THE RELATICINSHIP OF SCIENCE DEFICIENCIES T0 SUESEQUENT ACIADEMIC PRGGRESS IN THE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AT MIG-IIGAN STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE Thesis far tho magma of Ed. D. MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE Camaran Eredrick Clarke 1948 Thisistooertifgthatthc thesis entitled l'he leletlonshtp of Science Deficiencies to Subsequm Mode-1c Progress in the School of lumen-1n; st lichim Itete College of Agriculture and Applied Science. presented by cox-com l‘red club has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for ML—degree aging»! M' Major professor Baum—195‘..- THE RELATIONSHIP OF SCIENCE DEFICIENCIES TO SUBSEQUENT ACADEMIC PROGRESS IN THE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AND APPLIED SCIENCE by Corcoran Fredrick Clarke A DISSERTATION Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Division of Education 1 9 4 8 fl the s ~S\ 7' ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to the many persons who have aided him in the preparation of’this study. He desires especially to express his apprec- iation to the members of his committee, Professors Cecil V; Millard, Clyde Campbell, George P. Deyoe, George W. Angell, and Leonard Luker, for their patience and interest during the selection of the problem, and their many helpful com— ments and criticisms during its study. The author is in- debted to the registrar, Robert S. Linton, and his associ- ates, Kermit Smith and Mary Burdette, who so kindly made the data available, for their patience and c00peration during the long time required for the search of the records and the recording of the data. Thanks are due to Alvin Olmsted for his many helpful suggestions and kindly criti- cism. Special gratitude is due Esther whose encouragement and editing have been invaluable. Finally, full credit should be given Professor Paul Dressel, whose appreciation of the need of the study guided in the definition of the problem, for his interested criticism and patient, helpful suggestions all along the way. 207219 III. Iv. " TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. BACKGROUND AND NEED OF THE STUDY . . . . . . II. A SURVEY OF PERTINENT LITERATURE . . . . . Related studies . . . . . . . . . Special studies . . . . . . . . . . . III. DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM AND AN ANALYSIS OF CONCOMITANT FACTORS . . . . Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SCOpe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . An analysis of the causes of this problem. A brief analysis of present conditions . . Policies of removal . . . . . . . . . . . IV. THE SELECTION AND THE RECORDING OF THE DATA. Sources . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Preliminary survey . . . . . . . . . . . . The individual record . . . . . . . . . . College record . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Point grading system . . . . . . . . . . . Make-up work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . The high school record . . . . . . . . . . Mathematics deficiencies . . . . . . . . . DrOp-outs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 38 4o 40 4:5 44 47 47 48 9—4 I CHAPTER V. VI. VII. A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE GROUPS AND A SEARCH FOR A BASIS FOR COMPARISON . . . . The non-deficient group . . . . . . . . . The general sample . . . . . . . . . . . . Frequency of deficiency . . . . . . . . . The deficient group . . . . . . . . . . . An analysis of variance within the group . Basis for the comparison of deficient and non-deficient groups . . . . . . . . . . Correlations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A COMPARISON OF THE TWO GROUPS AND THE APPARENT EFFECT OF DEFICIENCIES . . . . . DrOp-outs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Transfers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Age of entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Examination of the psychological test scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . High school academic standing . . . . . . College academic progress . . . . . . . . In summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Deficiencies and their removal . . . . . . Drop-outs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Psychological examination . . . . . . . . iv PAGE 58 64 64 65 68 73 76 81 81 83 83 85 88 90 99 101 102 102 103 V'TY 'AAl. A an y ‘A. Lbfihv u. g H z:- CHAPTER VIII. Age of entry . . . . . . . . Scholastic ability . . . . . . . . . . . Effects of deficiency . . . . . . . . . . Keeler's results . . . . . . . . . . . . Finally . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY . . . . . . . A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . APPEI‘IDICES . o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o A. B. C. Definition of terms . . . . . . . . . . . . "College Agreement" . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of the entrance requirements of selected schools of engineering . . . . . Record forms used by Michigan State College from which these data were taken and form upon which they were recorded . . . . . . E. Index of subjects used in Sections 24 and 25 of Appendix D-3 to remove deficiencies . . Correlations made in this study . . . . . . Analyses of variance and co-variance made in this study . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . Analysis of the variations in the samples of the control group . . . . . . . . . . . PAGE 103 103 104 105 107 108 112 122 123 126 128 130 141 142 165 175 Analysis of the distribution of the American Council on Education Psychological Exami- nation scores for both groups . . . . . . A comparison of the deficient and non- deficient drOp-outs . . . . . . . . . . . A summary of essential data taken from the selected non-deficient (control) group . . A summary of essential data taken from the deficient (experimental) group . . . . . . vi PAGE 181 183 185 194 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I. Certain Entrance Requirements of Seventeen Selected Schools of Engineering . . . . . 15 II. Total POpulation Aged 14 to 17 Years, Secondary School Enrollment, and Per Cent of This Population Enrolled in Public High Schools in the United States from 1870 to 1944 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 III. Means, Standard Deviations, and Standard Errors of the Means of Various Ability and Achievement Measurements of the Five Samples of the Non—deficient Group . . . . 60 IV. High School Grade Point Average and Size of Senior Class for the Five Non- deficient Samples and a Comparison with the Deficient Group . . . . . . . . . 62 V. Analysis of Variance for Make-up and No Make-up High School Total and College First and Second Terms Grade Point Averages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 VI. Various Correlations for the Deficient and Non-deficient Groups, and the Significance of Their Differences . . . . 77 ally..- ,. III... N. viii TABLE PAGE VII. The Entrance Deficiencies and Psycholog- ical Test Score Ranks of 261 Engineer- ing DrOp-outs Between Fall Term 1946 and Spring Term 1947 . . . . . . . . . . 82 VIII. Analysis of the Co-variance of High School Total Grade Point Average and College First and Second Term Achievements Between the Deficient and Non-deficient Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92 IX. Analysis of Reduced Variance of the High School Total Grade Point Average and College Remaining Terms of Engineering, and Science and Mathematics Achievements Between the Deficient and Non-deficient Groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96 X. The Means and Standard Deviations of Various Measures of College Achievement for the Deficient and Non-deficient Groups I O O O I O O O O O I O O 0 O O O 98 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1. Growth of High School Enrollment and Total POpulation of High School Age from 1870 to 1944 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Per Cent of Total POpulation of High School Age (14-17 years) Enrolled in Public High Schools in the United States from 1880 to 1944 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Distribution of Deficiencies . h . . . Individual Record . . . . . . . . . . . . Comparison of the Distribution of the Size of High School Senior Classes . . . . . . Per Cent of Deficiencies,‘Transfers, and DrOp-outs in the POpulation of the Basic Engineering Group of the General Sample of Fall Term 1946 . . . . . . . . . . . . Per Cent of Each Type of Deficiency and Combination of Deficiencies . . . . . . Time Required to Complete Removal of Science Deficiency . . . . . . . . . . . Time Required to Complete Removal of Mathematics Deficiencies When Accom- panied by a Science Deficiency . . . . . 26 27 45 49 63 65 66 69 7O FIGURE 10. Distribution of Transfers . . . 11. Distribution of the Effective Ages of Entry of the Two Groups . . . 12. Distribution of the Psychological Test Score Ranks of the Two Groups and the DrOp-outs . 13. Distribution of First and Second Term College Total and High School Total Grade Point Averages of the Two Groups 14. Distribution of the Psychological Test Score Ranks on an Arbitrary Base 0 85 87 93 182 ' ~ t':' 1m A STUDY OF DEFICIENCIES CHAPTER I BACKGROUND AND NEED OF THE STUDY College entrance is a problem that has intrigued, sometimes perplexed and often baffled educators for a long time. In its early days the high school was the in- termediate school between the elementary or grammar school and the university. Under these conditions the one pur- pose of the high school was to supply the necessary tools for university entrance. These for the most part were Latin, Greek, and mathematics. Only the few who then attended the university thought it necessary to attend high school. The coming of the mechanical age with the new cen- tury and the rapid increase of communication and trans- portation facilities tOgether with the advent of mechani— cal power and complex machines on the farm demanded a better knowledge of the fundamentals of communication, transportation, and science. Consequently, those who now come to high school have new and varied interests and needs. A preparation for college entrance is not neces- sarily their major purpose. Many have not sufficiently matured1 either socially or mentally to decide what they wish to do as a life work or vocation. As a result many have entered college later without the subject pattern specifically required for their field of interest. The requirements of the school of engineering have been inherited from the days when the basic philos0phy of the secondary school was orientated around the need of a preparation for college, and on first examination they seem to be unquestionable. But the large number ofcol- lege entrants with deficiencies2 and the changing emphasis in the aims of the secondary school3 as recognized by many 1 Maturation as used throughout this study refers to the reaching or approaching that stage of adulthood when the desires and purposes have become sufficiently stabilized so that future planning can be attempted with a degree of certainty. Definition of terms used in this study will be given the first time the term is used and may also be found in Appendix A. 2 Deficiency is a term used to include those high school subjects which are specifically required for ad- mission to a given school of Michigan State College but which have not been successfully completed prior to the entrance of the student into the college. 3 This has culminated in a new type of entrance pattern for colleges and universities in Michigan. Al- though the various schools within the universities have not agreed to change their Specific requirements there will be, without doubt, an increasing pressure, from both within and without the university, to do so. For a full text of this agreement, known as the "Michigan College Agreement," as adopted by the Michigan College Association, November 7, 1946, the reader is referred to Appendix B. 14 educators today demand a re-examination of the traditions so carefully preserved by our educational system. Varia- tions in the entrance requirements of the various schools4 and the higher variation in the flexibility with which they are applied leads to serious questions regarding the valid- ity of arguments insisting on their essentiality. In comparison of the entrance requirements of se- lected schools of engineering as shown in Table I, the wide variation in the amount of science and mathematics and other subjects is apparent. Four of the schools require four years of mathematics while some of these same schools require but one year of science. Most of them are quite flexible regarding the extra year or years of mathematics and the second science, specifying that facilities at the university may provide for the make-up of such high school deficiencies there. Yet some, such as the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Specify that no exceptions to the requirements will be made. Four of the schools pre- scribe language as a requisite and two of these require three years of one language. Because of their abstract- ness these studies may act as a partial filter to prevent registration of some of the entrants who might find engi- neering subjects difficult. As the results of this study 4 See Appendix C for comparisons. TABLE I CERTAIN ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS OF SEVENTEEN SELECTED SCHOOLS OF ENGINEERING Units Number of Requirement studied required schools Per cent Mathematics 3 8 42 3% 7 37 4 4 21 Science (no a ecified subjects) 1 l 5 2 1 5 (with Physics specified) 1 7 37 2 9 47 3 l 5 Language 2 4 21 3 2 10 English 2 l 5_ 3 14 78’ 4 2 131 For a more detailed analysis of these requirements with the specific name of each school the reader is referred to Appendix C of this study. 16 are analyzed it becomes evident that at least the science and mathematics requirements would secure, on the average, a student of higher academic ability. This would probably be true for many such required subjects, including Latin, but it would seem that this is the only function that can logically be sustained. Other schools have practically dispensed with all specified subject patterns for entrance. Under the leadership of Doctor Jordan, Stanford University asked only that the applicant should bring evidence of having completed 15 units of high school work with a high degree of scholarship, and English was the only absolute requirement. Thirty-six years of eXperience with that method of admission has demonstrated that Lt is not what the candidate took Ln high school, but what he brings with him to college Ln the __y Lf mental ability, steadfastness Lf p__- pose, _outlook Ln life, and qualities Lf leadersg:p, that determine how far he will g_ in life. . . . We are not going to get anywhere in this college admission discussion until we succeed in switching the emphasis from that of insisting on a certain pattern of subjects taken in high school to that of selecting the best type of individual upon whom to expend the time ang money involved in a college or university course. These variations suggest a need of study into the essentiality of the various entrance requirements. 5 Quotation from W. M. Proctor, Chapter VI, "The relationship between high school and college," Depagtme pt Lf Superintendence Lf the National Education Association, Sixth Yearbook. (Washington. Department of Superintend- ence, 19287, p. 143,4. [Italics not in the original.) £1.31! w. ..._ 17‘ Recent studies6 such as the Eight-Year Study7 and those more limited ones by Douglass,8 Washburn,9 Keeler,10 Mitchel,11 Bent,12 and Odell13 have found little variation in subsequent scholastic progress in any way directly con- nected with the pattern of high school subjects chosen by 5 For a review of these studies as they relate to to this problem the reader is referred to Chapter II of this report, pp. 31-34. 7 Wilford Merton Aikin, The Story of the Eight-Year Study. (New York: Harper & Brothers, 194277 157 pp. Charles Dean Chamberlin, et al., Did They Succeed in Colleg . (New York: Harper & Brothers, 19425, 291 pp. 8 Harl R. Douglass, “the relation of high school preparation and certain other factors to academic success at the University of Oregon," Schogl Review, 40:174,5, March, 1932. 9 Oliver M. Washburn, "Predictive values of high school subjects," California Journal 9: Secondary Educa- tion, 15:400-2, November, 1940. 10 L. W. Keeler, "An investigation of the effect of subject deficiencies upon accomplishment of students en- tering the College of Engineering at the University of Michigan during the academic years 1927-1928, 1928-1929, and 1929-1930,“ Bureau of Educational Reference and fig- §earch; Bulletin fig. lgg, March, 1931. (Ann Arbor: School of Education, University of Michigan), 68 pp. 11 J. P. Mitchel, "The study clarifies college admission problems, " California Journal 9: Secondary Education, l7:l44,6, March, 1942. 12 Rudyard K. Bent, "Scholastic records of non-high school graduates entering the University of Arkansas," Journal g£_Education§; Research, 40:108-15, October, 1946. 13 william R. Odell, "College admission issues in California," California Journal 9; Secondary Educating, 16:235-8, April, 1941. L. . 31‘131)‘ 18 the pupil. Study habits,14 attitudes and goals,15 and an inherent determination for success associated with a fair degree of intelligence seem to be the greatest assets toward successful academic progress in college. The American Society for Engineering Education and its predecessor, The Society for the Promotion of Engi- neering Education, have been seriously interested in this problem for a number of years. The results of some of their researches have been exceedingly useful in the field of engineering education. As one would expect there are several schools of thought in the area of entrance re- quirements as expressed through the Journal 9: Engineering Education and the Proceedings of the Society.16 The one, as expressed in a recent article by Miller and Roth,17 advocates that high school requirements must be raised academically so that more and earlier attention may be focused on purely engineering subjects in the 14 Douglass, loo. cit.; Washburn, loc. cit 15 Ruth E. Eckert, "The significance of curriculum choice," Studies in Articulation of High School and Colle e, University of Buffalo Studies, Volume 13,1936. (Buffalo: University of Buffalo), pp. 313-5. 16 These are official organs of the "American Society for Engineering Education" and its predecessor, "The Society for Promotion of Engineering Education." 17 Fredrick H. Miller and Sidney G. Roth, "A Report on.Mathematics Preparation for Engineering Colleges," The Journal of Engineerinngducation, 37: 628- 637, April, 1947. 19 university. Miller's first recommendation furnishes a good illustration of the contentions of this school. The courses in algebra should be stepped up so that a higher attainment of skills can be accomplished at the end of each. Some of the techniques in intermed- iate algebra should be placed in the elementary alge- bra course and then reviewed and extended in later studies.18 This school of thought urges an increase of mathe- matics for its Specific usefulness in the field of engi- neering with the apparent purpose in view of requiring a better and deeper knowledge of tool subjects upon entering college so that more time will be available during the college course for professional training. Yet, it hardly takes into account the full problem of the typical high school when it preposes that the high school training should include four years of mathematics and that this ought to include training in the elementary concepts of the calculus. Although recognizing the dual purpose of high school education, it overlooks the vital problem of the efficient separation of the college preparatory group during the early high school years before sufficient ex- ploration has been allowed. The high school youth of today who will be the engineering student of tomorrow is often unprepared in educational maturation to fully decide 18 Ibid., p. 635. 20 upon a chosen field of study early in his high school career. Another phiIOSOphy similar in its effects upon the high school program of studies, although widely separated in its basic concepts, is referred to by Wilds. Even today in many countries we find schoolmen who are still agencies for the preservation of the theory of fomnal discipline, defending the old formal gram- mar, Latin, algebra, and geometry as the most import- ant subjects in the curriculum, on the grounds that they produce great minds through a training in logi- cal thinking. 9 This second school of thought contends that it is rigorous mental training that is a necessary stepping stone to success, and that this training in thinking is essential before any Specialized training should begin. It might be significant to quote a few lines from Hutchins who is an outstanding example of this philosOphy. With deference I suggest to the New England prepar- atory schools (after they have become colleges) a course of study based upon ideas--how to recognize them, analyze them, deve10p them, and apply them. This used to be done through what was called the ntrivium": grammar, rhetoric, and logic. A course of study composed of the classics and the trivium would make the college an intellectual enterprise and college education an intellectual experience. The graduate would have had no vocational training. He would have trained his mind. He would be better equipped to meet practical situations than one whose training has been given him through the medium of . 19 Elmer Harrison Wilde, The Foundations 9: Modern Education. (New York: Rinehart & Company, Inc., 1942 , pp. 365,6. 21 little imitation practical situations in the class- room. I suggest also that the graduate of such a college would be better equipped to go into the uni- versity than one who had passed through a preparatory school of the variety that exists today.2 Again. . . . We have then for general education a course of study consisting of the greatest books of the western world and the arts of reading, writing, thinking and speaking, tOgether with mathematics, the best exemplar of the processes of human reason. . . . If we wish to prepare the young for intelligent action, this course of study should assist us: for they will have learned what has been done in the past, and what the greatest _ men have thought. They will have learned to think for themselves. . . . All the needs of general educatiog1 in America seem to be satisfied by this curriculum. This concept fails to meet the strong public senti- ment and philos0phical concepts that have set up a new educational yardstick for successful secondary training. The old "disciplines,“ however successful they may have been, do not meet modern criteria for education-~a truly democratic education in a democracy-~although these "disciplinesa with their, of necessity, concomitant trans- fer of training concepts have, perhaps, been too completely discarded in modern educational planning. A third school of thought maintains quite a dif- ferent point of view when it advocates that it is the 20 Robert Maynard Hutchins, fig Friendl Voice. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 19365, pp. 79,80. 21 Hutchins, The Higher Learning in America. (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1936), p. 85. 22 business of the high school to train for adequate living and thus leave the college or university free to adminis- ter the technical training. This concept integrates with the modern phiIOSOphy of the high school as eXpressed by Proctor. What the high school insists upon, since it belongs to all of the peeple and is supported by them, is the right to teach those subjects which are found to be best adapted to the deve10pment of worthy citizens for a democracy and for the orientation of those prospec- tive citizens in the world as it now is, and not as it was in 1635, 1750, or even 1890. . . . It is because the emphasis on foreign languages and mathematics, in most of the prOposed national standards of college admission, are so exces- sive as to make impossible the inclusion of the sub- jects which are coming to be recognized as of greater importance for carrying out the true principles of secondary education, that public education officials ought to think twice before endorsing such preposals?2 Moehlman continues this thought as he summarizes these reaponsibilities of the high school. Individual differences in human beings seem to me to demand that the school rovide two distinct types of learning activities: (1 provisions which release to the full the creative talents and peculiarities of each personality; and (2) provisions which orient the individual in the cosmic process and prepare him for high-level social c00peration. . . . Both are needed 22 Quotation from W. M. Proctor, Chapter VI, "The relationship between high school and college," Department of Superintendence of the National Education Association, Sixth Yearbook. (Washington: Department of Superintend- encey, p. 144. 25 for completeness of living. . . . Democracyhrepre- sents a moving equilibrium between the two.“5 While it is true that many high schools have not deve10ped their philoSOphies to this point, yet the in- fluence of the times--the democracy of the community—-is making itself felt in the philoSOphy of the most conserva- tive school or system. This philos0phy of education deve10ped through years of eXperience by the peOple of America has come to demand that: Schools should be dedicated to the prOposition that every youth in these United States-~regard1ess of sex, economic location, or race--should eXperience a broad and balanced education which will (1) equip him to enter an occupation suited to his abilities and offer- ing reasonable Opportinity for personal growth and social usefulness; (2) prepare him to assume the full responsibilities of American citizenship; (3) give him a fair chance to exercise his right to the pursuit of happiness; (4) stimulate intellectual curiosity, engender satisfaction in intellectual achievement and cultivate the ability to think rationally; and (55 help him to develop an appreciation of the ethical values which should undergird all life in a democratic society. It is the duty of a democratic society to provide Opportunities for such education through its schools. It is the obligation of every youth as a citizen to make full use of these Opportunities..24 Spaulding suggests that it is the duty of the high school to train its pupils in (l) the fullest preparation for citizenship, (2) the abilities necessary for continued 23 Arthur B. Moehlman, School Administration. