
procedure would not raise anxiety in any group and to

ensure consistency of technique within the groups.

Counseling Setting

 

All six of the groups met in portable classrooms
near the high school. Individuals were not assigned
seats. Chairs were available and arranged in a circle

facing each other; cushions were scattered in a circle on

 

25Examples are in Appendix G.

102

the floor. Counselors often sat on the floor; as did the
students. A small portable stand, equipped with the port-
able video and tape recorder, was in the room for each
session; the use of the video was introduced about the
mid-point of the sessions. The individual counseling ses-
sions were conducted in the small offices in the same
portable buildings.

The equipment (recorder or video) was used for
recall purposes in individual sessions in the group-indi-
vidual treatment and in group sessions in the group only

treatment.

The Counselors

All four of the counselors involved in this re-
search held degrees in counseling and guidance. One had
his doctorate, three held Master's degrees, and one was
working toward her doctorate. Three of the counselors
had worked in public schools and had previously partici-
pated in limited group and extensive individual counseling.
The investigator had experience as a group practicum in-
structor and extensive group experiences. At the time of
the experiment, three of the counselors were members of
the staff at Southern State College, Magnolia, Arkansas.
The fourth was employed as a counselor in an educational

consulting firm working for local public schools.

103

The Null Hypothesis

 

The basic research hypotheses of this study were
broadly stated previously in Chapter I. A more specific
formulation of those hypotheses as they related to the
design of the experiment is now stated.

Hypothesis One: One-Way Anal-

ysis of Variance of the Min-
nesota CounseIing Inventory

 

 

 

The analysis of variance of the Minnesota Coun-
seling Inventory scores for students of the three treat-
ment groups will be made by a one-way analysis of vari-
ance.

Null Hypothesis One: There are no differences in the
Minnesota CounseIing Inventory mean scores at comple-
tion of the experiment in the group-individual (GI),

group experience (G), and the mean scores of students
who did not participate in group counseling (C).

 

H : “GI = “G = “c
01

Alternate Hypothesis One: The Minnesota Counsel-
ing Inventory mean scores at the completion of

the experiment will be lower for the students in
the group-individual (GI) than the mean scores

for the students in the group (G), which in turn
will be lower than the mean scores of those stu-
dents who did not participate in counseling (C). 6

 

U U

: GI < uG < c

H
a1

 

26MCI low mean scores indicate change in self-
Concept in.a positive direction.

104

Hypothesis Two: One Way
Apalysis ofPVafiance off
The Tennessee Self-Con-
cept ScaIés

 

 

 

 

The analyses of self-concept scores of the stu-
dents in the three treatment groups were made by a one-
way analysis of variance.

Null Hypothesis Two: There are no differences in
self-concept mean scores at the completion of the
experiment among the students in the group-individual
experience (GI), group experience (G), and the self-
concept mean scores of students who did not partici-
pate in group counseling (C).

 

Alternate Hypothesis Two: The self-concept mean
scores of the students at the completion of the
experiment will be greater for the students in
the group-individual experience (GI) than the
mean scores of students in the group experience
(G), which will be greater than the mean scores
of students who did not participate in group
counseling (C).

 

H : “GI > “G > uc
a2

Hypothesis Three: One Way
éfifilysis of Variance of
£33 Survey of Study
Habits and Atti:

Egdes (SSHA

The analysis of variance of the Survey of Study
Habits and Attitude scores for the students of the three

treatment groups was made by a one-way analysis of vari-

ance .

105

Null Hypothesis Three: There are no differences in
the mean scores at the completion of the experiment
in the group-individual experience (GI), group ex-
perience (G), and the mean scores of students who
did not participate in group counseling (C).

H : “G1 = 11G = 11c
03

Alternate Hypothesis Three: The SSHA mean scores
of the students at the completion of the experi-
ment will be greater for the students in the
group-individual experiences (GI) than the mean
scores of students in the group experience (G)
which will be greater than the mean scores of
students who did not participate in group coun-
seling (C).

H : “GI > uG > “c
a3

Hypothesis Four: One Way
Analysis of Variance of
The Third Term Grades

 

 

 

The analyses of the third term grade point aver-
ages of the students in the three treatment groups were
made by a one-way analysis of variance.

Null Hypothesis Four: There are no differences in
academic achievement at the end of the third term

of the experiment between the students in the group-
individual (GI), group experience (G), and the aca-
demic achievement of students who did not partici-
pate in group counseling (C).

 

H : uGI = 11G = 11C
04

Alternate Hypothesis Four: The academic achieve-
ment of the students at the end of the third term
of the experiment will be greater for the group-
individual experience (GI) than the academic

106

achievement of the students in the group experi-
ence (G) whose academic achievement will be great-
er than those of the students who did not parti-
cipate in group counseling (C).

H : uGI > uG > uC
a4

Hypothesis Five: One-Way
Apalysis of Variance of
FourEh Term Grades

 

 

The analysis of variance of fourth term grades for
the students in the treatment groups was made by a one-
way analysis of variance.

Null Hypothesis Five: There are no differences in
academic achievement at the completion of the exper-
iment between the students in the group-individual
experience (GI), group experience (G), and the aca-
demic achievement of students who did not partici-
pate in group counseling (C).

Alternate Hypothesis Five: The academic achieve-
ment of the students at the completion of the ex-
periment will be greater for the students in the
group-individual experience (GI) than the academ-
ic achievement for the students in group experi-
ence (G), which will be greater than the academic
achievement of students who did not participate
in group counseling (C).

 

H : “GI > “G > uc
as

107

Hypothesis Six: One-Way
Analysis of Variance of
the Haggerty-Olson-Wick-
man Scale

 

 

 

 

The analysis of variance of the Haggerty—Olson-
Wickman Scale scores for the students of the three groups
was made by a one-way analysis of variance.

Null Hypothesis Six: There are no differences in the
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman mean scores at completion of
the experiment in the group-individual (GI), group
experience (G), and mean scores of students who did
not participate in group counseling (C).

 

H : uGI = “G = 11c
06

Alternate Hypothesis Six: The Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman mean scores at the completion of the ex-
periment will be greater for the students in the
group-individual (GI) than the mean scores for the
students in the group (G), which in turn will be
greater than the mean scores of those students

who did not participate in counseling (C).

 

H : uGI > 11G > uC
a6

Statistical Treatment

 

Raw scores of the California Test of Mental
Maturity were averaged for each group and compared by
one-way analysis of variance to determine if groups were
homogeneous.

One-way analysis of variance of previously earned
GPA was used to further determine if groups were homoge-

neous .

108

The one-way analysis of variance was the tech-
nique used to treat the null hypotheses of this study.
The technique differentiated variation among a number of
means according to different treatments.27 The treatment
allowed the isolation of the sum of squares associated
with each experimental variable and tested the signifi-
cance statistically.28

This study was composed of three independent vari-
ables and five dependent variables. The five dependent
variables were self-concept, study-habits and attitudes,
third term grades, final grades, and behavior observa-
tions. The five dependent variables were measured by the
MCI, Tennessee Self-Concept, SSHA, third term GPA, final
GPA, and the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Observation Scales
rated by teachers.

The data were analyzed using the one-way analysis
of variance (ANOVA) because this study was a replication
of the Story study and part of the Mezzano study. For
comparison purposes, the results of this study were
analyzed and reported exactly as the analyses were
reported in their investigations.

The data were further analyzed using the Univar-

iate and Multivariate Analysis of Variance, Covariance and

 

27D.T. Campbell and J.C. Stanley.

28Ibid.

109

Regression.29 The procedure was not available for Story
and Mezzano when the data from their investigations were
analyzed. The Multivariate Analysis of Variance
(MANOVA)30 procedures were chosen because of the ability
to consider the relationships among the dependent mea-
sures. The multivariate significance tests may be re-
garded as multivariate extensions of analysis of vari-
ance31 as applied to one-way classification designs. A
multivariate approach is likely to be more powerful than
a univariate analysis since it is possible to obtain
significant multivariate differences without obtaining
univariate effects. The MANOVA procedure weights the con-
tributions of each dependent variable in such a way as to
obtain the most efficient combination of dependent mea-
sures. Using MANOVA, it was possible to obtain signifi-
cance with groups of measures such as the MCI and the
Tessessee Self-Concept instruments and not simply with a

single measure examined in isolation.

 

29Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariance Version 4, (June
1968). Modified and adopted for use on the Michigan State
University CDC.

30Verda M. Scheifley and William H. Schmidt,
“Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariate-Univariate and Multivari-
ate Analysis of Variance, Covariance, and Regression,
Modified and Adopted for Use on the CDC 6500," Occasional
Paper No. 22, Office of Research Consultation, Michigan
State University (October 1973), pp. l-23.

31Maurice M. Tatsuoka, Multivariate Analysis:
Techniques for Educational and Psycholo ical Research,
John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New YorKi(19 I), pp. IO-BK and
194-214.

110

In considering the assumptions required for a uni-
variate analysis, one assumption was that each response
occurred independently of every other response. In this
study, it would have been questionable to assume the
responses to questions on four instruments administered
to each subject in one week were independent of each
other. The self-concept and behavior measures adminis-
tered in this study were multi-faceted and it seemed logi-
cal to analyze the results by a procedure that had the
power to examine the relationships between several depend-
ent measures. In addition, MANOVA is less likely than
ANOVA to occasion a Type I error.32

The replication of previous studies and the instru-
ments used to measure the outcomes necessitated the choice
of a procedure for extended analyses that would guard
against the possibility of a false rejection of the null
hypotheses.

The assumptions of the MANOVA are: the dependent
variables are multivariate,normally distributed, have homo-
geneous variances, and the errors of measurement are nor-

mally distributed across the treatment population.33

 

32T.J. Hummel and J.R. Sligo, "Empirical Compar-
ison of Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Procedures," Psychological Bulletin, (1971), Vol. 76, pp.
49-57.

33Kerlinger and W.W. Cooley and P.R. Lohnes,
Multivariate Data Analysis. New York: Wiley and Sons,
Inc, (1971).

111

There were no indications that the assumptions required
for the Multivariate Analysis of Variance were not met.
The statistic to be used was F, the ratio of the
mean square for the between groups to the mean square
for the within groups.
The level of significance for rejecting the null

hypotheses was set at the .05 alpha level.

Summary

The experiment was designed to test the differ-
ences in the effect of group or group—individual counsel-
ing treatment on grade point average, self-concept, and
behavior of low-motivated male high school juniors. The
length of time was held constant for each counseling ses-
sion.

The study was unique because it was a replication
of the investigation by Story,34 in which both group and
individual counseling were conducted by a team of one male
and one female. The treatment was unique because
affective and structured methods were combined in the
counseling techniques.

One hundred fifteen male students who ranked in
the lower half of their junior class on the Michigan M-
Scales were randomly selected and invited to participate

in a counseling program. One hundred males accepted the

34Story.

112

invitation to become subjects of the study. Subjects
were grouped according to the period of the day when they
were in study hall. From each of these groups, ten indi-
viduals were randomly selected to be members of the six
treatment groups: three group-individual (GI) and three
groups (G). The others were assigned to the one control
group (C). Three of the groups were randomly assigned to
the group-individual counseling treatment while the other
three groups were assigned to the group counseling only
treatment. Randomizing techniques were also used to
assign the pairs of counselors to the various treatment
groups. The control group received no counseling. Changes
in subjects in the treatment groups were obtained by com-
parison with the control subjects on four criteria:

grade point averages, study habits and attitudes, self-
concept, and behavior ratings.

The one-way analysis of variance was used to test
the null hypotheses of this study.

With six dependent measures for each subject, the
analysis of variance was extended to further examine the
data by multivariate significance tests.35

The level of significance for accepting or reject-

ing the null hypotheses was set at the five percent level

of confidence.

 

35Maurice M. Tatsuoka.

113

Six dependent measures were employed in the study:
The Minnesota Counseling Inventory, the Tennessee Self-
Concept Scales, the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits
and Attitude, grade point averages at the third and fourth
grading periods, and the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior
Rating Scale.

Both multivariate and univariate analyses were

36 The multivariate analyses of

performed on the data.
variance (MANOVA) were performed for each measure with the
probability of a Type I error for hypothesis testing set
at the .05 level of significance. The univariate analy-
sis of variance was calculated separately for each depend-
ent measure. An attempt was made to control for the prob-
ability of a Type I error for hypothesis testing by using
a controlled alpha for each set of univariate analyses.

The univariate F tests were considered significant for p

as follows:

Probabilities to Reject Univariate no
a - .05

 

 

a' I .05 a‘ 3 .05 o' - .05 a' I .05 o' I .05

H1...H7 M8...H17 H18 M19_20

o'-.oou e'--0050 o'=.05 1 «H.025 3 a"-.05 1
2

1
2
3
4
S
6

OUOQG Auk:

p

 

The univariate no will be rejected if:
p < .007 for the MCI

p < .005 for the Tennessee

9 < .05 for the SSHA and the NOW

p < .025 {or the GPA

 

6Jeremy D. Finn.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

In Chapter IV, the analyses of the experimental
results are reported. Each of the six null hypotheses is
tested by an analysis of variance technique. The analy-
sis of variance technique is extended by multivariate sig-
nificance tests.

The results of the hypotheses are presented in
numerical order beginning with hypothesis one.

The hypotheses in this chapter are stated in the
direction of anticipated significance. The ANOVA and
MANOVA are nondirectional tests. Directionality is estab-
lished on significant results by means of post—hoc tech-
niques.

Results of the analyses are reported in Tables 4.1
though 4.26.

A total of twenty-seven (27) participants were in
the group-individual treatment, twenty-eight (28) partici-
pants in the group treatment and thirty-seven (37) par-
tiCiPants were in the control group. Scores for each
were complete for each variable and included in all

analyses. For the purposes of replication and comparison

114

115

with the Story1 and Mezzano2 studies, the data are
reported in the format they used for the one way
analysis of variance. The multivariate data are reported

in combined tables.

Analysis of Variance of the Sub-Scales
of the Minnesota Counseling Inventory

 

 

The first hypothesis, which predicted the effects
of treatment, was tested by the analysis of variance of
the sub-scales of the Minntesota Counseling Inventory

(MCI) .3

Hypothesis One

 

Hypothesis one is restated in null form.

There are no differences in the mean scores at com-
pletion of the experiment in the group-individual (GI),
group experience (G), and mean scores of students who
did not participate in group counseling (C).

Symbolically: HO : uGI = LlG = L1C
1

Legend: GI
G
C

group-individual
group
control

Alternate Hypothesis: At the completion of the
experiment the mean scores on the Minnesota
Counseling Inventory of the students in group-
individual (GI) will be lower than the mean
scores of the students in group experience (G),
which in turn will be lower than the mean scores
of those students who did not participate in
group counseling (G).

 

 

—

1Story, pp. 47-58.
2Mezzano, pp . 56—7 9 .

3 . .
The lower MCI scores are p051tive.

116

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > uG > 11C
l
Lenged: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

The first hypothesis was tested by comparing each
of the seven Minnesota Counseling Inventory (MCI) sub-
scale scores of the two treatment groups and the control
group,using the one-way analysis of variance technique.

The results of the analyses are presented in

Tables 4.1 through 4.8.

Table 4.l.--Analysis of variance of the Family Relation-
ship Scale (FR) for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H1.

 

 

 

 

Means GI = 16.51 G = 14.82 C = 13.02
Source of Hypothesis
Variation S'S' df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 192.29 2 96.14 1.98 Not rejected
Within

Treatments 4359.82 90 48.44

Total 4552.12 92

 

Necessary: F .05 > 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups

can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

117

The analysis revealed an F value of 1.98 which
was not significant. The differences among the three ex-
perimental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-
ences in the Family Relationship scores between students
who participated in group counseling and those who did not

participate in group counseling was not rejected.

Table 4.2.--Analysis of variance of the Social Relation-
ships Scale (SR) for the group individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H1 .

 

 

 

Means GI = 25.96 G = 22.96 C = 23.18
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s. df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 157.99 2 78.99 0.82 not rejected
Within

Treatments 8581.62 90 95.35

Total 8739.62

 

Necessary: F .05 i to reject Ho

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.82 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-

ences in Social Relationship scores between students who

118

participated in group counseling and those who did not

participate in group counseling was not rejected.

Table 4.3.--Analysis of variance of the Emotional Stability
Scale (ES) for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control groups

 

 

 

(C): H1.
Means GI = 19.88 G = 19.64 C = 18.86
Source of Hypothesis
Variance S‘S' df m.s. F Tested is:
Among
Treatments 18.69 2 9.34 0.17 not rejected
Within
Treatments 4785.42 90 53.17
Total 4804.12 92

 

Necessary: F .05_: 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of confidence.

Inspection of the table reveals an F value of 0.17
which is not significant. The difference in Emotional
Stability among the three experimental groups was likely
to have occurred by chance. Therefore, the null hypothe-
sis that there was no difference in the sub-scale of Emo-
tional Stability of the students who participate in group
counseling and those who did not participate in group

counseling was not rejected.

119

Table 4.4.-—Analysis of variance of the Conformity Scale
(C) for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups (C):

 

 

 

H1.
Means GI = 16.96 G = 17.00 C = 14.35
Sifiiiiififi df m-s- F giiiéfieii?
Among
Treatments 153.06 2 76.53 4.13 rejected
Within

Treatments 1667.40 90 18.52

Total 1820.47 92

 

Necessary: F .05 i 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

A significant F value of 4.13 was revealed by the
analysis. Differences as large as this would occur by
chance less than five times in one hundred. Therefore,
the null hypothesis of no differences on the Conformity
Scale among the students in the group-individual counsel-
ing, group counseling, and the students who did not par-
ticipate in group counseling was rejected.

Following the F test for significance, the

Scheffé4 test was used to compare means of the treatment

 

4H. Scheffé, The Analysis of Variance, New York:
Wiley and Sons, (1959).

120

groups. Results of the post hoc test indicated that the
mean scores of the control (C) group exceeded those of the
experimental groups. The finding was contradictory to the

alternate hypothesis which was rejected.