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1940), p. 53, 9:. p. 28. 24 Education for All American Youth, Educational Policies Commission. (Washington: National Education Association, 1944), p. 21. learning, (3) a healthful program of recreation, (4) voca- tional experiences suitable to their individual needs. He also appeals for a new type of diploma and new standards of evaluation as a basis for recommendation from school to school or from school to other new environment such as the farm,sh0p, business, or home.25 As the aims of the high school have broadened to include the needs of a greater percentage of the pOpula- tion the enrollment has multiplied correSpondingly. Edmonson suggests that: Many of the greatest achievements of secondary edu- cation, and most of its perplexing problems, have had a common origin in a rapidly increasing school enroll- ment. More liberal provision is made here LU. S. An] than in any other country for the education of all youth, bright and dull, rich and poor. Schooling is now provided for a larger percentage of the pepulation than ever before in our history. It is estimated that one-fourth of our total pepulation is now enrolled in educational institutions. The general acceptance of the high school as democracy's agency for bringing second- ary education to all the children of all the people, regardless of racial, political, or economic differen- ces among parents, has been most encouraging. The United States has been proud to stand first among nations in the proportion of youth enrolled in high schools. Because of their great faith in the values of education, the peOple of this nation have been willing to make sacrifices in order to provide school- ing for an increasing number of young peOple. 25 Francis T. Spaulding, High School and Life. (New York: The McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1938), pp. 263- 83. 26 James Bartlett Edmonson, Joseph Roemer and Francis L. Bacon, The Administration 9: the Modern Second- ary School. (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1941), p. 44. 25 This increase of high school pOpulation is best shown graphically. In Figure 1 the actual increase in enrollment is shown which represents the great eXpansion of the demands made on the facilities for secondary educa- tion. On this same Figure a graph of the increase of total pOpulation of high school age is shown. Figure 2, however, shows the increase in the percentage of the total pOpula- tion within the ages of 14-17 who are attending school. This increase means that there will be a much greater variability in needs, interests, and abilities, academi- cally, socially, and vocationally within the school. AS this percentage continues to rise so also does the hetero~ geneity of the school pOpulation increase. If the second- ary school is for all of the peOple, then it seems certain that all will agree that most of these peeple will not get the greatest benefit out of a detailed study of mathematics or a specialized preparation in science. Expressing the same thought another way, if each high school furnished but one engineering student per year to the universities there would be over 31,000 entrants each year.“27 In 1939 there were but 31,797 engineers enrolled in the freshman classes 27 David T. Blose, Statistical Summary of Education 1943-4, Biennial Survey of Education in the United States 1942-4. (Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1947), p. 19. 26 '09- TOTAL POPULATION I4—l7 YEARS. —--- ”’\ 912. TOTAL ENROLLMENT.-,-—-—/ ’/ _ PUBLIC SCHOOL / e.o ENROLLMENT. ....... / (D Z O 3 -_J 2 E (I: ll] 0 z D _Z o I L n n A i l 1 1 I870 l880 I8§O l9OO I9IO 1920 I930 1910 I9§O YEAR A.O. FIGURE 1 GROWTH OF HIGH SCHOOL ENROLLMENT AND TOTAL POPULATION OF HIGH SCHOOL AGE FROM l87O TO I944" * After Edmonson, op. cit., p. 46-7. Data from Blose, Op. cit., p. 19. Table II. L H . JM“M 2'7 IOQ . 90_ v 8Q 70 60 5Q PERCENT 401 SQ 20__ I JA I I I I I 1 I960 I990 I900 I9I0 I9’20 I930 I940 I950 YEARS A FIGURE 2 PER CENT OF TOTAL POPULATION OF men SCHOOL AGE U4-W’YEARS) ENROLLED IN PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES FROM I880 TO l944‘ * Ibid., also Blose, Op. cit., p. 10. See Table II. 28 TABLE II TOTAL POPULATION AGE 14 TO 17 YEARS, SECONDARY SCHOOL ENROLLMENT, AND PER CENT OF THIS POPULATION ENROLLED IN PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOLS IN THE UNITED STATES FROM 1870 TO 1944* High school POpulation from enrollment by 14 to 17 years Per cent Year thousands by thousands. enrolled 1870 80 - NO data given - 1880 110 3,937## 2.8**# 1890 357 5,354 6.7 1900 696 6,152 11.3 1910 1,111 7,220 15.4 1920 2,496 7,736 32.3 1930 4,800 9,341 51.5 1940 7,113 9,720 73.2 1942 6,923 9,619 72.0 1944 6,021 9,298 64.8 # Blose, Qp, cit., p. 10. ** Estimated. (110 x 100) ( 2.8 ) tee Edmonson, 93. it., p. 46. I. i V .- 'n‘ u. 29 in the United States.29 It is apparent that the primary work of the high school cannot be said to be that Of pre- paring pre-engineers since about 0.5% Of the 1938 high school pOpulation enrolled for engineering in 1939. Since most Of the schools are small, with a limited and sometimes highly overloaded faculty, the curriculums cannot be highly Specialized. This means that pupils from these schools will Often be ineligible for entrance to a school Of engineering. As these new philOSOphical concepts of the function of the secondary school and the rapidly growing recognition of secondary education as a necessary preparation for life, and the consequent increase in heterogeneity, eSpecially in ability, interests and physical, emotional, and educational maturations Of the school pOpulation are considered in conjunction with the complex and vital problems connected with the deve10pment Of competent engineers, the urgent need Of a study of the specialized requirements which the college makes upon the high school is manifest. This study cannot hOpe to solve but only bring to light many of these pertinent problems. Its sc0pe, field Of emphasis, and geographical area must Of necessity be 23 The Journal 9: Engineering Education, 30:457, 1940. W- 30 limited. Further studies such as this and others on related problems as they are revealed should be undertaken so that planning committees and entrance boards may have facts upon which tO base their philOSOphies and hence their requirements. Before taking up the details Of this study a review Of pertinent literature is essential to a prOper under- standing Of the current approach to this problem. CHAPTER II A SURVEY OF PERTINENT LITERATURE There is a vast amount of literature on the general tOpic of college and university admissions. Considerable Of this material deals with high school requirements and some with deficiencies in general. An extensive bibli- ography dealing with college entrance requirements was furnished to the author by A. D. Graves Of San Francisco. This is being supplemented every month by the magazines and journals in the field of education. Related studies. A number Of general studies in articulation Of high school and college have been repor- ted. Notable among these are the Buffalo Studies1 in which a number Of research workers pooled their resources, the Eight-Year Studyz which was so aptly reported by mem- bers Of the directing committee, and the Oregon Studies:5 1 Edward Stafford Jones, Ed. Studies in Articula- tion 9f High School and College. University Of Buffalo Series I, II, and III. (Buffalo, New York: University of Buffalo, 1934-1936). r 2 The study Of Thirty Schools Sponsored and direc- ted by the Progressive Education Association and reported in a series of books. See bibliography under: Aikin, Chamberlin, and Thirty Schools Tell Their Story. 3 University g; Oregon Publications, Educational Service, Volume 3. (Eugene, Oregon? University Publica- tions, September, 1931). 32 which have furnished several reports by Harl Douglass and others. Mitchel4 in a review Of the Eight~Year Study empha- sized the need Of a specific preparation during the high school years for the "Hard Things" of life. Harl Douglass concludes that: There is no significant correlation between the number Of units credit earned in high school in any subject field and the scholastic success in college. The scholastic success of those students whose pattern of high school subjects is deficient in amount in any of the various subject fields is to no significant degree inferior to that of the students presenting the prescribed credits.5 He also suggests, "It would seem that no more strik- ing example of the application of fallacious untested theories to educational administration may be mentioned than in the prevailing method of selecting students for higher education."6 A quotation from a recent article summarizes the case in point very aptly. One group believes that a certain number of Specific courses in English, mathematics, science, and foreign 4 J. P. Mitchel, "The study clarifies college ad- mission problems," California Journal 9: Secondary Educa- tion, 17:144,5, March, 1942. 5 Harl R. Douglass, "The relation Of high school preparation and certain other factors to acadgmic success at the University of Oregon," (Eugene, Oregon: University 2: Oregon Publications, Education Series, Volume 3, September, 1931). 56 p. 6 , "The relation of pattern of high school credits to scholastic success in college,“ North Central Association Quarterly, 62283-97, December, 1931. 33 languages are the key to success in the university. They say that these subjects have proved their value and that peOple who succeed in them in high school also succeed in college or university. Another group believes that these are hurdles only. They look with a skeptical eye on the length of time a student must devote to these subjects in high school and say that for many students other areas Of learning might be far more profitable. . . . There is a great deal of evidence to indicate: (1) that success in the univer- sity or college is not dependent upon what pupils take in high school, but how well they do with what they take; (2) that success in the university or college can be predicted with considerable success by the use Of aptitude tests, personal interviews, records Of grade-point averages in high school and participation in high school activities; (3) that students from high school with curricula related to their life and prob- lems of today make just as good records as pupils graduating from traditional curricula; (4) that the effect of college entrance requirements upon high school curricula cannot be minimized. This effect in- fluences the subjects taken by the 85% who do not go to college, as well as the 15% who do go.7 Aiken8 in a preliminary report on the Eight-Year Study made a very significant comment, the import of which has not been fully perceived by either the high schools or the colleges, when he pointed out that preparing students FOR college is not synonymous with preparing them for COLLEGE ENTRANCE. The Californ;§_Journal 2; Secondary Educatigp has been active in publishing many minor studies in this same 7 Albert D. Graves, "Another look at college ad- missions," California Journal g£_Secondary Education, 21:122-125, February, 1946. 8 Wilford M. Aiken, "proparing students for col- lege," Educational Record, Supplement 11, 19:22—37, January, 1936. 34 field. The Michigan "College Agreement"9 is an outgrowth of these and similar studies and their influence. It, perhaps more than any other one thing, suggested to the writer this area of research as being of active import. In the Specific area of engineering education the Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education through the Journal g: Engineering Education has done more active writing than the rest. These published Opinions at times fail to realize the implications of the educational changes in the modern high school and the necessity Of a readjustment in college entrance requirements to compen- sate for those changes. The engineering schools as a group continue to make the heaviest demands upon the high school in the field of Specific subject requirements. Special studies. A significant study in this par- ticular area was made sixteen years ago Of the entrants to the School Of Engineering Of the University of Michigan over a three-year period 1927-1930.10 It was found that: (a) deficiency in mathematics was most frequent, and 9 For the text of the Agreement please see Appendix B. 10L. W. Keeler, An Investigation Lf the Effect Lf Subject Deficiencies upon Accomplishment Lf the Students Entering the College Lf Engineering Lf the University Lf Michigan During the Academic Yegrs 1927- 28, 1928- 29, and 1929-§Q_. Bureau of Educational Reference and Research, Bulletin NO. 138, (Ann Arbor: University Of Michigan, School of Education, March 30, 1931), 68 p. .-s ,“fl‘ we. ‘3 35 greater than the sum of all other deficiencies; (b) defi- ciency in physics was next in order of frequency; (c) the percentage entering with deficiency was increasing; (d) there was no significant difference in progress in the college field between the groups with and without defi- ciency; (e) the rate of mortality was slightly higher among those with deficiency.11 The Society for the Promotion of Engineering Edu- cation published a bulletin12 in 1926 in which the admis- sion procedures with eliminations and their apparent causes were analyzed. They reported the rate of elimina- tions among those admitted with conditions in mathematics much higher than those with clear entrance. The engineering school at Purdue University has employed an active psychologist on its staff for a number of years. His study in c00peration with Geigerlz reported 11 Ibid., p. 66,7. 12 "A study of admissions and eliminations of engi- neering students,n Committee on Admissions and Elimina- tions (H. H. Jordan, Chairman), Investigation 9: Engineer- _;pg Education, Bulletin No. 2, The Society for the Promo- tion of Engineering Education. (Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Lancaster Press, Inc., September, 1926), 35 p. 13 H. H. Remmers and H. E. Geiger, "Predicting success and failure of engineering students in the schools of engineering at Purdue University," Studies 1g Higher Education, Volume gg. (Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue Univer- sity, Division of Educational Reference, May, 1940). p. 10-19. Ill! I'llr _. I {. I! ‘ t t , I . u r 0‘ u a v 0 h u I , v I I .. a .. . | .i . .\ . v. I |I . . I] r . A . . . T . .A _ . . r . L. . L k t. . . _ r. t . s . . r . . . u r, . I . .. I. . . . . t a v . o . J v I i . .. . r . .. \ . v. w. a {I r v . I . i . I I 0 II C . . . n . ) a ,x . 3. r. J a.| 1‘ 1 cl . I .— a e . . I] . . . , . l .. (a .4. l .1 ‘ \ 1:. Ir . . s o . v . .1 .. x e 5 n V .5 v f. V I. , O . . ks O i . . or. r . . 0v. . f A c I. o . . y r , . v i C (J. . . i . . .~. v . n I. I O . . . s r . a r .- v v ,. . . f. .o ,e . ‘3 n . A . . n n) t . l. . a '- p _. . -A L. . . p In 2 -. . u ’ ‘ ) .. y n . . . . . .I. o . . L .I\ . . 4 u . . . . I . i I a . « A ~.. .7. ll. 1 . r . . .IJ f v. . V a, v . r e\ .e . .I n 8.4 14 L I .. . I 1 . I . .v r e I. . 4 I . i. y! . r . I . x . r . 4. i. . . .. 7 . . . . .. . t . . . s . . . t . . .I e F It I . an . u y in f I . \ .I .. w . n A, .K . i . N l\ . I: n u A v . . . . f. . . i 5 in . 'I. Q . y e . ) r . a. . a I v), . . . y .F, be I - . 04:4 . e . .t» - ‘A. . I. .1. . 36 in 1940 that the correlation of various predicting examina- tions and future academic progress varied from .52 to .72. The eXperience of Purdue University with the admission of 14 as a part of the accelerated non-high school graduates education program during the war years revealed that the grades of these Special students were slightly higher than the normal grades of the university. CorreSponding studies at the University of Arkansas15 revealed similar results. Grade-point averages were .28 higher with these accelerated pupils. Some of these studies drew conclusions from the population without regard to the variations of scholastic ability in the groups compared; at least, such considerations are not mentioned in the reports of the studies. Bent concluded his report with the comment: It should not be concluded from these studies that high school attendance is unnecessary, . . . or that colleges should admit all who apply for admission. They Should, however, avoid the strict adherence to their stated requirements or the employment of a mechanical device or mathematical formula for pre- dicting success as a basis for selective admission, for this cannot be done, Since these devices merely 14 Jean Harvey and Kenneth Davenport, "Purdue University's eXperience with the admission of non-high school graduates," §tudies in Higher Education, Volumg gg, (Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University, Division of Educational Reference, May, 1940). p. 3 - 9,, 15 Rudyard K. Bent, "Scholastic* records of non-high school graduates entering the University of Arkansas,“ Journal g§_Educational Research, 40:108-15, October, 1946. 37 supplement rather than become satisfactory substitutes for the employment of judgment in evaluating and guiding each candidate as an individual.16 There appears to be an urgent need for study into the basis upon which some of the present college entrance requirements rest, eSpecially along Specified subject matter fields. What better Opportunity could be afforded than the present influx of large numbers of deficient entrants. 16 Ibid., p. 115. CHAPTER III DEFINITION AND SCOPE OF THE PROBLEM AND AN ANALYSIS OF CONCOMITANT FACTORS Definition. This problem deals Specifically with high school deficiencies and the relationship of science deficiencies to subsequent academic progress of all reg- istrants in Basic College with engineering preference and the School of Engineering at Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science during the fall term of 1946 and it follows them through the winter and Spring terms of 1947. Thus, the minimum attendance of any en- trant studied is three terms. Many, however, have had Six terms or more in attendance. During the past twenty-five years there has been little change in the entrance requirements of the School of Engineering of Michigan State College or its predeces- sor Michigan Agricultural College.1 The wording of the engineering requirements has been altered twice but three 1 Michigan State College Catalogue and Michigan Agricultural College Catalogpg, section entitled High School Requirements, 1920-1947. 39 units2 of mathematics has always been required. Until 1937 physics was the only Science required. At that time the requirement was changed to read two units of science. This remained in force until Basic College was instituted in 1945 when the science requirements were changed to read, "physics and one other laboratory science or Physical Science Basic 131, 132, 133 from Michigan State College."3 The problem as set up deals primarily with the science requirements but Since these are so completely interwoven with the mathematics deficiencies, the math- ematics deficiency must of necessity be considered in any rate of progress study. These two subject areas include more than 95% of the total deficient entrants4 admitted to the study of engineering. In a further section of 2 Units refer to high school credits in which four units constitute a full load for a normal high school child for a school year. A unit was originally defined as the Carnegie unit in an effort to standardize high school studies. This required a class meeting of at least forty- five minutes, five days per week, with approximately forty-five minutes Spent in preparation each day. 3 General Catalog 9: Michigan State College, 1945- 36. (East Lansing: Michigan State College, 1946), p. 57. 4 A deficient gptrant refers to a student who has been granted admission to the school of his choice, with deficiency, the understanding being that such deficiencies will be removed in a way acceptable to the school con- cerned by the active participation of the student. 40 this chapter the principal reasons for this concentration are analyzed. Sggpg. The scope of this study includes: (1) an analysis of the type and frequency of deficiencies in the records of current students registered in Basic College with engineering preference and the School of Engineering at Michigan State College; (2) the methods by which these deficiencies are removed; (3) the variation in the time required for the removal of these deficiencies; (4) a comparison between frequency of drOp-outs of the deficient and non-deficient groups; (5) an analysis of the scholastic achievement in the engineering subjects and the general education subjects of the early (terms one and two) and later (remaining terms) collegiate work as related to the deficiencies in high school science and mathematics on admission to Michigan State College. ‘ég analysis 9: the causes g§_this pggblem. The present influx of ex-servicemen came with all types of educational backgrounds. Some were able to continue where they had left off in their educational program at the the they were called to service. Others, and this was probably the majority, had matured in the service and had caught new visions of the possibilities in education. Many had changed their fields of interest. Many who had drOpped 41 out of school, perhaps several years before entering the service, for various reasons such as lack of finances or interest, now determined to attain their new educational ambitions with the aid of the promised government assist- ance. Most of these had completed their high school work and many were able during their time in service to obtain advanced credit, often within their field of choice. There are also deficiencies among the non-veterans but since the veterans form the greater percentage of the population of the engineering school, their problems form a vital part of the total picture. Another reason why the high school work of many of these returning men, as well as some of the younger en- trants, was not Shaped toward an engineering program is that, in order for a high school graduate to attain in a normal manner the three units of mathematics (some engi- neering schools require four units) and two units of lab- oratory science required in engineering, his vocational choice must be made before he registers for his SOphomore year in high school. It is a common practice of our educational system for children to begin School when about five years of age. and to be promoted one grade each year. Since individuals do not mature in a uniform pattern Simultaneously with their chronological age, there iS found considerable 42 heterogeneity among any single age group. Some at fourteen years are ready to decide upon their life interests; others must wait several years. When we consider the varying maturation5 rates of a given individual, it is a real credit to the high school guidance program that so many are pre- pared to enter college without deficiency. Chance cannot help having played a part in this preparation, since there is a strong tendency to offer and encourage the program of studies that has been accepted by tradition as college preparatory in many high schools. The acceptance by the high schools of Michigan of the new College Agreement,6 within the spirit of that agreement, will tend to produce a greater number of these deficiencies as the student is encouraged to explore throughout a wider field before he begins his Specialization. For that reason, if for no other, the present study should be Significant since in the future more of the regular entrants will, in all probabil- ity, Show deficiencies for these highly Specialized curricula. Third, many small high schools are unable to offer the third unit of mathematics or the second unit of 5 Albert J. Huggett and Cecil Vernon Millard, Growth and Learning 1p the Elementary School. (Boston: D. C. Heath and Company, 1946), p. 14-45. 6 See Appendix B. 43 laboratory science because of the small need for these subjects. This often results in a student of otherwise excellent pre-engineering qualifications entering with as much as two units deficiency due to no fault of his own or of the school which prepared him. With the continued increase in the uses of engi- neering and complex engineering activities on the part of many trades, it is to be expected that an increasing per- centage of the total pOpulation will require engineering training.7 Therefore, it may be expected that many of the present conditions will continue to exist in the area of admission problems. Leaders in the engineering field estimate that labor and industry will continue to require over 23,000 new trained men per year.8 A_brief analysis 23 present conditions. At present approximately 30% of the total current enrollment in engi- neering, i.e., Basic College with engineering preference and the School of Engineering, are deficient in some 7 Karl T. Compton, et al., "The outlook in the demands for and supply of engineering graduates," (Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education, Survey, Ihg_ Journal 2: Engineering Education, 37:31,32, January, 1947). 8 Ibid. Henry H. Armsby, "A re-examination of the Compton report in the light of enrollment in engineering curricula, fall of 1946,” The Journal gngngineering Education, 37:675-88, May, 1947. 44 requirements. One-half of these were deficient by more than one high school unit and one-third by one unit; the remaining one-sixth were deficient by less than a whole unit. There are approximately 400 deficient in mathematics and 350 deficient in science. More detailed analysis will be presented in later chapters. Figure 3 Shows the fre- quency of deficiencies calculated from the basic engineer- ing section of the general sample. (The selection of this sample is outlined on page 64.) Policies 9: removal. Much of this work is made up during the first three terms (one year). At times this work is not made up until the eighth or ninth terms and in some instances the make-up has been omitted entirely. There are several recognized methods by which these defi- ciencies may be removed. Extreme cases are referred to the Servicemen's Institute (3. M. I.) where each student is allowed to complete his high school work as rapidly as his advanced maturity will permit. With the added age and consequent maturity combined with the added experience gained during useful employment these men often find it possible to do more than two years of high school work in the Space of one school year. This group includes those with a language handicap or deficiency or those lacking one year or more of high school work. These cases are not included in any of the summarizations of this OF STUDENTS NUMBER 3Q- 2Q. THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS £2. HAVING VARYING DEGREES OF ENTERING DEFICIENCY IN THE BASIC SECTION OF THE GENERAL SAMPLE; POPULATION OF SAMPLE e 434 NUMBER OF OEFIOIENT STUDENTS = I35 TOTAL UNITS DEFIclENT = |9l.5 UNITS DEFICIENT FIGURE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF DEFICIENCIES 46 study.9 Other cases such as those included in this study may take refresher (non-credit) courses such as those Offered in mathematics and physical Science. A third method allows the substitution of six term credits of reg- ular college work in the required field in lieu of each high School unit deficient. In a fourth method students are allowed to write examinations in certain subjects in which their experience and/or previous training have given them a background which will make the attempt worthwhile. If successful in the examination, credit is recorded in their high school record as credit by examination. A fifth and less frequently used method is removal by letter. If the chairman Of the Michigan State College Board Of Examin- ers or the Dean of the particular school feels that the work of the student shows sufficient attainment along this deficient field, he will write a letter Of request to the registrar suggesting that the deficiency be waived. In the sixth method six credits of basic physical science automatically removes a deficiency in physics. Data regarding the nature Of these entering defi- ciencies and time and method Of removal with an index of their effect on subsequent academic progress will form the essential material for a consideration of this problem. 9 Mr. ROSS Mateson Of Michigan State College Counsel- ing Department is making a particular study Of this group. CHAPTER IV SELECTION AND RECORDING OF DATA Sources. The Record Office, at the request of the Registrar, Mr. Linton, kindly Opened its records for this study. These records are in two distinct groups. The record Of registration and all work taken subsequent there- to are condensed onto a "Cardex" filing card approximately 8n x 11".1 Matriculation details are written on the head of the card and on the body of the card is recorded the work of each term including course numbers and names, followed by hours credit, grade and honor points. Sub- totals Of hours credit and honor points are made at the end of each term. Disciplinary actions, waivers, and advance standing evaluations are summarized on the reverse Side of the tOp Of this card. The application for admission, with a record of credit evaluation and cOpieS Of all inter-department correspondence regarding the student's enrollment and progress are kept in a vertical file. Here are to be found the recommendation of the high School principal, Size Of graduation class, rank in graduating class, and a complete 1 A sample record card may be found in Appendix v-2 . 48 transcript Of all high school credits as submitted by the principal or other Officer Of the graduating high school. There is also a summarized evaluation by the admissions officer of the college.2 A record Of the results Of the entrance examina- tions was Obtained from the Board of Examiners and the psychological and reading test scores were used. Preliminary survey. In the search for these data a preliminary survey was made of all records of the cur- rent attendance lists of both basic and undergraduate engineers of the fall 1946 term. During this survey a record was made Of name, student number, number of terms in attendance, and the nature of the entering deficiency of all students lacking one or more units of science re- quired for entrance by the School of Engineering. This formed the deficient group of this study. The Individual Record. Subsequently a record Sheet3 (Figure 4) was made for each student who entered with Science deficiency. The name was recorded as it is given on the permanent records of the Record Room. The 2 A sample of this record Sheet is to be found in Appendix D-l. 3 See Appendix D for a sample Individual Record sheet with cross references tO the source of each item on the records of the Record Room. 49 FJame‘ filtgt: 1m ..—-- -"-. ~-—-— _-— --——-—.—-¢.e-—-o— Date of Entry Number of Terms College Racer} lst & 2nd R maininq lat & >nd Hemainin k. . terms terms terms term: I -. T " 2‘ -. r”Ital pours Hours railed -g—-—-— —- ,._ _Honor Points Retio —.—- -a—n - o- T“, *0: s . r- “.’- u .e H I ' ‘.. IIOJJ ‘u Elli-J .LIIC‘Cir. int, lJAV".".“\J .: :11. l. . K... .I. “go—e- ; ”-O*- -m 7.- - 3, -, f‘ ., .‘ , :IO:.‘(.2-I‘ Points flittio ” _ e“ “m. .w”- . t- e .. 1 v.“ .. .. > (“11‘8- . $1-513.th f [1.1 ”(flirf‘, 53:11.09 i'c'l LIHSIHE c.1013 .._...-... t . r‘ . .-‘+ -‘r‘- .' IIOGOI‘ felling #th.1.0 uo—u“- w...— Make up Work Mathematics .cten 'l' ‘ ‘ ' '. ' - r ‘ /~' if Ll ’ 4'" I. -‘-.,‘.. r -1 m Aetnoo of. Course Crete Term bathed 0L Jodise 0rd 0 Term removal removal :atLo IULIO ' " ‘ ‘ 1 1 n "-'-\V\,- vs - 'I rrs A 1" -’ ‘1 T"..,. I --v “Lay : '- AIL—£1.11 0".(J C."1.L'JCQ ) 4‘4. 1.! , T'ECFJI ”1.659 CA ‘3’: ”ft-0..) ~r C1. ”'4. ‘u. ’ O '.:. It. In , 13"}; 53*;th r O a O _: - “ : ‘ "I I" . .. s”, - :zlterlng Def lc— Ugl-C—L'JL t -‘ LIJrL()(J Int-aw»: \;é~\n math Selenco Units Average. Science Pfizth Units Ave awe 'F(‘\t', I .T -1 4.... J w DJ ‘4 L1 I'— O J) -\ \‘I a. :3 (D O P‘. "I‘. I '3 (G O O 0 r4. 5“ I“ :3 C" t :> <‘, (3. ' J 0‘ '7” ‘4 v1 Psycholowical L.;ninntifn Transfer Credits Part 1 . - “art 2 From --*-—m fl...“-_. DOCllufl- Tar SchIce Credit .I.--“. cue—m“...— — FICRHUE 4 INDIVIDUAL RECORD (Completed for each case studied as explained in the text) 50 age was calculated as Of April 1, 1947 for the sake of uniformity Since the selection of the data Spread over a period from December, 1946 to August, 1947. The number of terms was corrected during a final acceptance Of the data during August, 1947. Number of terms followed by "S" indicates that the individual was in attendance during the 1947 summer session. However, no college grades were available for this term so no hours or honor points could be added. The date of entry was essential in order to Obtain the psychological test scores. College Record. In the first column under College Record is listed a summary of work during the first two terms in attendance. The first lire is the total hours earned, and the second line gives the total honor points for that work. These totals were taken directly from the subtotals made by the Record Room on the "Cardex" filing card. The subtotal at the end Of each term gives the total hours and honor points to date and includes sub- tractions for failures, since a grade of "F" carries with it a minus one honor point for each hour credit. Sub- tractions had to be made for transfer work and war service credit as these were recorded separately on the Individual Record sheet. The third and fourth lines give the same information for the engineering subjects except that the honor points were figured only for the hours passed (grade 51 Of "D" or over) and no subtraction was made for subjects failed. Lines five and Six give identical information for the science and mathematics subjects. The six blanks in the second column contain information identical to their parallel in the first for all Of the remaining terms in attendance. The third and fourth columns refer reSpectively to. the same division Of school work, with the first, third and fifth blanks giving the total hours failed and the second, fourth and Sixth the "point hour ratio," that is, the quotient Of credit points by hours credit, sometimes referred tO as the grade point average (g. p. a.). Point Grading System. At Michigan State College three credit points are given for an 2A", two for a "B", one for a "C", none for a "D" and a minus one for an "F" grade for each hour credit. Successive failures Of the same subject require but one subtraction. On the data sheet (Individual Record) this grade point system was used in all evaluation, both in college and high school grades. In computing the grade point average for the total hours in either the first two terms (T 1 and 2) or the remaining terms (Rem) a simple quotient was used, i.e.: total credit points ; g.p.a. _ total hours credit However, for the Special subject fields Of engineering and mathematics and science, points equal to the number of 52 hours failed in that field must be subtracted from the total credit points as recorded for that period before the quotient is taken, i.e.: credit points in field - hours failed ; g.p.a. hours credit (passed) This method was used because it greatly simplified the taking and recording Of this data and was of insignificant trouble in later computations. Make-up Work. For convenience the second section Of the record sheet entitled Make-up flgpk was divided into two Similar sections, mathematics and science.4 The key to the first column headed, "Method of Removal" is given at the foot Of this section, "M" referring to sub-college or work taken in one Of the college departments at high school level, and includes such courses as mathematics 90 (plane geometry), physical science refresher, and other courses for which college credit is never allowed. "N" refers to a college course Six credits Of which are neces- sary to substitute for each unit of deficient high school work.. This work is Of college level and would give credit toward graduation if not substituted for high school defi- ciencies and if not already successfully completed in high 4 The interested reader is referred to the dis- cussions on entrance requirements p. 38 and deficiencies p. 43 for‘further elucidation. 53 school. For instance, two pupils enter, without deficien- cy, both having one and One-half units of algebra and one of plane geometry, the first one-half unit Of solid geom- etry and the second one-half unit Of trigonometry. The first pupil will receive credit for mathematics 102, trig- onometry, since he has not had that subject, yet has com- pleted the three required units of mathematics.5 Similar- ly, the second will receive credit for mathematics 100b, solid geometry. "0" refers to a deficiency removed by examination. "P" signifies that because Of high scholar- ship in other subjects a request by the Board Of Examiners or a Dean has waived the deficiency. The second columns under mathematics and science reapectively, in the "make-up work" section, refers to the particular course number in the department.6 The third columns give the grade of that course and the fourth list the number of the term in the student's record in which he took this work to effect this deficiency removal. A blank was provided for a grade point average for this work. This average was not useful in the solution of the present 5 During the surve it has been noted that a number of students who have com eted up to two units Of algebra in high school are enrolIed in mathematics 100a, apparently for college credit. It seems that such courses Should be taken as "no credit" or refresher courses. 5 See Appendix E for a record Of the numbers and corres onding titles Of all courses used to remove science and ma hemat cs deficiencies as found in this investigation. 54 problem and, therefore, was never calculated. A compari- son Of these grades with correSponding high school and college grades might prove interesting and can be easily acquired from these data. The High School Record. The third section deals entirely with the high school record. The first column records in units the various deficiencies as given in the college record sheet. The mathematical subjects are Spe- cifically listed. If the student has had two years Of high school science with laboratory, then the physics re- quirement is checked as "Special" to distinguish this de- ficiency from those deficients having but one acceptable science. The second column of this section is filled entire- ly from the records as submitted in the original applica- tion Of the student and the accompanying high school tran- script. The Size of the high school graduation class, when given, was written directly above the heading High School Record, and the name of the town and the year of graduation immediately follow. The units were taken from this record and checked against those recorded on the stu- dent's college record. The quartile was taken from the_ report of the principal on the back Of the transcript and gives the academic standing Of the applicant in his grad- uating class; e.g., first or upper quarter to fourth or 55 lowest quarter. The averages were computed from the high school transcript by allowing three points for an "A" for each half unit (as explained for the college grades, ex- cept that there were no subtractions for failures) and then finding the quotient of total grade points by total half units. Due to the practice of accepting the evaluation of high school credits by a previous college, it was Often impossible to Obtain any grade point average for students who have transferred from other schools since only the summary Of units is usually given with a college tran- script. This required that twenty-two of the deficient group be drOpped. In the fourth section above the psychological exam- ination is written the name Of the intelligence test and the results, as an I.Q., if they were given in the high school record. Then follows the results, in deciles, of the American Council Psychological Examination which is Scored in two parts. Part I or the Q-Score attempts to measure the "abilities involved in quantitative thinking."7 Part II or the L-Score attempts to measure linguistic abil- ities. The third blank gives the total or composite score. 7 Report Of Board Of Examiners. Preface to fall and winter scores 1946-47, Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan. 56 under each blank is written the actual score when avail- able. Below this on the dividing line is written as a con- _tinuous number the scores in deciles of the four parts of the COOperative Test of Reading Comprehension. The first score is for the vocabulary section, the second is a rate measure of comprehension, the third is a difficulty meas- ure of comprehension, and the fourth is a total or com- posite measure of the three. The column on the right lists the transfer credits from other colleges and the war ser- vice credits. Below the line are listed the dates of disciplinary actions and a brief word as to the nature of the discip- line whether probation or a request to withdraw. Students in engineering who had less than one full unit deficiency in science were not studied, it being reasonable to expect that if a difference in prOgress were to-be found there would need to be a real distinct difference in the preparatory training. Mathematics deficiencies. The survey of mathematics deficiencies was taken from a sample of the general pOpu- lation, while a sample of the non-deficient group was being taken.8 8 For details regarding the selection of this gen- eral sample the reader is referred to page 64. DrOp-outs. The list of drOp-outs was easily ob- tained between the winter and spring terms, as the regis- trar's office had run a complete list of non-returns. The engineering students were tabulated from this list. The fall 1946 to winter 1947 list had to be compiled by comparing the two lists of engineering students supplied by the registrar's office for names missing on the winter list. The records of these students were then examined and information regarding psychological test score, number of terms in attendance and amount and kind of deficiency, if any, recorded. This information was taken from the total engineering population. Transfers. The list of transfer students was taken from the general sample at the same time the non- deficient sample was taken.9 The essential parts of this data were tabulated as given in Appendices L and M for the non-deficient and deficient groups respectively. This provided easy access to the pertinent portions of this data for the necessary analyses within and between the groups. 9 9;. p. 64. CHAPTER V A CRITICAL EMINLTION OF THE GROUPS AND A SEARCH FOR A BASIS FOR COMPARISON The non-deficient group. It was necessary to select a sample of the total pOpulation of the School of Engineering and Basic College with engineering preference since the total pOpulation presented too large a group. There were 1732 basic engineers1 and 636 upper division engineers or a total of 2368 in the two schools in the fall term of 1947. The non-deficient group, in order to show prOper contrast to the problem group as a control group, was selected only from those having no entering deficiencies in either mathematics or science. The selec- tion of this group was done arbitrarily. The alphabetical lists of engineering and basic engineering students were taken as a basis and every twelfth name was selected and examined for deficiency, transfer or drOp-out and lack of high school transcript. A sample of 111 cases without deficiency wees acquired in the first selection consisting of Group B1 of sixty-two cases from the Basic College and 1 Throughout this study students enrolled in Basic College with engineering preference will be referred to as basic engineers and their course as basic engineering. 59 Group El of forty-nine cases from the Engineering School. Since a larger sample was desired this same technique was repeated over both lists covering again every twelfth name beginning with the seventh name, and a further sample of eighty-two non-deficient cases was acquired consisting of Group Bz of sixty cases and Group E2 of twenty-two cases. Upon careful analysis of the variance of the high school grade point averages of these two groups, a discrepancy between B1 and 82 sufficient to doubt their origin from the same parent appeared.2 After a careful and fruitless search for a cause of this degree of variance a third sample, B3, consisting of seventy cases was taken from the basic engineering group, beginning with the fourth name on the list. The mean of the high school grade point average of this sample lay at almost the midpoint between the means of B1 and B2.3 A comparison of the sample means, as shown in Table III, of other academic averages revealed considerable variation in rank of the three groups from Basic College. It was noticed earlier that the mean of the size of graduation classes of groups one and two were quite divergent, yet 2 Results of these analyses may be found in Appen- dix I, Section 1, Tables XLVIII and XLIX, page 175-6. 3 See Appendix I, Section 2, Tables L and LI, for an analysis of variance of the five groups, p. 177-9. 60 8 owmao>m pGHOQ moo. ooo. ooo. .m.m oenem ooaposonpoa oHo. Nee. ope. .o.m poo ooeoaoo owoafioo omH.H oo¢.a non.H s oases oaoooo one needs ooo. nmoo. poo. a.m.m omeeo>e mow. moo. mam. .o.m waded oompm Hoe.H eoo.a oo.H 2 decoded Hoonoo swam ooo. «mo. Hoo. a.m.m omoao>o pesos one. see. ems. .o.m eooam Hepop omoHHoo mom.H eon.a Hem.H a made» weaeaoeom oH. mo. He. on. on. How. a.m.m mason oaooo oo.m me.m Ho.m eo.m Ho.m Hm.m .o.m eofieeoaaexo oe.o oH.o oo.o Ho.o oo.o we.o s Hooamofloeosoo .m.o.a Hoo. oHH. poo. poo. poo. poo. a.m.m omoeoee oeaoo ooeam oeo. mam. ens. oeo. mam. owe. .o.m soo.H ee.H mos.H moo.a moe.a Hmm.a s Hoooo Hooeom swam macho mm Hm mm mm Hm venmmaoo oopmaaoo kuoe camsmm ofipmapmpm newsmaSmwoz I.’ n 1" mDomm BzmHonmmnzoz mmB mo mmumzdm m>Hm Ema mo mEszmmDmde BZWEW>WHIO< 924 MBHAHmd mDon¢> mo mz¢m2 mme mo mmommm deflzskm Q24 mZOHE¢H>mQ mmmmzm pcfiom oompm Hoonem swam “mo sofipmfi>op ppooomum I’ll“ - 1“! ”It |I1H [l mo.omH r.mma o.nsa H.®Hm m.HmH m.~mm mNHw Hoonow swam mm.m wv.m mm.m mow.m mmm.m oom.m mwoam>m puaom opoaw Hoonow nmam oooao o e o m H co does HGUOB wMWWmHU If..- t.-- i i-euHMwwmmtmmmmumjiii mo.©mH o.moa m.HmH m.som os.OmH mm.mHm oNHm Hoonow swam om. 0mm.m mmm.m smv.m 0mm.m moo.m emwco>m waded ooocw Hoonem swam oooao mm Hm mm mm Hm co ones Hence museum - Aooueoaom may Abomw BzmHonmQ mme mBHS zomHmdmzoo < 024 mmqmzfim BzmHonmOnzoz M>Hm mme mom mm4do monmm mo MNHw 02¢ madmm>d BzHom madmm Joomom :mHm >H mqm¢e NUMBER OF CASES HAVING A GIVEN CLASS SIZE 63 6% — STATISTICS DEFICIENT NON-DEFICIENTS NUMBER OF CASES l52 20I MEDIAN 3qu I42 I40 5Q_ MEAN SIZE I90 l96 STANDARD DEVIATION 159 I88 LEGEND - I: 20 O oozool|oloo.o---Io-I e 400 0600 7070 0800—)UP 3SIZE OF CL5ASOS FIGURE 5 DISTRIBUTION OF THE SIZE OF HIGH SCHOOL SENIOR CLASSES 64 This group is large and includes all the non-defi- cients from over 20% of the total pOpulation. After con- sideration of all evidences at hand it seemed that this full group of 264 non-deficient cases best represented the non-deficient pOpulation of the engineering school.4 The general sample. A general sample of 548 cases from the engineering pOpulation was taken simultaneously with the selection of the non-deficient group. This sam- ple of the general engineering pOpulation includes the 264 cases which formed samples B1, B2, B3, E1 and 32 of the non-deficient group and the 284 cases which were re- Jected during the search for this non-deficient group. Data regarding deficiencies, transfers, and drOp-outs were recorded for each of the 434 cases from Basic College with engineering preference (basic engineering) and 114 cases from the School of Engineering (engineering). Frequency g: deficiency. Within this general sam- ple the 434 basic engineering students were deficient by a total of 103 units of mathematics and 97 units of science. Considering the requirement of three units of mathematics and two units of science, the science deficiency is the more frequent. One hundred thirty-five individuals in 4 A tabulation of the essential part of this data is to be found in Appendix L. 65 this group are deficient; therefore, the average defi- ciency is about 1.5 units per deficient student. Figures 6 and 7 give a detailed picture of the fre- quency of these deficiencies as related to the basic engineering section of the general sample. Figure 7 shows the interrelation of these deficiencies--the type and fre- quency of mathematics deficiency accompanying the various kinds of science deficiencies. The 114 upper division engineering students within the general sample had been, as entering freshmen, defi— cient by a total of eight units of mathematics and nine units of science. Fourteen individuals in this sample were deficient giving an average deficiency of about 1.2 units per deficient student. The deficient gpggp. From the preliminary survey of students from the total engineering pOpulation who en- tered with deficiency in high school science, a group of approximately 180 cases who had remained in engineering throughout the school year 1946-47 and whose records were sufficiently complete to make them usable was accepted. In further discussions this will be called the deficient group. This group was then divided into four classes according to the type of deficiency presented, namely: those having two units of science with the required lab- oratory but lacking physics (these were listed as physics 66 SCIENCE AND PHYSICS 38 P NON-DEFICIENT 5|.2‘7o ENROLLED FOR A MINIMUM OF THREE TERMS DEFICIENTS S.M. I. 9.2 SERVICEMEN'S INSTITUTE FIGURE 6 PERCENT OF DEFICIENCIES, TRANSFERS, AND DROP OUTS IN THE POPULATION OF THE BASIC ENGINEERING SECTION OF THE GENERAL SAMPLE .‘Q ‘e' r'izjir‘e'z are percent of the total .zect'. ‘- I 67 UNIT MATH. HGURE 7 PERCENT OF EACH TYPE OF DEFICIENCY AND COMBINATION OF DEFICIENCIES Taken from the 1157 deficient entrants in the Basic Col lege section of the general sample, (contains 32.2. of this section). Note: Numbers in each sector refer to the actual number of students entering with that type of deficiency. The inner arcs represent the total physics and science deficiencies and their combinations with mathematics. 23 ilgustggtg: There are sixty students or 43.5% with a physics deficiency including the eighteen listed as "special". Of the 42 physics, ten or 7.6» lacked physics only and thirteen lacked an additional science. Only four or 2.3% of these had no mathematics deficiency. FiVU (300 SCCtOP §_;_§fl) or 3.63 lacked physics, a science and two un'ts of mathematics (2M). 68 specials or just "Specials"); those having one acceptable science but lacking physics; those lacking one unit of laboratory science; and those few having no acceptable science to present for entrance. These four classes were then divided into sub- classes according to the type of make-up, either (1) sub- college work, (2) basic college work, or (3) no make-up. In turn, these classes were divided according to the amount of mathematics deficiency associated with their science deficiency.5 Examination of the high school and college grade point averages showed no visible pattern of averages that could be attributed to deficiencies. Figures 8 and 9 show the variations in time required to make up these science and mathematics deficiencies reSpectively. The attention of the reader is called es- pecially to the heel of the graphs on Figure 8 where those who have made no attempt to make up the science deficiency are placed. An analysis 9: variance within the group. An an- alysis of variance between the four classes6 without make- up work showed a very small variance between classes in either high school or college grades. A similar analysis 5 A tabulation of the essential part of this data is to be found in Appendix M. 6 The detailed analyses may be found in Appendix G, Section 2, Tables XXXIX to XLVII, pp. 171-4. students Humber Of 69 «3 Physics K] J [D (’3 (1) w uq ID :0 Physics (Special) K! «a :0 u IO F H No ' I E t i 5* make-up Terms required FIGURE 8 ANALYSIS or TIME REQUIRED TO COMPLETE REMOVAL or SCIENCE DEFICIENCY U 0 39% E 7.8% g 30% E 11.6% E 5.51 I s: I 1.11 : U I Two sciences ' Y I._21 # Science a NL T br_— 7O ' , p ' c '7 f "' O 1 g .7 v : L at) i 1 0v ' $ 2% Units .1 r4 ’3: 2 Units fiu——~ 43‘ T O cur H O) 15. J H 1% Units t’3] "‘ H t Nr :0] ‘1' (O u C Q g 1 Unit ‘ “a u CDJ [D B. O H H H to r“ l :v _ ,0 I d f". '4 7 —J ,5; Unit (Ol— J"— r: 01 H H (‘3 A A j J 4 L . 