"3

Table 4.5.--Analysis of variance of the Reality Scale (R)
for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups (C):

 

 

 

H1. £3.41
Means GI = 23.18 G = 22.53 C = 20.34
Source of Hypothesis
Variation S'S' df m.s. F Tested is:
Among
Treatments 144.39 2 72.19 1.17 not rejected
Within
Treatments 515.48 61.28
Total 5659.87

 

Necessary: F .05 3 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 1.17 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-

ences in the Reality scores between students who

121

participated in group counseling and those who did not

participate in group counseling was not rejected.

Table 4.6.-—Ana1ysis of variance of the Mood Scale (M)
for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups

 

 

 

 

 

(C): H1,
Means GI = 17.51 G = 14.96 C = 15.00
Source of Hypothesis
Variation S'S° df m.s. F Tested is:
Among
Treatments 122.49 2 61.24 2.60 not rejected
Within
Treatments 2115.71 90 23.50
Total 2238.20 92

 

Necessary: F .05 1 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

7 The analysis revealed an F value of 2.60 which was
not significant. The differences among the three exper-
imental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-
ences in the Mood scores between students who partici-
pated in group counseling and those who did not partici-

pate in group counseling was not rejected.

 

122

Table 4.7.--Analysis of variance of the Leadership Scale
(L) for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups (C):

 

 

 

 

H1.
Means GI = 15.44 G = 13.35 C = 13.73
Source of Hypothesis
Variance s.s. df m.s. Tested is:
Among
Treatments 67.79 2 33.89 1.57 not rejected
Within
Treatments 1941.37 90 21.57
Total 2009.16 92

 

Necessary: F .05 > 3.10 to reject HO

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 1.57 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-
ences in the Leadership scores between students who par-
ticipated in group counseling and those who did not par-

ticipate in group counseling was not rejected.-

 

123

Multivariate and Univariate Analysis for
the Minnesota Counselinngnventogy

The first hypothesis, which predicted the effects
of treatment on self-concept, was further tested by the

multivariate (MANOVA) and univariate analysis for the sub-

scales of the Minnesota Counseling Inventory (MCI).5

The hypotheses are restated.

Null Hypothesis One: There are no diffenences in the
mean scores at completion of the experiment in the
group-individual (GI), group experience (G), and the
mean scores of students who did not participate in
group counseling (C).

 

Alternate Hypothesis: At the completion of the
experiment the mean scores on the Minnesota Coun-
seling Inventory of the students in group-individ-
ual (GI) will be lower than the mean scores of the
students in group experience (G), which in turn
will be lower than the mean scores of those stu-
dents who did not particpate in group counseling
(C).

 

The first hypothesis was tested by comparing each
of the seven Minnesota Counseling Inventory (MCI) sub-
scale scores of the two treatment groups and the control
group. The results are summarized in Table 4.8.

The multivariate F value for the Minnesota Coun-
seling Inventory (MCI) was 1.159. The F value was not
Significant at the .05 alpha level.

Univariate analysis would not be reported in most
studies when there was no significant difference between
the experimental and the control groups as indicated by

the multivariate analysis. The univariate results were

——¥

5 . .
Lower scores for the MCI are p051t1ve.

 

124

Table 4.8--Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Vari-
ance for the Minnesota Counseling Inventory
(MCI) for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control groups
(C): H .
l

 

Multivariate test of differences between groups

 

 

 

F = 1.159 df = 16.0 and 164.0 p = less than .3063 NSD
Umbeuiaflatesbsfbrcfiifenameskxxwaxlgnmxs
Dxendan: typoUmsis Eran:
Nbamnes MS* NB** F p Iessflman
Endly'ne-
lationship 96.15 48.99 1.96 0.1466 NSD
Socufl.Re-
lationship 82.93 96.38 0.86 0.4265 NSD
Imotkmal
Stability 10.46 53.90 0.19 0.8240 NSD
Conformity 81 . 33 18 . 79 4 . 33 0 . 0161 NSD
Adjxnment
to Reality 81.47 62.28 1.31 0.2755 NSD
Mood 71.15 23.46 3.03 0.0532 NSD
Leadership 35.89 21.61 1.66 0.1959 NSD
*df==2
**dffbrlhzor==89
a = .0071

examined because Story rejected the null hypotheses for
the Social Reliability, Reality, Conformity, Mood, Leader-
ship and Behavior Scales when the data were analyzed by
ANOVA. The null hypothesis in this study for the Confor-
mity Scale was rejected (Table 4.4) on the basis of the

ANOVA results. The univariate analyses were examined for

 

125

each of the seven dependent measures: Family Relation-
ship, Social Relationship, Emotional Stability, Confor-
mity, Adjustment to Reality, Mood and Leadership. Each
univariate F was tested at the .05/7 alpha level, .0071
with 2 and 89 degrees of freedom. The univariate anal-
yses for hypothesis one are presented in Table 4.8.

Each of the univariate F tests exceeded the con-
trolled alpha level. It was concluded that none of the
means of the dependent measures of self-concept for the
MCI were significant for the two experimental groups and
one control group.

Analysis of Variance of the Tennessee
Self-Concept Scores

 

 

The second hypothesis, which predicted the effects
of treatment, was tested by the analysis of variance of

the sub-scales of the Tennessee Self-Concept Inventory.

Hypothesis Two
Hypothesis two is restated in null form:

There are no differences in the Tennessee Self-Concept
mean scores at the completion of the experiment be-
tween the students in the group-individual (GI), group
experience (G), and the mean scores of students who
did not participate in group counseling (C).

Symbolically: HO : uGI = uG = 11C
2

Legend: GI
G
C

group-individual
group
control

 

126

Alternate Hypothesis: The Tennessee Self-Concept
mean scores of the students at the completion of
the experiment will be greater for the students
in the group-individual (GI) than the mean scores
of students in the group experience (G), which in
turn will be greater than the mean scores of stu-
dents who did not participate in group counseling
(C).

 

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > uG > 11C
2

Legend: GI
G
C

group-individual
group
control

Hypothesis two predicted the effects of treatment
on self-concept by an analysis of the scores on the Ten-
nessee Self-Concept scale obtained at the end of the treat-
ment. A one-way analysis of variance was computed to
determine whether a significant difference in means ex-
isted between the experimental groups on the Tennessee
Self-Concept. The results of the analyses are summarized

in Tables 4.9 through 4.19.

127

Table 4.9.--Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Identity
Scale for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

Means GI = 116.44 G = 112.60 C = 109.70
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 709.13 2 354.56 1.72 not rejected
Within

Treatments 18511.50 90 205.68

Total 19220.64 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 1.72 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-
ences in the Identity scores between students who partici-
pated in group counseling and those who did not partici-

pate in group counseling was not rejected.

128

Table 4.10.--Ana1ysis of variance for Tennessee Self-
Satisfaction Scale for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

Means GI = 92.81 G = 91.35 C = 91.83
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s. df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 30.16 2 15.08 0.11 not rejected
Within

Treatments 11507.87 90 127.86
Total 11538.03 92

 

Necessary: F .05 3 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.11 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
‘Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no differ-
ences in the Self-Satisfaction scores between students
who participated in group counseling and those who did

not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

129

Table 4.11.--Analysis of variance for Tennessee Behavior
Scale for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C): H

 

 

 

2.
Means GI = 99.18 G = 99.35 C = 97.08
Source of Hypothesis
'Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among
Treatments 106.55 2 53.27 0.25 not rejected
Within

Treatments 19133.50 90 212.59
Total 19240.06 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.25 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
.Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in the Behavior scale scores between students who
participated in group counseling and those who did not par-

ticipate in group counseling was not rejected.

130

Table 4.12.--Analysis of variance for Tennessee Physical-
Self Scale for the group-individual counsel-
ing (GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

Means GI = 66.81 G = 65.92 C = 64.78
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 65.95 2 32.97 0.57 not rejected
Within

Treatments 5154.31 90 57.27

Total 5220.26

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.57 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in the Physical-Self Scale scores between students
who participated in group counseling and those who did

not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

131

Table 4.13.--Ana1ysis of variance for Tennessee Moral-
Ethical Self Scale for group-individual
counseling (GI). group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H

 

 

 

2.
Means GI = 59.40 G = 57.25 C = 56.81
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 113.53 2 56.76 1.11 not rejected
Within

Treatments 4583.56 90 50.92

Total 92

 

Necessary: F.05‘: 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 1.11 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no'differ-
ence in the Moral-Ethical Self Scale scores between stu-
dents who participated in group counseling and those who

did not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

132

Table 4.14.-—Ana1ysis of variance for the Tennessee Per-
sonal-Self Scale for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

 

 

Means GI = 61.25 G = 61.92 C = 60.48
Source of Hypothesis

Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:

Among

Within

Treatments 6052.37 90 67.24

Total 6085.93 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.24 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in the Personal-Self Scale scores between students
who participated in group counseling and those who did

not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

 

133

Table 4.15.--Ana1ysis of variance of the Tennessee Family-
Self Scale for the group-individual counsel-
ing (61). Group counseling (G), and control
groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

Means GI = 58.96 G = 59.25 C = 58.64
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 5.72 2 2.86 0.04 not rejected
Within

Treatments 5530.75 90 61.45

Total 5536.47 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An P value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

Inspection of the table revealed an F value of
0.04 which was not significant. The differences among
the three experimental groups were likely to have occurred
by chance. Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were
no differences in Family-Self Scale scores between stu-
dents who participated in group counseling and those who

did not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

134

Table 4.16.--Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Social-
Self Scale for the group-individual counsel-
ing (GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C): H2.

 

 

 

Means GI = 60.62 G = 59.78 C = 58.02
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 114.22 2 57.11 0.68 not rejected
Within

Treatments 7546.06 90 83.84

Total 7660.28 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

Inspection of the table revealed an F value of
0.68 which was not significant. The differences among
the three experimental groups were likely to have occurred
by chance. Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were
no differences in Social-Self scores between students who
Participated in group counseling and those who did not

Participate in group counseling was not rejected.

:3

J “ill-KL
.- '0

F”

135

Table 4.17.--Analysis of variance of Tennessee Self-Con-
cept Total Positive Scores for the group-
individual counseling (GI), group counsel—
ing (G), and control groups (C). H

 

 

 

2
Means GI = 308.40 G = 303.42 C = 297.70
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among
Treatments 1816.71 2 908.35 0.99 not rejected
Within

Treatments 82340.01 90 914.88

Total 84156.73 92

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an F value of 0.99 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in the Total Positive Self-Concept scores between
Students who participated in group counseling and those
Who did not participate in group counseling was not re-

jected.

136

Table 4.18.--Analysis of variance of the Tennessee Self-
Criticism Scales for the group-individual
counseling (GI), group counseling (G), and
control groups (C): H2

 

 

 

 

 

Means GI = 34.51 G = 36.17 C = 34.35
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 60.50 2 30.25 1.07 not rejected
Within

Treatments 2529.32 90 28.10

Total 2589.83 ~ 92 58.35

 

Necessary: F .05 3 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

The analysis revealed an P value of 1.07 which was
not significant. The differences among the three experi-
mental groups were likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in the Self-Criticism Scale scores between students
who participated in group counseling and those who did

not participate in group counseling was not rejected.

 

137

Multivariate and Univariate Analysis
for the Tennessee Self-Concept

 

 

The second hypothesis, which predicted the effects

of treatment on self-concept, was further tested by the

multivariate and univariate analysis for the sub-scales

of the Tennessee Self-Concept Inventory.

The hypotheses are restated.

Null Hypothesis Two: There are no differences in

 

the Tennessee SElf-Concept mean scores at the
completion of the experiment among the students

in the group-individual (GI), group experience (G),
and the mean soores of students who did not
participate in group counseling (C).

each of

for the

Concept

at the .

Alternate Hypothesis: The Tennessee Self-
Concept mean scores of the students at the
completion of the experiment will be greater
for the students in the group-individual (GI)
than the mean scores of students in the group
experience (G), which in turn will be greater
than the mean scores of students who did not
participate in group counseling (C).

 

The second hypothesis was tested by comparing

the ten Tennessee Self-Concept Sub-scale scores
treatment and the control groups.

The multivariate F value for the Tennessee Self-
Scales was .520. The F value was not significant

05 alpha level (Table 4.19). The mean differ-

ences for the two experimental groups and the control

group on the Tennessee Self-Concept did not indicate

differences between the groups as the result of treatment.

138

Table 4.19.--Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Vari-
ance for the Tennessee Self-Concept Inventory
for the group-individual counseling (GI), group
counseling (G), and control groups (C): H2.

 

Multivariate test of differences between groups
P = .520 df = 6.0 and 174.0 p = Less than .7927 NSD

 

Univariate tests for differences between group

 

 

Dependent
Measure Hypothesis Error F p Less
Tennessee MS* MS** Than
Self-Concept
Identity 266.78 200.99 1.33 0.2704 NSD
Self-
Satisfaction 14.71 129.36 0.11 0.8927 NSD
Behavior 38.77 216.53 0.18 0.8364 NSD
Physical Self 26.79 58.95 0.45 0.6364 NSD
Moral-Ethical
Self 47.23 52.05 0.91 0.4073 NSD
Personal Self 14.26 67.86 0.21 0.8110 NSD
Family Self 0.86 61.82 0.01 0.9862 NSD
Social Self 43.80 83.38 0.53 0.5932 NSD
Tenn. Total 680.52 922.97 0.74 0.4813 NSD
.Self-Criticism 27.98 28.02 1.00 0.3726 NSD
* **
df = 2 df for Effor = 89 a = .005

Univariate analyses were examined for each of the

ten measures:

Identity, Self-Satisfaction, Behavior,

Physical Self, Moral-Ethical Self, Personal Self, Family

Self, Social Self, Total Positive Scale, and Self-Criti-

cism.

Each univariate F was tested at the

.05/10 level,

139

.005, with 2 and 89 degrees of freedom. The univariate
analysis for hypothesis two are presented in Table 4.19.
Each of the univariate F tests exceeded the con-
trolled alpha level. It was concluded that none of the
dependent measures of self—concept for the ten Tennessee
scale means were significant for the three groups.
Analysis of Variance of the Brown-

Holtzman Survey of Study Habits
and Attitudes (SSHA)

 

 

 

Hypothesis three which states the effects of treat-
ment on study habits and attitudes is tested by an anal-
ysis of variance of the SSHA scores obtained at the com-

pletion of the treatment period.

Hypothesis Three

 

Hypothesis three is restated in null form:

There are no differences in the SSHA mean scores at
the completion of the experiment in the group-individ-
ual experience (GI), group experience (G), and the
mean scores of students who did not participate in
group counseling (C).

Symbolically: HO : “G1 = “G = Uc
3
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

Alternate Hypothesis Three: The SSHA mean scores
of the students at the completion of the experi-
ment will be greater for the students in the
group-individual experience (GI) than the mean
scores of students in the group experience (G)
which will be greater than the mean scores of stu-
dents who did not participate in group counseling
(C).

 

140

H U

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > G > C

3

Legend: GI
G
C

group-individual
group
control

The procedures followed to test hypothesis three
were identical to those used to test hypotheses one and
two. A one-way analysis of variance was computed to de-
termine whether or not a significant difference in means
existed between the three experimental groups. The results

of the analyses are summarized in Tables 4.20 and 4.21.

Table 4.20--Analysis of variance of Brown-Holtzman Sur-
vey of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA) raw
scores for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control groups

 

 

 

(C): H3.
Means GI = 22.29 G = 18.96 C = 19.59
Source of Sum of df Mean F Hypothesis
Variation Squares Squares Tested is:
Between
Treatments 174.95 2 87.47 1.43 not rejected
Within

Treatments 5485.52 90 60.95

Total 5660.47 92

 

Necessary: F .05 3 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups

can be concluded at the .05 level of confidence.

141

Inspection of the table reveals an F value of
1.43. The difference in SSHA scores between the students
in the three experimental groups was likely to have occur-
red by chance. Therefore, the null hypothesis three can-

not be rejected.

Table 4.21.--Univariate Analysis of Variance for the Brown-
Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes
(SSHA) for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control groups
(C) raw scores: H3. .

 

 

Mean Mean . .
322:2:123 square .. square Unlvsrlate Ptizis
Hypothesis Error
Between
Treatments 181.38 2 90.69 1.50 .2291 NS)
Within

Treatments 5385.39 89 60.51

 

a = .05

Univariate analyses were examined (Table 4.21)
for the dependent measure of the Brown Holtzman Survey
of Study Habits and Attitudes (SSHA). The univariate F
was tested at the .05/1 alpha level, .05, with 2 and
89 degrees of freedom. The univariate analysis for hy-
pothesis three is presented in Table 4.21. The F test
exceeded the controlled alpha level; it was concluded
that the dependent measure of differences between the
means for the three experimental groups was not

significant.

142

Analysis of Variance of Third
Term Grade Point Average

 

 

The fourth hypothesis, which predicted the effects
of treatment at the end of the experiment, was tested by
analysis of variance for the third term grade point aver-

age (GPA).

Hypothesis Four

 

 

Hypothesis four is restated in null form:

There are no differences in the academic achievement
as measured by the third term GPA at the completion of
the experiment among the students in the group-individ-
ual experience (GI), group experience (G), and the
academic achievement of students who did not partici-
pate in group counseling (C).

Symbolically: H : “GI = “G = “c

04
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

Alternate Hypothesis Four: The academic achieve-
ment of the students at the end of the third term
of the experiment will be greater for the group-
individual experience (GI) than the academic
achievement of the students in the group experi-
ence (G) whose academic achievement will be greater
than those of the students who did not participate
in group counseling (C).

 

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > LlG > HC

4
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

143

The fourth hypothesis was tested by comparing
third term grade point average means of the treatment
group and the control no-treatment group.

The results of the analysis are summarized in

Table 4.22 and 4.24.

Table 4.22.--Analysis of variance of third term grade
point averages for the group—individual coun-
seling (GI), group counseling (G), and con-
trol groups (C): H4.

 

 

 

Means G1 = 1.73 G = 1.92 C = 2.00
Source of Sum of d Mean F Hypothesis
Variation Squares Squares Tested is:
Between

Treatments 1.11 2 0.55 1.59 not rejected
Within

Treatments 31.51 90 0.35

Total 32.62 92

 

Necessary: F .05 i 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.19 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
Of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of confidence.