1 T r 1 fi make-up Terms required FIGURE 9 sngYSI: or TIPS RFZUIRED TO COMPLETE stovnt OF wsrasvirlcs DVFICIEYCIES Tats ACCOMFAYIED BY A SCIENCE DEFICIENCY 71 of variance between the four classes with make-up gave correSponding results. It was, therefore, logical to con- sider each of these two groups as a unit in further com- parisons. The comparison of the group without make-up with the group with make-up was sufficiently significant in the comparison of the college first and second term scores to warrant its inclusion within our text. Table V gives the breakdown of the analysis of variance between the group with make-up and the group without make-up work in both their high school achievement and the work pro- duced during the first two terms of college attendance. The variance between the high school scores of the two groups is very low which indicates that they are alike in their academic ability as measured by high school achievement. The variance between the college grade point averages of the two groups is almost highly significant indicating that there is a distinct difference between the college achievement of the two groups. An examination of the means of the two groups shows that there is a superiority of .1984 grade points in favor of the group having done no make-up work. Thus it is clearly evident that in these 180 cases those who have not yet done their make-up are making sig- nificantly higher grades in college than those who have 72 TABLE V ANALYSIS or VARIANCE FOR MAKE-UP ATD N0 MAKE-UP HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL AND COLLEGE lST‘AND 2ND TERMS GRA DE POINT AVERAGES Source of Var- 2 2 Mean square iance Df x y x‘ y . F test Total 179 62.4159 49.1749 Between for x in- groups 1 .2429 1.6729 .243 1.675 significant Within for y : groups 178 62.1750 47.5020 .349 .267 6.27* X Y (1) (2) High school g.p.a. College 1&2 g.p.a. No make-up Make-up. M : 1.53188 M x1 1.32927 yl M a 1.4708 M 1.1309 X2 Y2 = * Significant at the 5% level. (The F test at l and 150 degrees of freedom gives 6.81 at the 1% level and 3.91 at the 5% level.) 73 done their make-up work, although there was no significant difference between the high school grades of the two groups. This difference is to be expected from the very nature of the principles adOpted by the Board of Examiners and by the registration officers. It is a growing policy of the Board of Examiners and the deans to excuse the better students from this routine make-up since it is felt that their progress is not significantly hampered by omitting it. The foregoing seems to be a partial vindica- tion of this policy. A similar analysis was made comparing the results in the remaining terms of college, the results of which also substantiate the foregoing conclusions.7 With these conclusions in mind and with a knowledge of the similarity of high school records, it seems logical that the two sections of the deficient group, those with make-up and those without, should be accepted as a single group when comparisons are made between the deficient and the non-deficient groups. Basis for the comparison 2: deficient and non- deficient groups. For a comparison of academic achieve- ment between the deficient and the non-deficient groups 7 The detailed analysis may be found in Appendix G, Section 2, Tables XXXV to XLVII. 74 the best available measure of their academic abilities must be found. No comparison either of individuals or of groups would be significant unless some knowledge of their equivalency could be accepted. From a series of correla- tions it seems that high school achievement is the best criterion available for this purpose. After considering the problem of measuring abilities Peters and Van Voorhis have come to the conclusion that: Any criterion is good that is likely to correlate highly with improvement in the function under exper- imental study; if scores on a criterion do not corre- late well above zero with improvement in the function studied, that criterion is useless for purposes of matching. . . . Scores on an intelligence test are frequently used as a basis for matching in educational experiments. . . . Usually scores of previous academic achievement are more highly predictive of success, especially in the same field, than intelligence test scores are' hence, they make a better basis for measuring.3 There are factors other than intelligence which, no doubt, play a large part in achievement for which we have no adequate measure as yet.9 Early in the study attention was given to this problem. 8 Charles C. Peters and Walter R. Van Voorhis, Statistical Procedures and Their Mathematical Basis. (New Yerk: McGraw Hill Book Company, Inc., 19407, p. 449. 9 Outstanding among these factors which seem vital to the author are breadth or scOpe and intensity of inter- est, also stick-to-it-iveness or determination. As there are no adequate measuring instruments for such character- istics, studies on them must depend upon some secondary measure. It seems logical that this could be one reason Why the high school achievement should correlate more high- ly with college achievement than do the results of the psychological examination. 75 The psychological examination score gave low corre- lations with the deficient group progress wherever tested and the correction10 for the linear distribution of decile ranks made but little change in the actual correlations. Correlations of .124, .235 were obtained between peychological test ranks and high school totals and the college first and second term totals for the defICient group reapectively. A correlation between the high school mathematics grade point average for the deficient group and rank in the quantitative section of the psychological test was found to be .105. These correlations are low and those with high school grades have no significance. Hence, it did not seem wise to attempt to use the results of this test as a part of the basis of comparison of abilities of the deficient and non-deficient groups. If the psycholog- ical examination aims to test academic ability, the high school total grade point average should contain that as a factor in its total. The unreliability of the high school average in single cases and from various high schools is readily recognized, since the 204 deficient pupils studied 10 T. L. Kelly, Statistical Method (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1923), p. 194, cited by Peters and ‘Van Voorhis, gp. cit., p. 109. The formula given is: ryx -/o,£§: , where r = true correlation,,/’a the Pearson product-moment correlation between scores and ranks. 76 came from ninety-six high school systems, even though 51 'of these came from the two cities of Detroit and Lansing. However, deepite these differences the correlations be- tween high school and college achievement are all well above .40 (see Table VI). If high correlation is a cri- terion of a true basis for matching, the high school aca- demic achievement or grade point average seems to be the best one available for the purposes of this study. Correlations. A brief review of a number of the correlations which were necessary in the preliminary part of this study presents a new and interesting problem. As the results are analyzed it becomes apparent that the psychological test ranks fail completely in a prediction of the scholastic success of the deficient group.11 In contrast to this the high school grade point average is more consistent. The values of these various correlations have been assembled in parallel columns for the reSpective groups in Table VI. The most outstanding relation shown here is the fairly high and uniform correlation between various college 11 The reasons for this are dubitable. Could it be a greater heterogeneity of experience or a lack of certain fundamental mathematical or scientific concepts in a way that is not correlated with academic ability that causes these low values? The answer to this question lies out- side the scOpe of this study. It is unfortunate that the actual scores or "t" scores are not available for research- es of this type. TABLE VI 77 VARIOUS CORRELATIONS FOR THE DEFICIENT AND NON-DEFICIENT GROUPS, AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THEIR DIFFERENCES## Pearson product-moment correlation of n Defi- cient Non-de- t test of n ficient difference First and second term college total vs. 186 high school total Remaining terms col- lege total vs. 177 high school total First and second term college science and 187 math. vs. high school math. Remaining terms college science and math. vs. 182 high school math. First and second term college engineering & 179 science and math. vs. high school total Remaining terms col- lege engineering and 177 science and math. vs. high school total High school total vs. psychological test 191 total ranks High school math. vs. psychological test 183 "Q" rank First and second terms college total vs. 185 psychological test total ranks .435 .490 .454 .464 .414 .438 .1362 .107 .2405 264 261 265 264 258 258 .436 .3575 1.65 .4005 .297 2.034 .469 .3175 .320 2.35* .330 2.37** .437 2.29** 78 TABLE VI (continued) VARIOUS CORRELATIONS FOR THE DEFICIENT AND NON-DEFICIENT GROUPS, AND THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THEIR DIFFERENCES## Pearson product-moment Defi- Non-de- t test of correlation of n cient n ficient difference Remaining terms college total vs. psychologi- 177 .2878 254 .362 cal test total rank High school science vs. high school mathematics 264 .586 #Multiple correlations of remaining terms college total vs. psychologi- 177 .538 260 .444 cal test total and high school total r *f # These multiple correlations must be considered as esti- mates since an error is necessarily introduced because of the small variation of n in the respective correlations. t s 81 - 82 , where X = 4 log 1 / r , and dife 1 - I' SoEo dif. = 1 [Z 1 n1 " 3 n2 " 3 ## For details of these correlations see Appendix F, Tables XII to XXX. * Significant at the 5% level. ** Significant at the 2.5% level. Note: The divergence from a normal distribution of the data used for these correlations was not sufficient to materially affect the correlations. Figures 12, and 15, pages 87 and 93, show the general distribution of the principal data used in these correlations. 79 work and the corresponding high school work in the defi~ cient group. This is made more outstanding by the low and variable correlation of this same group when using the psych010gical examination ranks. This variation is again more pronounced when the correlations of the psychological examination with the academic progress of the non-deficient group are compared with the corresponding correlations of the deficient group. The differences between the correlation coeffi- cients for the deficients and non-deficients for the reSpective subject combinations were compared with the standard error of their reSpective differences and the quotient appended in the t column. The statistical significance of the differences between the deficients and non-deficients when the psychological test scores are used for comparison is pronounced. A search for the cause of this large variation between the correlation of college work with high school averages and with psychological test scores was beyond the scOpe of this study. This will be suggested as a tOpic useful for further study. It is also interesting to notice that the correla- tions of the academic progress in college of the deficient group with high school grade point average, and again with the psychological test scores, remain practically constant 80 throughout the whole period of college attendance. In contrast to this the parallel correlations of the non- deficient group show a definite, although statistically non-significant, decrease in correlation coefficient under each type of comparison between the first two terms of college work and the remaining terms of college work. N In summary it can be said that psychological test scores and high school grade point average rank about equally effective in the prediction of academic success of engineers when they enter as non-deficients and, as shown in the checked line of Table VI, the two together as a multiple correlation appear to improve that prediction in the remaining terms of college. For the deficients the high school grade point average is much better than the psychological test scores as a basis in predicting the academic success of the group in college work. This difference is statistically signif- icant. A grouping of the high school grade point average and the psychological test score rank in a multiple corre- lation gave a very slight change in prediction over the high schOol grade point average alone. It was because of this effect in the deficient group that for purposes of comparison of the academic ability of the deficient and non-deficient groups the high school grade point average was chosen. CHAPTER VI A COMPARISON OF THE TWO GROUPS AND THE APPARENT EFFECT OF DEFICIENCIES Deficiencies do not seem to be as vital a limita- tion to the academic progress of the student as the name implies. However, before the full effect of deficiencies can be estimated the variations of the two groups with and without deficiencies must be carefully examined. Drop-outs. An examination of Table VII reveals that 53.6% of the drOp-outs during the year 1946-47 entered free of deficiencies while 46.4% had some form of deficiency. The Basic College section of the general sam- ple had only 32.2% deficiencies. Approximately 22% of the deficient students while less than 12% of the non-defi- cient students drOpped out during the year. Therefore, the rate of student mortality was appreciably higher among the deficient students. 0f the drOp-outs with deficiency 7.5% were deficient by one-half unit, 40% by one unit, 29% by two units, and 12% by more than two units. A large number of the total drOp-outs whose psycho- logical test scores were available were in the lower three deciles. When the distribution of these scores is com- pared with those of the entire deficient and non-deficient TABLE VII 82 THE ENTRANCE DEFICIENCIES AND PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST SCORE RANKS OF 261 ENGINEERING DROP‘OUTS RETWEEN FALL TERM 1946 AND SPRING TERM 1947 Deficiencies scfige Psychoéggiiglrgggt score available 1&2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Total None 47 9 15 3 9 10 13 12 7 15 140 Physics 6 3 - 3 2 1 2 2 1 2 22 Science 1 - - 1 - 1 - - - 3 2 Sciences 1 - - - - - 1 - - 2 1 Math. / Physics 8 1 1 2 1 3 5 - l 25 Science - - - - - - l - - - 1 2 sciences l - ~ - - - - - — 1 15-2 Math. K Physics 5 2 1 - - - - - - 8 Science - - - - - - - - - - 2 Sciences 5 - 2 - - - - - - - 7 4 Mathematics 3 - 1 - - - - - 4 l 9 1 Mathematics 8 3 l - l 2 3 2 l 2 23 1% Mathematics - - - - - l - - - - 1 2/ Mathematics 5 - l 1 - - - - - — 7 Servicemen's Institute 7 3 - - - - - - 1 1 12 97 21 22 10 l5 15 23 22 14 22 261 Mean decile : 5.77 for the deficient drOp-outs. Mean decile : 6.20 for the non-deficient drOp-outs. For the difference of the means t Mean decile - Mean decile - 1.28 (insignificant) 6.986 for the total science deficient group. 7.452 for the non-deficient group. 83 groups as given in Figure 12, page 87, the extremely large number of drOp-outs from the lower deciles is apparent. Between the deficient and non-deficient drOp-outs the difference of the means of the ranks was approximately equal to one standard deviation of the difference of the means. The mean decile of the deficients was 5.77 and that of the non-deficients was 6.20. The correSponding meansof the total groups were 6.986 and 7.452 for the deficients and non-deficients reSpectively. The differ- ence of these groups was equal to 1.9 standard error of the difference of the means. The means of the psycholog- ical test scores of the drOp-outs are approximately three standard deviations of their differences lower than the means of the reSpective groups.1 Transfers. The diagram in Figure 10 gives the dis- tribution in percentage of the general sample that trans- ferred to various departments within the college during the school year 1946-47. The percentages transferring with and without deficiencies were approximately equal. Business administration is by far the most pOpular depart- ment to which engineers transfer. Age g§_entry. 0n the average, the deficient student 1 A summary of the essential data of the drOp-outs is to be found in Appendix K. 84 39.5% BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION PHYSICAL SCIENCE I 5.67, AGRICULTURE PREFERENCE I5.6% J FIGURE 10 DISTRIBUTION or TRANSFERS FROM Tue CRVRRAL SAMPLE'OF BASIC ENGINRRRINC are ENGIVTFRIVG (7.4% of the basic engineering group and 5.7% of the engin- eering group transfered during the year 1946 - 1947.) 85 begins his college work about nine-tenths of a year later than his non-deficient contemporary. Figure 11 gives a comparison of the distribution of the ages of the two groups. The chances are greater than four to one that stu- dents entering at seventeen years of age will be non-defi- cient while above twentyrfive years of age the chances are almost one to one between the deficient and non-deficient entries.2 In the computation of these data the ages of the students were taken as of April 1, 1947. Since some en- tered before being called to the armed forces while others entered upon their release, it seemed best for this compar- ison to.compute an index of the effective age of entry. This was done by subtracting one year of age from the ac- tual chronological age for each three terms of school work completed. Examination 9: the psychological test scores. The variation of the psychological examination test scores is worth noting. It is best shown by a graph, Figure 12, 2 Could it be, considering the composite of the evidence available, that the average overall maturation age of the deficients would be significantly lower for a given chronological age than that of the non-deficients, or that deficiencies are partially the result of the pres- ent practice of starting children in school too young? 86 2 MEAN AGES :1 NON-DEFICIENT GROUP 20.95 YEARS I DEFICIENT GROUP 2|.76 YEARS. 2Q SE 26 I - ‘DIF. t 3.53 RA" 0(HIGHLY SIGNIFICANT) n. 35.. O K 0 II- 0 we 2 In 0 I In a. 1 I l6 l7 l8 I9 26 2I 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 3| 32 33 34 0 INDEX OF EFFECTIVE AGE OF ENTRY, YEARS FIGURE ll DISTRIBUTION OF THE EFFECTIVE AGES OF ENTRY OF THE TWO GROUPS Note: The effective age of entry for each student was derived by subtracting one year for each three terms attendance completed at Hichigan State College from the actual age as of April 1947. 87 SCIENCE DEFICIENT o, DROPOUTS WITH ANY GROUP DEF‘C'ENCY Coo-do--. 4"."eo odoofi‘.‘. C" 00.... O... '- .oOoo-o ‘ ‘ Cog“.....h I '2Fs4se e'e'lo I OECILE DEFICIENTS DROPOUTS . WITHOUT DEFICIENCY-'0'" NON-DEFI‘OIENT GROUP \ ....-----~. I I 2'3T4's'e‘7'e‘e' IO DECILE W-OEFICIENTS FIGURE l2 DISTRIBUTION OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST RANKS OF THE TOTAL GROUPS AND THE DROPOUTS Note: An attempt was made to normalize the distribu- tion of the linear decile ranks by histograms of an arbitrary width obtained by comparison of previous test scores. The detailed tables may be found in appendix J. “- °"mm 88 where an attempt was made to change the linear decile ranks to a normal distribution of scores.3 Because of the loss in accuracy in reassigning scores within groups this meth- od does not improve the correlation coefficient. For that reason the correction factor suggested by Kelly4 was used to approximate the correlation in these statistics. There is no statistically significant difference between the de- ficient and non-deficient groups when figured from this estimated score. When the ranks are compared, the mean decile of the non-deficient is 7.452 while that of the deficient group is 6.986, which gives a difference of .466. The standard error of the difference of the means is .243, giving a quotient of 1.919 which would occur 6.3 times in 100 by chance. When the shapes of the two distributions are compared, it is apparent that the non-deficients Show a greater skewness toward the upper deciles. This differ- ence is consistent throughout the comparisons of the schol- astic work both in high school and college. High school academic standing. There is a highly 3 Please refer to the summary in Appendix J for details of their design. 4 Cited by Charles C. Peters and Walter R. Van Voorhis, Statistical Procedures and Their Mathematical Basis. (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1940), p. 109. 89 significant difference between the means of the total high school grade point averages for the deficient and non- deficient groups. The mean grade point average of the non-deficient group for the total high school program was found to be 1.6869 grade points. The correSponding mean for the deficient group was 1.5125 grade points. This gives a difference between the means of .1744 grade points. The standard deviations of these means were .514 and .560 for the non-deficient and deficient groups reSpectively. The standard error of the difference of these means was found to be .0518 and, therefore, the difference of the means is equal to 3.37 standard deviations. This difference should occur but fourteen times in 10,000 by chance.5 ‘ The specific scores for high school science and high school mathematics were isolated and their comparisons agree with the results of the total high school pattern. The difference of the science means was equal to 2.81 stan- dard errors and that of the mathematics was equal to 2.40 standard errors. This is lower than the high school totals, yet beth are statistically significant differences. Thus it is seen that the records of high school work of the deficient and non-deficient groups are more widely 5 See Appendix G, Section 1, for detailed analysis. 90 separated than the psychological examination scores since the margin of measured academic ability as shown by the psychological test scores is relatively small. This great- er divergence in achievement than measured academic ability may have a very direct connection with depth of interest,6 since those without deficiencies have in the majority of cases done more specific and long time planning as evi- denced by their high school preparation, i.e., lack of de- ficiencies. If this divergence is generally associated with science deficiency, the Opinion (or feeling) that has grown so strong among educators that the required high school mathematics and science constitute a necessary prep— aration for the engineering student may be due to this dif- ference in scholastic ability and interest. It may be the latent academic ability and a more Specific and intense interest that appears to give the almost certain promise of greater scholastic success to the student with a highly Specialized high school subject pattern. College academic progress. There is no appreciable difference in college academic progress that can be ascribed to deficiencies as such. As hasbeen shown in comparison of psychological score ranks, there is a distinct though 6 See footnote 9 on page 74. 91 non-significant differences in the so-called "academic ability" of the two groups. The comparison of the high school scores shows that there is a distinct difference in the applied scholastic ability in the achievement of the two groups. An analysis of co-variance of the high school total grade point average and college grade point average of the first two terms' achievement between the deficient and non-deficient groups, as shown in Table VIII, yields a difference that is significant at the 5% level. A graphi— cal comparison of the distribution of these grade point averages is to be found in Figure 13. From the corrected means of the college work, there is reasonable evidence to conclude that during the first two terms the deficient stu- dents of this study are handicapped to an average extent of .0975 grade points when compared with those non-deficient students of equal academic ability as measured by their high school grade point averages.7 This difference is small but,being true to the total pattern of college work attempted during the first two terms attendance, it is of interest to question what is the effect upon the closely allied fields of science, mathematics and engineering. 7 See Appendix 0, Section 1, following Table XXXII for full details of the corrected means. 92 .emfimmfipmm mm; zufimammoaos mo vamp m.am>mz .mosmfiam>aoe was mommnam> mo emphases usmsummnsm mam wasp :H .a aofipomm .m xausemmm .Hxxx manna mmfisoaaom essauso mew mmmmsm>m pcfiom spasm mwmaaoo mmpomaaoo we acoHumasono on» no wHHmpoe pom .Hm>eH RH pm or.o .Hm>eH an up om.n-u m aopoosm no meoammm one 94 4H.N .Ho>oa mm esp pm pamonHsmHm *so.v u mr.m « m ms.m H me.m coscsowwmo was om.vom house dem mmdoam smmgpmm . “poaaov ea m was m>.mmm wv.mmHH Hm.vmw mo.mvaa was wmdoaw manna: psoHoHMovIcoa av.mw mm.mm m®.mm H van pamao Iawmu cmoapem m.mmHH m.mam Ho.mrHH mew Hmuoe eons .m.a mnwwmyw mzw man man .m.a ooamaam> IHam> mo condom poodumm mmbomo EzmHonmQIzoz 92¢ BszonmQ Mme zmmaemm mezmz Im>mHmQ¢ Same onomm 024 BWMHm momqaoo Q24 mm4 BzHom mammw Adeoe geomom mem mo MUZde4>Ioo mmE mo mHmwAdzm HHH> mqmde 22- IQP IQL GRADE POINIT AVERAGE DEFICIENT GROUP LEGEND L HIGH SCHOOL COLLEGE ----...-- :"" """ I J i ‘ o-I- N-I- (N GRADE POINT AVERAGE NON-DEFICIENT GROUP HGURE I3 DISTRIBUTION OF, FIRST AND SECOND TERM COLLEGE TOTAL AND HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL. GRADE POINT AVERAGES OF THE TWO Gm 94 This question was settled in two parts. An analysis of co-variance was made covering the science and mathemat- ics in college using the achievement in high school mathe- matics as the basis of comparison of applied ability.8 The results of this analysis showed a small but non-significant difference in the field of science and mathematics in favor of the non-deficient group. A second analysis of co-var- iance, covering the fields of science, mathematics and eng- ineering using the total high school grade point average as a baSis of comparison showed no difference in this combined achievement between the two groups.9 From this analysis it is evident that no claim can be made in this study that, in the first two terms of work, the deficient student finds any handiCap within his professional field because of the lack of one or both sciences as part of his high school background. 0n the average his work, in science, mathemat- ics and engineering, is fully equal to that of those having equivalent high school achievement with no accompanying science deficiency.10 8 See Appendix G, Section 1, for the full analysis of this co-variance, Tables XXXIII and XXXIV. 9 See Appendix G, Section 1, for details of this analysis, Tables XXXV and XXXVI. 