Inspection of the table revealed an F value of
1.59 which is not significant. The difference in the
third term grade point averages between the three experi-
mental groups was likely to have occurred by chance.

Therefore, the null hypothesis that there were no

144

differences in academic achievement between the students
who participated in group counseling and the students
who did not participate in group counseling was not re-
jected.

Analysis of Variance of Fourth
Term Grade Point Averaggs

 

 

Hypothesis five which predicted the effects of
treatment at the end of the experiment was tested by an
analysis of variance of the fourth term grade point

averages (GPA).

Hypothesis Five

 

Hypothesis five is restated in null form:

There is no difference in academic achievement at the
completion of the experiment between the students in
the group-individual experience (GI), group experi-
ence (G), and the academic achievement of students
who did not participate in group counseling (C).

Symbolically: HO : “GI = “G = “c
5
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

Alternate Hypothesis Five: The academic achieve-
ment of the students at the completion of the ex-
periment will be greater for the students in the
group-individual experience (GI) than the academic
achievement for the students in group experience
(G), which will be greater than the academic ’
achievement of students who did not participate

in group counseling (C).

 

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > uG > HC
5

145

Legend: GI
G
C

group-individual
group
control

The second hypothesis was tested by comparing the
fourth term grade point average means of the two treatment
groups and the no-treatment control group. The results

of the analyses are summarized in Tables 4.23 and 4.24.

Table 4.23.--Ana1ysis of variance of fourth term grade
point averages for the three experimental
groups: H

 

 

 

5 0
Means GI = 1.90 G = 1.78 C = 1.72
Source of Sum of df Mean F Hypothesis
Variation Squares Square Tested is:
Between
Treatments 0 . 50 2 0 . 25 0 . 7 2 not rejected
Within
Treatments 31.19 90 0.34
Total 31.69

 

Necessary: F .05 Z 3.10 to reject Ho

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences between groups
can be concluded at the .05 level of confidence.

Inspection of the table reveals an F value of
0.72 is not significant at the .05 level. The hypothesis
that there was no difference in academic achievement at

the completion of the experiment among the students in

146

the group-individual (GI) experience, group (G) experi-
ence, and the students who did not participate in group
counseling (C) was not rejected. Differences in the fourth
term grade point averages were likely to have occurred by

chance and the null hypothesis was not rejected.

Table 4.24.--Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Vari-
ance for the third term grade point averages
and for the final grade point averages (GPA)
for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control groups (C):

H4 and H5.

 

Multivariate test of difference between groups
F = 2.266 df = 4.0 and 176.0 p = less than .0640 NSD

 

Univariate tests for differences between groups

 

 

Dependent Hypothesis Error F p less
Measures MS* MS** than
Third Term GPA .5590 .3541 1.58 0.2120 NSD
Final GPA .2511 .3505 0.72 0.4914 NSD
*
df = 2
**
df for Error = 89
0‘= .025

The multivariate F value for the third term grade
point averages and for the final grade point averages was
2.266. This value was not significant at the .05 alpha
level (Table 4.24). It was concluded that the dependent
measures for difference between the three groups were not

Significant.

 

147

Univariate analyses were examined (Table 4.24)
for the dependent measure of third term grade point aver-
age and for the final grade point average. The univari-
ate F was tested at the .05/2 alpha level, .025, with 2
and 89 degrees of freedom. The univariate analyses for
hypotheses three and four are presented in Table 4.24.
The F tests exceeded the controlled alpha level. It was
concluded that the dependent measures of differences be-
tween the three experimental groups were not significant.

Analysis of Variance of the Haggerty-
OISon-Wiékman Scores

 

Hypothesis six was tested by an analysis of vari-
ance of the scores on the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior

Rating Scale.

Hypothesis Six

 

Hypothesis six is restated in null form:

There are no differences in the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman
Behavior Rating mean scores at completion of the ex-
periment in the group-individual (GI), group experi-
ence (G), and mean scores of students who did not par-
ticipate in counseling (C).

Symbolically: HO : “GI = uG = “c

6
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

Alternate Hypothesis: At the completion of the
experiment the mean scores on the Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Behavior Rating Scale of students in
group-individual (GI) will be greater than the
mean scores of students in the group experience

 

148

(G) which in turn will be greater than the mean
scores of students who did not participate in
group counseling (C).

Symbolically: Ha : uGI > uG > L1C
6
Legend: GI = group-individual
G = group
C = control

Hypothesis six predicted the effects of treatment
on behavior observed by the teachers. The observation was
given at the end of the treatment using the Haggerty-
Olson-Wickman Behavior scale. A one way analysis of var-
iance was computed to determine whether a significant dif-
ference in means existed between the experimental groups
on the scales. The results of the analysis are summarized

in Tables 4.25 and 4.26.

Table 4.25.--Analysis of variance of the Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Behavior Rating scores of the group-
individual counseling (GI), group counseling
(G), and control groups (C): H6.

 

 

 

Means GI = 12.89 G = 14.32 C = 13.65
Source of Hypothesis
Variation s.s df m.s. F Tested is:
Among

Treatments 28.36 2 14.18 0.57 not rejected
Within

Treatments 2234.94 90 24.83

Total 2263.30 92

¥

Necessary: F .05 3 3.10 to reject Ho

149

An F value of 3.10 is necessary for 2,90 degrees
of freedom before significant differences among groups can
be concluded at the .05 level of significance.

Inspection of the table reveals an F value of 0.57
which is not significant. The difference in the Haggerty-
Olson-Wickman Behavior Rating scores between the three
experimental groups was likely to have occurred by chance.
Therefore, the null hypothesis that there was no differ-
ence in teacher observed behavior of the students in the

different groups cannot be rejected.

Table 4.26.--Univariate Analysis of Variance for the
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman (HOW) Behavior Rating
Scale for the group-individual counseling
(GI), group counseling (G), and control
groups (C) scores: H6'

 

 

 

Nban Nban . .

Source of Univariate p less

. . Sqmue df Smfime
‘Wmnatux: I ureis r F ‘flwm
Seaman
Cells 28.86 2 14.43 0.5837 0.50 NSD
Wiufin
Cells 2200 . 08 89 24 . 72

°‘ = .05

Univariate analysis was examined for the dependent
:measure of the Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior Rating
Scale. The univariate F was tested at the .05/1 alpha

level, .05, with 2 and 89 degrees of freedom (Table 4.26).

150

The F test exceeded the controlled alpha level. It was
concluded that there was no significant difference in the
three groups as indicated by this dependent measure.

The means of the three groups for the six hypothe-
ses in this study are summarized in Table 5.1, Chapter V.

There were no significant statistical differences
between the three treatment groups; however, the direc-
tion of the mean differences was consistent with the di-
rectional changes that occurred in the Story and Mezzano
studies. A comparison of the data will be included in
Chapter V.

Research Conclusions from Studies
Being Replicated

 

 

The major conclusions from the replicated research
are briefly summarized.

Mezzano's6 findings indicated there were no sig-
nificant differences in self-concept between the defined
underachievers in the group plus individual (GI) counsel-
ing, the group (G) counseling, or the control (C) groups
at the completion of the experiment as measured by the
.Tennessee Self-Concept total positive scale.

No significant differences in the GI, G, or C
group means on study habits,as measured by the Brown-

Holtzman Survey of Study Habits,were reported.

 

6Mezzano, pp. 56-79.

151

During the treatment period and ten weeks follow-
ing the experiment, Mezzano examined the grade point aver-
ages of the three experimental groups. During the treat-
ment period, his research findings indicated there were
no differences in academic improvement during the treat-
ment. However, ten weeks after the experiment, the grade
point averages of the students who had received G counsel-
ing treatment were higher than the grade point averages
of the students who had received GI counseling, and the.
grade point averages of students who had received GI coun-
seling were higher than the grade point averages of the C
group. The direction was Opposite what the hypothesis had
predicted. Inspection of the means revealed a peculiarity;
the grade point averages from the first term through the
fourth term for the two counseled groups revealed contin-
ued improvement. The reported grade point averages for
the control group indicated a continuous decline in grades
during the same grading periods.

The conclusions from the companion research of
Story7 are significant. The Minnesota Counseling Inventory
seven sub-scales were the dependent measures used to ana-
lyze the difference in the means between the group plus
individual (GI) counseling treatment, the group (G) only

counseling treatment, and the control (C) group. Results

 

7Story, pp. 47-58.

152

were significant for five scales: Emotional Stability
(ES), Social Relationships (SR), Reality (R), Mood (M),
and Leadership (L). The remaining two sub-scales,Family
Relationships (FR) and Conformity (C),did not yield sig-
nificant findings.

Inspection of the means revealed that the mean of
the group (G) treatment exceeded the means of the group
plus individual treatment on four of the five sub-scales
(Emotional Stability, Social Relationships, Mood and Lead-
ership). The finding was in the opposite direction from
what Story had predicted. The sub-scale, Reality, indi-
cated that the GI group was significantly changed from the
G group or the C group,as had been predicted,because of
the group-individual treatment.

Story's post hoc analyses of means of the four
significant sub-scales of Emotional Stability, Social Re-
lationships, Mood and Leadership indicated that subjects
who had experienced the group counseling treatment had
lower means on the sub-scales than had the students who had
participated in group plus individual counseling. The GI
mean scores were lower than the mean scores of the control
group. The difference between the counseled groups was
significant, but in the opposite direction from Story's
prediction.

' The Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior Rating Scale

was the dependent measure used to analyze observed

153

behavior change between the counseled groups. Story found
a significant positive change for the group plus individ-

ual counseling treatment. Students who had received

group plus individual counseling had significantly higher

ratings than had the students who had received group coun-
seling; their ratings in turn were higher than were the

control group's rating.

Summary

The analysis of variance technique and the multi-
variate technique were used to test the six null hypothe-
ses stated in Chapter III.

The first hypothesis tested each of the seven sub-
scales of the Minnesota Counseling Inventory. Results
were significant for one sub-scale, Conformity, and the
null hypothesis was rejected. The mean of the control
group exceeded the means of the treatment groups. The out-
come was not in accord with the alternate hypothesis;
therefore, the hypothesis could not be accepted. Further
analysis with the multivariate technique did not support
significance for the Conformity Scale: the finding could
have occurred as the result of a Type I error. Analyses
of the remaining sub-scales (Family Relationship, Social
Relationships, Emotional Stability, Reality, Mood and
Leadership) did not yield significant findings.

Null hypothesis two, designed to further evaluate

the differences between the groups on nine Tennessee

154

Self-Concept sub—scales and the total positive scale,
did not yield significant findings.

Analysis of the third hypothesis, designed to mea-
sure change among the three groups on the Brown-Holtzman
Survey of Study Habits and Attitudes, did not yield signif-
icant findings. -

The fourth and fifth null hypotheses were not re-
jected. The grade point averages of the three groups at
the third and fourth grading periods were not statistical-
ly different.

The null of hypothesis six, designed to evaluate
the differences among the groups on the Haggerty-Olson-
Wickman Behavior Rating scale was not rejected.

Statistically, there were no differences in the
group-individual treatment (GI), the group treatment (G),
or the control group (C) for any of the six hypotheses

in this study.

CHAPTER V
SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS, DISCUSSION,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Summary

A summary of the investigations and the conclu-
sions of the data analysis are presented in Chapter V.

The limitations of the study are included in the
discussion section; implications for future research are
included with the recommendations.

The focus of the study was on the relative effects
of two types of counseling treatments on the self-concept,
the study habits and attitudes, academic achievement, and
change in observed classroom behavior of low-motivated

male high school students.
The basic hypotheses of the study were:

1. The self-concept scores of low-motivated stu-
dents who received group counseling in conjunction with
individual counseling would be greater at the completion
of the experiment than the self-concept scores of low-
motivated students who had group counseling. The self-
concept scores of the students who had received group
counseling would be greater than the self-concept scores
of low-motivated students who had no counseling.

2. The study habits and attitude scores of low-
motivated students who received group counseling in con-
junction with individual counseling would be greater at

155

156

the completion of the experiment than the study habits

and attitude scores of low-motivated students who had
group counseling. The scores of the students who had
group counseling would be greater than the study habit and
attitude scores of low-motivated students who had no coun-
seling.

3. The academic achievement of low-motivated
students who received group counseling in conjunction with
individual counseling would be greater at the third grade

period during the experiment and at the fourth grade period r.
at the completion of the experiment than scores of low- E
motivated students who had group counseling. The academic

achievement of the students in group counseling would be

r'TTi-ifi TI.
I

greater than that of low-motivated students who received
no counseling.

4. The teacher observed behavior rating scores
of low-motivated students who receiVed group counseling
in conjunction with individual counseling would be greater
at the completion of the experiment than scores of low-
motivated students who had group counseling. Teacher
behavior ratings would be greater for the students in group
counseling only than would be teacher behavior ratings of
low-motivated students who received no counseling.

Eighteen group sessions were conducted jointly by
a counseling team made up of one male and one female coun-
selor. The counselors were active participants in the
group discussions. Combined affective and structured tech-
niques were used by the counselors in each session.

One hundred and fifteen male students who ranked
in the lower half of their junior class on the Michigan M-
Scales were invited to participate in the counseling pro-
gram. The 100 students who accepted became the subjects
of this study.

The 100 subjects were first grouped according to
the period of the school day when they would be free to

participate in group counseling. From each category ten

 

157

individuals with free hours in common were randomly
selected. In this manner, six experimental groups having
ten members each were formed. Three of those groups were
randomly assigned to the group-individual counseling treat-
ment, while the other three were assigned to the group
counseling only treatment. Randomizing techniques were
used to assign the pair of counselors to the various treat-
ment groups. .The 40 students not selected by the random
procedures were designated as the control group and
received no treatment.

Change in counseled subjects was measured by com-
paring them to the control subjects on five criteria: self-
concept, study habits and attitudes, grade point average,
and behavior ratings.

To be included in the analysis of the study a min-
imum of 16 sessions for the group counseling treatment or
eight sessions for the group-individual treatment was re-
quired. Individual sessions were on a flexible schedule
and attendance was not a problem. Twenty-seven in the
group-individual treatment and 28 in the group treatment
of the original 30 in each of the treatment groups (55 of
the original 60) met the requirement for post-treatment
analyses. Thirty-seven of the original 40 subjects in the
control group completed both the pre- and post-test mea-
sures. Proportionately, the attrition rate was evenly dis-

tributed between the treatment and the control groups.

158

Data for the six null hypotheses were analyzed,
using the one way analysis of variance (ANOVA),because
this study was a replication of Story's1 research and part
of Mezzano's2 study. For comparison purposes, the data
were analyzed and reported exactly as the analyses were
reported in their investigations. The F statistic was
used to test for significance at the .05 level.

The data analyses were extended using univariate
and multivariate (MANOVA) procedures. The multivariate
procedure was not available at the time of the Story-
Mezzano investigation. The MANOVA significance tests
were chosen as an extension of the analyses in this study
to test the main effect and interaction hypotheses related
to the dependent measures. The additional analyses were
performed to guard against the possibility of a false re-
jection of the null hypotheses. The level of significance
for rejecting the null hypothesis was set at the .05 alpha
level.

Three major findings emerged from the study:

1. The Conformity Scale scores from the Minnesota
~ Counseling Inventory (MCI) indicated a significant differ-
ence between treatment groups, but not in the direction
Predicted. The other six scales did not yeild significant

results.

1Story.

2
Mezzano.

159

2. The grade point average changes were not sig-
nificantly different between treatment groups. However,
the mean GPA of the counseled groups increased each grad-
ing period. The mean GPA of the control group decreased.

No significant differences were found to exist be-
tween the means of the treatment groups for the other
three dependent measures: the Tennessee Self-Concept
Scales, the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study Habits and the
Haggerty-Olson—Wickman Behavior Scale.

3. The counselor time of one hour per session for
group counseling appeared to be effective with or without
the addition of individual counseling.

The statistical evidence did not indicate that
students who received group plus individual (GI) counsel-
ing developed a more positive self-concept, achieved im-
proved social relationships, acquired a greater degree of
emotional stability, or earned more acceptance from peers
and teachers than those students who experienced group

(G) counseling only.

Exploratory Analysis of the Data
The means of the three groups for the six hypothe-
ses are summarized in Table 5.1. The direction of the
mean differences were inspected because this study was a

replication of the Story-Mezzano investigation.

160

Table 5.1.--Summary of Means and Standard Deviations from
Univariate and Multivariate Analyses of Vari-
ance for the group-individual counseling (GI),
group counseling (G), and control group (C).

-’. . .. - .11—.1 .L. .4. '__':_'.--._&_J_.n_, 4 - .-. ‘

 

“—- ”an...“

GI G C

8_.—

 

(27) (28) (37)
Dependent Measure i S-d- Y s.d. Y s.d.
Minnesota Counseling Inventory
Family Relationship 16.52 7.11 14.82 6.40 13.02 7.34
Social Relationship 25.96 9.61 22.96 8.52 23.05 10.82
Emotional Stability 29.89 6.25 19.64 7.44 18.81 7.97
Conformity 16.96 4.37 17.00 4.28 14.27 4.35
Reality 23.19 7.20 22.54 8.08 20.19 8.21
Mood 17.52 4.40 14.96 4.48 14.68 5.38
Leadership 15.44 4.59 13.36 4.48 13.65 5.39
Tennessee Self-Concept
Identity 116.44 12.40 112.61 16.76 ' 110.62 13.23
Self-Satisfaction 92.81 10.89 91.36 11.66 91.97 11.49
Behavior 99.19 10.04 99.36 11.25 97.41‘ 19.17
Physical—Self 66.81 7.43 65.93 8.67 64.97 7.04
Moral-Ethical Self 59.41 7.17 57.25 7.21 57.14 7.25
Personal Self 61.26 7.86 61.93 8.55 60.59 8.27
Family Self 58.96 6.71 59.25 8.81 58.95 7.88
Social Self 60.63 8.30 59.79 9.59 58.32 9.35
Total Positive 308.41 26.46 303.43 33.56 299.08 30.52
Self-Criticism 35.52 3.87 36.20 4.96 34.46 6.33
Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study
Habits and Attitudes 22.30 8.35 18.99 8.40 19.46 6.80
Grade Point Average
Nine Weeks 1.74 .48 1.92 .65 2.00 .62
Final 1.90 .55 1.79 .53 1.72 .66
Haggerty-Olson-Wickman Behavior
Rating Scale 12.89 5.35 14.33 4.64 13.78 4.93

 

xObserved cell means.