10 The cause of this difference between the results of these analyses of co-variance of the total subject pat- tern and of the professional work in early college is be- yond the scepe of this problem. It may be closely related 95 This division of early college work (terms one and two) was separated from the rest because many with whom the writer counseled during the early stages of research felt that if there is to be a difference in college work it will be most noticeable while the student is obtaining his orientation and basic college tools, and that the dif- ference would be less and less observable as the student acquired the backgrounds of early college instruction. There was another group who considered that the ef- fect of these deficiencies would be noticeable only in the strictly engineering and scientific subjects whose founda- tion is supposed to rest on these preliminary science sub- jects in high school. The student does not usually begin this regular work in either engineering or mathematics and science, aside from basic science courses, college algebra, and engineering drawing, until after the end of the second term. In order to study this question Specifically, a fur- ther analysis of co-variance was made of the high school total grade point average and the "remaining terms" of col- lege work in engineering and science and mathematics be- tween the deficient and non-deficient groups. Table IX 10 (Cont.) to the problem discussed in footnote 9 on page 74, i.e., interest and determination, since many of these deficient students are, no doubt, deficient be- cause they lack or have lacked that fire or determination that should enable them to attack the harder things of life. 96 TABLE IX ANALYSIS OF REDUCED VARIANCE OF THE HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE AND COLLEGE REMAINING TERMS OF ENGINEERING, AND SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS ACHIEVEMENTS BETWEEN THE DEFICIENT AND NON-DEFICIENT GROUPS 2 Reduced Source of variance 1(y - Y) df variance Error or within groups 1698.6924 432 3.9321 Error / between groups 1700.1764 433 Difference (for testing) 1.484 1 1.484 F = 1.48 2 .397. No significant difference F at 5% level 3.39 at l and 432 degrees of freedom is 3.86. 97 11 There is gives the reduced variances for this analysis. again no difference between the two groups. Thus it is apparent that no statistically significant differences can be found between the deficient and non-deficient groups, when due regard is taken of the initial applied academic ability as measured by high school achievement, except in the non-professional "general education" work of the first two terms. After the deficient group entered college the actual differences in academic achievement appeared to decrease slowly, as is indicated by the following: (1) The differ- ence in the means for college total grade point average during the first two terms was equal to 3.48 standard errors of the difference of the means; (2) For the remain- ing terms the correSponding difference was equal to 1.96 standard errors of the difference of the means. The mean for the non-deficient group in the science and mathematics grade point averages for the first two terms of college work exceeds the mean for the deficient group by approxi- mately one standard error of the difference of the means and showed no appreciable change during the remaining terms. A brief summary of these means and standard deviations is to be found in Table X. 11 Full analysis is to be found in Appendix G, Sec- tion 1, Tables XXXVII and XXXVIII, p. 169-70. 98 .Hm>ea mm esp pa paeoHeHame pmoafia * .Hmpoa RH one pm paaoaeaamam ** mcfiummcfimco .mofiumamnpma amm.a flea. omso. van.a boo. mmm n>H.H amp. sea .moamfiom magma madcawamm moflpmaenuma 0H.H peso. emmo. HPN.H 0mm. mmm emH.H new. mmH new mocoaow wagon mcfisfimaem *wm.a mwa. ammo. own.a ewe. How mmH.H owe. pea Hmpop . mane» madcawaem weapmamzpma mm. eewo. memo. emmn.a ems. mom nmn.a sew. bma use oecefiom aaou vacuum was pmaam «*mv.n mmsa. have. vow.H new. vww mwm.H How. me Hmuou mauop ncooow use uwefim 03m.” mawma adflw‘ use: :5 a Smog: [6 : dopoamaou p .aam . . .aeoa omoHHoo mocwofimficwfiw mo pmma mpcmfioHantsoz wucmfioaMoa :1 mmDomm BzmHonmQuZOZ 924 BzmHonmn mmB mom Bzm£m>mHm04 mmmqqoo ho mmmam¢m2 mDon4> mo monBdemQ Qm4mz¢em Q24 m2¢ms mme N mqmdh 99 lg summary. (1) The percentage of drOp-outs was appreciably higher from the deficient group. The average of the psychological test scores of the deficient drOp-outs was only slightly (less than one standard error of the dif- ference of the means) lower than the non-deficient group. (2) The non-deficient group entered college at the effective age12 of 20.865 years while the average of the deficient group was .901 years more, the average actual' age being 22.610 and 23.097 years in their respective groups. (3) There is a very significant difference between the ability of the group entering with deficiencies and, the group with all high school requirements fulfilled: (a) In the decile rank of the psychological scores the non-deficient group excelled the defi- cient group by 1.9 standard errors of the differ- ence of the means; (b) In the high school total grade point aver- age the non-deficient group excelled by 3.37 stand- ard deviations of the difference of the means; (c) The grade point average of high school 12 The effective age used in this calculation was taken as the present age less one year for each three terms attended. This was done in order to make a comparison possible among those who entered college before entering service. lOO mathematics for the non-deficient group was 3.24 standard errors of the difference of the means above the average of the deficient group. (4) After entering college the difference between the groups tends to decrease. After a careful consideration of the grade point averages of high school and college work by both defi- cient and non-deficient groups, it is found that when allowance is made by an analysis of co-variance for the difference of initial ability as measured by high school achievement of the deficient and non-deficient groups, there is no significant difference in the performance of the two groups as measured by their academic achievement in college, except in the general college achievement dur- ing the first two terms. This is quite contrary to the generally accepted conclusions and the reasons usually given for the Specific high school requirements. From the results of this study it appears that the college work most affected by the lack of science in the specific high school entrance pattern, is the work outside of the closely related fields of mathematics, science, and engineering. CHAPTER VII CONCLUSIONS This investigation adds its confirmation to the serious questioning of many of the present methods used in screening college admissions. However, before any answer to the question can be given, the purpose or basic philos- Ophy of higher education must be settled. This contro- versy was ably summarized in the Sixth Yearbook g: the Department 9: Superintendence. In 1926 P. Angell of Yale addressing the North Central Association took the ground that the function of college being to raise up a race of intellectual leaders, college entrance requirements should be highly selective. A year later Chancellor Lindley of Kansas before the same body maintained that in a democracy the chief duty of the college is to train for useful, intelligent citizenship the largest possible number of young men and women. As the first conclusion of this study it would seem apprOpriate to state that before college admissions can be successfully approached a unification of purposes, i.e., philOSOphies, must be reached by the staff of the school, and that in a democracy these purposes must be consistent with democratic concepts of life and way of living. 1 Department 9: Superintendence, Sixth Yearbook. (Washington: Department of Superintendence of the National Education Association, 1928), p. 144. 102 Deficiencies and their removal. 32.2% of the entrants into Basic College with engineering preference were deficient, while about 14% of those now enrolled in the School of Engineering have or have had deficiencies. ‘ihese deficients carried an average of 1.43 units-of deficiency. In the investigation of over two hundred cases only two cases of English deficiency were listed. This did not include the group in the Servicemen's Institute. The make-up of the science deficiencies covered a period of six terms with approximately 39% doing no make- up work. Half of those doing make-up work completed this work at the end of the second term. The make-up work for mathematics deficiencies when accompanied by a science deficiency covered the same range with only 14% doing no make-up work, and 47% of the make-up being completed dur- ing the first term. Drogeouts. There is a distinctly higher rate of drOp-outs from the deficient group. During the school year of 1946-47, 21.3% of the deficient group drOpped out as ‘compared with only 12.0% of the non-deficient. The mean decile rank of the drOp—outs was more than three standard deviations of the difference of the means below the mean decile rank of their reSpective groups as measured by the scores of the psychological examination. This indicates 103 that the loss of these groups tends to raise the average of the academic ability of the parent groups. Psychological examination. The lack of pregnostic ability of the American Council of Education Psychological Examination with the deficient group is outstanding. This lack of correlation was equally low in comparison of previ- ous work such as high school grade point averages and also subsequent work in college. In direct contrast to this was the high correlation of the high school and college grade point averages of the deficient group.2 If this is a char- acteristic of this psychological examination, care must be used in applying its results to those who are deficient in science and mathematics. Age 3: egtgy. The index of the average age of entry of all students studied, including both groups, was about 22.75 years. This index was derived by subtracting one year for each three terms completed. This increase of about four years above the usual age of entry is without doubt due to the effects of the war and the heavy demand it made upon the man power of the nation for its duration. Scholastic ability. The average scholastic ability of the deficient group is almost significantly lower than 2 This, again, may be due to variability of interest or determination. It has been suggested that deficiency may sometimes be caused by a deliberate attempt on the part of the student to shun the hard things in life. 104 that of the non-deficient group as measured by the psycho- logical examination ranks. When the applied scholastic ability is measured by the grade point average of high school achievement the difference is highly significant. Effects 9: deficiency. The science deficiency in- troduces no noticeable handicap into the scholastic achieve- ment during the college work, except that noted during the first two terms. This effect was tested both during the first two terms of work and during the Specialized train- ing of the remaining terms of study. Almost 40% of the deficients studied had successfully attempted advanced Specialized training either before or without deficiency removal. If the results of this study are generally true there is no Special advantage that can be attached to any particular science requirement in the subject matter pat- tern. The slight disadvantage accepted by the deficient group during the first two terms in college does not seem to affect their remaining work to any significant degree and even during these first two terms it seems that there is no disadvantage found in the professional subjects of their chosen field. Academic success in college work was found to depend to a greater extent upon a better applica- tion of academic ability than upon the type of subject mat- ter studied in high school. It seems, therefore, that 105 entrance requirements Should be based upon what the candi- date did with what he took in high school and not upon the subjects which he took. Keeler's results.3 In comparison with Keeler's study at the University of Michigan in 1930, it is inter- esting to note many similarities: KEELER'S STUDY PRESENT STUDY Frequenqy g: deficieney An average of 37.6% of the 32.2% of students enrolled entrants deficient. in Basic Engineering en- tered with deficiencies. The average deficieney per deficient student 1.42 high school units. 1.38 high school units. Number 9: deficient students and length g: time 9: Observation 127 students - 1 semester 86 students - 3 terms 98 students - 3 semesters 19 students - 4 terms 73 students - 5 semesters. 25 students - 5 terms 27 students - 6 terms 22 students - 7-12 terms. Measures used lg comparing academic ability Matched on an average of Am- Compared by analysis of co- erican Council of Education variance on basis of high Psychological Examination, school grade point average. Iowa Placement Test English, 3 L. W. Keeler, "An investigation of the effect of subject deficiencies upon accomplishment of students enter- ing the College of Engineering of the University of Michigan during the academic years 1927-28, 1928-29, and 1929-30." Bureau 9: Educational Reference and Research, Bulletin No. 138. (Ann Arbor: School of Education, University of Mich- igan), 68 p. 106 KEELER'S STUDY PRESENT STUDY Measures used ig_comparing academic ability (Cont.) Iowa Placement Test Mathematics. The variations on academic ability 9: the deficient and non-deficient groups Mean decile rank of all Mean decile rank of non- entering freshmen = 5.07, deficient group = 7.452, (r: 2.11. d"! 2.6. Mean decile rank of Mean decile rank of deficient freshmen - 5.06, deficient group 2 6.986, 6‘: 1.88. 0‘: 2.5. Academic achievement No difference during the Mean achievement of defi- first three semesters. Be— cients : 1.232, non-defi- yond third semester non- cients : 1.4045 during the deficient group higher by first two terms of college small fraction of honor work. This difference is point. equal to 3.39 standard err- ors of the difference of the mean. For the remaining terms the difference de— creased to 2.0 standard errors of the difference of the means. Percentage g: withdrawals from deficient and non-deficient groupe Deficient. . . . 29.8 Deficients. . . . 21.3 Non-deficient. . 17.5 Non-deficients. . 12.0 Ratio. . . . . . 1.70 Ratio . . . . . . 1.77 Taken over first, third, Taken over two terms. and fifth semesters. 107 The above comparisons Show that the percentage of deficient entrants has changed but little, notwithstanding the large influx of war veterans and older students, over the values at the University of Michigan seventeen years ago. This was hardly to be eXpected considering the lib- eralizing influences that have been at work in the high school subject pattern during the last score of years. Perhaps the traditional influence of the university en- trance requirements is still a potent guide in high school offerings. Finally. It appears from the present study that the deve10pments which have resulted in the new admission policies of the Michigan College Agreement4 have been psychologically sound in their prognostications. If defi- ciencies play as small a part in successful college work as appears from the results of this study into the effect of a lack of a basically technical prerequisite within a highly Specialized field, it is logical to inquire why all schools and colleges, whether separate institutions or units within a larger university, would not find a more functional selection policy in the whole-hearted support of the "College Agreement." 4 See Appendix B. CHAPTER VIII SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER STUDY This study of the effect of entrance deficiencies should be repeated in at least a survey form after the new Michigan College Agreement1 has been accepted long enough by a sufficient number of schools to make a sig- nificant change in the number and kind of deficiencies. The most important field of research which this study suggested was in the field of interest. There seems to be exhibited in the data of this experiment a factor or factors which none of the present "yardsticks" are able to measure. This thought was first suggested during the ex- ploratory period by Mr. Carl M. Horn, who was then Chief of the Division of Occupational Information and Guidance of the State Board of Control for Vocational Education. It is emphasized by the fact that students of relatively low 1.0. for college success (near 100), as measured by several examinations in high school, at times produce a two-point (B) average in their college work, while at the same time others with a high 1.0. (above 125) do failing work continually. The nature of these factors is beyond the scOpe of this problem and for want of a better term 1 See Appendix B for the text of the Agreement. 109 they have all been Spoken of as interest during this re- port. It has been suggested that these may include cer- tain eXperienceS during childhood and youth or perhaps an association with a parent or friend whose occupation or hobby is closely related to engineering. The attitude toward work, including determination, drive, and reaction to difficult situations, without doubt plays an important role in college success. There is, at present, no ade- quate measuring instrument for these qualities. The re- sults of previous work along comparable lines, oftimes, form the best basis of measurement in predicting future success, yet they are also closely related to the initial abilities and cannot be said to measure Specifically any of these qualities. This effect of interest upon academic success was lightly touched by Eckertz in discussing the factors influencing curriculum choice at the University of Buffalo. If some scale could be devised that would compare the depth and intensity of motivating interest between individuals, it would prove of exceptional value in deal- ing with admission problems. 2 Edward Stafford Jones, Editor, Studies ip Articu- ];ation 9: High School and College. (University of Buffalo Eitudies, Series II, Bulletin 8. Buffalo, New York: LIniversity of Buffalo, 1936), pp. 313-335. 110 A Short study could be made comparing the amount of high school algebra and geometry actually taken and the lowest corresponding course for which credit Should be allowed in Basic College. There appears to be a very high variability in the present procedure. A number of students having had two units of algebra are apparently allowed credit for mathematics 100a. An interesting study could be made into the reasons for the exceedingly low correlation of the psychological examination scores and high school work of the deficient group. There may be some valid Significant reason for this. It is suggested that success in the psychological examination may be partially dependent upon subject matter contained in the deficient courses. . Assuggested earlier in this study3 an interesting analysis could be made of the grades earned by deficient students on their make—up work taken at the college in comparison with corresponding work in high school and subsequent work in college. There is Opportunity at the present time to study a group who normally do not attend college and to par- ‘tially answer the question of how many would be successful (sellege students if allowed the Opportunity for advanced 3 See page 54. 111 study. 'It should be possible through personal interviews to find a group of students who would not have attended the university without the present government aid. A com- parison of their abilities and progress with their con- temporaries would be helpful in future planning. A study comparing the academic ability of students transferring from other colleges and out-of-state students entering Michigan State College with that of the regularly enrolled in-state freshmen would prove useful. It should be one step toward answering the question, Why do students come from long distances to attend Michigan State College. A problem presents itself in the apparent Signifi- cant difference between the success of the deficient stu- dents in the professional subjects of their chosen field and in the general education subjects required during their early college work. This problem may be closely related to the first problem suggested. It may often be that the cause of their deficiency has been their unreadiness to accept what Mitchel has called the "Hard things of life." This problem should raise a challenge to those whose in- ‘terest lies in the field of measurement of academic ability. BIBLIOGRAPHY A SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Aikin, Wilford Merton, The Stqpy pf the Eight-Year Study. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942. 157 p. Annual Hand Book. College Entrance Examination Board. New York: Ginn and Company, 1945. Baten, William Dowell, Elementarngathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1938. 281 p., and tables. Chamberlin, Charles Dean, et alles, Did They Succeed lg College. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942. 291 p. Cowen, Philip Albert, College Entrance Inquiry. New York: University of the State of New York Press, 1932. Dewey, John, Democracy and Education. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1924. 418 p. , EXperience and Education. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1938. 116 p. Education for all American Youth, Education Policies Commission. Washington: National Education Associa- tion, 1944. 421 p. Fine, Benjamin, Admission £9 American Colleges. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1946. Garrett, Henry Edward, Statistics ip Psychology and Educa- tion. New York: Longmans, Greene and Company, 1937. 493 p. Goulden, C. H., Methods 9: Statistical Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1939. 277 p. Iiuggett, Albert J., and Cecil Vernon Millard, Growth and Learning ip the Elementapy School. Boston: D. C. Heath and Company, 1946. 413 p. Piutchins, Robert Maynard, jg_Friendly Voice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1936. 198 p. 114 , The Higher Learning ip America. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1936. 120 p. Jackson, Dugald 0., Present Status and Trends 9: Engineer- ing Education Ln the United States. New York; New York Committee_ on Engineering Schools, Engineers Council for Professional Development, 1939. 177 p. Koopman, G. Robert, Alice M161, and Paul J. Misner, Democracy in School Administration. New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, Inc., 1943. 330 p. Koos, Leonard V., Integrating High Schoql and College. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947. Lindsay, Earnest Earl, and E. 0. Holland, College and University Administration. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1930. 666 p. Love, Harry H., Experimental Methods gp Agricultural Research. Rio Piedras, Puerto Rice: University of Puerto Rico, 1943. '229 p. Lovejoy, C. E., §g You're Going :9 College. New York: Simon and Schuster Company, 1940. 383 p. Marsh, Clarence Stephen, editor, American Universities and Colleges. Washington: American Council on Education, 1940. 1120 p., A. A. Potter, Engineering, p. 109-115. Moehlman, Arthur 3., SchoolgAdministration. Boston? Houghton Mifflin Company, 1940. 929 p. Jedden, Franzzur, Wegweiser fur den Praktikanten Lm Maschinen- und Elektromaschinenbau: ein hilfsbuch fur die werkstattaubildurg_éum Ingenieur. Berlin: Springer, 19 43. Noll, Victor H., The Teaching of Sciences Ln Elementary and §econda_y Schools. New York: Longmans, Greene and Company, 1939. 238 p. Enters, Charles C., and Walter R. Van Voorhis, Statistical Procedures and Their Mathematical Bases. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1940. 477 p. EScience Ln General Education, Progressive Education Assoc- iation. New York: D. Appleton- Century Company, 1938. 591 p. 115 Smith, James 0., and Acheson J. Duncan, Elementapy Statis- tics and Applications. New York: NcGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1944. 680 p. Snedecor, George W., Statistical Methods. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State College Press, 1946. 476 p. , Analysis pf Variance. Ames, Iowa: Collegiate Press, Inc., 1934. 91 p. Spaulding, Francis T., High School and Life. New York: McGraw—Hill Book Company, Inc., 1938. 377 p. Spears, Harold, The Emerging High School Curriculum and its Direction. New York: American Book Company, 1940. 400 p. Stewart, Lowell 0., A_Career 1p Engineering. Occupational Monograph No. 30, American Job Series. Chicago: Science Research Associates, 1943. 48 p. - Thirty Schools Tell Their Story, Progressive Education Association. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1943. 802 p. Thurston, Robert H., 9p the Organizatiop pf Engineering Courses, and pp Entrance Requirements for Professional Schools. Ithaca: The Cornell University Press, 1898. Van Zyl, Johannes, Mathematics e; the Crossroads. Cape Town: Maskew Miller Ltd., 1942. Wilds, Elmer Harrison, The Foundation gf_Modern Education. New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1942. 690 p. B. PERIODICAL ARTICLES Aikin, Wilford H., "Preparing students for college," Educational Record, Supplement 11, 19:22-37, January, 1938. Armsby, Henry H., "A reexaminatipn of the Compton report in the light of enrollment in engineering curricula, fall of 1946,n Journal 9: Engineering Education, 37:675-88, May, 1947. Bent, Rudyard K., "Scholastic records of non-high school graduates entering the University of Arkansas," Journal 9: Educational Research, 40:108-15, October, 1946. Brooks, T. D., "Preposed changes in college admission practices," Texas Outlook, 29:16-19, August, 1945. Carleton, R. H., "Acceptability of physical science as a college entrance unit,” Science and Education, 30: 127-32, April, 1946. Clark, Willis W., "Status of university students in rela- tion to high school courses,“ Journal 9: Educational Research, 13:36-38, January, 1926. Compton, Karl T., “The outlook in the demands for and supply of engineering graduates," The Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education Survey, The Journal 9: Engineering Education, 37:25-49, July, 1946. Douglass, Harl H., “Relation of high school preparation , and certain other factors to academic success at the University of Oregon," University pf Oregon Publica- tion, Education Series, Vol. 3, No. 1. Eugene, Oregon: University Press, September, 1931. 