8'd'Observed cell standard deviation-

()

Number in group.

The Story3 study indicated significant outcomes

for four of the MCI scales used as criteria measures for

 

3Story.

161

self-concept change, but the means were in the direction
opposite her prediction.

In this study, the mean scores for six of the Min-
nesota Counseling Inventory sub-scales (Family Relationship,
Social Relationship, Emotional Stability, Reality, Mood
and Leadership), for the group counseling (G) treatment
exceeded the group-indivudal (GI) counseling treatment.

The finding was in the opposite direction predicted for
this study. The mean of one sub—scale (Conformity) for the
GI treatment exceeded the group treatment in the direction
predicted. The means of the group counseling treatment
exceeded the control gorup means on five sub—scales (Family
Relationship, Emotional Stability, Conformity, Reality,

and Mood). Two sub-scale means (Social Relationship,
Leadership) for the group treatment exceeded the control
group means in the predicted directions. However, two ob-
servations do not constitute a trend and thus should be
viewed as exploratory evidence for future research.

Again, from the data of this study, the univariate
means for the Tennessee Self-Concept measure were examined.
As predicted, the means for the GI group treatment exceed-
ed the G treatment of the control group means for the fol-
lowing scales: Identity, Self-Satisfaction, Physical-
Self, Moral-Ethical Self, Social Self, the Total Positive
Scale, and Self-Criticism. The group treatment means ex-

ceeded the control group means for nine of the ten

162

dependent measures in the Tennessee Self-Concept Scale;

the group mean was less than the control group mean on

the Self-Satisfaction Scale, but it was the predicted
direction of hypothesis two. The group treatment mean
exceeded the group-individual mean on the following scales:
Behavior, Personal Self and Family Self. The outcome was
opposite the one predicted; however, the direction was the
same as the direction of the means in Mezzano's report.4

The means from the Brown-Holtzman Survey of Study
Habits and Attitudes were in the predicted direction for
the GI and G treatments. However, the control group
mean exceeded the group treatment mean: the opposite of
the prediction for hypothesis three.

Inspection of the means of the reported grade
point averages for the three groups of this study revealed
the same phenomenon that occurred in the Mezzano study.5
The means of the grade point averages for the group plus
indivudal treatment groups increased while the control
group grade point average mean decreased.

The Behavior Rating Scale mean was the highest
.for the group treatment, the opposite of the prediction
for the difference in means in relation to the group-

individual treatments. Story's6 analyses for the

 

4
Mezzano.

51bid.

6Story.

163

observed behavior measure were significant and the
direction of the means were as predicted in that investi-
gation.

The outcomes from this study and from the Story-
Mezzano investigation raise some serious questions about
the impact of the treatment on some of the variables. It
may be that the measures were not sufficiently valid to
register the changes which did occur, or it may be that
no changes did, in fact, occur. Furthermore, the direc-
tionality of the research hypotheses is suspect. It would
appear that group plus individual is not better than group
alone, and this theory should be so hypothesized in

future research.

Observed Outcomes

The students involved in the study did not become
cohesive group participants until the last three weeks of
the study. The four counselors reported that in each
group, regardless of treatment, the students' attitudes
had changed from distrust toward each other and hostility
toward the team counselors to trust and warm feelings.
The students began talking with ease about their feelings
within the groups by the end of the experiment. A mutual
trust and respect for each group member became obvious
and the counselors were accepted as friends and group
participants. The students were disappointed that the

study was completed; they formally asked the school

 

164

administration to continue the same type of counseling
the next year. Eight of the participants sought individual
counseling on a regular basis at the end of the study.

The school administrators had been skeptical of
group counseling. The principal cooperated with the
research, but would not allow any of the regular counselors
to participate in the study as co-leaders. The summer
following the study, the school district sent one counselor
to a summer institute to gain group experience. In the
fall of the 1974-1975 school year, the school district
implemented group counseling in both the elementary and
the secondary guidance programs. The school district
retained one of the college counselors as a consultant
for group work with the students. A group experience was
also conducted for the teachers by the district.

The counselors participating in the study agreed
that the use of co-leaders was a rewarding experience
because the sessions were less strenuous, more comfortable,
and more insightful than had been individual sessions
they had previously counseled alone. One college coun-
selor went to Harvard the summer following the study and
participated in an intensive group experience. Group
techniques were implemented in his college counseling
center the fall of 1974-75.

Teachers commented that behavior changes occurred

both in attendance and in grades for the "trouble-makers."

165

However, their written reports, the teachers reported,
followed the old behavior patterns they had expected from
the students.

The observed outcomes of the study indicated that
group counseling, using team counselors, caused behavior
change in students, counselors, and administrators. Group
procedures were adopted as permanent techniques to be used

in three public programs and one college program.

Conclusions

 

No statistical evidence was found to support the
hypotheses that either treatment was superior to the other
or to the control group.

Four factors could have contributed to the lack of
statistical significance.

1. The team counselors had limited experience as
group leaders; three of the four were excellent with
individuals but they had not experienced group counseling
as participants or as leaders. The in-service training
period of one week was too short and too intensive. The
following co-facilitating problems7 that might affect
group processes were all exhibited by the teams:

(a) ‘The short-term training had raised the
leaders' anxiety and the students were aware of the

counselors' apprehension.

 

7Jones and Pfeiffer, pp. 220-221.

166

(b) The individuals had different theoretical
and technical orientations. As team counselors,
they were aware of the differences and afraid they
would work at cross purposes.

(c) The extra energy demanded by group leader-
ship made it difficult for them to give as much
attention to the students as they could have given
in individual work. They concentrated too much
energy outside the sessions on professional devel-
opment and the relationship with their co-leader.
The students', not knowing how to interpret the
counselors' tensions, may have created an emotional
distance between the team counselors and the stu-
dent participants during the first half of the
experiment.

(d) Unconsciously, at first, the leaders
became competitive with each other. They denied
concern for popularity. However, they were very
threatened by the students' reactions to them.

The researcher's critique of the weekly sessions
made them anxious and they reacted as if they were
in a practicum course.

(e) The team counselors tried to overtrain
the treatment groups. Two counselors, at once,
often attempted to interpret and facilitate one

participant.

weeks.

167

(f) The leaders occasionally had mutual blind
spots in observing inter- and intra-individual
dynamics and reinforced each other's failure to
attend to particular areas.

(9) One counselor or the other was often
too slow in reacting to the students in the hope
that a participant would take the responsibility
for maintenance of the group.

(h)' The teams became good models. They did
not distrust each other and constantly worked to
understand each other. The students followed
their example. By the last half of the experi-
ment, the co-leaders were excellent models.

The disadvantages were obviated after about nine

In the weekly counselor sessions, designed to main-

tain treatment consistency, the co-leaders solicited hon-

est feedback from each other. They became cohesive,

dynamic group leaders approximately five weeks before the

participants become cohesive groups.

2. Mezzano and Story were correct in recommending

more time than 18 weeks for treatment.

(a) The 18 weeks ended just as students
appeared to begin internalizing behavior changes.
(b) One hour periods were too short for

video recall sessions.

168

(c) Participants had no perceptions of the
purpose for group counseling. They accepted the
invitation to participate to "get out" of study
hall and to be noticed by someone, even for
negative reasons.

3. All standardized measures were administered
in one week to the total student body. Too many measures
were administered in too short a time span. The students
became tired and many of them marked responses at random.

4. The faculty was not aware either of the nature
of the experiment or of the students involved in the group
sessions. The question of contamination of the results by
a possible halo effect may have been a limiting factor in

the experiment.

Recommendations

 

The effectiveness of group counseling with team
counselors should be further tested to establish the
effectiveness of the technique in changing attitudes and
behavior and in improving academic achievement of low-
motivated high school students.

To correct the factors that could have contamin-
ated the findings in this study the following changes
should be made in future investigations.

1. The team counselors should be trained for one
full semester prior to the experiment. The counselors

need time to internalize their own reactions to group

169

interactions; as part of the training they should be
involved in group counseling as participants with col-
leagues. To develop behavioral perceptions, the counselors
should experience honest, straightforward reactions.

2. Eighteen weeks, one session per week was not
sufficient. However, schedule and personnel changes in
the public schools make longer time durations impractical.
There should be two sessions per week instead of one; one
group session and one IPR session.

3. Video training for the students should be
introduced when the invitation to participate is extended.
Modeling and written materials explaining group procedures
would balance counselor and student expectations and facil-
itate the group process.

4. Behavioral measures in addition to teacher
observations for outcomes should be included in the
design. The measures should focus on individual change
within and outside the group. The standardized measures
included should be fewer and the instruments should be
administered to small groups of students.

5. Students to be involved in group experiments
should be identified in the spring prior to group involve-
ment in the fall. The sessions should start in September
because the holidays that occur in the first semester

would allow students time to internalize new behavior

patterns.

170

6. Teachers should be included in the investiga-
tion by the counselors meeting with them and sharing
materials that might help teachers cope with "problem
. students."

7. Follow-up evaluations should be planned as
part of the design, staged at three months and six months
following the treatment period, to evaluate whether or not
changes in self-concept and grades were sustained.

The use of group counseling in this study was
based upon the theory that low-motivated students require
a comprehensive approach. The low-motivated students
need the benefits of peer and adult support for longer
periods of time. Low-motivated students block and fail to
develop solutions to their academic and emotional problems.

The fact that group counseling seemed effective
with or without individual counseling may be part of the
low-motivated individual's personality dynamics. The
effects of peer support, reassurance, and understanding
seem to have been internalized more readily than the
support from the counselors.

The experimental subjects tended to perceive them-
selves as isolates at home and at school. They maintained
the "bad guy" behavior, minor classroom disturbances,
unexcused absences, irritability, and impulsiveness, thus

perpetuating isolation and self-defeating behavior.

171

As group counseling progressed, the students
appeared to gain self-confidence and to alter self-
concept which, in turn, enabled them to begin giving up
some asocial behaviors. Apparently, the students'
understanding of this progress was reflected by their
responses to the MCI Conformity Scale. They answered
the items as adults would expect them to behave. The
students had recognized some of their self-defeating
behavior patterns. New patterns of behavior had been
cautiously tested in the group sessions. However, the
new patterns of behavior had neither been tested in reality
nor internalized by the students as a real part of them-

selves by the end of the experiment.

LIST OF REFERENCES

172

LIST OF REFERENCES

Alexander, Lawrence F.; Davis, Robert H.; and Yelon,
Stephen L. Learning System Design: An Approach
to the Improvement of Instructibn. McGraw-Hill
Book Company. 1974.

Allen, Thomas W. (Ed.) "Client Centered Therapy." The
Counseling Psychologist. 1969, I.

 

Anastasi, Ann. "Test Reliability." Psychological Test-
ing. New York: MacMillan Company, 1961.

Berdie, Ralph and Layton, Wilbur. Minnesota Counseling
InventoryyManual. New York: Psychological Cor-
poration, 1957.

 

Bergin, A.E., and Garfield, S.L. (Eds.). "The Evaluation
of Therapeutic Outcomes." Handbook of Psygho-
therapy and Behavior Chagge. New York: Wiley,
1971.

Birmingham, Donald R. "The Effects of Counselor-Led Group
Counseling and Leaderless Group Counseling on
Anxiety, Self-Concept, and Study Habits Among High
School Seniors." (Doctoral dissertation. North
Texas State University, 1974).

Brown, W.F., and Holtzman, W.H. Brown-Holtzman Survey of
Study Habits and Attitudes: Manual. New York:
The Psychological Corporatian, 1956.

Campbell, Donald T., and Stanley, Julian C. Experimental
and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chi-
cago: Rand McNally and Company, 1963.

. Handbook of Research on Teaching. Chicago:
Rand McNally and Company, 1963.

Chase, Bradford Stevens. "A Study of the Effects of the
Duration of Group Counseling on the Study Habits
and Attitudes, Absenteeism, and Achievement of
Chronically Absent High School Students in Easton,

173

174

Massachusetts." (Doctoral dissertation. Univer-
sity of Wyoming, 1971).

Cirigliano, Rocco Joseph. "Group Encounter Effects Upon
the Self-Concepts of High School Students." (Doc-
toral dissertation. St. John's University, 1972).

Cohn, Benjamin (Ed.). Guidelines for Future Research on
Group Counseling in the Public School Settigg.
Washington, D.C.: APGA, 1967.

Collins, Barry E., and Guetzkow, Harold. A Social Psychol-
ogy of Group Processes for Decision Making. New
York: Wiley and Sons, Incorporated, 1964.

Cooley, W.W., and Lohnes, P.R. Multivariate Data Anal-
sis. New York: Wiley and Sons, Incorporated,
1971.

Corsini, R.J. Methods of Group Psychotherapy. New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1957.

 

Cox, D.R. Planning of Experiments. New York: Harcourt,
Brace, and World, Incorporated, 1963.

 

Cronbach, Lee J. Educational Psychology. New York: Har-
court, Brace, and World, Incorporated, 1963.

Cudney, Milton R. "Elimination of Self-Defeating Behavior."
(Workshop materials. Western Michigan University.
Kalamazoo, Michigan. 1973).

DeEsch, Jesse Barry. "The Use of the Ohlsen Model of
Group Counseling With Secondary School Students
Identified as Being Disruptive to the Educational
Process." (Doctoral dissertation. Indiana State
University. 1974).

Easterwood, Harold B. "An Investigation of the Effective-
ness of Group Versus Group Individual Counseling
With Potential High School Drop-Outs." (Doctoral
dissertation. University of Southern Mississippi.
1973).

Ebel, R.L. "Estimation of the Reliability of Ratings."
Psychometrika. 1951. 16.

 

Educational Policies Commission. Manpower and Education.
Washington, D.C.: National Education Association
of the United States of America. Association of
School Administration. 1956.

175

Edwards, Allen L. Experimental Design in Psychological
Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston,
Incorporated. 1960. -

. Statistical Methods for the Behavioral Sciences.
New York: Holt, Rihehart, and Winston, Incorpora-
ted.' 1963.

 

Eysenck, H.J. (Ed.). "The Effects of Psychotherapy."
Handbook of Abnormal Psychology: An Experimental
Approach. New York: Basic Books. 1961. 711.

Farquhar, William W. Motivation Factors Related to Academ-
ic Achievement. Cooperative Research Project 846.
(East Lansihg, Michigan: Michigan State Univer-
sity. Office of Research and Publication. 1963).

 

Farquhar, William W. and Payne, David A. "A Classification
and Comparison of Techniques Used in Select Under-
and Over Achievers." Personnel and Guidance
Journal. Washington, D.C.: American Personnel and
Guidance Association. May 1964. 874-884.

 

. "The Dimension of an Objective Measure of Aca-
demic Self-Concept." Journal of Educational Psye
chology. 53:4. 1962. 187-192.

Farquhar, William W., Payne, D.A., and Thorpe, M.D. The
Michigan State M-Scales. U.S. Office of Education.
1961.

 

Farquhar, William and Stewart, Norman. "Counseling the
Low-Motivated Male: A Working Paper." (Mimeo-
graphed paper. Michigan State University. April
1966).

Ferguson, George A. Statistical Analysis in Psychotherapy
and Education. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Com-
pany. 1966.

 

Fiester, Thomas L. and Farquhar, William W. "An Investi-
gation of the Process and Outcomes of the Elimin-
ation of Self-Defeating Behavior Workshops: A
Minimum Group Treatment for Specific College Stu-
dent Problems." (Manuscript. Michigan State Uni-
versity. April 12, 1973).

Finney, Ben C. and Van Dalsem, Elizabeth. "Group Counsel-
ing for Gifted Underachieving High School Students."
Journal of Counselinngsychology; January 1969.
16:1. 87-94.

176

Fitts, W.H. Tennessee Self-Concept Scale: Manual.
(Nashville: Counselor Recordings and Tests. 1965).

 

. Interpersonal Competence: The Wheel Model.
Nashville: Dede Wallace Center. October 1970.

 

. The Self-Concept and Behavior: Overview and
Sppplement. Nashville: Dede Wallace Center.
June 1972.

 

 

. The Self-Concept and Performance. Nashville:
Dede Wallace Center. April 1972.

 

Fitts, William; Adams, Jennie L.; Radford, Gladys; Richard,
Wayne C.; Thomas, K. Barbara; Thomas, Murphy M.;
and Thompson, Warren. The Self-Concept and Self-
Actualization: Studies on the Self-Concept and
Rehabilitatibn. Nashville: Nashville Mental
Health Center. July 1969.

 

 

Garrison, Clifford B. "A Comparative Investigation of Be-
havioral Counseling Group Techniques Used to Mod-
ify Study Skills, Attitudes and Achievement of
Selected High School Pupils." (Doctoral disserta-
tion. State University of New York At Buffalo.
1971).

Gazda, George. Group Counseling: A Developmental Approach.
Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Incorporated. 1971.

Goldberg, Carl. Encounter: Group Sensitivity Training Ex-
perience. New York: Science House, Incorporated,
1970.

Glass, Gene V. and Stanley, Julian C. Statistical Methods
In Education and Psychology. New Jersey: PrentiEe-
Hall, Incorporated. 1970.

 

Gourley, Martin H. "The Effects of Individual Counseling,
Group Guidance, and Verbal Reinforcement on the
Academic Progress of Underachievers." (Doctoral
dissertation. University of North Carolina at
Chapel Hill. 1970).

Guthrie, Robert V. Encounter: Issues of Human Concern.
Menlo Park, California. Cummings Publishing Com-
pany. 1970.

Hanley, Dennis Eugene. "The Effects of Short-Term Coun—
seling Upon High School Underachievers' Measured
Self-Maturity." (Doctoral dissertation. Purdue
University. 1970). ,

 

177

Hare, A. Paul; Borgatta, Edgar F.; and Bales, Robert F.
Small Gropps: Studies in Social Interaction.
New York: Alfred A. Knopf. 1967.