56 p. , "The relation of pattern of high school credits to scholastic success in college," North Central Association anrterly, 6:283-97, December, 1931. "Education of American Youth," Teachers College Record, Vol. 48, January, 1947. 'Hharollment of undergraduate engineering students as of November 5, 1946," The Journal 9: Engineering Educa- tion, 37:469-75, January, 1947. 117 Graves, Albert D., "Another look at college admissions,” California Journal pf Secondary Education, 21:122-25, - February, 1946. Hill, Merton E., "University of California admissions problems," California Journal of Secondary Education, 21:10-17, January, 1946. Leonard, J. P., "Facing the evidence on college entrance requirements," School Review, 53: 327- 35 , June, 1945. Lindsay, Frank B., "Problems in secondary education that affect engineering college," The Journal q: Engineer- ing Education, 31:379-86, December, 1940. Mercer, M., "Personal factors in college adjustment," Journal 9: Educational Research, 34:561-8, April, 1943. Miller, Frederick H., and Sidney G. Roth, "A report on mathematics preparation for engineering colleges," The Journal 9: Engineering Education, 37:628-37, April, 1947. Mitchel, J. P., "The study clarifies college admission problems," California Journal 9: Secondary Education, 17:144,5, March, 1942. Nordberg, H. Orville, "Admission deficiencies of student- veterans," California Journal 9: Secondary Education, 21:341,2, November, 1946. Odell, William E., "College admission issues in California," California Journal 9: Secondapvaducationy 16:235-8, April, 1941. Pugsley, A. L., "Will comprehensive courses meet the needs of engineers?" The Journal q£_Engineering Education, 37:840-2, June, 1947. Stalnaker, Elizabeth Mattingly, "A four-year study of the freshman class of 1935 at West Virginia University," Journal gf_Educational Research, 36:100-18, October, 1942. Jackson, R. W. 8., "Application of the analysis of variance and covariance method to educational problems, " Department of Educational Research Bulletin No. 11, Toronto: University of Tbtonto, 1940. C. LEARNED SOCIETIES Brown, E. J., "Methods of admission and matriculation requirements of 331 colleges and universities," Chapter XIX, p. 331- 62, Department Lf Superintend- ence Seventh Yearbook. Washington: Department of Superintendence, 1929. 616 p. Department Lf Superintendence Sixth Yearbook. Washington: Department of Superintendence, 1928. 496 p. "From high school to college," National Education Associ- ation Research Bulletin, 16, No. 2. Washington: National Education Association, March, 1935. Grace, Alonzo G., "The state and the educational system," Chapter 11, Forty- fifth Yearbook Lf the National Society for the Study Lf Education, Part 11, Nelson B. Henry, Editor. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1934. Mills, H. 0., "Problems involved in studying overlapping between high school and college," "EXperimenting with the direct method," "Contributions of high school chemistry to college chemistry," Studies Ln Articu- lation Lf High School and Colleg_, p. 213- 61, Edward Stafford Jones, Editor, University of Buffalo Studies, Series I, Vol. 9, Part 111. Buffalo, New York: University of Buffalo, 1934. 319 p. D. BULLETINS "A study of admissions and eliminations of engineering students," Investigption 9: Engineering Education. Bulletin No. 2, Committee on Admission and Elimina- tion, (H. H. Jordan, Chairman). Lancaster, Pennsyl- vania: Lancaster Press, Inc., September, 1926. 35 p. Badger, Henry 6., Statistics 9: Higher Education, 1943- 1944. Washington: United States Office of Education, 1946. 75 p. Blose, David T., Statistical Summary Lf Education 1943- 44, Biennial Survey of Education in the United States 1942-1944. Washington: U. 5. Government Printing Office, 1947. Faunce, Rowland 0., Some Went 39 College, Michigan Study of the Secondary School Curriculum, Lansing: Michigan Department of Public Instruction, 1945. 42 p. Froelick, Gustav J., The Prediction Lf Academic Success at the University Lf Wisconsin, 1909- -l941. Madison, Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin, 1942. Harvey, Jean, and Kenneth Davenport, "Purdue University's experience with the admission of non-high school graduates," Studies lg Higher Education. Vol. 52. Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Division of Educational Reference, 1944. Hinkley, William H., Handbook Lf College Entrance Require- ments, United States Office of Education. Washington: United States Government Printing Office, 1941. 79 p. John, Walton C., "A study of engineering curricula," Investigation 9: Engineeripg Education, Bulletin No. 10, The Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education. Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Lancaster Press, Inc., May, 1927. 95 p. Keeler, L. W., "An investigation of the effect of subject deficiencies upon the accomplishment of students en- tering the College of Engineering of the University of Michigan during the academic years of 1927-28,1928-29, and 1929- 30, " Bureau Lf Educational Reference and Re- search, Bulletin No. 138. Ann Arbor: School of Educa- tion, University of Michigan, March, 1931. 68 p. 120 Ninety-Seventh Report Lf the Superintendent Lf Public Instruction. Lansing: Superintendent of Public Instruction, 1944.134 p. Odell, Charles W., Predicti_g the Scholastic Success Lf College Freshmen. University of Illinois Bulletin, Vol. 25, No. 2, Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1927. 54 p. , Predicting the Scholastic Success Lf College Students. University of Illinois Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 5. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1930, 43 p. Remmus, H. H., "The quality of freshman preparation then and now," Purdue University Division of Educational Reference, Studies in Higher Education, Vol. 30, No. 2. Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Press, 1929. Remmus, H. H., and H. E. Geiger, "Predicting success and failure of engineering students in the Schools of Engineering in Purdue University," Studies lg Higher . Education, Vol. 38. Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University Division of Educational Reference, May, 1940, p. 10-19. "Survey of enrollment in colleges of engineering for November, 1939," The Society for the Promotion of Engineering Education, The Journal 9: Engineering Education, 30:449-59, 1940. Trimble, Otis Carroll, and H. H. Remmus, "Measures of edu- cational outcomes versus standards of institutional machinery as high school accreditering criteria," Studies in Higher Education, Bulletin No. 22. Lafayette, Indiana: Purdue University, March, 1933. 37 p. Votaw, D. P., "A comparison of test scores of entering college freshmen as instruments for predicting subse- quent scholarship," Journal 2: Educational Research, 40:215-18, November, 1946. Washburn, Oliver M., "Predictive values of high school subjects," California Journal g£_Secondary Education, 15:400-2, November, 1940. E. THESES, DISSERTATIONS, UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS, AND RESEARCH IN PROGRES Albee, Jane, "Evaluative problems relating to placement of freshman engineering students in mathematics." Un- published Master's thesis, Michigan State College, East Lansing, 1941. Bailey, Donald W., "Adjustment in transition from school to college." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, 1937. Abstract, Curriculum Journal, 9:232,3, May, 1938. Brown, Clara M., "A study of prerequisite sciences and certain sequent courses at the University of Minne- sota." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, The Uni- versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1941. Abstract, Curriculum Journal, 13:84,5, February, 1942. Gies, Tacitus P., "The effect of training in high school chemistry on accomplishment of first term chemistry at Michigan State College." Unpublished Master's thesis, Michigan State College, East Lansing, 1931. Johnson, Albert Pemberton, "The prediction of scholastic achievement for freshmen engineering students at Purdue University." Unpublished Doctoral disserta- tion, Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, May, 1942. Abstract by the author, Purdue University Division 2: Educational Reference, No. 44, May, 1942. Loye, E. S., "A study of the preparation in mathematics of students in engineering." Research in Progress 1942, under Doctor Boardman, University of Minnesota. gggg- gal g£_Educational Research, January, 1942. p. 367. Stapleton, Mary R., "The differential prognosis value of certain meadures as criteria for the educational guid- ance of entering freshmen.“ Research in Progress 1946, under Doctor Kemp, University of the City of New York. Journal 9: Educational Research, March, 1946. p. 555. Ullevik, Bjaine, "A factor—analysis of the academic success of freshman engineers at the University of Wisconsin." Research in Progress 1942, under Doctor Torgerson, University of Wisconsin. Journal 9: Educational Research, January, 1942. p. 367. APPENDICES APPENDIX A DEFINITION OF TERMS Basic engineers as used in this study refers to those enrolled in Basic College with engineering prefer- ence. Credit points are the number of points rating A a 3, B a 2, C s l, D = O, F = -1 per hour or per half unit of credit. They are totaled the same as hours or units of credit. Deficiency is a term used to include those high school subjects which are Specifically required for ad- mission to a given school of Michigan State College, but which have not been successfully completed prior to the entrance of the student into the college. Deficient entrant refers to a student who has been granted admission to the school of his choice, with defi~ ciency, the understanding being that such deficiencies will be removed in a way1 acceptable to the school concerned by the active participation of the student. Deficient group refers to the selected group con- sisting of all those having had upon entrance one or more units of science deficiency who were registered at Michigan 1 See page 44 for accepted methods of removal. 124 State College for the fall term of 1946 and whose high school record was available. Its selection is described on page 48 of the text. Grade point average is a quotient of the number of points earned by the number of hours or half units. It is the average grade points per hour or grade points per unit. This gives a convenient numerical quantity representing the average grade for a student. General sample refers to the group of one-fourth of the total pOpulation from Basic College with engineering preference and one-sixth of the total pOpulation from the School of Engineering used as source of the control group in this study. Its selection is outlined on page 64. Hours credit refers to the number of credit hours successfully completed. One credit hour is given for each hour which a class meets per week for a full term. Maturation as used throughout this study refers to the reaching or approaching that stage of adulthood when the desires and purposes have become sufficientlt stabil- ized so that future planning can be attempted with a fair degree of certainty. Non-deficient group refers to the selected group consisting of all those free of any kind of deficiency upon entrance, having high school records available, and registered for the fall term of 1946 in the School of 125 Engineering or Basic College with engineering preference, at Michigan State College, from the general sample. Its selection is described on page 57 of the text. Remaining_terms refer to all work taken subsequent to terms one and two (the student's first and second terms) at Michigan State College. Terms one and two refer to all work taken during the first and second terms attendance of the given student at Michigan State College. Upltg refer to high school credit in which four units constitute a full load for a normal high school student for a school year. A unit was originally defined as the Carnegie unit in an effort to standardize high school studies. This required a class meeting of at least forty-five minutes, five days per week, with approximately forty-five minutes Spent in preparation each day. A PrOposal Regarding Admission to Michigan Colleges and Universities Unanimously adOpted by the Michigan College Association, November 7, 1946. 1. It is preposed that the College Agreement of the Michigan Secondary Curriculum Study, with certain changes, be extended to include any accredited high school whose staff will make the commitments noted below in Sec- tion Two. The wording of the prOposed Agreement is as follows: "The college agrees to disregard the pattern of subjects pursued in considering for admission the graduates of selected accredited high schools, pro- vided they are recommended by the school from among the more able students in the graduating class." This Agreement does not imply that students must be admitted to certain college courses and curricula for which they cannot give evidence of adequate preparation. Secondary schools are urged to make available such basic courses as provide a necessary preparation for entering technical, industrial, or professional cur- ricula. It is recommended further that colleges pro- vide accelerated programs of preparation for special— ized college curricula for those graduates who are un- able to secure such preparatory training in high school. 2. It is preposed that high schools which seek to be governed by this Agreement shall assume reSponsibility for and shall furnish evidence that they are initiating and continuing such procedures as the following: a. A program involving the building of an adequate personal file about each student, includ- ing testing data of various kinds, anecdotal rec- ords, personality inventories, achievement samples, etc. The high school staff would assume responsi- bility for develOping a summary of these personnel data for submission to the college. 127 b. A basic curriculum study and evaluation of the purposes and program of the secondary school. c. Procedures for continuous follow-up of former pupils. d. A continuous program of information and orientation throughout the high school courses regarding the nature and requirements of certain occupations and Specialized college courses. Dur— ing the senior year, to devote Special emphasis to the occupation or college of the pupil's choice. 3. It is further recommended that a joint commit- tee be established to study applications of new schools and to recommend certain of these schools to colleges for inclusion in the Agreement; also to determine from time to time whether the criteria have been met in the schools on the list. This joint committee would include representa- tives of the Michigan Secondary School Association, the Michigan College Association, the Department of Public Instruction, and the Department of Superintendence of the Michigan Education Association. It would be served by a part-time staff supplied from three sources: the Bureau of COOperation of the University of Michigan, the Department of Public Instruction, and the Inservice Committees of various Michigan colleges and universities. 4. It is understood that high schools which cannot or will not make and observe the above commitments (see Section Two) will continue to employ the major and minor sequences for those students who wish to attend college. APPENDIX C TABLE XI ANALYSIS OF THE ENTRANCE REQUIREMENTS OF SELECTED SCHOOLS OF ENGINEERING , Enforce- Mathe- Lang- Eng- College Date ment matics Science uage lish Carnegie Institute of Technology 1942 I 3 2 P 2 4 California Insti- tute of Technology 1946 F 4 2 P - 3 or by examination l946 - 3 l P - 2 Cornell University 1946 Any pattern from upper 40% of HS or 1946 - 4 l P 2 3 - Colorado A. and M. College 1946 - 3 2 P - 3 Columbia University 1946 F 4 2 P - 3 Massachusetts Insti- tute of Technology 1946 I 4 l P - 3 Michigan College of Mines 1944 F 3 1 P - 3 Michigan State Col- lege of Agriculture and Applied Science 1946 F 3 2 P - '3 Ohio State University 1946 - 3 1 P - 3 Princeton University 1946 ~ 3% 2 P 3 3 129 TABLE XI (Continued) ANALYSIS OF THE ENTRANCE REQUIREKENTS OF SELECTED SCHOOLS OF ENGINEERING Enforce- Mathe- Lang- Eng- College Date ment matics Science uage lish Purdue University 1945 L 3 1 P - 3 Rensselaer Poly- technic Institute 1947 I 3% 2 P - 3 Stanford University 1945 L 3% 1 3 3 or better l946 — 3% 3 P - 4 University of Cali- fornia, Berkely l946 - 3% 2 - - University of Cali- fornia, Los Angeles 1946 - 3% 2 P - - University of Michigan 1946 L 3% 2 P 2 3 University of Notre Dame 1945 - 3 l P 2 3 These requirements were taken from the catalogues of the date as listed of the respective schools of engi- neering. Enforcement is classified as I, inflexible, L, limited flexibility, F, flexible application of these requirements as judged by the methods of removal of defi- ciencies suggested in the catalogue. The numbers refer to high school units of the par- ticular field required for entrance. "P" in the science column indicates that physics is Specifically required as one of the'sciences. (Print your name in space above.) '7 ram too—s: V ..- Q luo A 2:.)an .‘JIII: D Q ection l I .—l J. 7. {‘1 K) MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION GENERAL INFORMATION The Basic College has been established as an educational unit in which all students will be enrolled during their freshman and sophomore years. The Basic College is designed to provide students with a sound educational foundation on which to build an intelligent interest in personal, family, vocational, social, and civic problems, a better understanding of these problems, and a greater ability to cope with them. It includes the study of man’s relationship to physical, biological, and social sciences, an increased knowledge of the historical background of present-day civilizations, and an enhanced appreciation of cultures, past and present, that have been expressed in literature, music and art. Students whose training may eventually become highly specialized need this foundation of general educational experience that each may have a greater appreciation of the relationship of his special field to the needs of society as a whole. Specialization for the Bachelor’s degree is completed in the appropriate school. INSTRUCTIONS The first three pages of this blank are to be filled out by the applicant in ink,- the entire blank is then to be referred to the prin- cipal of the high school from which the applicant graduated, who will fill out the remaining page: and forward the entire blank to the oflice of the Registrar. 1. Name in full ...W....... _ Date WWW _,., (Last) (First) (Middle) 2. Home address ...... (Number and street) (City) (State) 3. Mailing 311(1me u (If difl'erent from home address) (Street and number) (City) (Stats) 4. Birthplace Date of Birth__._.. ..--._. ,._---.----------__-W----..Are you a U.S. citizen?W._-_-___. (Month) (Day) (Year) 5. (a) Single Wlsrried Do you have any children?l,...--.._.--------__W_Number (b) Are you a veteran of World War 11?..- ................ Total months in service..--.--..--- Branch of Service--- 6. High School _. (Name of High School) (Imation) (Date of Graduation) 7. (a) Have you .t my time applied for admission to any other college or universityP--_. If so. give some of institution and full details of the outcome of your application (1)) Have you attended any college or university?............ If so, give name and location of the institution, time spent there, and reason for withdrawal (1:) If you have attended another college ask the registrar to send us a transcript of your record or a statement of honor- able dismissal if no credit was earn .. 3- When do you expect to enter college? I] Fall [3 Winter D Spring E] Summer. Year-W-.-” 9a. (1) Father’s full name, '9b. (1) Mother’s full name: “1mm; (mam?)"“"""""""““' "Wallis ' (First) ""“"”"(maam" (£3?me (2) Living? ........... _ (3) Place of Birth -W---- (2) Living? (3) Place of Birth.----_---------_.-----._.W.. (4) National extraction- .V.-____..W--_____. 4 (4) National extraction (5) Is he an American citizen?.._--4..--_...--.._ --__.__.--__.------ W . (5) Is she an American citizen? (0) Occupation (6) Occupation . - “sf-wt. 2 10. If you have worked since graduation from high school, state positions held and duration of each term of employmentWWm J 'I 11. Give names, addresses and occupations of at least two responsible adult persons (not your former school teachers or ofieers, or relatitq as references h. —‘ W“... _ 4 l 12. What influences led you to come to this College?.. ____. q C] requirements for Bachelor's degree? (Four-year course) 18. Do you expect to complete [:1 the two-year terminal course only? I E] the one-year terminal course only? i ., 1 14. Check your preference (check one): : SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND mi C] General Agriculture (Agricultural Eco- E] Chemical nomics, Agriculture Extension, Animal E] Civil [3 Electrical (Continued) 3 (Check Major Field) Husbandry, Farm Crops, Farm Man- Physical Science: ~-____n._.-.. - agcment, Poultry Husbandry, Rural [3 Mechanical D Chemistry . SilS' DMtll . l ClGeography Socwlogy and Anthropology, 0 ct- e a urgica D Geology ence, Pre-Theological.) D Sanitary D Mathematics E] Physics and Astronomy Social Science: I] Agricultural Education (Teaching) Cl Food Technology Agricultural Engineering Series: D Farm Engineering [J Agricultural Engineering SCHOOL OF HOME ECONOMICS Child Develo ment 3 Clothing andecxtiles D Economics C] Foreign Studies [3 Foods and Nutrition D History D General C] Philosophy D Home Economics and Nursing D Political Science Dairy Series: D Dairy Production l C] Institution Administration U Psychology 3 C] Dairy Manufactures C] Related Arts Cl Sociology l Fore'trlf sen“: C] Vocational Education (Teaching) Pre-Profcsaionai- : D TCCthGJ Forestry [j 2 Yr. Terminal in Home Economics C] Dental ' D Housing 811d Lumber Merchandising C] 2 Yr. Terminal in Food Supervision D Law ; Horticultural Series: D Medical ' Cl Floriculture SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND ARTS 1 . 0 Panda" (Check M330, Field) SCHOOL OF VETERINARY nsmul. D Vegetable Production Landscape Series: [3 Landscape Architecture D Urban Planning Fine Arts: D Veterinary Medicine D Art E] Medical Technology [3 Applied Music [:1 Music Major I] Music Theory El Musical Therapy B Public School Music BASIC COLLEGE [j N 0 Preference (Undecided on linger) SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC SERVICE Business Administration: Education: E] Business Administration—degree cur- D Elementary (Teaching) riculum Cl Secondary (Check Major Field Also) D 2 Yr. Terminal in General Business I] 2 Yr. Terminal in Insurance IMPORTANT WRITE YOUR NAME ON THE BACK OF A SMALL UNIOUNI' Language and Literature: check one: ED PHOTOGRAPH on SNAP- D 2 Yr. Terminal in Retailing C1 Eng'fsh Cl French SHOT op roman? m [J 2 Yr. Terminal in Secretarial Science B '0’318" Languages '3 German [:1 1 Yr. Terminal in Business D Literature Cl Latin ATTACH HERE [3 Speech, Dramatics and Radio C] Spanish [:1 Hotel Administration APPLICATION was. as con- D Journalism [1 Physical Education, Health and Recreation D Police Administration D Public Administration D Social Service Biological Science: [J Bacteriology C] Botany [:1 Entomology E] Physiology [j Wildlife Management and Fisheries C] Zoology SIDERED INCOMPLETE I? PHO- TOGRAPH I8 OMITTED. THIS IS REQUIRED OF EVERY APPLICANT ____”'l 3 152 FOR COUNSELOR (To be completely filled out by the applicant.) a --_-.Date of Birth (Middle Name) (Month) (Day) (Year) Name (Last Name) (First Name) Home address Single _ Married-_W------_.--_---_--.--__-. Do you have any children?._-.----.-.. Number-..-. ((1) Mother‘s name--....-.---_-. l. (a) Father’s name (e) Mother’s occupation (if wage earner) (b) Father’s occupation (f) Mother’s education, (check if a graduate; otherwise (c) Father’s education (check if a graduate; otherwise give number of years in attendance): give number of years in attendance): MSC M . ..... - Grade school..- W.-- High school-_..-....--College{ .80. Grade school ....... High school .---------.College{ 2. Give names and relationships of relatives who have attended M.S.C.. including years of attendance . CL- . W... 12...... 3. (a) Have you contributed toward your support while in high school? ........ Approx. number of hours per week Nature of employment (5) Have you been employed since graduationi----_.---------_----_----. How long and at what work?----..._----...,__-_._.---_- ‘- (3) In what subject do you expect to specialise in colicge?...-.... .-----...._ _----_...Do you plan to teach?_----.. - (b) Name high school subjects you liked best (c) List any particular honors, prises, other special awards for scholarship obtained in high school _--_._ 5. (0 Make a complete list of the sports and other extra-curricular school activities in which you participated in high school ‘r- mo-¢--—._.-.. ”www.— (5) WI!“ Special recognition, if any, have you received in any of these activities? —-'——.~c--N (e) Which, if any, of these activities do you intend to continue in College?.---__--_---..__..-- . 6' What do you look forward to as a life work? 7' Wt are your plans for financing your college course during the first year? 8. . . - If one year or more has passed since your graduation from high school, state whether or not and how your attitude “mud. h‘Shcr education has changed MN 9' State mndition of general health, naming any illness which may have handicapped you while in high school--_----. -Wk 10. Do you have periods of unconsciousness, convulsions, epilepsy, or fainting spells? 4 (Confidential) CANDIDATE’S PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS ( To be filled out by the high school counselor, principal. or superintendent.) This sheet will be placed in the hands of the student’s college Counselor. 1. To the high school official: ‘ (a) Please indicate your judgment of the candidate by placing check marks on the scale of ratings given below. (b) If a rating on any trait is omitted, it will be understood that you do not have sufficient knowledge of the candidate to express judgment. Such omissions will not put the candidate at a disadvantage. Trait Very low Low Average Fairly high High Very high Potential intellectual capacity Actual intellectual perfu. Seriousness of purpose Originality ______ Tractability Social ‘ “ ’ _____ Independence of effort - __-. Popularity .