Harper, Robert A. Psychoanalysis and Psychotherapy: 36
Systems. New York: Jason Aronson Incorporated.

1974.

Harrison, Margaret Kirk. "Group Counseling with Second-
ary School Norm Violators." (Doctoral disserta-
tion. Rutger—State University of New Jersey.
1971).

High, Belva Howle. "Group Counseling with Underachieving
Tenth Graders." (Doctoral dissertations. Uni-
versity of South Carolina. 1970).

Hodge, William E. The Effects of an Intensive Group Coun-
seling Process on Failing Chicano Males. (Doc-
toral disseration. Uhiversity of Utah. 1975).

Hummel, T.J. and Sligo, J.R. "Empirical Comparison of
Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of Variance
Procedures." Psychological Bulletin. 1971. 76,
49-57.

Ivey, Allen B. Microcounseling: Innovations in Interview-
ing Training. Illinois: Charles C. Thomas. 1971.

 

Kell, Bill L. and Mueller, William J. Impact and Change:
A Study of Counseling Relationships. New York:
Appleton-Century-Crofts. 1966.

Kemp, C. Gratton. Perspectives on the Group Process: A
Foundation for Counseling with Groups. Boston:
Houghton Mifflin Company. 1970.

Kerlinger, Fred N. Foundations of Behavioral Research.
New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston,
Incorporated. 1964.

Klapman, J.W. Group Psychotherapy: Theory and Practice.
Second ed. New York and London: Grune andlStrat-

ton. 1959.

Kohlberg, L.; LaCrosse, R.; Ricks, D. "The Predictability
of Adult Mental Health from Childhood Behavior."
Wolman, B. (ed.). Handbook of Child Psychopath-
ology. New York: McGraw-Hill. 1972. 1271.

178

Kohlbert:, Lawrence. "Counseling and Counselor Education:
.A.Developmental Approach.” Counselor Education
and Supervision. June 1975. 250.

 

 

Konopka, G. "Group Work and Therapy." A Decade of Group
Work. Hendy, C.E. (Ed.). New York: Association
Press. 1948. 39-44.

Kranzow, Glenn W. "Peer Group Counseling Project in
.Special Education District No. 70, Libertyville,
Illinois." Peer Counseling Handbook. Illinois:
.ARW Graphics. March 1973.

 

Mann, J. "Some Theoretical Concepts of the Group Process."
International Journal of Group PsychotherapY: V.
1955. 235-242.

 

Martin, Samuel D. "The Effects of Group Counseling on Se-
lected Senior High School Students Who Demonstrate
Negative Attitudes and Behaviors." (Dissertation.
University of Pittsburgh. 1973).

Matheny, Kenneth B. "The Periodical Literature of Group
Work." American Personnel and Guidance Journal.
April 1971. 49. 649-651.

 

Mezzano. Joseph. "Group Counseling with Low-Motivated
Male High School Students: Comparative Effects of

Two Uses of Counselor Time." (Doctoral thesis.
Michigan State University. East Lansing, Michigan.
1966).

"Group Counseling with Low-Motivated Male High
School Students: Comparative Effects of Two Uses
of Counselor Time." (Doctoral dissertation.
Michigan State University. 1966). 1-2.

"Group Counseling with Low-Motivated Male High
School Students: Comparative Effects of Two Uses
of Counselor Time." (Doctoral dissertation.
Michigan State University. 1966.) ll.

Mermis, William L. Jr. "Bibliography of Group Literature."
American Personnel and Guidance Journal. April

Miller, Jane M. and Engin, Ann w. "Tomorrow's Counselor:
Competent or Unemployed." Personnel and Guidance
Journal. January 1967. 262-266.

 

179

Mintz, E.E. "Special Values of Co-therapists in Group
Psychotherapy." International Journal of Gropp
Psychotherapy. XIII. 1963. 127-132.

 

Morris, C.E. (Coordinator). Arkansas Department of Edu-
cation 1975 Evaluation Report, Title I, ESEA.
Little Rock, Arkansas. January 1975.

Murphy, Francis Joseph. "A Study of the Effects of Group
Counseling on Attendance at Senior High School
Level." (Doctoral dissertation. The George Wash-
ington University. 1975).

Myrick, Robert D. and Haight, Donald A. "Growth Groups:
An Encounter with Underachievers." The School
Counselor. November 1972. 20:2. 115-121.

 

 

Pfeiffer, J. William, and Jones, John E. "Co-Facilita-
ting." The 1975 Annual Handbook for Group Facil-
itators. University Associates Publishers, Incor—
porated. LaJolla, California. 1975. 219-222.

. A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human
Relatiéns Training. University Associates. La
Jolla, California. I. 1974.

 

. A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human
Relations Training. University Associates. La
Jolla, California. II. 1974.

 

. A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human
Relations Training. University Associates. La
Jolla, CalifOrnia. III. 1974.

 

. A Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human
Relations Training;_ University Associates. La
Jolla, California. IV. 1974.

 

Rader, Florence C. "Group Counseling with Secondary School
Norm Violators." (Doctoral dissertation. Rutgers-
State University of New Jersey. 1971).

Sales, M. Vance. Arkansas High School Graduates 1974, Re-
search Bulletin. Arkansas State Ufiiversity. Con-
way, Afkansas. March 1975.

 

Scheifley and Schmidt. "Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariance
Version 4, Modified and Adapted for Use on the
Michigan State University CDC 6500." 1973.

180

"Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariate-Univariate and
Multivariate Analysis of Variance, Covariance, and
Regression, Modified and Adopted for Use on the
CDC 6500." Occasional Paper No. 22. Office of
Research Consultation. Michigan State University.
October 1973. 1-23.

Selby, Samuel M. Standard Mathematical Tables. Cleve-
land: The Chemical Rubber Company.

 

Shirts, Elmo. "Effects of the Self—Consistency Principle
of Behavior Change and the Retroflexive Reforma-
tion Process of Group Counseling on the Academic
Achievement and Behavior of Selected High School
Students." (Doctoral dissertation. Oregon State
University. 1971).

Siebenthall, Curtis Alan. "The Effect of Group and Group-
Individual Counseling on Achievement and Self-
Concept with Coordinated Vocational-Academic Edu-
cation Students." (Doctoral dissertation. North
Texas State University. 1972).

Sprinthall, Norman. "Fantasy and Reality in Research:
How to Move Beyond the Unproductive Paradox."
Counselor Education and Supervision. June 1975.
310-322.

Staton, Thomas F. How To Stugy. P.O. Box 6133. Montgom-
ery, Alabama. 1968.

Stefflre, Buford. Theories of Counseling. New York:
Wiley and Sons. 1965.

Stewart, Ronald Van. "The Effects of Group Counseling on
Acceptance of Self, Acceptance of Others, Grade
Point Averages, and Teacher Rated Behavior of
Failing Tenth Grade Students." (Doctoral thesis.
University of Tulsa. 1969).

Stock, Dorothy and Thelen, Herbert. "Emotional Dynamics
and Group Culture." Group Therapy and Group Func-
tion. Rosenbaum and Berger (Eds.). New Yofk:
BaSlC Books. 1963. 83-86.

StorYI Delores. "The Effectiveness of Two Types of Group
Counseling Upon the Self-Concept and Observed Class-
room Behavior of Low-Motivated Male High School
Juniors." (Doctoral dissertation. Michigan State
University. 1967).

‘1fl‘
I. .
...- 1 A.

181

Sue, Donald Wing. "New Directions in the Personnel and
Guidance Journal." Personnel and Guidance Journal.
September 1975. 16-20.

. "New Directions in the Personnel and Guidance
Journal." Personnel and Guidance Journal. Septem-
ber 1975. 17.

 

Tang, Kendel Sunico. "Inducing Achievement Behavior Through
a Planned Group Counseling Program." (Doctoral 5
thesis.- University of Hawaii. 1970). hi.

_-_
w. . r
J1

Tatsuoka, Maurice M. Multivariate Analysis: Techniques
for Educational and Psychological Research. John .
Wiley and Sons, Incorporated. New York. 1971. __
10-84. 194-214. (

 

Taylor, Hess. "A Comparison of Group Counseling with In-
dividual Counseling in the Modification of Self—
Adjustment and Social Adjustment of Fifteen Year
Old Males Identified as Potential Drop-Outs."
(Doctoral dissertation. University of Virginia.

Taylor, Theodore David. "Effects of Group Counseling on
Self-Concept and Academic Achievement of Selected
High School Sophomore Health Classes." (Doctoral
dissertation. Oregon State University. 1970).

Thoresen, Carl. "A Behavioral Approach to Encouraging
College Accomplishment in Disadvantaged Youth:
An Exploratory Study." (Manuscript. Michigan
State University. 1966).

Thorndike. R.L. and Hagen, Elizabeth. Measure and Evalua-
tion in Education. New York: Wiley and Sons.
l96l.

 

Warner, Richard Jr. "Planning for Research and Evaluation:
Necessary Conditions." Personnel and Guidance
Journal. September 1975. 10-1l.

. "Research in Counseling." Personnel and Guid-
ance Journal. 53:5. January 1975. 382.

 

Warters, Jane. Group Guidance: Principles and Practices.
New York: McGraw-Hill Company, Incorporated. 1960.

Washburn, Helen. "Vice-President's Message." Elementary
School Guidance and Counseling. December 1975.
84-85.

182

WOody, Robert H.; Krathwohl, David; Kagan, Norman; and

Farquhar, W.W. "Stimulated Recall in Psychother-
apy Using Hypnosis and Video Tape." The American

Journal of Clinical Hypnosis. VII:3. January
1965. 234-241.

Yates, Joe (Ed.). Atlas of Arkansas. Arkansas Depart-
ment of Planning. Little Rock, Arkansas. August
1973.

 

APPENDICES

183

APPENDIX A

SPECIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR
CHAPTER II

184

-—-r—n-uflm-'
,

APPENDIX A

SPECIAL BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR CHAPTER II

Elementary School
Grades 1-6

 

 

Calhoun, James Dean. "The Effect of Group Counseling on

Duvall,

Faison,

Gumaer,

Harris,

Kehres,

Academic Achievement and Personality Adjustment

of Normal Elementary and Secondary Pupils."
(Doctoral dissertation. The Pennsylvania State
University. 1968). Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
national. 1969. 30:03. 981-A.

Ward Beecher. "The Effects of Group Counseling
Upon the Classroom Behavior of Second Grade Boys."
(Doctoral dissertation. University of Georgia.
1971). Dissertation Abstracts International.
1972. 32:10. 5544-A.

Ruth Ann. "A Study of Specified Behavioral Changes
in the Four Groups of Sixth Grade Boys Using: (1)
Group Counseling, (2) Group Counseling and Multi-
Media Presentation, (3) Multi-Media Presentation,
and (4) No treatment." (Doctoral disseration.

St. Louis University. 1972). Dissertation Ab-
stracts International. 1972. 33:03. 696-A.

 

 

Jim and Myrich, Robert D. "Behavioral Group Coun-
seling with Disruptive Children." The School Coun-
selor. March 1974. 21:313-317.

Norman Charles, Jr. "Effectiveness of Group Tech-
niques with Socially Anxious Children." (Doctoral
dissertations. The University of Texas at Austin.
1974). Dissertation Abstracts International. 1975.
35:5118-A.

Marlene Kirek. "Comparative Analysis of Group Coun-
seling with a Male-Female Co-Counseling Technique
and a Single Counselor Technique." (Doctoral dis-
sertation. University of Akron. 1972).

185

 

186

Kelly, Eugene W. Jr., and Matthews, Doris B. "Group Coun-
seling with Discipline--Problem Children at the
Elementary School Level." The School Counselor.
March 1971. 18:273-285.

Leo, Pau1.Frank. "The Effects of Two Types of Group Coun-
seling Upon the Academic and Self-Concept of Mexi-
can-American Pupils in the Elementary School."
(Doctoral dissertations. University of the Paci-
fic. 1972.) Dissertation Abstracts International.
1973. 33:04. 1442-A.

Martin, Pfiudlis Jean. "The Effects of Group Counseling on
Self-Concept and Achievement of Selected Education-
ally Disadvantaged Elementary School Children."
(Doctoral dissertations. United States Interna-
tional University. 1973.) Dissertations Abstracts
International. 1974. 33:3297-A.

Nivens, Maryruth Kelly. "The Relationship Between Elemen-
tary School Developmental Counseling Group Member-
ship and Conceptual Tempo." (Doctoral disserta-
tions. Purdue University. 1974). Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1975. 35:3433-A.

O'Keefe, Edward A. "Comparison of Group Counseling Ap-
proaches With Behavior-Problem Boys in an Urban
Elementary School." (Doctoral dissertation. Bos-
ton University School of Education. 1973). gig-
sertation Abstracts International. 1974. 34:1625

-A.

Rand, Martin Edgar. "The Use of Didactic Group Therapy
with Academic Underachievers in a College
Setting." (Doctoral dissertation. Cornell
University. 1969). Dissertation Abstracts
International, 1970. 30:4379-B.

 

Randolph, Daniel Lee and Wallin, Kenneth R. "A Comparison
of Behavioral Consultation and Behavioral Consul-
tation with Model-Reinforcement Group Counseling
for Children who are Consistently Off-Task." THE
Journal of Educational Research. November 1973.
67:l03-107.

Schaefer, Harry David. "Group Counseling of Students Ex-
hibiting a Significant Discrepance Between Ability
and Grade Point Averages." (Doctoral dissertation.
University of California, Los Angeles. 1968).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1969. 29,

1138-A.

 

187

Southworth, Robert Samuel. "A Study of the Effects of
Short-Term Group Counseling on Underachieving Sixth
Grade Students." (Doctoral dissertation. Boston
University School of Education. 1965). Disserta-

tion Abstracts International. 1966. 27, l272-
1273—A.

Tenenbaum, Samuel. "School Grades and Group Therapy."
.Mental Hygiene. October 1970. 51:525-529.

Torrance, E. Paul. "Structure Can Improve the Group Be-
havior of Five-Year-Old Children." Elementary
School Journal. November 1971. 72:102-106.

 

Tosi, Donald J., Swenson, Carl and McLean, Pat. "Group
Counseling with Nonverbalizing Elementary School
Children." Elementary School Guidance and Counsel-
ing. May 1970. 4:260-266.

Trotter, Harry Darby. “The Effectiveness of Group Psycho-
therapy in the Treatment of Academic Underachieve-
ment in College Freshmen." (Doctoral disseration.
Texas Tech University. 1970). Dissertation Ab-
stracts International. 1971. 32. 573-574-B.

 

Junior High School
Grades 7-9

 

Arulsigamoni, A. "The Relationship Between Self-Concept
and School Achievement in Low-Achieving, Junior
High School Children and the Effect of Counseling
Intervention of Self-Concept." (Doctoral disser-
tation. The American University. 1972.) Disser-

tation Abstracts International. 1973. 34:01.

B“”mett, Charlotte Stumph. "Relationships Between Selected
Personality Variables and Improvement in Academic
Achievement for Underachieving Eighth Grade Boys
in a Residential School." (Doctoral dissertation.
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. 1969).
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1970. 30:
08. 3272-3273-A.

Brusnahan, Brother Joseph. "A Study of the Effects of
Small-Group Counseling on the Ninth Grade Under-
achievers." (Doctoral dissertation. The Univer-
sity of Tennessee. 1969.) Dissertation Abstracts
International. 1970. 30:08. 3273-3274-A.

T. '. arr. lud- I_
1." i

 

188

Castelyns, Nicholas. "A Study of the Effectiveness of Two
Procedures of Group Counseling with Small Groups
of Talented, Underachieving Seventh and Eighth
Grade Students." (Doctoral dissertation. Fordham
University. 1967). Dissertation Abstracts Inter—
national. 1968. 28:09. 3498-A.

Davis, Charles Spurgeon. "An Assessment of the Effective-
ness of Small Group Counseling on Selected Groups
of Seventh and Ninth Grade Underachieving Boys."
(Doctoral dissertation. The University of Tennes-
see. 1969). Dissertation Abstracts International.
1970. 30:08. 3275-A.

Sanches, Marion Anthony. "The Effect of Client-Centered
Group Counseling on Self-Concept and Certain Atti-
tudes of Seventh and Eighth Grade Students."
(Doctoral dissertation. United States Interna-
tional University. 1969). Dissertation Abstracts
International. 1970. 30:09. 3283-3284-A.

Thayer, John Adelbert. "The Effects of Group Counseling
on Achievement and Behavior of Junior High School
Students." (Doctoral dissertation. University of
Arizona. 1968.) Dissertation Abstracts Interna-
tional. 1969. 29:04. llll-lllZ-A.

'Von Klock, Karl B. "An Investigation of Group and Indi-
vidual Counseling as Remedial Methods for Working
With Junior High School Underachieving Boys."
(Doctoral dissertation. Boston University School
of Education. 1965). Dissertation Abstracts In-
pprnational. 1966. 27:05. 1276-A.

Community College--Junior College

Axmaker, Iarry William. "The Effect of Group Counseling
on the Self-Concept, on the Motivation to Achieve
and on the Proportion of Dropouts Among Selected
Community College Students at Southwestern Oregon
Community College." (Doctoral dissertation.
Oregon State University. 1970.) Dissertation
1Alpstracts International. 1971. 30:10. 4214-A.

Haendschkl, Martin August. "A Study in Group Counseling
‘with Low-Achieving Students on the Sophomore Level
of a Junior College." (Doctoral dissertation.
.Marquette University. 1967.) Dissertation Ab-
_§practs International. 1968. 28:08. 3024:A.

 

Werner,

189

Raymond Sverre. "Group Counseling with Under-
achievers in a Community College.“ (Doctoral
dissertation. University of Southern California.
1971.) Dissertation Abstracts International.
1972. 32:07. 3708-3709-A.

 

West, William George, Jr. "The Effects of Two Types of

Brown, Robert D. "Effects of Structured and Unstruc-

Group Counseling Procedures with Junior College
Students." (Doctoral dissertation. North Texas
State University. 1971.) Dissertation Abstracts
International. 1972. 32:07. 3709-A.

Universities

 

 

tured Group Counseling with High- and Low-Anxious
College Underachievers." Journal of Counseling
Psychology. May 1969. 16:209-214.

 

Cort, Charles Christopher. "Effects of a Group Approach

Che stnut

Dickenso

Davis , 'I'

Emphasizing Student Development on the Academic
Performance and Social/Psychological Adjustment of
High Risk College Freshmen." (Doctoral disserta-
tion. University of Georgia. 1973.) Dissertation
Abstracts International, 1974. 34:08. 4776-47777-A.

 

, W. "The Effects of Structured and Unstructured
Group Counseling on Male College Students, Under-
achievers." Journal of Counseling Psychology.
1965. 12:388-394.

n, Walter A., and Truax, Charles B. "Group Coun-
seling with College Underachievers." Personnel
and Guidance Journal. 1966. 45:243-247.

 

 

heodore. "Differential Gain in Grade Point Aver-
age in Response to Structured Group Counseling as

a Function of Personality Traits." (Doctoral dis-
sertation. Oklahoma State University. 1973.)
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1974. 34:10.
6380-A.

Darni' IKenneth Fyfe. "The Effect of Adlerian Group Coun-

seling on the Academic Performance of Marginal Com-
muter College Students." (Doctoral dissertation.
Boston University School of Education. 1972.)
Dissertation Abstracts International. 1973. 33:04.
l434-A.

190

Gilbreath, Stuart H. "Appropriate and Inappropriate Group
Counseling with Academic Underachievers." Journal
of Counseling Psycholpgy. November 1968. 15:506-
511.

"Group Counseling, Dependence, and College Male
Underachievement." Journal of Counseling Psychol-
ogy. 1967. 14:449-453.

Harper, John Hudson. "The Relative Effectiveness of Group
Counseling Versus Individual Counseling as Indi- .1
cated by Change in Grade Point Average and Client
Insight." (Doctoral dissertation. Auburn Univer-
sity. 1969). Dissertation Abstracts International.
1970. 30:05. 1821-1822-A. 2;

Hoopes, Margaret Howard. "The Effects of Structuring Goals
in the Process of Group Counseling for Academic
Improvement." (Doctoral disseration. University
of Minnesota. 1969). Dissertation Abstracts Inter-
national. 1970. 31:03. 1012-A.

 

Jones, G. Brian; Trimble, Marilynne; and Altmann, Harold A.

‘ "Improving College Students' Performance Through
Group Counseling."- The Journal of College Student
Personnel. September 1970. 2:373-382.

Lee, Robert Eugene. ”Relationship Between Basic Encounter
Group and Change in Self-Concepts and Interpersonal
Relationships of College Low Achievers." (Doctoral
dissertation. United States International Univer—
sity. 1969.) Dissertation Abstracts International.
1970.: 30:06. 2337-A.

Lewis, Sinclair O. "A Test of Small-Group Procedures in
College Adjustment." (Doctoral dissertation.
University of Kentucky. 1968). Dissertation Ab-
stracts International. 1969. 30:06. 2337-A.

 

LiChter: Sigmund J. "A Comparison of Group Counseling with
Individual Counseling for College Underachievers:
Effect on Self-Concept and Academic Achievement."
(Doctoral dissertation. The University of New Mex-
ico. 1966.) Dissertation Abstracts International;
1967. 27:06. 2138-2139-A.

 

MitChEII: Kenneth R. and Ng, Kim T. "Effects of Group
Counseling and Behavior Therapy on the Academic
Achievement of Test-Anxious Students." Group Coun-
seling and Behavior Therapy. 1972. 19:491-497.

 

191

Mitchell, Kenneth R. and Piatkowska, Olga. "Effects of
Group Treatment for College Underachievers and
Bright Failing Underachievers." Journal of Coun-
‘seling Psychology. November 1974. 21:494-501.

McLaughlin, Geddes M. "The Effect of Group Counseling Up-
on Students' Achievement in a Baccalaureate Pro-
gram in Nursing." (Doctoral dissertation. North
Texas State University. 1972.) Dissertation Ab-
stracts International. 1973. 33:03. 974-A.

Rubin, Howard A. and Cohen, Helen A. "Group Counseling
and Remediation: A Two Faced Intervention Approach
to the Problem of Attrition in Nursing Education.”
The Journal of Educational Research. January 1974.
67:l95-l98.

Stone, Patricia Amyett. "Comparative Effects of Group En-
counter, Group Counseling and Study Skills Instruc-
tion on Academic Performance of Underachieving Col-
lege Students." (Doctoral dissertation. Univer-
sity of North Dakota. 1972.) Dissertation Ab-
stracts International. 1973. 33:06. 2724-2725-A.

 

Walker, Betty Ann. "Effects of Short-Term Group Counseling
on Changes in Attitudes of Flexibility, Tolerance,
and Nonauthoritarianism." (Doctoral dissertation.
University of Southern California. 1971.) Disser-
tation Abstracts International. 1972. 32:07.
3708‘A.

Whittaker, Leon. "The Effects of Group Counseling on Aca-
demic Achievement and Certain Personality Factors
of College Students with Academic Deficiencies."
(Doctoral dissertation. Washington State Univer-
sity. 1966.) Dissertation Abstracts International.
1967. 27:09. 2834-28351A.

Valine, Warren James. "Focused Feedback with Video Tape:
An Aid in Group Counseling of Underachieving Col-
lege Freshmen." (Doctoral dissertation. .Univer-
sity of Georgia. 1970.) Dissertation Abstracts
International. 1971. 31:11. 5784-A.

APPENDIX B

REPORT OF BASIC PUBLIC SCHOOL
CHARACTERISTICS OF ARKANSAS

192

APPENDIX B

Report of Basic Public School
Characteristics of Arkansas E

The report of basic public school characteristics
was included in this study for the purpose of describing
the typical school in Arkansas. The information included
in pages 193 - 198 was summarized and lifted from the
Arkansas Fiscal Year Report, 1975.1

 

 

Arkansas is located in the south central part of
the United States and consists geographically of a plains
area in the south and east and a mountain area in the
north and west. Elevation ranges from 2,823 feet to 55
feet with an approximate mean altitude of 650 feet. With-
in Arkansas' 53,104 square miles are 605 square miles of
water. There are also two national parks, three national
forests, and 17 state parks.

According to the 1970 U.S. Census, Arkansas had
increased in population to 1,923,295. Approximately 22
percent of the population is black. The major cities are
Little Rock, North Little Rock, Fort Smith, Pine Bluff,
and Hot Springs.

The public school population is 447,593 located
in 385 districts. There are 106 private schools with
13,535 population. Sixteen colleges and universities or
branches of universities are located in the state. Median
number of school years completed by residents 25 years of
age and older is 10.5 years according to the 1970 census.

The mainstay in Arkansas economy is cotton farming,
but other agricultural crops and industrialization are
increasing. In 1955 the Arkansas Industrial Development
Commission was established and helped attract a large num-
ber of new industries to the state. Unemployment is high,
and per capita income is still the second lowert in the

 

1C.E. Morris (Coordinator), Arkansas Department of
Education 1975 Evaluation Report, Title I, ESEA, Little
Rock, Arkansas, January 1975, pp. 1-28.

193

194

United States in spite of the great increases made in the
past decades.

The Department of Education is a major agency of
state government. The chief state school officer holds
the title of Director, is selected by the State Board of
Education [subject to confirmation by the Governor] and
serves at the pleasure of the Governor.

Tables B-l through B-4 contain information con-
cerning the total number of Arkansas Local Education
Agencies (LEA) and their enrollments.

Table B.l--The distribution of students in the Arkansas
public schools by grade level and by race.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grade white Black 0t4er Io a1
31.“.--32333; .P'EET . WE: . ..?.‘?If€'ff._._.’.‘”.'.“b.ei. 35:35.38 (We- .1. REST-
Pre K 109 4 43.14 141 51.44 4 4.44 1 234 144.44

K 13,489 76.32 3.979 22.66 91 .52 . 17,554 140.00
1 25.855 75.44 4.434 24.44 355 .45 3 34.454 144.44
2 25.144 75.44 3.144 24.47 143 .44 § 33.447 144.40
3 25.555 75.13 3,317 24.45 143 .42 1 34.415 144.44
4 27.423 75.41 4.747 24.17 153 .42 36,363 144.44
5 34.421 77.45 4.743? 22.56 151 .39 33.942 344.44
5 34.133 74.44 . 3.925; 22.73 152 .34 34.254 144.44
7 31.354 75.77 4.312 22.44 174 .43 44.334 144.44
3 34.137 75.55 4.449 23.44 162 .41 34.344 144.44
4 24,111 74.43 4.734 23.44 144 .37 37.444 144.44
In 2r.43r 7r.54 7.435 22.96 154 .45 34,774 144.44
11 23,443 74.47 6.445- 22.54 143 .47 34.521 144.44
I? 1 21.442 77.23 4,447 22.34 113 .41 27.272 144.44
Unnraded 134 44.53 47 34.37 4 4.44 223 144.44
Dropouts 3.533 ' 64.71 1.806 34.72 31 .57 5.460 100.00
fig§29;..£44__-_zgg”“(u45.71 844 53.91 6 .38 1.575 IOQLQQ_M
TOTAL 343.421 j 74.44 145,444 23.53 1.935 .43 452,296 144.44

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

195

Table B-2.--The number and percent of all students in
Arkansas schools by grade level.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grade Level Numbgl1 SCh olgement
Pre-K 210 .05

K ' 17,559 3.88

1. 34,459 7.62

2 33,447 7.39

3 34,015 7.52

4 36,363 3.04

5 38.942 9.41

6 39,260 3.68
Subtotal 234,275 51.79
7 40,836 0.03

3 39,368 8.70

9 3 37,989 4.44
Subtotal 1 113,193 26.13
10 34,779 7.69

11 30,521 6.75

12 27,272 6.03
Subtotal . 92,572 20.47
Ungraded 221 .05
Dropouts- 5,460 1.21
Special Education 1,575 ‘ .35
, GRAND TOTAL . 452,296 100.00

 

 

196

Summary

Racial Composition

 

76.04 percent of all students in Arkansas schools

are white.

23.53 percent of all students in Arkansas schools E
‘-l_
I

are Negro.

.43 percent of all students in Arkansas schools

are Latin American, Indian, or oriental.

Economic Level

33 percent of all students in Arkansas schools

come from low-income families.

Grade Level

52 percent of all students in Arkansas schools
are enrolled in elementary grades (K-6).

26 percent of all students in Arkansas schools
are enrolled in junior high schools (7-9).

20 percent of all students in Arkansas schools

are enrolled in senior high schools (10-12).

Hope High School in Hempstead County, Arkansas,

is a typical Arkansas Public School.

197

Table B-3.--Number of 1974 Arkansas

high school graduates

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  
  

 

 

 

 

 

by county.
' Hfi'lu6oé CAMDLL MIMI gunk“, .3.) ‘ "1X33 ifll'” l | \JAI
146 2
80 20 208 97 7,.“ 133 219
own
«24mm "m," 13" noun: .
501 119 38 W" 195
20 nubmur :
WNW! 6‘9
. norm mu m: W’w'h‘ r n .4, '
370 11444111! 113 108 . 1. m"?
170 380 226 371
SMTXM: 1 W" 1 warm 1 care: 41:117....
607 106 - - - tax-mm 280 ‘73
151 .
rum 2“}?-
sozrrr 456
110
mu "mm W
177 45 l'lllUH‘u
466
I may"
n—J
am
118 15
1.1111; In mm MW
182 130 .4141va
Hum 192 69
69 [moo
139 «anon anon mu!
385 623 336 301
mam

 

 

*Study Population

198

Table B-4.--Number and percentage of the 1974 Arkansas

high school graduates by county, who enrolled
in college.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

' ' I“ _ . ' a“, '{l 'l',‘ 1 3“. V, '_l!. t 3. 1' . u!
"9““ 241 w'“65 "127 '4‘ 6g ‘ ‘" 3° 36 9‘
39.71 4.52 30‘92 pr! 97 o-a 270“
105.32 20.071 31.77. - . 7.
man 49
. 41:30- 21 _ .
36 . SZ "“’ '
“m“ 30 W 31 . 8:: 6“
91 787
153 5 7 7 [I 3- a a
30.51 25.22 13.1% 35-02 2“ mummy»
237.02 95 w .
' M“ , "w 4'" n i z-wl;
”W rwnnl .11-mum 52 I‘l'lgg - 27 40" 38. 771 8 .4
22.72 74 46.02 25.02 39.34
43.52 27-OZ
(.1 I 8% ‘ 4.2!? 1
SM’TZA‘: 1‘L’G‘I67 23 VAI'IJMU. “I”! 187 walls-IN"
259 34.1 1.62 171 40.02 2 12 .‘
v . 3 ml - 4.3
42. “1-49 42.5 5 ’ 162
' "' 7 mum: "
51:11 36 57 28
28. 42 15 . . anus. x mm“ mmw :0 67
32.72 3444 1,503 99 26 9
. .3 141 - 29. 62
"flmum" ‘“““ “5'11 33.72 35.02
M" 41 11 266 4:11.111.
46 . 22 20
23. 12 24 .42 38 . 11 41:: 3‘ .. A.,, L...,.;-,_.121 (.4. 21
«4: 2.29m; 7" 471
W341“; 13"26 sun '7 37 72 34 9%
...u 134 23-7~ ' 39.72
23 5.4 33.32 1 1: ‘33*‘ .q,,%, 13%..
33.12 mmvnn 31,0; 29 22.22 *”“ 117
21211.! luv. a 67 nun. "mm," 36 ' 77' mm 41 ‘ 3
* 5 7 81 .ALIZ- 103 NM! r1 2 2
92.92 2.0; 43 82 17 77- l
mu . 32.72 22. 37; J 31.8% muo-
11 40.1. -., '
39 aid-Z3“ W!" I. 3 L7! 103 85
243 .2
15'9 28.0 34.62 28 2
warm: 38° 77" 39 . OX

 

 

 

*Study Population

APPENDIX C

REPORT OF BASIC SOCIOECONOMIC
CHARACTERISTICS OF THE STUDY
POPULATION IN ARKANSAS

199

 

APPENDIX C

Report of Basic Socioeconomic
Characteristics of the Study
Population in Arkansas
Socioeconomic data, pages ZOO-215, for Hempstead

County was lifted from the Atlas of Arkansas.1 Hope

 

High School is located in Hempstead County.
The population included in this study were all

residents of Hempstead County, Hope, Arkansas.

 

1Joe Yates (Ed.), Atlas of Arkansas, Arkansas
Department of Planning, Little Rock, Arkansas, August,
1973, PP. 1-99.

 

200

201

 

 
 

o.— 02.231
3 . ...> w? :35...
NR . :23? ..~ ..... .. .52....
tn .1 :2: 1.13.5823 ”.3 1 .52....—
m.. .1. .22....) on. ,1 . . 5......
pd ........ . ;:2:n :n> m6 . . .. 1.3a.
v.3 : 5...: ts 3.32.2.6...
—.0 1 2.2.». mdfl .. : .42-Io:
a... ., 92a 3. 9......“ .o:
E. .. 3.3 3.. 1.82.5:
.6 5:3...“ No . ,. 2.8.0
No .2... t. 1. ., 2:6
No .1 23m 5.. . :2:...0
an 1. - 2....» _.o . 5...;
a... .. 2:23.55 9. .. 53......
t. .. 1.8:... ..o .. 35......
v.8 .. ,, 3...... Mom . .32..
no. 1 2...: Q? 1 1 2.3..
“d .1 ; .2... v.3 .1 5.5
no . .=o.. 93 ,. :20
a... .32.... n: . 5.2.5.6
oi 3.... Nu 2......6
ten a........ 3 3...»...0
0d . >20; «.5 . $2230
13 1 2......6 NE 1 ....E...ou
No ._ 1 :2:: ad. . 23.236
3. .. , 1 .. .1252 .d . 2.... .6
no 1 b.5323: No : ._u
oi. 1 1 , 8.5: 3a {.5
SN : . . 1 2.33.3.2 win .830
a.” .. . ; . _ , 3...: No .350
no .. .1. . 5...: tum, ....o.._.u
No 53.32 ... .m is...
:— 32... ..o 1 2.8-
.... .1 . .53 no . 5......
“.5 . 1 1 ,1 1...: £3 to . .2...
O.N¢ . . 1 . 53:3 mdm . >013
0.0m . . . o... QNN naanf<
2.09.0; £5.00 2.020; #550

20:2.—3‘2 9:13.202

2: Elna-son no :3 l.- "nu-s

Ohm.— .ZO_._.<._DLOL H.223 . 202

   

5.3.3; .23 .9 5:52.;

 

202

o:- .I.==.L.L no upon—o dd .uu-aco

    
 
     

     

 

93 2
5.9 .. 1...» m6“
ado $3.133 afio ..
w” .H 5......3 a...“ 11

. .