____ 2. If candidate took tests, please give: Name of Test Date Given Percentile gar; Ranarh 3. General rank in class (check one): (Best 25%).-_._ --- (Second 25%)....-_._._.-7(Third 25%) ........... (Poorest 25%)....-_.-._. 4. (a) Has the applicant any defect of speech, sight or hearing? _— (b) Is the applicant subject to periods of unconsciousness, convulsions, epilepsy, or fainting spells? -_— 5. State any other defects or qualities which are not covered by above __— .— 6. To what degree did the candidate’s attitude towards scholastic work and application to academic subjects change during the last year or two in high school? .___-_ __.“ 4..— 7. Describe any particular circumstances of the candidate’s environment, personality, or fortunes of life that may have been influential in determining the record made in high school“.-. ,-_”___.___-______- ’- 8. Give any additional information which you think will be of value to us in understanding and guiding the candidatew.’ "While-"hw- - ' " W Signature ._._._-__.__.__ . ‘.‘._._...H -— - __.—y..__.._l. . . 1 - -.—_~-..... 1 _- 154 HIGH SCHOOL RECORD AND CERTIFICATE OF RECOMMENDATION (Confidential) High School 51 ---- Located at ._ __. r. .fi--..-- _-._.-..-_---. .-. ..—--—.__ ...-_..,.._._._ ..__..__._.__._.__. -. fl----’_..__ By what recognised accrediting associations is your school accredited? __--s.-...._--.--_ Student’s name (Last) (First) ' (Middle) 52 CI College Preparatory Course Date of graduation from (check one){ I] Non-college Preparatory Course (a) Years in attendance (b) Names of and years in attendance at other high schools, if any, which candidate attended and from which credits were accepted Has a statement of the applicant’s credits been submitted to any other college or university?--__._.__If so, when and to what school? If candidate took tests, please give: (If given in page 4, omit here) Name of Test Date Given Percentile 312;; Remarks 45 ST . (a) Number in candidate’s graduation class 50 (b) Applicant’s rank in class (cg—highest, 1; second highest, 2) (c) General rank in class (check one): (Best 25%)..5a§___._(80c0nd 25%) ............... .. (Third 25%).--------_.--_-_ (Poorest 25%).. _________ 9- Check the group under which you think the scholastic record of the applicant may be expected to fall: U Excellent E] Superior D Average C] Inferior C] Probable Failure 0- Grade required for recommendation to College 1. Principal or Superintendent please check and sign the following: I hereby certify that the following transcript is a true copy of the applicant’s record [I 1.) do omcially recommaad admission to Michigan State College as checked: C] Clear. C] With examinations. and (check one) C] 2.) do not omcially recommend admission to Michigan State College. Date_- assign}; Superintendent -_, gx‘r-a ”rm STUDENTS NAML STU DI ES ENGLISH: First Year Second Year Third Year Fourth Year LATIN: First Year Second Year Third Year Fourth Year FRENCH: First Year Second Year Third Year Fourth Year GERMAN: First Year Second Year Third Year Fourth Year SPANISH: First Year Second Year MATHEMATICS: Algebra. First Yr. Second Geometry. Plane . Solid Trigonometry PHYSICS CHEMISTRY BIOLOGY . BIOLOGY Y: Ancient World Eu ropes n United States 'HOME ECONOMIQ: TOWARD GRADUATION 00TH!!! STUDIES NOT ACCEPTED TOWARD GRADUATION Passing grade of school Grading system (give numerical equivalents oi letters. when letters are used.) oi Recitation Period oi Laboratory Period Specify by (PG) any suhieets taken subsequent to graduation. 0Mer (L) any studies occupying double periods. The entire blank must be sent directly so sh. College Registrar by the official who signs its Curriculum desired (Do not write in this space) 156 [:1 Degree Curriculum [:1 Two Year Terminal C] One Year Terminal To credit oint = Total halfl units _....--.-..,.GROUP : English—__Speech.-__~--_-...J ourn.______Dramatics..--_.-.- __.____GROUP: hfln___French—_ German....___ Spanish__.__ _-.---_--- GROUP: Algebra.____Pl. Geom..---....--Sol. Geom._._.-Trig.-...____ _ - ---..GROUP : : Physics—__ChMWM...“ Biology...____._ Botany Zool- Geol._._._ PhysioL-.. Gen. Sci... ._.. -_-- __GROUP: History—__Econ...“...____-Am. Govt. .Geog._ Social- Civ- Social Prob.- iicad. Cr. . _-__....GROUP: Agricult.-_ Home Ec._-_-_..._ Com’L__.__ Indust.-.____ M usic-__-____ Misc. _-_ Total __.--.— Condltions or deficiencies---__.__.9.b_!_9.l$ 27,: 28.; 291 - __ -- - _--_-____ --_ - _- ___- ............................................ Tot. Cr.------..---.— Transcript“) received from _ -- Admission 0L Shun” Date :Remarks: Grade point average HIGH SCHOOL REQUIREMENTS FOR ADMISSION l .' The requirements for admission are slalcd in terms of units; a unit meaning a subject pursued through a school year with not less theater recitation periods each week. TO BASIC COLLEGE I. For graduates from accredited high schools: LAsatlstactoryhighschoolrecord.Thhmeammeeflngthe‘coflegcrecommmdinggrade,”udedgnatedhytheflfischsd. ' 2. Aminlmumoffltteenunits. ThreeormoreunitsmustbeinEnglishgsndsevenunits (slxunitslleunitsofnngikhsrepnsaiei) I chosen from three of the following groups: foreign languages, mathematics. sdenm, and nodal atudlu. Three additional units db _1 I i from the subjects Just mentioned or from vocational studies. such as agriculture. home economics, commercial or industth an lei r: m quired. (Music may be presented in place of vocational studies for those who expect to specialias in music). The other units prannd {‘33 I may be from any other subjects accepted by the high school toward graduation. 2.7:- h 9 Satisfactory recommendation from the high school principal or other proper administrative oflcer as to attitudes, habits, emotional stability, general conduct, character, ability and capacity, to indicate that the candidate will make a suitable college studmt. II. For those not qualified for admission under the term of I: l I. The applicant must have passed his eighteenth birthday except in the case of high school graduates. 2. Entrance examinations from the following areas will be required: 5 _ r 7 a. Communications (English and Speech) b. Biological Science c. Physical Science (including mathematics) d. History and Social Studies e. Literature and Fine Arts The Board of Examiners will determine which of these examinations will be required. 3. The results of the entrance examinations, the applicant’s previous record (scholastic and experience) and results of intelligent ml 9; sptitudes tests will be used by the Board of Examiners in judging the candidate for admission. TO THE SCHOOLS For those students who plan to continue their education for a Bachelor’s Degree, individual curricula specify, in addition to admhsionb I the Basic College, the following minimum requirements: _ z... SCHOOL MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS w ture lunlt Algebra ltuni Plane Geometry Business and Public Service— Business Administration, Hotel Administration, and Public Administration 1 unit lunit Plane I“Geometry Police Administration Be qualiflsd to pass physical examination for aimed 11.0.1.0. ‘ Engineering 1% units Algebra (Including Agricultural) I unit Plane Y. unit Trigonometry 2 units Science: ~ 1 unit Physics 1 unit Laboratory Science from High School or Physical Science (Basic 181,132, 183) at MSG Home Economics...” __ 2 units Math. or Science or 1 unit Math. and l unitSd Science and Arts— Biological and Physical Sciences, including Pro-medical and Pro-dental ,. .1 unit Algebra 1 unit Plane Geometry ‘ Veterinary Medicine no additional requirements Other Curricula (1)-2) no additional requirements I A STUDENT WHO ENTERS WITH DEFICIENCIES IN REQUIRED WORK MUST MAKE UP SIX COLLEGE CREDITS FOR J EACH SUCH UNIT BEFORE BEGINNING THE SOPHOMORE YEAR. Uta». IULUM l’ a! GUARDIAN: -4. lVIIkI Hle J I I'\I E LULLCUC STUDENT’S RECORD MAJOR MATRICULATED 4 DATE OF BIRTH 2 a IRTHPLACE _SOCIETY AFFILIATION HONORS I Science cience » Ad usted Term Grades ILComp. Exam. 3 c Living of Civilization I Fine Arts Date 2 Cr. Pt. TRANSCRIPTS ISSUED GR‘ 4 , CI SENIOR STATEMENT MADIE_ CR UCU biL‘Il 6 L00. STUDENT NUMBER ‘3 pr C- .__:;;IEE DEGREE GRAD. FROM 51 ENGLISH CHEMISTRY 1 CIVICS .SPEECH. BIOLOGY 3”SOC. PROBL- JOURNALISM , BOTANY AGRICULTURE DRAMATICS. ZOOLOGY HOME ECON LATIN GEOLOGY COMMERCIAL FRENCH PHYSIOLOGY INDUSTRIAL GERMAN GENERAL SCI. MUSIC SPANISH HISTORY MISC. ‘ 7 ALGEBRA ECONOMICS GEOMETRY GOVERNMENT E. 5 TRIGONOMETRY54 GEOGRAPHY" PHYSICS SOCIOLOGY DEFICIENCIES: ,‘33 - 29 " PT [I J53]. 'HDASd 'S 'H NI XNW w ETEEIIIHN INSERTS WI'I‘IIDIHHID HZBWI'IN .LNEOI'LLS APPENDIX D Ilfi’j‘II’..-'IDJ..G.I. RED}; Section 3 Name Date of Entry lst & 2nd terms 5 12 To 1313.1 31.0711‘5 ..lfL... LL“ item 111111;; I . 7' , . 1 9w 2 - _ .‘IUITILI‘E‘I‘ 3 ‘n‘, 4 ihnnbor Oi Itnxns 5 , - . r- , .1 I 41.51:}?! 0 Jr: at & in“ Remaining I terms term: 1 I; ixfluu‘fkints _*___m_ Cm.wh_34ti0 __8__. - , rm.-.- ..- ° A. - c .-lhb.i.xic Luring-J I :2 22 uv‘ll v.) H'Or-‘Or Pornts fifitLG 1' “O (‘f‘; f3 _) O. 'l ; .. ¢ - .-f‘ ,0 2 lfi.e9¥*“‘ff£n““jg 20 23 mans bfiLUfi —. '_n’f ’ h '. , ' l‘ _\ “__.—o __.— o...— g..Ca bA-blrlz- -.‘ta‘J 17 MCQCI‘ .I Olin“? 41:. i0 ——-———-—-— mn— . -. 7,7. - x "i » C. In... In -: L p ;O£ I. ‘5' . . ' .. -. : ': ’ Hothcmetjcp CO ence g Q 1 . s ' ‘ '11 _ LT ;.' ; ..1 .‘ ._.‘ '., “ . f 7* . setnoo of. CO!T.8 Crane .Grm mconoc on LOU:.C «rr 0 Iorm removal remove i .I. I V‘ 4‘6.va ls‘b-0 " 7".“ I h»? I v ‘1" n-n‘4. " . r «r '31 1.- ~ Ilbey : _’ .IA—L_I‘JO-(J f. L 'JL e ‘s‘« - re ’ ‘L I - krl (:8 J. 9d M~ S f 3r -.h u: ’ K/ .‘A..J‘L'\ A ’ 1L ' ~I.I" $.7ttLr T— . . .: A -A 1 ‘ r3, ‘. \ ,. I" - :s .‘ . .nter1.g D. 10- eucis; ‘lf‘ “CHUUI nceore ""1“?“ f“ " I by" I: ll ' + ’ " \‘rW- “ Iii'i- On. ‘.,'L’.L. lec .. -., l’li. “ta‘ “Vb- $51.1 -\ ' .. . ‘.."..-i-‘ ..- ,.. a _ ‘ 23 50121109 SIC; .3 Un I i.” live ago __29 Phys 110 s . 2’27 Psycnologlcal '—\ Y"~ o. 0‘ g"'- ‘- .. ,- y- ”0"- -. -.£| - 'fi , . .. -L r. .'-1’.'.i.ma.ssli flammaa 11. (IsaCJJ. Cr JI'\;G .L in.) ‘ ~. . ',. 35' . - ', rn-‘.. -- - ,. ...,_ ..- ) CHBCn LC spoolci Ictei unite fluorego --—.-—-—-.o.—— {3.18 I‘tilf‘r I43 Part 1 38 41 Part t 39 From - ’ mop-Io...“ Docilgr 40 "7.2.1“ Service Credit I 42 44 APPENDIX E INDEX OF SUBJECTS USED IN SECTIONS 24, 25 OF APPENDIX D-3 TO REMOVE DEPICIENCIES science Physics Preparatory. General Physics. Physics 158, 168, 178, General Physics, does not require Calculus. Physics Refresher. Basic Physical Science 131, 132, 133. One method to remove physics deficiency. Physics 271, 272, 273. Regular college physics course, never used for high school substitute, but sometimes taken without high school background courses. In such cases the information was recorded in the Indi- vidual Record sheet during this investigation. Basic Biological Science 121, 122, 123. Used to remove science deficiencies. Botany 101, 203b. Used occasionally. gathematics Mathematics 90 - Plane geometry on a high school level. Mathematics 100a - Second year high school algebra. Mathematics lOOb - Solid geometry. Mathematics 100c - Algebra for Statistics. Second year high school algebra. Mathematics 102 - Trigonometry. )(III. XIV. XV. XVI. XVII. APPENDIX F CORRELATIONS MADE IN THIS STUDY Correlation of First and Second Term College Total Grade Point Average with High School Grade Point Average, Deficient Group . . The Correlation of First and Second Terms College Grade Point Average with High School Total Grade Point Average, Non- deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of Remaining Terms College Total Grade Point Average with High School Total Grade Point Average, Deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of Remaining Terms College Total Grade Point Average.with High School Total Grade Point Average, Non-deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . . Correlation of First and Second Terms College Science and Mathematics with High School Mathematics Grade Point Averages, Deficient Group . . . . . . . . The Correlation of First and Second Terms of College Mathematics and Science with High School Mathematics, Non-deficient Group . PAGE 145 146 147 148 149 150 1E .c.t.¢... . .—. .1131. it . . w XVIII. XIX. XXII. XXIII. The Correlation of Remaining Terms of College Science and Mathematics with High School Mathematics Grade Point Averages, Deficient Group . . . . . The Correlation of Remaining Terms of College Science and Mathematics with High School Mathematics Grade Point Averages, Non-deficient Group . . . The Correlation of Remaining Terms Science, Mathematics and Engineering Total Grade Point Average with High School Total Grade Point Average, Deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of Remaining Terms Col- lege Science, Mathematics and Engineer- ing Total Grade Point Average with High School Total Grade Point Average, Non- deficient Group. . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of High School Total Grade Point Average with the A. C. E. Psychological Examination Score Ranks, Deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of High School Total Grade Point Average with the A. C. E. 143 PAGE . 151 . 152 . 153 C 154 . 155 TABLE XXIV. XXVI. XXVII. XXVIII. XXIX. Psychological Examination Score Ranks, Non-deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of High School Mathemat- ics Grade Point Average with the Psycho- logical "Q" Score Decile, Deficient Group The Correlation of High School Mathematics Grade Point Average with the Psycholog- ical "2" Score, Non-deficient Group . . The Correlation of College First and Sec— ond Term Grade Point Average with the A.C.E. Psychological Examination Ranks, Deficient Group . . . . . . . . . . . . The Correlation of College First and Sec- ond Term Grade Point Average with the A.C.E. Psychological Examination Ranks, Non-deficient Group .'. . . . . . . . . The Correlation of the Remaining Terms Grade Point Average with the A.C.E. Psy- chological Examination Ranks, Deficient The Correlation of the Remaining College Terms Grade Point Average with the A.C.E. Psychological Examination Ranks, Non- deficient Group . . . . . . . . , . . . The Correlation of the High School Mathe- matics with High School Science Grade Point Averages, Non-deficient Group . . 144 PAGE 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 145 APPENDIX F TABLE XII CORRELATION OF FIRST AND SECOND TERM COLLEGE TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH HIGH SCHOOL GRADE POINT AVERAGE * DEFICIENT GROUP Class ' 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .65 .66 .99 1.56 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 6.00 f 1 6 26 48 56 51 22 10 6 d -4 —6 —2 .1 O 1 2 5 4 df .. —4 ~18 .52 -48 51 44 50 24 d‘f 16 54 104 48 51 84 90 96 5-00 1 5 5 25 1 2.67 2°66 2 4 8 52 2 2.54 2°°5 12 5 56 1.8 1 1 1 5 2 4 2.00 1'99 12 2 24 48 4 11 " 5 1 2 1.67 ° ‘ 111:4 48 1 48 48 1 5 9 12 8 6 5 2 1-55 61 O 2 11 18 16 9 4 1 1.00 '92? 27 -1 -27 27 5 7 5 8 5 1 -?§4 15 —2 .50 60 1 2 8 2 2 ~35 6 .5 -18 54 1 1 2 1 1 .00 00 ° 1 -4 .4 16 1 -.55 '- 54 c; . 1 —6 .5 26 1 -066 1.512 G.P.A. B.S.T. Zia = 522.757 “x n = 186 z 7 zxy : 207.609 My = 1.262 G.P.A. Col. 1 8.2 x 8 2y2 = 455.64 Pyx = .455 {y = 37 (‘2 = .551 2x2 = 525 A d? = .5615 Zyk = 445 146 APPENDIX F TABLE XIII THE CORRELATION OF FIRST AND SEcmlD TERMS COLLEGE GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH HIGH SCHQQL TOTAL QRADE POINT AVERAGE - __ NON-DEFICIENT GROUP Class O .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 r 4 19 42 71 54 44 22 8 d -4 —5 _ .2 —1 0 1 2 5 df -16 -57 -84 —71 44 44 24 42$ 64 171 168 71 44 88 72 5.00 2.67 5 5 15 75 1 1 1 2.66 o (f; t) 2.54 15 4 52 208 2 4 4 2 1 2,325,021 565189 5 4 5 4 4 5 1'99 41 2 82 164 1 1 5 9 7 15 5 2 1.67 1'66 58 1 58 58 1 7 4 19 15 12 6 1.54 ° 1.% ( 1.00 75 O 1 5 18 25 17 7 4 '?:7 55 -1 -55 55 6 6 10 7 2 1 1 '62, 14 -2 -28 52 1 2 5 5 2 1 .150 5 .5 —9 27 5 .oo -.55 5 -4 -12 56 2 1 n = 264 '22? = 647 "x = 1.68 G.P.A., H.S.Total xx = ~ll6 21y : 292.6 “y = 1.405 G.P.A., 051. 1 s. 2 1y = 118 aye = 712.1 ryx .-.-. .452 2x2 = 698 72: = .545 Easy - 210 637 = .555 147 APPENDIX F TABLE XIV THE CORRELATION OF REMAINING TERMS COLLEGE TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE RITE HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POIET AVERAGE - DEEICIENT GROUP Class O .54 .67 1.00 1.34 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.53 1.66 1.99 2.55 2 66 5.00 f 1 5 24 45 56 50 25 9 6 d .4 -5 .2 .1 O 1 2 5 4 df .. -4 -15 —48 .45 5O 46 27 24 dd: 16 45 96 45 50 92 81 96 53327 1 5 5 25 1 .66 I 22.54 5 4 12 48 1 1 1 2.55 _ 23014642126 1 4 5 2 2 2 .9 . 11.67 29 2 58 116 1 6 5 4 8 4 1 1.66 1.545115151 6 9 5 6 4 1 1.55 1.00500 1611915721 .99 .6718 -l-18 18 1 5 6 5 2 1 .66 .5410 .2-20 40 4 6 .55 , . .00 7 .5—21 65 2 1 5 1 .OO _ __.556—4-24 96 1 2 1 1 1 -.54 -066 O .5 -067 --1.00 8 -6-48 288 _ 1 4 5 n = 177 27:2 = 497.729 “x = 1.528 G.P.A., H.S.Total 2x = 15 33?: 518.56 My = 1.199 G.P.A., C51. Rem. 273 = 17' 2372: 849.569 ryx= .490 2:2 = 499 63? = .55 ixy= 520 W = .72 y = .222/.64x Zy2= 851 APPENDIX F TABLEXV 148 THE CORRELATION OP REMAINING TERMS COLLEGE TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE IITR HIGH SCEOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE. N ON-DEFIC IENT GROUP Class O .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 f 5 19 42 7O 54 45 22 8 d —4 -5 -2 —1 O 1 2 5 4 df _ —9 .58 .42 54 86 66 52 622 27 76 42 54 172 152 128 3-00 4 ’4 96 2 2 2.67 5 2 2 2.66 2 . 2.54 12 5 56 108 5 2 1 4 2 25?30 21 2 42 84 1 5 7 5 4 1 1.99 T ‘ r' 1.67 56 1 56 56 1 4 5 10 8 5 2 I.” f ("6“ 0‘ 1.54 51 O 2 8 22 8 8 2 1 1 55 . . , . . o _ _ ’ 6 (3. 1.00 72 1 72 72 15 18 15 1 6 '93? 52 -2 .84 128 2 7 6 8 7 2 '624 12 -5 .59 117 1 1 2 4 5 2 '530 10 -4 -40 160 5 4 1 2 00 - -5 —5 25 -54 . ° ' -6 72 _.66 2 -12 2 - 67 - - .5 5 -1.00 5 7 ‘5 24 1 1 1 1 1 n = 261 222: 545.95 “x = 1.690 G.P.A., H.S.Total 21 = 149 zxy = 284.62 My = 1.555 G.P.A., 051. Rem. 2y’ 2 -129 2y? = 1079.2 #yx = .5575 1x2 = 651 fi' = .482 zxy= 2].]. J? = .677 {42:11:45 APPENDIX F TABLE XVI 149 CORRELATION OF FIRST AND SECOND TERMS COLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EIEH §IGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE EQIflT_AVERAG§S. DEFICIENT GROUP Class 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 f 10 15 11 49 16 25 50 14 21 d .4 .5 .2 .1 0 1 2 5 4 df -40 -59 —22 ..49 25 60 42 84 d f 160 117 44 49 25 120 126 556 500 . .. - 5 55 5 2.67 7 17 1 2 2 2 2:66 7 4 28112 1 1 1 4 2.34 2 55 . ° 5 1 5 5 2 2.00 20 60180 1 1 2 6 1.99 . . 1.67 22 2 44 88 1 2 4 5 6 2 2 1.66 I' 6" 1" 1.54 27 1 27 27 2 2 9 5 5 2 4 155 - 4 4 7 8 1.00 51 o 1 6 6 2 2 '92724 421 24 2 2 9 1 2 1 5 1 '66“ 14 -2'-28 56 1 2 6 1 4 53015 4.59117 4 1 4 2 2 oo - 1 -4 -4 16 1 -053 -54 - 1 .5 .5 25 1 “0'66 11 =187 {122956.37 “x =1.6055 G.P.l., H.S.Meth. 2x = 59 43:402.55 “y =1.555 G.P.A.,1&2001. m.&hm 2y = 94 2y2=772.7 1‘35:: .468 2x2=975 a: =- .811 y = .755; .547: aye-452 cry = .647 2y2 = 820 APPENDIX F TABLE XVII 150 THE CORRELATION OF THE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS OF COLLEGE MATHEMATICS D so 5 H HIGH 5011093; MATHEMATICS. NON;DEFICIENT GROUP c1455 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 r 6 7 18 42 52 46 59 27 27 d —4 -5 .2 .1 0 1 2 5 4 df 2 .24 .21 -56 .42 46 118 81 112 d‘f 96 65 2 42 46 25 245 448 am (V r‘ - 4 5 4 2.67 14 6 22 2 1 2 4 5 2.66 . ‘. 2.5418554162 514118 2'55 56 2 72 144 4 2 10 11 6 5 2.00 1.99 .. r , . 1.6754154 54 2.1 1 5 515 7 2 1.66 ,. 2 , 1.34 00 0 2 l 5 d u 4 .5 2 5 11530 67 .1 -67 67 5 1 4 14 8 14 15 5 4 '92? 21.2.42 84 5 6 5 2 2 1 53415-529117. 1 1 5 5 5 '530 19-4-76 504 5 5 6 2 5 1 1 1 figs 8-5-40 200 4 1 2 1 -54 O _6- 8 r "66 5 18 10 2 1 -.67 -1.00 2 7 14 96 2 n = 265 {22:10:39.5 Mx=1.7945 G.P.A., 5.5.1212: 2x — 254 zxy= 500.6 hiy=1.5994 G.P.A., 142051. 80. &.Math zy - -80 zy2=1505.84 ryx: .4005 21:2 1246 I; = .658 my: 450 03} - .794 132-1550 151 APPENDIX F TABLE XVIII THE CORRELATION 0F REMAINING TERMS OF COLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS ‘WITH HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE POINI‘AVERAGES. DEFICIENT_GROUP C1888 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 * .55 .66' .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 f 11 11 11 48 15 25 51 14 18 d —4 _5 -2 -1 0 1 2 5 4 df .44 -55 .22 -48 25 62 42 72 d2f 176 99 44 48 25 124 126 288 5.00 ‘ 2.67 5 5 15 75 1 1 1 2.66 2 2.54 11 4 44 176 2 1 2 1 5 2.55 _. 7 , 2.00 17 5 51 155 5 5 5 5 5 1.99 , 2 - 1.67 12 2 24 48 2 2 1 2 5 1.66 . . 1.54 24 1 24 24 1 1 6 2 2 9 1 2 1.55 2 1.00 64 0 4 6 5 16 6 12 8 8 1 '92? 14 -1 —14 14 2 1 1 4 1 4 1 ‘6g4 14 .2 ~28 56 2 2 4 5 .1 1 1 .233) 10 -o -uO 90 1 5 l 2 l .00 -.55 1 -4 —4 16 1 -.54 _.66 5 -5 -25 125 1 1 5 :i?30 7 -6 .42 252 1 2 2 2 n = 182 'zxe‘z 915.15 “x = 11.5955 G.P.l., H.S. ' ; Math 2x = 52 .zxy = 7459.72 h“y = 1.1945 G.P.A., 061. Sc. &.Math. ' 2y = 15 2?? = 1027.76 1x2 = 928 if = .6275 ryx = .464 2x: = 444 a? = .665 i472 = 1029 152 APPENDIX F TABLE XIX THE CORRELATION OF REMAINING TERMS OF COLLEGE SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS WITH HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE POINT AVERALES. NON—DEFICIENT GROUP c1455 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 r 5 8 17 59 51 50 55 28 27 d —4 -5 -2 .1 0 1 2 5 4 df F —20 —24 -54 —59 50 106 84 108 0‘2 60 72 68 59 50 212 242 452 5°00 10 4 40 160 1 4 2 5 2.67 2&664 15 5 45 155 1 1 2 1 5 2 5 2 55 . . ° 5 64 128 1 5 5 5 7 5 2 6 2.00 2 2 1 99 . . - 4 4 5 1.67 16 1 16 16 2 1 2 1 66 . ' 5 4 1.54 56 0 2 1 5 7 6 6 1 55 , , . - — 6 5 5 1 8 12 14 6 5 1.00 65 1 —65 5 2 '92? 22 .2 —44 88 1 1 5 4 6 5 5 1 '6? 57 -5-111 555 2 1 5 5 4 10 10 2 '530 15 —4 -60 240 1 1 5 5 2 4 1 .00 _ . _.55 4 .5 20 .100 1 2 1 ‘054 _.66 0 —6 o - 57 - ° - ' 94 1 .1.00 6 7 —42 2 1 2 1 1 n = 258 :2x2 = 998.2 Mx = 1.7981 G.P.A., 9.5.5555. 1x = 251 .2xy = 556.6 My 4 1.2716 G.P.A. Rem. Col 2 Sc. 8: Math. 2y - —177 .zy£ = 1457.6 Fyz — .297 2x2 = 1205 6i = .655 ny = 198 ii = .786 Lyz 1559 APPENDIX E TABLE XX 155 THE CORRELATION OF REMAINING TERMS SCIENCE,MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING COLLEGE TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE 052101257 GROUP c1555 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 f 1 5 26 45 54 29 25 8 6 d .4 —5 .2 -1 0 1 2 5 4 df —4 -15 .48 .45 50 46 27 24 d r 16 45 96 45 50 92 81 96 5 00 - 6 2.67 1 4 4 1 1 2 66 - 5 8 54 1 1 2 2.54 6 1 1 1 2'55 17 2 54 68 2 1 2 5 5 4 2.00 1 99 2 . o 4 4 1.67 14 1 1 14 5 2 5 2 1.66 . 1.54 26 o 5 7 4 6 5 1 1°55 62 —1 -62 62 1 10 14 15 15 8 1 1.00 '92? 18 -2 -56 72 2 2 7 2 4 1 '634 14' -5 —42 126 1 5 5 5 1 1 .55 r l' .00 7 .4 .28 112 1 1 2 5 .00 _ _.53 2 .5 10 50 1 1 “.54 n _.66 4 -6 24 144 5 1 - 67 - - .4 _1.00 6 7 2 294 1 1 5 1 n = 177 222 : 498.725 ”x = 1.5152 G.P.A.,H.S.T. 1x = 7 zxy'= 500.88 My = 1.175 G.P.A.,COL.R. .Zy' = 4174 .zy2 = 941.00 ryx = .458 2:2 = 499 ii = .570 (a: 294 137 = .785 ‘ALL;__ 154 APPENDIX F TABLE XXI THE CORRELATION OF THE REMAINING TERMS COLLEGE SCIENCE,MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE _J NON-DEFICIENT GROUP Class 0 .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 r 0 4 17 45 68 55 41 25 9 d .4 —5 —2 .1 0 1 2 5 4 df -9 .58 .42 ' 54 86 66 52 dzf 27 76 42 54 172 152 128 5-00 6 4 24 96 2 a 2 2.67 2.65 9 5 27 81 5 1 5 2 2.54 2-55 58 2 76 152 1 1 4 6 10 10 5 1 2.00 1-99 15 1 15 15 6 4 5 1 1 1.67 1-66 45 o 1 5 9 15 9 5 5 1.54 1-55 70 -1 —70 70 5 12 20 12 11 7 5 1.00 ~92? 58 -2 -66 152 1 5 10 10 5 2 -624 25 -5 .75 225 5 8 5 5 5 1 .530 15 .4 .52 208 2 5 2 1 5 1 1 -09 1 .5 .5 25 1 -035 ~954 5 -6 ~18 108 5 -066 ‘ n = 258 52:2 = 626.6 “x = 1.695 G.P.A.,H.S.T. zx. = 151 2xy = 255.5 My = 1.514 GPP.A.,Col.R. 1y' - .144 zy2 = 1051.55 ryx = .5175 .zx2 - 715 a: - .518 {xy = 171 03? = .667 zy2 = 1112 THE CORRELATION OF HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE APPENDIX F TABLE XXII AI C, E, PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION _SCOH BANKS. 155 DEFIC IEN T GROUP Class 1 2 5 4 5 6- 7 8 9 10 r 4 4 15 25 20 25 22 19 19 29 d -6 .5 -4 .5 _2 .1 0 1 2 5 df — 4 -20 -52 -69 —40 .25 19 58 87 022 144 100 208 207 80 25 19 76 261 5g?g7 6 4 24 96 1 1 5 1 2;?24 9 5 27 81 1 1 2 1 1 5 2;?20 25 2 46 92 1 4 1 2 5 5 2 ‘7 1i?27 27 1 27 27 2 1 2 5 2 5 5 5 4 4 li?§4 55 0 2 7 5 6 5 6 5 5 1i5g0 47 -1 .47 47 1 2 5 5 5 8 7 6 5 9 '?27 26 .2 —52 104 1 7 5 9 4 5 2 2 '?§4 6 -5 .18 54 1 1 1 1 1 1 .55 .00 1 .4 -4 16 1 n = 178 :zx2 = 1078.5 Ax = 7.017 C.F. =yfijgf‘ 1x = -86 my 2 99.45 My = 1.505 2y’ =. 5 4zy2 = 516.95 Pyx = .1555 g2 = 1120 45:“ = 2.46 ryx corrected = .1562 zyz = 517 <7? 2 .567 1x7 = 98 ‘ |_'=—= _izz; APPENDIX F TABLE XXIII THE CORRELATION OF HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE 2, C, E, PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION SCORE mums. NON-DEFICIENT GROUP 156 Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 r 6 1O 15 24 25 25 28 57 56 54 d -6 .5 .4 —5 -2 .1 O 1 2 5 df ~56 -50 -60 -72 -50 .22. 57 72 162 d2f 216 250 240 216 100 25 57 144 486 55%)., 8 4 52 128 1 1 1 5 as; 21 5 65 189 1 1 1 4 4 2 8 25ng 45 2 86 172 2 4 6 5 5 11 10 33:36., 55 1 55 55 2 6 6 6 5 5 7 9 9 11:5; 70 O 5 4 7 6 7 8 11 9 14 1'55 41 -1 —41 41 1 1 5 6 5 4 5 7 2 7 1.00 ‘32., 18 .2 -56 72 2 5 5 2 1 2 2 1 ‘24 4 -5 .12 56 2 1 1 .530 _4 :============: 35:: 2 n = 258 25:2 =171O.45 M5: = 7.4225 2: = .20 zfi=519.25 My =1.6875 G.P.A., H.S.T. zy == 145 257-2: 609.5 ryx= .515 2:2 = 1712 G = 2.57 Corrected = .520 zxy = 508 6’? = .512 zyz = 691 APPENDIX F TABLE XXIV THE CORRELATION OF HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE PSYCHOLOGICAL "2" SCORE DECILE. DEPICIENT GROUP ##“fi Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 5 10 r 2 6 9 21 20 15 14 27 51 40 d -8 -5 -4 -5 -2 .1 O 1 2 5 df -12 ~50 -56 -65 .40 .15 27 27 62 120 52f 72 150 144 189 80 15 27 124 560 5°00 21 4 84 556 5 2 2 2 1 2 9 2.67 2%?g4 14 5 42 126 1 2 1 5 2 5 zéfgo 50 2 60 120 2 5 4 1 2 1 5 6 6 1i?27 22 1 22 22 1 1 1 2 1 4 6 6 1i?24 14 0 1 5 1 5 5 5 lifgo 48 .1 —48 48 1 5 5 6 5 5 9 6 6 6 -?27 12 —2 -24 48 . 2 2 1 5 1 5 '624 11 .5 -55 99 1 1 4 1 1 2 1 '?go 11 .4 -44 176 1 1 5 1 1 5 1 n = 185 2x2 = 1157.77 M2 = 7.582 . 1x = 15 .ny = 167.17 My = 1.607 G.P.A.,H.S.Rath 2y = 59 .2y2 = 555.91 ryxz .105 2x2 = 1159 Corrected = .1075 21:3? 3 181 2y? 2 975 APPENDIX F TABLE XXV 158 THE CORRELATION OF HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE POINT AVFRLGE WITH THE PSYCHOLOGICAL "C" SCORE. W NON-DEFICIENT GROUP {_r L‘ Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 _ 7 8 9 10 r 5 7 10 15 19 16 26 25 42 75 d -6 —5 .4 -5 -2 —1 0 1 2 5 df -50 -55 —40 —59 -58 —16 25 84 225 825 180 175 160 117 76 16 25 168 675 5'00 25 4 92 568 1 1 4 ' 5 12 2.67 2;?24 24 5 75 225 1 1 5 6 1 15 2;?30 51 2 102 204 1 1 4 4 6 4 12 19 11?:7 42 1 42 42 1 4 1 5 5 7 4 6 15 11?24 51 0 1 1 2 4 2 5 5 4 9 1i?30 59 —1 .59 59 2 2 4w 6 4 2 2 4 7 6 -?:7 15 .2 —50 60 2 1 1 1 1 2 4 5 °?