.s ....... a. ._ 2.2 20.5.5.9. 2......»
$2. ...... 5:5 v.3 ..
0.8 0:2... 02.1111
v.00 92% the .
ado .o.>om 0.00 .
m. .1.... m. .
ado 1 :3» Q8 .1 e... 3 U
Two .............. 1.:: 02:0“ 0.8 .. nun—m D
Nam ...... ...u.......n a... 1. 2-3 In
060 ...... 1 {.1.—E... 060 11 2.- : I
12. ...... ..... 5...... no» .1 3....
m... ...... .fi. .6. 1. 2.8.. I
. .. ........... . 1 In C
M.“ .. ....... J—O“ ".MW 1 Lph“ Izaa—IBOL _I~°._. an clue-=95:
N—o .. 202...: m.Nm :ov:o=_.0
(do .1 ......... 3.: ”Ho ............................... v3.3.0
9... 1. 1.1. g....... 5. 11111111111111111111111 1 1.22.5
—.FO .. 1 50L ”“6 .1: I ..11111>Q’SOU
ado .1.1.11.11.....u...o «.3 22.5.30
98 11.... .8232 .6” 1. 1 2.1.5.0
m.ho .. .1... .11 ..1111.1.11. ails: 0.x ....... 1 : 1 1 : 1 1 1..-53....”
ham 1 96¢ 1 >30
5.0m m.:. . 11 .1.—0
0.2. v.3 . 11 1 2.3.6
12.. ~60 11111 . =2..0
ha ,1 0&0 1. 1 1 5.2.10
«.8 : m6» 1. >335
.69 .1 ado :25:
mi. v.8 3...:
3m 56 :22
o.~¢ EL. 32.3.2
2.3.3; >2.on 2.3.: £5.00

20:53.3: ”.513

203

fiat-Hui: .2... 0... 0.32230

 

          
  

 

 

8:2...0..:. .0...o ..< .30.. .30.:3... :. 10.3.2. 2.50. .050 :. 1:0 .0: .5 £25.... 3 .3...» a. ".8...
a . . .pfinfil n5... 2 a . 00m. .0 «000... :. 00.. 2.! 28.0..
=- .0 2...:3 £02130.» :00...- ...n:00 .m .D a .52-=12. :3... 2....
0.0m : whip»
m.” 00:230.
.me , y: , =0> 0.0 . o=0>0.1_ .
3. =23... a... : 5...... 03. 20.5.5.9. 2.3.5
.xom 0...; 1:. , 5.20:0—
..8 . :2:...23 «Hm : :01:—
..0 : :i .. :2... :0> 0.0 . . : v.00.
inn : :o.:... h.—m : 00:00:09.3.
:.0 ..... ”:05 “mm : : u. 1...-30...
..0 . .0.“ .0m : :3:: .. : :.. mg... I
.Vm .0.>0n . 9m? ::::: : 1021:.0... o. e D
.N» 2.3.8 0.3 : : ; 0:0!0 an I .— U
0.” >23... 0M0 : .. . 3.0.0 a... I 0n a
.. 2:33... a. : , : : .20—30 I
int ::::::::::::::: 0:..un 0.0 : .5: 5...... 2 .m I
.6? 505......» a.“ . :::::: : 5.4:... m. I = I
_..MM Ii. 1 {1. : l fifl—GVBIK —.O.' . . .. LOEJ—BIK Esau—Item _u~0.—. .0 «BOULOL
is .. Ina—am min . :. 30.0
0 0 ...... : 0...... mdt :::::::::::: 2.00
3 : 2.0. m6? : 3:3
tn #0. 9mm : : .020
tm 10.50.. to» 51:23.0
. 0 : 0.... udm , 0.6.03.0
mm 3...... 3m , : 32......»
0 :::::::::: .63. m6? . >03:00
ow «.20-:0 0.3 : -..........e0
0 :2302 0.0 : 15.2.0.0
um 0.302 0.0 05.3.0.0
. 0 E0Eou.:02 0.0m >30
0m ,,,,,, 02:02 Em? .1.—0
.m 3.5.3.: o. .0 .0020
. 3 3...} 0.0 ..o..00
_ 0 5...: 0.0 5.2.10
_ o 5.2:: gm 5....
#m 00.2.0.. 0.0m : 0:3.
: .0 : : : . : :02... mat :2::
u ..m : : : ::::: .0»... 0...... fimu .0830
..0 : .. : 58:... 0.0+ ,. 55¢
..Nm : . : .. 00.. 0.00 . .3:3..<
300.0. 3:300 $00.0. 3:300

 

20:53.0. Z<n¢3

204

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

\6
h

qrmmo—oqoovquONo—OF

“DECO—M—OOVMOGHD
”"7

$3

gun!
m1:

.:020.

.—

:guxsssgsssg

zsszasggaassasaa$aps

: 02.03.0501:—

_ ...... 3.010...
u:....n .0...
1:21:31
. 4 0:020
; .:0.0

03:51.0

20:53.0. 453:

an I m.
a... I ma
no I 1..
on | no
a... I =
02.1000. 1...... .0

chad

           

IIIDD

.320.

o...— .IO.¥: b. g .0! Hal!

.zc.h<4=n.0n. 4<¢3¢

205

    

 

...—m :
odm
5.3 ..
«.5
9mm
0.5 I
.13
0.; ..
¢.~m
tnm
odm
«.mm
Non I.
..3
m.~m
...—m
9mm
mdm
m.~m
06m
ado
win ..
0.; .

. . I 320-30 ¢.Nm .. .... 0353—00
Nun ..... :IzIII.; goes-z wan :. -::.;=:;II s:.1>gu
_;m.:s s::e=:I.:.v=sz odNI: ossasu
mdm r2525! 9.8 I. . Eu
tom I. II -0252 «in .I ........... .....u
0.3 I. I. 1&5!“ ..3 I. .320
min I I ., 5:2 «.3 ..otau
o6" II .31.! m.mm ...—2:6
93 I 5...}! ER 3.....-
hum 3.2.3 $8 ......... 2.8..
_._m .I I .I .59.. gm :25.
NR II :5 3:: h: ......... ......-
odm IIIII I I. II 53:: ..3 II .2. 3:... 3:1
93 . I ..III 8.. mam II II 5.5.3

...-2: £5.00 ...-9.: 3.500

u0< no 25> u— Inn—23 mzsnun

 

:0- .lzdsnt no Gnu-8 ii "-0-!

Ohm—
u0< ...O m¢<u> an mun—z: mzomflun—

         

an Imu D
an I3 I
eelon I
mtI—v I

use-...: .30... .. ous-02.;

 

206

 

 

 

:53

.. 1.11.111 : Isl—.11.;

£2.25 Gm

.-IisiaaIIizia
...! ..1 ...: mil—BE
.11 1 ...: Cub—Infi

one;

:93WHHWM1:££

. res—ounce:

 

 

«SE-:00
1.3.23.0
22.30—U

.. >10

u!OUZ_ (hr—<0 nu.—

.gluo ‘35.:-

«had

no: I 3:
33 n 3:
32.. I 33
m3.” - :3
an: I 3..."
:5...

IIBDU

I: load-:- a<i=nol ‘1'1-31 . Cal-:I. "no-I:

.uEOOZ.

<h_m<0 mum

          

nun-A

Q".°"!".‘Q"!°."!°QQ‘°.

_- qqnqq

207

 

QEfiWQfiQQQEQ'J'fi‘QQVEEQ'fi".

      

 

Ii. :5.“
p.032; .5

————
. I . I
I I I I

 

fl '1"219°.993':”$929"!'1‘9‘:QfiQHQQQQQQMQQ‘ZQ'fiNQQE'fl'fl".

.—
. HBO-:IU
_ ..... 3....-
_ ..... :2...-
— 1.. ............... 52:.

E 5‘2

... 5.5.2

3> 3.500

OEJLIOU 23> 48:0“ z<_nu2

     

on: icy—3...; u. 2.30 .‘l "no-la

Iu>o as: an uc< axon-um ...:

Ohm.“ .nuhan—EOO m¢<u> ..OO—fium 21:5:

        

3 I as D
a. I .... D
...: I ... I
9:- ...: I
#2-:— I

  

208

 

 

.. I .25. :2:

0032’:

 

 

 

 

 

h.
o. ..... 8.0.0.1

o. 03....0—

—. u ...... SOP-£0—

... ........... £3100—

... . 1.0x.

0.. I I 02.03.0001...

m. I. 2020:

m. _ .I . s .0:

o. — .000. E0:

h. . ...... 030.50

0. z I ...-.0

O. = . . ‘GQ—LIU

. ... I see—an

...I.:.::.....-_0..0.£..m h... ...—Jeni
.. assays h. — .05—30$

0.. I 305

u._ 2.000

v. 3:00

*. II 320

... :01..£..0

h. 0.3320

... 102.320

m. — 1 ual-.00

m.. — . I 0353.00

m. . . _ 1.3.25.0

h. .I I 05:40.0

v. II Eu

m. . I. ...-.0

o. .. «001.0

h. .3200

N. 5.0500

n. 0.10.-

w. = 0:00:

II III; :30.— o... :02...
O. — ...................................... hall.

£02.: 3.. ................................... >33

£5.00 200> >256
34¢! .OEALSOU m¢<u> .0018 25an

3:. ...: an no.
Ohau .muI—<E
OHPHJEEOO m¢<u> 400:0“ z<—DNE

       

0.5 I oi U
0.. I 0.. D
0.0.. I 0.3 I
0.: I 0.:
ad. I ed.

 

209

— — —— 0- u-
. 1 i i I I l I 1
——|— —— —.—.—.— —_

..
«*mon—tqoqvthwthquqq

..
004——00—0—0o0000066060—00—00000000—000
..

 

Q0OOODOOOQOOQOGQOQOOONQO—OQ—OON—ON

 

‘Q‘QFQYYQQQ'ZEQQQV‘

 

I @NQQfiQMQQQ‘CQQ‘QQ'fiQ‘QQfi‘QN".‘19‘2'fiQ'1‘1'TVITQ . . .

3
5
6

c00>

mu4<2wu .OEJLIOU 23> 48:00. z<3m2

Im>0 08¢ an no:
Ohm.— .mu._<:u._
.QUFNJQEOO m¢<u> AGO—.00 z<.nuE

         

as I 0.0
0.0 I 0.0
0.0. I 0.0.
0.: I 0.:
ud— I 0.:

IIIDD

210

0.3:;

0:“:
002...;

3......

...»...
0.330
000”}.
0.1.30
0.0”:

..
..
0.3:;

2......
2:... a 9.3...

:3131
:0‘500 .000
.00:

3:3 0::
£2.13:
.2020:
000000 E

.2... 02...:
£0 :28.
00000.5.
000:0..000;
...:o

5.5m tom
3...: 0:5
0:002:02
0.00: 0.002
0500.00»:
0500.950
03:00
50:00:
00.0.: 0:503
...-0.. 0.0.... ......02
0:30...

:90: 0.00...
0......0..0...<
00:13 ...-0..“
003:00
0......0..0...<
3.000
2:000:00
35.500
2.000
3.2.3:: 0.0.0
3.3.7003:
0:15:00-
..88 0.00..
£0

..vok.0> 03.3 £3...
‘00....0> 0000.533
‘ooh6> 3:: 00..
..u0....0> 00:...

:uok6> :00— 0.000
..u0....0> 0030030
..u0....0> 0.0a :0
..00PI0> ..vox 0.0.3
..00._..0> 0:300:
..uo....0> 0:0n

:00PI0> on}... 0.0—03.0
..uoh.0> :00 :0200
..u~....0> .0»... 0.003
£00....0> >u=0> 000:0...<
.323 .3.....3...._2.o=.8>

.....ou 3...... ......)

:2. 2.: .. 5.5.... ... 55......
0:00.200: 00 002.311 .0 31.03::
400.. 0.3... .0 000:0...< 00 3.0.00.5.

000:00 00.0000 50......“

000:00 .0002.»

.058 £5.53 :56 SEE:
.53 .5...» 30.52..

3.0.2.25 00.0000 00100.6
31.03:... :32: .w 5.0—

000..00 0.01:0:

003.00 0003. :0000051

000:00 050.0...

000:00 000.: 0.0.0.20

003.00 .0200. 13:00

..u:0.n 2.00- .3.!0>.:D 0.00m 000:0{<
3.0.00.5. 000cm 000:0.t<

.33 35.81.... 5.5.5
0.0—.00 000:0...<

000.30 00.00.00 000:0...<

0000.30 0:0 002.200.:3

“400100 ...0w....0> nz< .mewadOU .mu.k.n¢u>_23

 

«7:: $00-00... ailozdulnu 033...: "nu-000

Nhau $400100 =0uh.0> nz<
Juana-.00 .mu.....m¢u>.z=

 

=1: aim-(x:
«...—.50. n
8 in.a-(I

 

211

. .00....500 =0> 0:0 000.. 00.< .30. 0......803. 0:0 . 20.2000 t3. 0:0
03:00. 00.< .30. :2:...2 200.3000 0:..0m 0:0 3.00.:0. 00.< 10.00205
5:300:02 0.00:0.m .00.. 0:... 5.02.00: 0.... . .0E0..0...O .00..::00
..0>o:..0m 0:0 0.0—".0. 0:0 .000:0...< £025.00 0.0.30.0 0:0 5:02.09 00.<
.00..0..0.m 5:300:02 0.00:2... ..0.Em ..0... . ..0.0::00 2.50:0 0:0 5.0..
..00. 00.< .30. :00E00 "0.0 £5.00 0:0 :0... 0.0:. 0020:. .0... 000.0 .30.
.00..::00 .0 9.0.0 0 00.00 0E3 :. .0 55.00 0 :. .:0E>o....:0 .0 .0.:00 3.0.:

0... .0. 00....E00 0.0 0.00 00.0 .30.

 

.0... ......83
8....— ; ........... .....3
one... 1 .l , cots...)
mu... ,, ......- ...>
8.... . .......... .....5
80.0 ......
80.0 ......
“0.... 2 I .:.: ......
2.3.2.0 .... 5......

0...... ,0 ......
mu... :8.
3...... .... 2......

 

103:00 00.. ...:

  

 

H... . I.“ I“ I, z 2...:

5.30.0.0. Q 0.3030...

0....0030 Q ::0...0

600.0 .040. .0. 0.0 03: 00.00205

1 a z . ., : 00:0.30.

‘ 00000000.

00:00:30.3.
...-30...
0:0...“ 00:
00002.50...

:20

., 0:0..00

: :00...“
:....:0....
.05—300
. . 300.

 

. 02......
>03. .0 03:0
03:5...

:0... .
00.00.

, : .09....-

 

.
_
00.8.—
_
1 .111 L ...-In.—
, .‘.,...V .....2

 

00:00 ..00<. z<....>.0 .55....

0.00.. 0. 0.0-=2.- aliulc "06-:-

35 00-... .0
Nb“.—
HOEO... ¢0n<d z<_.=>—O .—<.—.O.—.

        

«no.0 I emu. D
000.0 I 2...... D
000.0. I 09...... I
000.0" I 090.00. I
,0 2.0.00 I

000.... .0 .0008:

 

212

. 33.5.8 =o> v..- onos. n2< .31. 053.325 v.3. 33.5.3 r3; .2:
>nicoU. n2< .31. :2:..02 ” 30.2.33 2:3 ...; inn—an: n3< .nu_.n_.n.w

......2.2..z 2.2.2.». .2... ...... £3238. ”......

. RES—«1.0 53.5.3

xioavom v5 22qu new 63:314. 62.5.0... 10.320 “:3 9.2.2.19 nu.<

72.2.05 ent—ones: Yucca; ....Em to...

AOU:=3°U 85.30030 VCR ‘30-.

._nU. a2< .33 gouEnU .9; >253 23 ca... 20... 2.3.2: .2. «no: .33
62.5.3 .9 9.0% n .33 «Ben E ..o 3:30» a 5 :05»...an .0 3.5.9 37:.
o... .0. 3.3.55 2- «.4. no: :31—

Om—.N:.

”.52....
.89.. .8. ...»

2.3.320 c8. :2:-.32..

>93...“
to“
...—3.3.. so: Siam

...—.2.“ Q inn—an
2:25
=o> mu 2.0.—

3......
132.30 03. E35
...-.0510 .3. 2.52.0

botanic}
02.32
15.2.3.2

.nflflhfl 5°30— .0. 05¢ ”On: uvzmzflum

gov—.235
Eta-now kw 15.320

=2=U
c.2330 nu 5.2.10
>235

nw>04szu nZOmqu no “unzaz 2::

...ca 5. nun-ulti- a<nl¢un1 in"

Gm: 30.1. >-

thn .nu>O._n=zu mZOmcmL no Gums-a: z<u£

         

 

mom; I a
mafia I oocfi
000.3 I 9.3.3
oooiv I occéa
¢ oooém

IIUDU

 

213

. .00....03 =0> 0:0 000... 00..< .30. 0...»..0003. 0:0 . .00....03 {.00 ....0
.0350. 00.< .30. 02.502. .00....03 0....0m 0:0 3.0.0.0.... 00.< .00..0..0.m
02:002.»: 0.0.2.0.m 0.00..— 0.2.. ....02. .00.. 2...... .0E0..0.._O 02.5.3
..0>0..3m .....0 0.0...01. ....0 00000.1( £025.00 0.0.30.0 1:0 00:02.09 00.<
.03....05 00:33.20: 0.00005 ....Em tom " 3025.3 0....0030 ....0 5.0..
..00. 00.< .30. 000500 “0.0 #530 0.... ..0... 0.0:. 013.0... .0... 000.0 .30.
62.5.3 .0 0:0.“ 0 00000 0.53 ... .0 £5.00 0 ... 2.05.3350 .0 .0...0u .0.0E
0... .0. 00.53.00 0.0 0.01 00.0 .30. 000.0 .30. .I0. 0.0 Iva... 02.2.0.5

 

 

a... 300.30..
...... 8: ...» ~.m 2.5....
m.m 30.0003 v.” 0005.0—
o.N. II I 0....3 9m 000.030.
..t 00.9.2003 v.0 003.00—
m.m— 0055 ..0> m6 . I I 0.00.
M.m .I I II .I .1 flow-n: M.F I IOIIUEO‘EOEO‘E—
ad I II II . . 2.2m m6 II II 0.030...
m6 I I 0.0.... w... 9.10m .0...
Q? I I .030... 0.? 30.00.00:
. 1.0.30.0 000. 00.30..“ m.m 2.00.0
—.O— I 00.08 QM I ...0.0
N.m ..3m mi I ....0..00
3.00.... 00.. 05.0.». 9m 00......
..v 0.2.0.. ..v. ad— 0......0...
to .1.—0100.. ..h .05....0...
...v I0....0n 0 £00.... a6 30.0
..t I 01.0... 9m 2.000
m... I __.> 0 ...o. 0.0 5.5
o.“ IIIIII ...0.. o... I 002.0
Eu $30.0.— 0.0
9+ ...... Qm 00.3003 I0 1.0.30.0
...m a....... .... ......»Eu
II.I>0......00 000. >500 N6 >5... 0 >0!..00
.I....I.I....00 000. 0.1.00.5 0... 030.300
06— . ..... 00.302 m... 3.0.30.0
N6 06 05......0
an .0 :5
En M.“ ...0.0
hm v.0 .320
«.0 ...w ..2.00
—.n a... 0....0000 Q ....0...00
o... a... I 5......
ti Qm 2.00n
06 ad I I II ..0...0n
m.m ...v .200:
$2 . 0.0 ......<
V... ...? II 0300f<
...-9.0.. 35.00 ...-0.0.. £5.00

h2m2>0402w23 m0 uh: u0<h2w0¢mn z<m1

Nhau
uh<¢

.011.- .o ..I-Ip-‘su. violin-u "mu-3°:

<un< uen<.. >n

....zuE>O...=2uz= ...O

u0<h2u0¢um

z<uE

 

 

 

.03...- lltn win-:I. .uu-aon

Mao ooofl I .I I w...<...m
war On I II . I =0> amt—N II II 0210.0}.

Mbmd— I II I I 300.30..

0.0.183 .0500 IIIIIIH m 5.5.... 9.0.5.8.... ...... ...: 00......“ e: «...:- figs...
0....3 :0 :N 000.0..0—

....f» Mm... III.IIIHIIMIIII.IMII._.u._u. 0.0. .3033“... ..<.0z<z.... .50.

 

214

       

   

IIIIIII 00.0... 03.5 II 00001000010.
000.... NnodN 1.030...
IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII I 0.2.0 30.00 .....003...
I IIIIII .0...0m muodm I II II II 100.0900...
IIIII 00:02.0» 056m . II II 0000.0
........ >200w mafia II II II II .020 0... I 0 U
IIIIII I . £00m 02.62 II I I 100..0
II 2.... $3. I I, 5......“ .. I 3 H.
50.000...» Tai— II I 0.300.. 00. l m. I
..... ...—.0100... N850 II I .05—.00.. 00... I 00. I
....I 3.00.0... N_h.om I_ II I II I 30.
.52.. 02.60 IIIIII I a...“ +2... I
...... 060$ mmhK— II 00:00 0.0..09 .0 000...;
I I ......— ONudm IIIIII I I 30.0
IIIII II 2000.00 5%: I II I I 00100....0
IIIII 00.... 0mm.mm II II I 1.0.30.0
IIIIIIIIII I 00. ...... www.3— I. I. II 100..u.0.0
I II IIIIIII .00 ELEM III . II II .03000
II IIIIIII 0....0000 mmmfio I IIIIII II I 0305.00
00.302 wmofi I II II I 100.0020
010002 Ontou II I IIIII I 00.2.0.0
I 0.00.0200! ¢m~.mm II I 0.0
IIIIIIIIIIIIII 00.002 hmtmo I {0.0
.001-.00.} m0ndm IIIIIII .0020
IIIIII 3...: orw€m II ..0..00
02.02 0006 0:0...00
IIIII 000.102 2%.; .0.105
3.000.. mum. 5 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII 0000:
I I. I II 030.. Gavin. II IIIIII 00.00n
I I . .0»; 0.0.... —Nw.h0 II .I.0.x0n
II 0.000.. 017.3 IIIIIIIIIII II IIIIIIII >0...0<
II I00. ZQJQ II IIIII 00000.1(
10....00 08 0.0-.00 102.0... 08 #0000
0.0—.00

30.503.— ..<.02<2.u .(hO...

 

215

             

mmh.o_m.m:..::.3 PPS—h
mmm6m .................................... ...»
. =58?
........... 823

. 320:1...)

 

. 2202.0
cots-2
:3333 «.332
.toEouecoI
: 09:32
Reign-.2

  

3333.23.22.92.—
3.030:
. 3.:...: “5....“ so:

       

 

 

 

 

 

V
02.3 . JAE-:00
htN. .— . . van—25.0
mania . . . : : 05:30.0
smug? .. >10
3*. m : ...... {:0
0mm. V : . .320
mmm. m : I =9.=.0
0N3: . . ...-2.10
0:. m . .:. >335
:—.om ..... . : ...... 250:
OmNfim—333: . :2:-n
8a.: : LEI-n
tmofih . .. >o...n<
OhN.=. u3:51<
‘32:.008 3.500

23.00

#5002. u<20m¢mm ..(PO...

lab-nu 3.03-.:- Ilc Io-iuou- ...-I‘lnl. n<nl<=< 3 ton-up... "not-on

         

On an
uEOuw: 4<zom¢um ._<._.O._.
8...: .. 83 D
23.3 ISSN D
23 ... 2 I an: E
39.2....— : 39.2: I
:2:.- ~ I

:2...— t. nun-:3...—

 

APPENDIX D

LETTERS

216

 

217

   

SOUT?;w'1 _5.:LLEGE

"It

MAGNOLIA, ARKANSAS
January 3, 1974

Dear

You are one of a group of students whose academic performance has not
reached the level we would have expected from your test scores. It is
recognized that many factors may be involved in your performance. The
factors frequently listed by other students who have been in academic
difficulty are study techniques, reading skills, personal problems and
family relationships. We are certain that group counseling can be of
significant aid in helping you deal with some of these problem areas.
We have, therefore, arranged a group counseling experience similar in
nature to those which have shown encouraging results at a number of
other high schools.

The experience we are suggesting requires that you attend a small
discussion group one hour a week for eighteen weeks during this spring
semester. The group will meet in the Agriculture-A Building and will
be composed of eleventh grade students having similar difficulties.

It will be led by two counselors from Southern State College.

If you decide to join one of our groups, we would like to point out
the necessity of continuing throughout the whole eighteen weeks. A
helpful group experience is dependent upon the regular attendance of
each member.

Please indicate on the enclosed form the hours which you will be in
study hall and return it to the counseling center as soon as you have
completed registration. Seal the form in the enclosed envelope and
hand it to Mrs. Wood. You will be contacted by us as to the hour which
best fits both of our schedules.

Sincerely yours,

Earl Downs Ann K. Thomas
Counselor Southern State College

AT/aw

218

Date of Withdrawal

 

HOPE PUBLIC SCHOOLS

 

 

 

Cause Enrollment Card
Yr. 19 19 Grade
NAME HOME PHONE:
Last name First Middle

MAILING ADDRESS:
RESIDENCE ADDRESS:

 

 

DATE OF BIRTH: Month Day Year
PLACE OF BIRTH: County or City STATE
Parent's or Guardian's Name: Address:

 

Occupation of Parent or Guardian:

How far do you live from school? miles. Do you ride the bus? No.
Dogparents or guardian live in this School District?

Name and address of school attended last year:

 

Schedule of Classes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Look No.
Locker No.
Name Home Room No. Teacher
P— “lst Semester 2nd Semester
Period Subject Room Teacher Period Subject Room Teacher
1 l
2 2
3 3
4 4
5 S
6 6

 

 

 

Parent or Guardian Address Name Telephone Number

 

219

 

SOUTHE$NSE£HNflHLEGE AMNKZWDMAS

Magnolia, Arkansas 71 753 Counselor and Director

Telephone 234-5120, Ext. 298 of Institutional Testing
Dear

This is to remind you of Group Meeting
in A-16 today from .

We Need YOU!

Mrs. Thomas

APPENDIX E

ANALYSIS OF RATINGS FOR HAGGERTY-OLSON-
WICKMAN BEHAVIOR SCALES: INCOMPLETE
SETS, RATERS NOT IDENTIFIED

220

APPENDIX E

ANALYSIS OF RATINGS FOR HAGGERTY-OLSON-
WICKMAN BEHAVIOR SCALES: INCOMPLETE
SETS, RATERS NOT IDENTIFIED4

 

 

 

 

Rathgs K Sun
Pupil l 14 16 17 3 47
Pupil 106 07 06 13 l6 l9 5 61
Sums 308 4163
Sum of squared Ratings 206015.00
Sum of products (pupil sum times pupil mean) 62801.70
Product of sum and mean 56268.08
Smncfi'amxues
For total 206015. - 56268.0812 = 149746.92
For pupils 62801.70 - 56268.0812 = 6533.62
Fbr error 149746.92 - 6533.62 = 143213.30
Nban:&pmme
For pupils 6533.62 2 105 62.2250

For error' 143213.30 e 202 708.9767

Average value of K 2.9015

Reliability 62.2250 - 708.9767
62.2250 + (2.9015-l) (708.9767)

 

- 646.7517 0.4586

1410.3442

 

4Ebel, R.L., "Estimation of the Reliability of
Ratings," Psychometrika, 16 (1951), 407-422.

 

221

APPENDIX F
HAGGERTY-OLSON-WICKMAN BEHAVIOR
RATING SCALE

(abbreviated form)

222

HAGGERTY-OLSON-WICKMAN BEHAVIOR
RATING SCALE
Teacher Observation

(abbreviated form)

Directions: Circle ONE observation for each question,
one through eight.

Scoring weights:

A = 0 B = 1 C = 2 D = 3 E

Total score range per scale: 0 - 32.

223

224

mofluummmm
3338

manflxwam
>um>

Hamz mum> Sue
Imonusm mudw00<

meanuxum>w
an ummumucfl
mcassmcou

>ua>auom
nose m3ocm

Eamon
yamCHommoxm

mpofluwd mcoH
no“ coeucmuun
0H0: cu wand

Dumas 0cm
m>HHm zacwmx

m

90.8.0.2

moonume
3m: venous

8 logo

DCTHHQEOO
.HSCDUodmmm

Ummsoun
xaflmmm
mummumucH

umomm

Regina?

88 we ~23
5 @8834

mfizm on?

D

announce:
8:3 83%
.:30 man undo:

«MHTTEH: uuommm on moon Ho muozuo on CH m>wm ms moon .

momaum xuammmo
no: no xamcfl
naaaz mEu0mcoo

ucoanmno
xaflumcHouo

umoEODCH
can qumOHudo
Hmsms m>naamao

mmmcenu :H ummumuca mxnu w: moon Do accumuwACCH m; mH .

m>auom
3326.6

woman xumcapuo
zuH3 mxcHLB

xamumsvoom
unsound

tucwmmum
Saamsm:

U

$3...» $38 .39.
>Hamumcmo muummmm Hm>mz

mcofime no

xufluonesm umAEHOQCOOCQG
baboon 8 30$ 68336
mm: ma manflxmam 30m .
xuauonusm
wo HmoHUAuo unmammo

mxufluonusm Damoom m: mwoo 3o: .

pmummumuca pmcuoocoocs
38% 558385

occam moans pumca
.uflmunnumu new mung

mm>auom no xuma >Hamucme on mH .

mCHEGOHQ 30am

.nmammSHm xamemuuxm
SEES... 5 gods no 32.... we mu .

pmumdwEHoLAAu umnuocm

xmmu um amox ou mcacu moo

8 ”iguana sod mouse
mpmcHMDmsm coaucmuum men mH .

mmeoown EH pmhuomnm

Saucmszum >aaddcflucoo

mmxmzm mpflz no omuomuumnm m: mH .

m .d

 

ence Hangoufie
coaum>uwmco umcomme

ZO addum UZHHdm

mudum OZHBEm mOH>cmmm Z¢SXUHZIZOmAOI>Bmm00¢m

225

SOUTHERN STA TE COLLEGE ANN K. THOMAS
Magnolia, Arkansas 71 753 Counselor and Director
Telephone 234-5120, Ext. 298 of Institutional Testing

 

May 14, 1974

Dear Hope Faculty:

Thank you for your cooperation in my research
this semester. I hope the final results will
be of benefit to your school as well as to
other students.

As a last request, will you circle one response
for each of the eight questions for the lUthi
and 11th grade male students you have in any
class? I appreciate the extra effort any

paper work requires at the end of school,

but this is one vital part of my research
design.

Again thank you for your cooperation!

Ann

 

Ill! (lilll‘ll‘ll’ul‘lli II! II

 

APPENDIX G

COUNSELING SESSION ACTIVITY SAMPLES

226

 

Session

1

10

ll

12

13
14-18

*Source:

Illinois,” Peer Counseling Handbook, Illinois:

227

Counseling Session Activity Samples

Activity

"Able"--"Ing" name tags
Identifying Personal strengths
Non-verbal communication of
feelings

Development of group expression
Role playing

Broken squares

Top dog
Positive and negative feedback
Poor me

Communication "Sounds of
Silence" by Simon Garfunkel

Lost on the moon

Trust walk

Objectives

30 minutes of video tape play-

back of the preceeding session
and then discussion

Source*

A:

A:
A:

A:

p.
p.

p.

50-52.

3, Vol. 1

54-56

No. 3

p.

57-59

No. 5

No. 4

p.

61-63

No. 6

P.
p.

25-27
64-68

No. 7

p.

p.
p.
p.

75-76

78-80
84-90
97-100

No. 2

AGlen W. Krazow, "Peer Group Counseling Project
in Special Education District No. 70, Libertyville,

Graphics, March 1973.

ARW

BMichigan State University Sensitivity Training
Exercises for 882-816 C.

 

228

CJ.William Pfeiffer and John E. Jones, A
Handbook of Structured Experiences for Human Relations

f

Training5 finiversity Associates, 1a Jolla, California,
I-IVp

Three handouts were given to the students the
first session. The handouts were referred to throughout
the eighteen weeks. The papers were

(1) "Introduction to Personal Growth Groups,"
by Martin and Shewmaker, Group Psychotherapy, Vol. 15,
March 1962, No. b, pp. 24-29,

(2) "Ground Rules for Personal Growth Groups,"
by Genlin, mimeograph paper, University of Chicago,

1968 and,

(3) "Constructive Openness," by John L. Wallen,
Ph.D., 1967.

Two examples of the materials issued to the
counselors each week follow. The activities were adopted

to ensure session structure and counselor consistency.

 

”‘1

I iAIIIII‘ ‘11 | l l l

225)

Meeting 2
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION Bob B. Winborn
COPYRIGHT APPLIED FOR William C. Hinds

Norman R. Stewart

We appreciate the cooperation of Department of Counsel-
Dr. John Suehr, Department of ing and Educational
Higher Education and Administra- Psychology
tion, Michigan State University Michigan State Univer-
in making this exercise available. sity

882-816C

Sensitivity Training Exercise #3

Title: Strengths and Weaknesses
Purpose: This exercise is designed to assist students

to increase their present awareness and
sensitivity to the feelings of others.

Objective: Given a list of strengths and weaknesses
prepared by members of a personal develop—
ment group, each student will correctly
assoicate at least three of the other mem-
bers of the group with specific strengths
and weaknesses they prepared.

Directions: 1. List five strengths and five weaknesses
below the dotted line on this page.

2. Give the bottom of this page to the
group leader. Do not discuss your list
with other group members.

3. The group leader will then read the lists
to the group. You are to copy them on
the worksheet that is provided.

4. After copying the strengths and weak-
nesses of the group members, identify the
members whom you believe wrote specific
lists.

5. Now, write the reasons why you identified
individual members with specific lists of
strengths and weaknesses.

6. When all have finished, the leader will
read the lists and identify the students
who wrote them.

7. Now, discuss this exercise in your group.

(Tear along the dotted line, fold, and give to the group
leader)

 

Name

What are my strengths? (Try to describe in one or two
words) What are my weaknesses?
I. l.

2. 2,

3. 3.

4. 4.

 

 

230

Name Place the number of
correctly identified
persons in this box

 

Worksheet for Sensitivity Exercise #3

Reasons for
Strengths Weaknesses Name of Person Identification

1. 1.
2. 2.
3. 3.
4. 4.
5. 5.

01.» blue F‘ in h»£fl fi>+fl 01uh halo hi tn b-cu Nil“
0
uu.> uate F‘ in b»:» said 01:5 UJIO kl Ln h~tfl kild

231

MEETING 7

Purpose of Meeting: For indivduals to experience and iden-
tify feelings in the group. Members will see more
clearly where they fit into the group constellation.
Self-disclosure and a supportive atmosphere
(cooperation and good feelings) are to be encour-
aged.

 

 

Expected Outcome: Group members will gain experience in
. making critical decisions within the group, will
experience feelings of being accepted and of being
rejected and will have an opportunity to identify
these feelings with similar experiences in school,
and at home.

Materials Used: Top Dog Worksheets
Under Dog Worksheets
Pencils

 

Meeting Plan:

 

ACTIVITY DESCRIPTION

1. Warm-up: Ocean The leader encourages the meme
Liner Fantasy bers to sit in a close circle Or

on a rug. The members are asked
to close their eyes for a while.
The leader describes an ocean
voyage (the sky, sea gulls, the
blue rolling waters). The group
is asked to imagine that they are
on this trip and may open their
eyes. The leader may begin to
rock as the ship does and encour-
age group members to do the same.
Encourage free body movement and
uniformity of rocking in the
group. After the group is warmed
up, the leader can introduce the
"Life Boat Exercise"

2. Life Boat The leader will introduce this
Exercise exercise in order to examine the

group's constellation and
decision-making process. Pro-
cedure: Engage the group in
fantasy. "You are on an ocean
liner that is slowly sinking. A
rescue ship has heard your S.O.S.

 

3.

Top Dog-Under Dog

232

and it will be coming to your
aid in four hours. There is one
lifeboat available, but it

will only hold three people.

The rest of you have to stay
with the sinking ship or jump
overboard, but there may be
sharks in the area. The group
has 15 minutes to decide who
goes and who stays."

Stop the exercise after 15
minutes and have the group do a
Top Dog-Under Dog.

See pages 234-235.

Procedure: Ask each member to
think of one or two other mem-
bers who made them feel good
and why. Each member takes his
turn in the group to share his
feelings.

233

TOP DOG - UNDER DOG

Purpose: To encourage self-examination and self-
disclosure.

Suggested Time: 15 minutes.

Procedure: After distributing material, give a brief
. lecturette on being "Top Dog" and "Under
Dog." Have group members fill out "Times
When I'm a Top Dog" and "Times When I'm An
Under Dog."

Have group members discuss what they wrote.
Ask how they felt during the ”Life Boat
Exercise."

Materials: "Top Dog - Under Dog" Worksheets (2 pages)

234

Times when I'm 0 TOP DOG

Write as much as you can about times when you act as a TOP DOG.
In writing, tell about the following:

a. Who you were with

b. What you did

c. How you felt acting as a TOP DOG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

235

Times when I'm on UNDER DOG

Write as much as you can about times when you act as an
UNDER DOG. In writing, tell about the following:
a. Who you were with

b. What you did
c. How you felt acting as an UNDER DOG