§4 7 —5 .21 65 1 2 1 5 -?30 5 .4:::0 80 1:1_ A 2 1 1 1 n = 258 222 = 1514.5 “x = 8.072 I-”T’Di’l€ rank 2: = 156 zxy = 576.1 My = 1.7815 Average high school mathematics 2y 2 201 2y? = 911.2 (:2 = 1592 at = .840 ryx ' .522 any 1'- 495 a? 3 .652 Corrected 3 .530 lyz = 1081 APPENDIX F TABLE XXVI 159 THE COORELATION OF COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERM GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE A.C.E. PSYCHOLOGICAL EXEQATION MAINE. DEF IC IENT GROUP Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 f 1 5 16 26 22 27 22 21 22 28 d -6 .5 -4 -5 .2 .1 0 1 2 5 df -6 .25 -64 ~78 .44 .27 O 21 44 84 d2f 56 125 256 254 88 27 21 88 252 555%, 1 5 5 25 1 25:4 2 4 8 52 1 1 25500 12 5 56 108 1 1 1 1 5 5 If“ 11 2 22 44 1 1 1 1 7 If; 49 1 49 49 1 6 8 7 7 5 5 6 4 15330 60 0 1 1 5 10 5 9 9 11 6 5 '93:? 28 -l-28 26 2 5 5 1 5 4 5 5 5 5; 14 -2-28 56 1 2 5 4 1 1 2 '530 5 -5-15 45 1 1 1 2 £25 5 4.12 48 1 2 n = 185 1:2 = 1076.25 Mx = 6.987 ; 1 .. fix = .95 213': 159.5 M 21.25:: G.P.A.,18c2 2y = 56 Ly‘? = 428.00 ryx =02?) T. {12 = 1124 0'5? = 2.279 Corrected = .2405 m = n1 o’y‘ . .4982 q2 = 455 160 APPENDIX F TABLE XXVII THE CORRELATION 0F COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERM GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE A,C.E. PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION BANKS. NON—DEFICIENT GROUP Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 f 6 10 15 24 25 25 28 57 56 54 d —8 -5 —4 -5 -2 -1 0 1 2 5 df -56 .50 -60 -72 .50 -25 _ 57 72 162 dzf 216 250 240 216 100 25 57 144 486 5%?g7 2 4 8 52 2 2;?24 15 5 59 117 1 1 5 8 2;?30 20 2 4O 80 1 1 5 6 7 1i?27 58 1 58 58 2 1 6 5 7 4 15 1i?§4 54 0 1 1 5 9 7 1 5 7 9 11 I2 '66 15 -5-45 155 2 2 2 1 2 2 5 = 728 n = 258 1:2 = 1710.45 “x = 7.4225 CchI : xx = -20 zxy = 7475.175 My = 1.5865 G.P.A.,I 4 2 2 Col. T. a 2-88 25" = 725.0 ryx = .427 11:2 = 1712 r2 = 2.57 Corrected : .457 my = 482 ff = .568 zyz THE CORRELATION OF THE REMAINING COLLEGE TERMS GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE A.C.E. PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION RANKSQk_ APPENDIX F TABLE XXVIII 161 DEFICIENT GROUP _ zyz = 1045 Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 r 4 4 15 24 18 26 21 19 19 29 d -6 -5 -4 -5 —2 -1 0 1 2 5 df .24 -20 -52 ~72 —56 —26 19 58 87 d2f 144 100 208 216 72 26 19 76 261 aé0g7 1 4 4 16 1 2&634 5 5 9 27 1 1 1 22?30 16 2 52 64 1 4 2 1 1 2 5 1i??? 28 1 28 28 1 2 1 4 4 2 6 8 .6 11.24 28 0 5 5 1 5 4 5 5 4 1.55 . A .99 .67 16 -2-52 64 2 1 1 2 6 2 1 1 .66 .54 12 .5-56 108 1 1 1 2 5 4 '330 9 -4-56 144 1 2 4 1 1 :3g5 6 .5—50 160 1 1 2 1 1 -.34 -066 o '6 -.67 _ 99 8 -7-56 592 1 2 5 1 1 n = 177 .zx2 =>1080.2 “x = 7.015 , £3 = -86 229*: 274.8 My = 1.1855 G.P.A.,CoI. _ Rem. T. 1y = -167 4y? = 885.5 ryx = .281 2x2 - 1122 fi‘ - 2.466 Corrected = .2878 m = 556 G = .745 162 APPENDIX F TABLE XXIX THE CORRELATION OF THE REMAINING COLLEGE TERMS GRADE POINT AVERAGE WITH THE A.C.E§_PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION BANKS. NON-DEFICIENT GROUP Class 1 2 5 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 r 6 10 15 24 25 22 28 55 55 54 d -6 -5 —4 -5 -2 .1 0 1 2 5 df .56 -50 .60 -72 —50 -22 55 70 162 d2f 216 250 240 216 100 22 55 140 486 5;?g7 4 4 16 64 1 2 1 25624 12 5 56 108 1 1 2 2 6 2é5go 21 2 42 84 1 1 5 5 2 5 6 1i927 55 1 55 55 1 1 5 1 5 2 7 7 10 If; 50 0 1 2 8 7 5 5 9 6 7 1'53 72 -1 -72 72 2 5 5 4 7 6 6 7 9 19 1.00 '?27 50 .2 -60 120 5 1 5 2 1 7 2 6 5 'fg4 15 —5 —59 117 1 5 5 2 2 1 1 .?30 9 —6 56 144 1 1 5 1 2 1 :Sgs 1 .5 —5 25 1 S‘:?:6 2 -6 —12 72 1 1 gig-1-7 -55 245 1 1 5* n = 254 ' xx? = 1704.555 Mx = 7.4488 1; = .15 22y = 471.55 fly = 1.529 G.P.A. {y = 2150 :12 = 1019.5 ryx = .554 xx? = 1705 if = 2.59 Corrected = .562 220’ = 478 G = .6745 (y? = 1086 APPENDIX F TABLE XXX THE CORRELATION OF HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS WITH HIGH NON-DEFICIENT SCHOOL SCIENCE GRAQE POINT AVERAGES. 165 Class .54 .67 1.00 1.54 1.67 2.00 2.54 2.67 .55 .66 .99 1.55 1.66 1.99 2.55 2.66 5.00 f 5 7 8 64 29 4O 66 12 55 d —4 -5 -2 —1 0 1 2 5 4 df .12 -21 —16 -64 40 152 56 140 d2£ 48 65 52 64 40 264 108 560 5&037 28 4 112 448 1 2 5 5 10 2&624 27 5 81 245 2 1 4 15 1 6 25530 60 2 120 240 2 9 6 9 21 5 9 li?:7 44 1 44 44 11 7 10' 12 1 4 1i624 54 O 1 15 5 8 5 1 1 C TITCO 42 .1 .42 42 1 2 5 15 6 4 9 1 ‘927 17 -2 -54 68 1 2 1 9 2 2 '624 7 .5 -21 65 1 2 1 5 '530 5 -4 .20 80 1 1 1 1 1 .00 .1 n = 264 :22 = 969.8 (x = 255 35:? = 578.5 (y = 240 zy~2 = 1009.9 ryx = .586 12:2 1' 1179 23¢ = 792 23-2 = 1228 164 APPENDIX F—2 An estimate of the multiple correlation between the remaining terms college total grade point average with the A.C.E. psychological test score rank and the high school total grade point average. * RV.xz = ‘\v/F ryxz - zryxrxzryzt/ rxy2 l rxzz Let: y the remaining college total grade point average. x 3 the psychological test score rank. z the high school total grade point average. The deficient Group: ‘2882 - 2 x .288 x .490 x .156 g .4902 1 - .156? Ry.xz = .558 The nonsdeficient group: 1 - .5202 .444 Where the linear correlation coefficients are: deficient non-deficient ryx .288 .562 rxz .156 .520 ryz .490 .357 *WillIHH Dowell Eaten, Elementary Mathematical Statistics, (New York: JOhn Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1928), p. 187. lad... ”Irv .. 1.44 APPENDIX G Section 1. TABLE XXXI THE ANALKSIS OF COVARIANCE OF HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERM§:TOTAL BETWEEN THE DEFICIENT AND NON—DEFICIENT GROUPS High School Total College lst & 2nd Terms Total "1 x2 yl y2 01383 d 2 df d2£ r (11‘ d2: 2 drdgr A 2 df d2£ Mark 2.855 4 6 24 96 8 52 128 l 4 16 5 12 48 2.500 5 10 30 90 22 66 198 2 6 18 15 59 117 2.167 2 22 44 84 44 88 176 12 24 48 21 42 84 1.855 1 51 51 51 54 54 54 12 12 12 41 41 41 1.500 0 56 71 48 58 1.167 ~1 48 ~48 48 42 ~42 42 61 ~61 61 75 ~75 75 .855 -2 26 ~52 104 19 ~58 76 27 ~54 108 35 ~66 132 .500 ~5 6 -18 _54 4 ~12 56 15 ~45 155 14 ~42 126 .167 ~4 1 ~4 16 6 ~2 96 3 ~12 48 -.167 ~5 1 ~5 25 5 ~15 75 1.500 -6 #1736 56 Totals 186 7 525 264 148 710 186 ~149 555 264 ~76 746 Meant 1.5125 1.6869 1.235 1.404 Grade Points _:I;_» 1‘“ .11 (1) Deficient group. axlyl = 186. (x2y2 = 250. (2) Non-dlficient group n = 450 C. F. x = 55.589 {x = 155 C. F. xy = ~77.500 zy = 225 C. F. y = 112.5 2x2 3 1255 ”" xx! 456 Lyz = 1501 165 166 TABLE XXXII ANALYSIS OF THE VARIANCE AND COVARIANCE 0F TABLE XXXI AND A TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE Source of Variance D.F. {1:2 In zyz Z(y - Y)2D.F. 5:? Total 449 1179.61 515.5 1188.50 Between Groups. 1 59.95 ' 29.28 28.59 Within Groups (error) 448 1149.76 484.21 1159.61, 955.78 447 2.14 Between groups plus error 964.50 448 Difference for testing; 8.72 __1 8.72 F . 8.72‘:_4.07 significant at the 5% level. 2714' rxy. = .418 for error. t = 9.75 a t =.for 1 and 448 degrees of freedon. by): = .421 Correcting college grade point averages for differences in high school abilities. Y 3:71 -Pyx (xi - 3) I1 3 1.26975 corrected mean for deficient college grades. I2 3 1.56725 corrected mean for non-deficient college grades. Difference of means = .09750 * . 1 2‘ . . t : . 4 11; _;_ ( 1744 ) S E of the difference of hese means 3 1 (186‘K’264 % 1149.3 ) : :LflZ ' 5 t 3 3 '.085 significant at 5% level. . 4O 5 .*J. Wishart, "Tests of significance in analysis of covariance," Supplement to Journal Royal Statistical Society, 5:79-82, cited by, Harry H. Love, Egpggimental methods ig_§gricultural Research. (Rio Piedras, Puerto Rico: The Agricultural Experiment Station of the University of Puerto Rico, 1945.) p. 66. 167 APPENDIX'G TABLE XXXIII THE ANALESIS OF CO-VARIANCE OF HIGH SCHOOL MATHEMATICS GRADE POINT AVERAGE (x) AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS GRADE POINT AVERAGE (y) BETWEEN THE DEFICIENT AND THE NON-DEFICIENT 1 GROUPS 1 . Greggg .gva 21: 23' 1x2 _gzw' gyz Deficient 187 59 ~95 975. 561. 819. Ngggdefigient 265 254 ~80 1246. 450. 1550. .Total 452 295 ~175 2221. 791. 2549. Correction factor fi;;§9.95l4 -1l2.1458 __6632146 Total 8. S, .1_. f_ 2051.0686 905.1458 2282.7854 TABLE XXXIV ANALYSIS OF THE CO-VARIANCE 0F TABL§:§XX;;;:AND A TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE Degrees Source of of 2x2 lxy zyz [(y - Y)2 D.F. variance ‘ freedom Total 451 2051.0686 905.1458 2282.7854 1881.1896 450 Between 6. 1 55.5099 4.1900 12.1601 '1';th G, (E) 450 1995.758? 898.9558 223:0:L6255 1885.712? 449 TABLE XXXIV (continued) "THE REDUCED magma; Source of variance _[ty - Y)2‘ .5 D. F. Reduced Variance F Total 1881.1896 450 Within Groups, error 1865.71.27 449 4.1552 5.7247 Difference for testing 15.4769 _fgg ¥1§,4769 No significance. F at the 5% 18781 and 450 degrees of freedom is 5.86. 168 APPENDIX C TABLE XXXV ANALISIS 0F CO-VARIANCE OF THE HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGE (x) AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS ENGINEERING AND SCIENCE AND NATRE- MATICS GRADE POINT AyERAGE (y) BETWEEN THE DEFICIENT AND THE NON—DEFICIENT GROUPS 93932 n 2:): xi 1x2 XXX 1 H2 w Deficient 179 4 -119 516. 257. 729. Non-dgfici ent264 1:48 4135 718 . ‘ 556 L 1191 .1 Total 445 152 ~254 1254.7 575. 1920. Correction Factors 52 . 1554 --80 . 2889 12 ’0' . 6027 Total sum of §guares " 1181.8466 655.2889; 11796.5975 TABLE XXVI ANALYSIS OF THE CO-VAEIANCE OF TABLE XXXV AND A TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE Degrees . Source of of ZX‘: zxy 2:372 [(y - Y)2 D. F. Variance Freedom Total 442 1181.8466 655.2889 1796.5975 1455.2791 441 Between G. 1 50.9056 15.1601 5.6056 , Within G E 441 1150 9410 640.1288 :1390.7957g_1454.6678 440 TABLE XXXVI (continued) THE REDUCED VARIANCE __fi Source of Variance Z(y - D2 _QJ. Reduced Variance A_ F .4 Total 1455.2791 441 Within Groups, error 1454.6678 ' 440 5.260 5.55 D' ference 461.15 1 .8115 No significance. F at the 5% level and 450 degrees of freedom is 254. APPENDIX G TABLE XXXVII 169 THE ANALISIS OF CO~VARIANCE OF HIGH SCHOOL TOTAI.GRADE POINT AVERAGE AND COLLEGE REMAINING TERMS ENGINEERING AND MATHEMATICS AND SCIENCE BETWEEN THE DEFICIENT AND THE NON-DEFICIENT GROUPS. _— High School Total College Remaining Terms Total Engineering and Mathematics and Science x1 x2 y1 Y2 Class d f or d2f r or dgf r or oar r or dzf flaggl 2.855 4 6 24 98 9 58 144 1 4 18 8 24 98 2.500 5 8 24 72 25 89 207 8 18 54 9 27 81 2.187 2 25. 46 92 41 82 184 17 54 88 k 58 78 152 1.855 1 29 29 29 55 55 55 14 14 14 - 15 15 15 1.500 0 54 68 26 45 1.187 —1 45 .45 45 45 .45 45 82 —82 62 7O -70 70 .855 —2 26 .52 104 17 .54 88 18 .58 72 55 -66 152 .500 -5 5 -15 45 4 12 58 14 .42 126 25 -75 225 .167 .4 1 .4 18 7 ~28 112 15 —52 208 -.187 —5 2 .10 50 l -5 25 4.500 -6 4 —24 144 5 -18 108 Tgtals 177 7 499 258 151 715 :111hzig4 1112 258 .144 1112 Mean 1.5152 1.895 1.175 1.514 Grade Points ' (l) Deficient Group leyl 1' 294. £182)".a I 171. (2) Non~deficient Group n = 455 2x2 = 1214 C.F. x = 57.5885 2: = 158 gxy = 465 C.F. xy = 115.5054 (y = -518 1372 = 2224 0.1". y 2 252.4889 TABLE XXXVIII ANALYSIS OF THE_VARIANCE AND CO-VARIANCE OF TABLE XXXIII AND A TEST OF SIGNIFICANCE Source of variances D.F. 21:2 UV zyz {(y - Dz D.F.§::: Total 454 1156.61 580.50 1991.55 Between Groups 1 51.26 25.55 18.95 Within Groups(error)453__71125.54 555.17 1972.57 1898.89 452 5.95 Between groups plus error 1700.17 455 ‘Qigference for testing;f 1.48 l 11:36 . r - yx - .572** for error no significance 3 8.52 for l and 448 degrees of freedom Correcting college grade point averages for differences in high school abilities. Y1 Y‘. 3 1.2261 corrected mean for deficient college grades. 5 3 1.2776 corrected mean for non-deficient college grades. Difference of the means 3 .0515 S. E. of difference of means t = .456 no significance 3 .1940 171 APPENDIX G Section 2. ANALYSIS OF THE VARIANCE WITHIN THE DEFICIENT GROUP TABLES OF SUNS AND MEANS OF GRADE POINT AVERAGES. TABLE XXXIX HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL (x) AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS TOTAL (y) WITH MAKE UP 11 A . n r .' Group 11 4x 1.3! 122!“ m If? l"X it] 1 Special 15 24.86 18.67 46.7254 54.2851 27.9460 1.6575 1.2446 Physics 54 75.59 58.76 118.0701 87.1674 77.7904 1.562 1.087 Science 28 45.08 55.15 78.0585 54.6640 44.8219 1.6100 1.8509 Ph1/Sc. 13 19.75 14.96 51.4517 22.8954 18.6989 1.4092 1.069 Total 111 165.26 125.54 274.2857 199.0079 169.2569 1.4708 1.1509 3‘ F.A# 1..- 1_._ 240.1245 184.6456 141.9846__ .111 1_ TABLE XL HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL (x) AND 0011505 REMAINING TERMS T0TAL.LT) WITH NAKE UP I Group a six 1y 51x2 zxy ngyz mx Ty Special 15 24.88 21.55 48.7254 58.7820 55.8579 1.8575 1.4587 Physics 54 75.59 51.41 118.0701 85.4490 91.8890 1.5827 .9520 Science 28 45.08 29.84 78.0585 51.7488 44.0210 1.8100 1.0857 Ph,£ Sc, 14“ 19.75 15.58 51.4517 22.8954 18.8988 1.4092 1.089 Total 111 185.28 118.58 274.2857 195.7841 191.7551 1.4708 1.0485 szF. 240.1246 17151455 121.9788 ‘II. 4P. .Vturfiq a n a)... a. 41... » 172 TABLE XLI HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL (x) AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS TOTAL (y) WITH NO MAKE-UP _LL-L Group n xx .27 252 zxy zyz Mx My 1_ Special 17 28.81 25.79 47.9449 40.9017 58.9887 1.5047 1.59941 Physics 54 52.15 44.80 91.2949 72.8525' 70.5818 1.5558 1.5178 Science 15 19.87 18.58 58.2485 28.5585 24.1882 1.5284 1.2800 Ph. I 54. 5 8.07 8.75 15.5289 12.8729 10.4541 1.814 1.550 Total 89 108.70 91.72 195.0152 154.7497 142.1508 1.5588 1.52927 C. F. 164.9984 121.9211 141.8557 TABLE XLII HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL (x) AND COLLEGE REMAINING TEHHS TOTAL (y) WITH NO MAKE l ‘1‘ 4— L UP £23141 IL etx: 25 Six? lixy £52 “x. ME» Special 17 28.81 24.55 47.9449 40.5700 58.5977 1.5852 1.4525 Physics 54 52.15 58.05 91.2949 84.5787 58.9445 1.5558 1.1191 Science 11 18.54 18.44 55.8008 55.0020 55.8798 1.8875 1.8784 245.! Sc. 5 8.07 7.57 15.5289 15.52504215.4959 f1g814 411.474 Total 67 105.17 88.21 190.5695 151.6717 144.5159 1.5697 1.5165 G. F. ’ 6 185.0855 158.4855 118.1545 175 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AMONG THE GRUUPS WITH MAKE-UP COMPLETED TABLE XLIII ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F TABLE XXXIX HIGH_SCHOQL;TOTAL (x) AND COLLEGE FIRST ANDngCOND TERAS TOTAL (y). 2 2 Mean Square L Source of variance D.F. LX ty' i}: 1; ratio X Tota1 110 54.1581 27.2725 .5105 .2479 1.92 Between Classes 5 1.7476 .4258 .5825 .1419 y Within Classes (error) 107 52.4088 28.8485 .5029 .2509 _ .57 A No significance TABLE XLIV ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F TABLE XL H;9H SCHQQL:TOTAL (x1_AND COLLEGE RELAINING TERMS TOTAL C1) 6 2 Mean Square t Source of variance D.F. 43‘ {y x y ratio_ 1 Tota1 110 54.1581 89.7585 1.92 Between Classes 5 1.7475 2.8605 .5825 .9554 7 Within C1asees (error) 107 52.4088 88.8980 .5029 .82519 1.52 No significance 174 ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AMONG THE GROUPS OITHOUT MAKE-UP COMPLETED TABLE XLV ANALYSIS OF THE VARIANCE 0F TABLE XLI HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL 12:) AND COLLEGE FIRST AND SECOND TERMS TOTAL 11) . , 2 ~ 2 Mean Square t Source of variance D.F. -zx zy'+v_ x , 3' ratio ' ' x Total 68 28.0168 20.2297 .412 .297 ’ .05 Between Classes 5 .0585 .1528 .0127 .0509 Within Classes (error) 65 27.9785 20.0769 .450 .5089 .15 No significance TABLE XLVI ANALYSIS OF THE VARIANCE OF TABLE XLII HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL 1x1 AND COLLEGE REMAINING TERMS TOTAL (:71 * Mean Square t Source of variance D.F. 2x2 132 x y ratio x Total 66 25.4858 28.5816 .586 .450 “ ‘ .15 Between Classes 5 .1585 5.1015 .0528 1.054 Y Within Classes (error) 85 25.5255 25.2801 .402 .401, ' 2.58 No significance TABLE XLVII ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE BETWEEN THE GROUP WITH MAKE—UP AND THE GROUP WITHOUT MAKE-UP (TABLES XLV AND XLVI) 2 2 Mean Square t Source of variance D.F. 2; 5y x 1' ratio x Total 179 62.4159 49.1749 69 Between Groups 1 .2429 1.6729 .245 1.675 y Within Groups (error) 178 62-1750 47-5020 '549 '2670 5 97* .( *Significant at the 5% level. For the 5% level t = 5.90, and for the 1% level t = 6.78 APPENDIX I Section 1. TABLE XLVIII 175 THE ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF HIGH SCHOOL GRADE POINT AVERAGE AMONG THE .EOUR INITIAL GROUESTOF THE GENERAL SAMPLE_~ Groups Bl B2 E2 32::8 d r df def f or 82: 2 df 82: r df 828 2.855 9 ‘ 5 27 245 2 18 182 1 9 81 2.500 8 1 8 84 8 48 584 5 24 192 5 24 192 2.187 7 10 70 490 12 84 588 9 85 441 5 21 147 1.855 8 10 80 580 15 78 468 15 90 540 5 80 180 1.500 5 25 115 575 14 70 550 15 85 525 5 25 125 1.187 4 8 52 128 9 58 144 8 24 98 4 18 84 .855 5 9 27 81 2 8 18 1 5 9 1 5 9 _.500 2 1 2 4 1; 2 4 Totals 82 514 1702 60 551 2179 49 287Q1360 22 128 798 Mean of . Samples 5.085 5.850 5.852 W 5.820 Mean ' 8,3, . 1,5217 1.7858 _ng7859__ g._1.7755_. Htotal = 5.5958, or 1.6869 grade points. Sum of squares between f :, 195 C. F. 3 6025.441 columns 2 6068.177 2x = 1080 .22? = 415.559 42.758 2x2 = 8459 176 TABLE XLIX A ALYSIS 0F VARIANCE 0F TABLE XLVIII Degrees of Sum of Mean F Source of variance freedom squares sguare ratio Total 192 415.559 Between columns 5 42.756 14.245 7.25** Within columns Lerror) 1:89 570.825 413965 **Significant at the 1% level. F at 150 and 5 degrees of freedom = 2.66 at 5% level and 5.91 at 1% level. “total 5.5958, or 1.887 grade points. of 1/5 1/1'79‘85 Z .487 There is a highly significant difference between the means of B; and B2. A careful search of the records reveals no reason for this dis- crepancy except as a result of two highly divergent samples from the parent sample. B2 is in close agreement with the two samples of El and E2. However there is no logical.premise by which it can be in- ferred that the basic sample should agree with that of the engineering sample. A further sampling will be necessary to attempt a selection of the true sample. 177 APPENDIX I Section 2. TABLE L ANALISIS 0F VARIANCE AS MEASURED BY HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE POINT AVERAGES AMONG SAMPLES OF THE CONTROL GROUP _‘_A Groups Classes 50d, if A- 2 Bldf £13sz stdf rEldr szdf £03038: 2.85 9 0 0 5 27 2 l8 2 18 1 9 8 648 2.50 8 1 8 6 48 9 72 5 24 5 24 22 1408 2.17 7 10 7O 12 84 10 70 9 65 5 21 44 2156 1.85 6 10 60 15 78 10 60 15 90 5 50 55 1908 1.50 5 25 115 14 70 16 80 15 65 5 25 71 1775 1.17 4 8 52 9 56 15 ’60 6 24 4 16 42 672 .85 5 9 27 2 6 6 18 1 5 l 5 19 171 £50 2 1 2 1 2 2 4 0 — 0 ~ 4 16 Totals 62 4514 60 551 70 582 49 287 22 128 265 8754 Mean of columns 5.065 5.850 5.457 5.852 5.820 df = 1462 Bean of G: P. A. 1.5217 1.7856 1.6522 1.7859 1.7755 utotal = 5.57, or 1.6869 grade points 21' = 285 ' 2 zx : 1462 C. F. = 114%?— 2 8127.185 06 2x2 = 8754 222 = 626.857 PSum of squares between columns = 26.79 TESTS BETWEEN COLUMHS OF TABLE L MEl - MBl = .787 , - . 1 ( 1 1) if fa— .M. {€002 (52 - E) 2 .29115 N) GD [-4) t 3 3 2.706** 1 to 100 chance. .29115 M35 - MEI = .592 t - 1.592 no significance t = 5.175** Well above 1% level B2 B5 t 3 1.467 no significance # George W. Snedecor, Ana1zsis g£_Variance. Collegiate Press, Inc., 1954). p 17. 109 degrees 150 degrees 120 degrees 128 degrees 178 of freedom of freedan of freedom of freedan (Ames, Iowa: 179 TABLE LI ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE 0F TABLE L Degrees of Sum of Mean F Source of variance freedom squares square ratio Total 262 626.84 2.59 Between columns 4 26.80 6.70 2.88* Within Columns Lerror) 258 808. 05 2. 52 Between - B1 8 &.E1 2 1 7.957 7.957 5.565 No ’2" ’ significance Within groups 261 618.885 2.57 *Significant at the 5%“leve1. F at 250 and 5 degrees of freedom 2 2.65 at the 5% level and 5.86 at the 1% level. “total = 5.57, or 1.6869 grade points. The variance with the addition of the third group from basic engineering has decreased from the .14% level to the 4% level when the variance of the high school scores are compared. Upon comparison of the scores of the other subject divisions as given in TableIII‘the variations of these gr01ps are seen to be quite random. Section 2 of this Appendix I shows that if these samples had been taken in a single sample and then analyzed the variance would be extremely small. ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE AS MEASURED BY HIGH SCHOOL TOTAL GRADE APPENDIX I - 2 TABLE LII 180 POINT AVERAGE AMONG EIVE ALPHABETICALLX SEPARATED GROUPS OF THE NON-DEFICIENT SAMPLE l Sum of Classes Groups Coded l 72 5 4 5 squares G,P,§. fdf id; __fdf fdf 1‘8;w r d2f 2.85 9 5 27 1 9 1 9 2 18 1 9 8 648 2.50 8 4 52 5 24 2 16 6 48 6 48‘ 21 1544 2.17 7 11 77 6 42 12 84 5 55 11 77 45 2201 1.85 6 14 84 15 78 11 66 10 60 5 50 55 1908 1.50 5 12 60 16 80 11 55 19 95 15 65 71 1775 1.17 4 6 24 7 28 11 45 8 52 11 44 45 688 .85 5 5 9 6 18 5 9 2 6 5 15 19 171 150 2 TL - 11.4 2 2 4 11 15 2 A O - #1 4 16 Totals 55 515_, 55 281: 55 286 55 296 52 288 264_‘8751 “colmg 5.900 5.299 5.592 5.580 5.450 df = 1464 TABLE LIII ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE OF TABLE LI; #5 Degrees of Sum of Mean F Source ggjvariance freedom §guares §guare ratio Total 264 652.9 2.59 No Significance Between Classes 4 11.25 1.81 Within Classes {error} 260 621.17 2.58 181 APPENDIX J ANALYSIS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE AMERICAN COUNCIL ON EDUCATION PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION SCORES FOR BOTH GROUPS. TABLE LIV RANGES 0F ACTUAL SCORES FOR EACH PERCENTILE RANK FOR THE YEARS 1957 - 1946 INCLUSIVE. (UPPER SCORE OF EACH RANK GIVEN) Percentile Year ‘ Average rang: <;:1957,1958:;g59;1940 1941 1942;194501944 1945 1946 Range__ 10th 9th 245 101 111 155 155 150 156 129 127 127 9 8th 217 91 102 127 124 121 127 120 119 119 6.5 7th 200 84 96 120 118 114 121 114 112 112 6 6th 185 79 90 114 112 109 114 108 105 105 5 5th 172 75 86 109 106 105 108 105 100 100 5.4 4th 160 68 81 105 101 97 105 98 95 95 6 5rd 48 ' 61 77 98 95 91 97 91 88 88 6.9 2nd 155 54 71 91 88 84 92 85 80 80 9.6 lst 115 47 65 80 78 74 85 75 71 71 TABLE LV SUMMARY OF STATISTICS Statistic Decile Ranks Deficient Non-Deficient n 185 258 Mean Decile 6.986 7.452 0‘3: 2.455 2.6 "x .1815 .1815 mm .245 M1 - M2 .488 t 1.919 Chance 6.5/100 SCIENCE DEFICIENT I DROPOUTS WITH ANY GROUP ——— . -,osFIcIEch ----'----"‘- w _ fl E-----—-¢:lr-w .......... ' - ' I 9 IO ' I 2 3 4OECIEE7 s DEFICIENT STUDENTS NON—DEFICIENT 1g, DROPOUTS WITHOUT GROUP ————- 4 DEFICIENCY----~ 1b 1- :1: ——-::.-‘I—-—-- .. -”““"“ ---.4 - ---- ..... ____q + F ' l 2 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 Io OECILE NON-DEFICIENT STUDENTS FIGURE l4 DISTRIBUTlON OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTSCORE RANKS ON AN ARBITRARY BASE APPENDIX K A COMPARISON OF THE DEFICIENT AND NON-DEFICIENT DROP-OUTS TABLE LVI ANALYSIS OF THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE PSYCHOLOGICAL SCORES OF THE DEFICIENT AND NON-DEFICIENT DROP—OUTS DURING THE SCHOOL YEAR 1946-47, FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF MICHIGAN STATEfCOLLEGE Decile Deficient Nonedeficient 2.44.12 1‘ d; 42,2 4 4.1:w c1241 10 7 70 700 15 150 1500 9 7 65 567 7 65 567 8 10 80 640 12 96 768 7 10 70 490 15 91 657 6 5 50 180 10 60 560 5 6 50 150 9 45 225 4 7 28 112 5 12 48 5 7 21 65 15 45 155 ;:&.2 .._;§; :18 27 9 0&14 21 Totalsf_g 71 410 2929 95 576 4261 Score unknown 50 47 New? ' 184 APPENDIX K TABLE LVII COMPARISON OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINATION BANKS OF THE DROP—OUTS WITH THOSE OF THEIR RESPECTIVE GROUPS Deficientgi Statigtic Non—deficient DrOp-outs Group Drop-outs Group 71 185 n 95 258 5.77 6.986 Mean decile 6.20 7.452 2.828 2.455 4'5: 2.72 2.60 .5555 .1815 W; .282 .1815 1.216 :AMl - I712 1.252 .581 Q‘Eirmx , .5245 2.19 11 I“; r 5.87?“ * Difference Of‘Means of drop-outs = .45 Standard error of the difference of the Means = .458 t ratio II o {O (D 185 APPENDIX L TABLE LVIII A SUMMARY OF THE ESSENTIAL DATA FROM THE NON-DEFICIENT GROUP Column Column 1. Key to the sample in which the case was originally selected: a -— Bl The first sample from Basic College with engineering preference. b -— B2 The second sample from Basic College with engineering preference. c —— B3 The third sample from Basic College with engineering preference. d - E1 The first sample from the School of Engineering. e -— E2 The second sample from the School of Engineering. 2. The number of terms attendance at M. S. C. Columns 5 - 8. Column College grade point averages. 9. A. C. E. Psychological test scores as decile ranks. Columns 10 - 12. Column High school grade point averages. 15. Size of High School graduating senior class. 186 APPENDIX L TABLE-LIV ENTIAL DATA FROM THE NON-DEFICIPNT GROUP r. \ U A SUMMARY OF THE ES l t;— gh school Hi _—__ College work Sen. class Total pop. Science NO. of terms Groupk Psyc. test Math. Sc .éfidath. Engineer 152 Total 1&2 Rem 1 score 1&2 Rem. Rem. Section 1 _959656 6555529576 202.4_26;~0,54_0_008”6 50.1.(58 (79070414259600 7 548994 5 515 0 26 2 042 4550-2 1 114. .2 5 2 1 1 54885660220556905187902 556574665590 1 96978021847r(748.fi.5705 7 . 68155705824zc85r/a coco-000.00.00.00... 0 11112 112112222 111 11(2111111.(9~111111 9~275me¢8 omwm080007mm55602705757 20 77070 84.6.... 42nw056 771016077700 4.0 6688 .. . 12112 .25.LL25.52 L21 122111 115221 LlL @7005705476500605005 55200 6.00205 0506 600(20078110C51474L7 79.0005 175602..." 5r(:uol (Llln(lll..(llr( un(2llllln(lr(lllll.122.(((1.31 05767604606 0 4 5 4 5 O O 6 4 8 8 9 8 O 7 6 4 7 5 O 7 9004 _ 1. 1. .1 1.11 .1 1. 11 11 .8.o.o.o.4.Omwn2.o.Unouwuwmwno.2.lro.o.omw .uwro.4nlnoronl .nlnb.8 nouw b .U.O.O.5.U.o.U.8.8.U.U.O.9.UnlponbFonI.4nU .nunlpo.b.9.u.9 .nl.o.8 .4.U.8 1 1 1 ll 1 1 l l 1 zunucu cananun! no nunuzonumwnfl _ 7.nu92nunuzu:ua1nunonon2mo.2 .4L_ 7.7: agave. 01.4.5”! 0. nununo.U 25:07.nu1lzozoconunu.1.o.o.b.11 5 00.00.000.0..0000 0000000000 000 0 .0 21111 12115211 1 11111122L21.1 2 alronomwso.Unlnl.5.U.Dnl.o.o.o.U.a.Umwnlnlnéroponb.U,o.U.b.b.o.2 5.0.5.1 acntal "0.0.6.6n2nunlnononlr<.u.2nu no.0.4nlntal”8.5.5.2nlwo.l onux2n2 . . 00.00.000.0000000. 2L.. LLL22 L222 122 211111 2121111 ,2 .4 0 0706 546 0 2 8 08 061 05805 bm0_0.652_“~880._0m.5Mw_1~3_01~091 25507....mw .0. 00 0 0 0. 00. 0.00. 0 251. 2 11 2 2 LLLL 2 1 11 2 2 .1 22 700007 50000 600 00 0 00 005 2 0 65ch 556—@me .m.550.00 180w50mm0mw08_005_2.5 0. .0. 00000000000 00. 0 0 22 1 LL .L2L2LLLL 12 221111 241 1 n2n0.1.U.U ”0.5.4.4.Unlsopo.l.ono.U.4.1.o.a.1mwno nintnefloMW _.l.o.o.1.4 7.1.01.4.0 1.0.4.assocgzuzOn141qlrbnb n.qov.zo 24 ron9.l.o convogncnl 00.00. 00.00.00. 000.000.0000. 000.. 211121LL1 21212 1 11121111121 112 .OHM.O.U.7_5.7.1.85 .U.1.5.5 .5.Unlnon2.4.o.U.U.U.O nunlno.unoranle.b.9 .U .8.5.5.8n8.on12 nIn