THE {NFLUENCE 0N SELECTED NON' NTELLECTUA' FANTOPS ON ACADEM ANHWEMENT IN A - CHAPLB VELHAM UEIE ._~ f ‘:"5K§;Z;.i.5:711:33 ' 2N7 ; ; ’ E“ ‘7: A {w LIBRARY Michigan State University Q may --.-—--~ This is to certifg that the thesis entitled The Influence of Selected Nonintellectual Factors on Academic Achievement in a Beginning Course in Biological Science presented by Charles W. Gee has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for PhHD degree in Education MJNW Major professor Date AUQUSt 9, 1967 ; 0-169 TM“ ABSTRACT THE INFLUENCE OF SELECTED NONINTELLECTUAL FACTORS ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN A BEGINNING \ COURSE IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE by Charles William Gee Problemiinvestigated. The purpose of this study was to survey college student reaction to selected nonintel- lectual variables and the relationship of the selected nonintellectual variables to academic achievement in Biological Science 211 at Michigan State University. An interrelationships between the selected nonintellectual variables. Descriptive features and treatment of data. The . c additional concern of this study was the investigation of ( selected nonintellectual variables-examined in this study were a student's: curriculum major; classification; sex; preparation in organic chemistry; marital status; employ- l ment status; place of residence; and study patterns. College students enrolled in the fall 1965, winter 1966, fall 1966 and winter 1967 terms of Biological Science eatfixspecific population were surveyed with a multiple \ 211 provided the study populations. The students within l i cllcflce questionnaire instrument relevant to the selected l II<>Iiintellectual variables and were exposed to three course I 63><é3minations. Student questionnaire responses, raw Charles William Gee examination scores and course grades achieved were collected and recorded separately for each study population. The questionnaires were administered to the fall 1965 and winter 1966 populations as a single mailed instru- ment after their enrollment in Biological Science 211. The fall 1966 and winter 1967 study populations were administered a three part questionnaire during their periods of enrollment in Biological Science 211. Response to the questionnaires produced a forty-nine percent (49%) return from the fall 1965 population, sixty-two percent-(62%) return from the winter 1966 population, eighty-nine percent (89%) return from the fall 1966 population and an eighty-three percent (83%) return from the winter 1967 population. The questionnaire responses were analyzed for signi- ficance with the chi-square technique. Student raw examin- ation scores, based on student chemistry preparation, were analyzed for significant differences with the one-way analysis of variance and critical ratio techniques. The criterion level of significance was set at 0.05 for all statistical techniques. Findings. Each selected nonintellectual variable was tested for its influence on academic achievement in Biological Science 211. The following conclusions were supported by the data: (1) enrollment in a particular curriculum major was not a significant contributor to academic achievement, but achievement was affected by student committment to a selected major; (2) achievement was not influenced by student classification; (3) female students eachieved at a level significantly higher than male students; Charles William Gee (4) previous or concurrent preparation in organic chemistry appeared to be beneficial to achievement; (5) achievement was not significantly influenced by Student marital status; (6) student employment did not significantly influence achievement; (7) students residing off campus achieved at significantly higher levels than on campus students; and (8) achievement was enhanced by a consistent study effort. These conclusions indicate that continued investi- gation of the influence of selected nonintellectual variables upon college academic achievement is desirable. Additional nonintellectual variables need to be identified and re- searched in an effort to further an understanding of the importance of nonintellectual variables to academic achievement. THE INFLUENCE OF SELECTED NONINTELLECTUAL FACTORS ON ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT IN A BEGINNING COURSE IN BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE By Charles William Gee A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY College of Education 1967 647077 #9 0667 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer expresses sincere appreciation to Professor John M. Mason, chairman of his doctoral committee, for interest, guidance and encouragement in the identification, development and completion of the study. He also expresses gratitude to the other members of the doctoral committee, Drs. Charles A. Blackman, Howard H. Hagerman and T. Wayne Taylor, who greatly assisted in the planning and execution of the study. Appreciation is also extended to Dr. S. Arthur Reed who was a member of the initial doctoral committee, but was unable to continue due to his acceptance of a leave of absense. A Appreciation is extended to Dr. James L. Fairley, coordinating lecturer in Biological Science 211, for his cooperation in all phases of this study. The writer also extends appreciation to Dr. Frederic B. Dutton, Dean, of the Lyman Briggs College, for administrative encouragement and support and to Dr. Julian R. Brandou, Acting Director of the Science and Mathematics Teaching Center, for con- tinued administrative encouragement and support. The writer expresses appreciation to Mr. Horace C. King, Registrar, and his staff for their cooperation in providing student enrollment information. ii Sincere appreciation is expressed to the students whose cooperation made this study possible. Finally, appreciation is extended to his family and friends for their support, encouragement and patience throughout his program of.d0ctoral"study. iii CHAPTER I. II. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION Background and design of the study Need for the study Statement of the problem Hypotheses of the study Assumptions of the study Collection and treatment of data Definition of terms Limitation of the study Organization of the dissertation REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Academic major as a nonintellectual variable Student classification in college as a nonintellectual variable Sex as a nonintellectual variable Marital status as a nonintellectual variable Student employment as a nonintellectual variable Place of residence as a nonintellectual variable Study patterns as a nonintellectual variable College roommates as a nonintellectual variable Cumulative grade point average as a nonintellectual variable Credit load as a nonintellectual variable iv PAGE KOOCDOJVO‘UONl—l h‘ band C: Flt: l3 l7 19 21 27 30 31 31 CHAPTER Motivation and student aspiration as a nonintellectual variable Satisfaction and security of college life as a nonintellectual variable Test anxiety as a nonintellectual variable Time of initial enrollment in college as a nonintellectual factor: Summary 'III. DESCRIPTIVE FEATURES AND TREATMENT OF DATA Design of the study A brief description of the involved college biology course - a The selection of student participants Preparation of the questionnaires Administration of the questionnaires Collection of data Analysis of data Summary IV. ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESULTS Analysis of the fall 1965 data Final course grades achieved and questionnaire returns Analysis of raw examination scores of the fall 1965 questionnaire respondents Chi-square analysis of questionnaire responses Analysis of the winter 1966 data Final course grades achieved and questionnaire returns PAGE 33 34 36 36 37 4O 4O 41 42 45 46 48 49 54 56 57 57 59 61 64 64 CHAPTER Analysis of raw examination scores of the ‘winter 1966 questionnaire respondents Chi-square analysis of questionnaire responses Analysis of the fall 1966 data Final course grades achieved and questionniare returns Analysis of raw examination scores of the fall 1966 questionnaire respondents Chi-square analysis of questiennaire responses Analysis of winter 1967 data Final course grades and questionnaire returns Analysis of raw examination scores of the winter 1967 questionnaire respondents Chi-square analysis of questionnaire responses Summary of chi-square findings- Analysis of the data relevant to the tested hypotheses V. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS Review of literature Design of the study Hypotheses tested Results and overall conclusions Educational implications Some problems which seem.to be worthy of further research BIBLIOGRAPHY APPENDICES vi PAGE 67 68 68 68 68 79 79 79 82 84 84 92 92 92 93 94 97 98 100 110 LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE 1. Classification of the student populations in the study 43 2. Academic majors of the student populations in the study 44 3. Final letter grade distribution for the students in Biological Science 211, fall term, 1965-- total enrollment, respondents to the question- naire and percentages 58 4. Data relevant to determining the critical ratios for the fall, 1965, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores 60 5. Critical ratios for the fall, 1965, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores 1 62 6. One-way analysis of variance for the final examination raw scores of the fall, 1965, student population in Biological Science 211 based on organic chemistry preparation 63 7. Questionnaire matrices which produced a significant chi-square for the fall, 1965, student population of Biological Science 211 and satisfy Siegel's criteria , 65 vii TABLE 8. Final letter grade distribution for the students in Biological Science 211, winter term, 1966-- total enrollment, respondents to the question- naire and percentages 9. Final letter grade distribution for the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 10. Response to a three part questionnaire by the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 11. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of curriculum major on academic achievement 12. Final letter grade distribution for the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211 13. Response to a three part questionnaire by the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211 14. Data relevant to determining the critical ratios for the winter, 1966, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores 15. Critical ratios for the winter, 1966, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores viii PAGE 66 69 7O 73 80 81 112 113 TABLE l6. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. One-way analysis of variance for the final examination raw scores of the winter, 1966, student population in Biological Science 211 based on organic chemistry preparation Questionnaire matrices which produced a signi- ficant chi-square for the winter, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 and satisfy Siegel's criteria Data relevant to determining the critical ratios for the fall, 1966, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores Critical ratios for the fall, 1966, Biological Science 211 student population based on chemistry preparation--examination raw scores One-way analysis of variance for the final examination raw scores of the fall, 1966, student population in Biological Science 211 based on organic chemistry preparation Questionnaire matrices which produced a signi- ficant chi-square for the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 and satisfy Siegel's criteria Data relevant to determining the critical ratios for the winter, 1967, Biological Science 211 student population based on organic chemistry preparation--examination raw scores ix PAGE 114 115 117 118 119 120 123 TABLE if ‘ PAGE 23. Critical ratios for the winter, 1967, Biological Science 211 student population based on chemistry preparation--examination raw scores 124 24. Onedway analysis of variance for the final examination raw scores of the winter, 1967, student population in Biological Science 211 based on organic chemistry preparation 125 25. Questionnaire matrices which produced a significant chi-square for the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211 and satisfy Siegel's criteria 126 26. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of classification on academic achievement 129 27. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of a student's sex on academic achievement 132 28. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of a student's organic chemistry background on academic achievement 134 29. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of marital status on academic achievement 137 30. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of employment on academic achievement 139 TABLE PAGE 31. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of a student's place of residence on academic achievement 141 32. Significant questionnaire matrices relevant to the hypothesis concerning the influence of study habits on academic achievement 144 xi LI ST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX A. Tables for the winter, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 B. Tables for the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211 C. Tables for the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211 Tables of significant chi-square matrices Questionnaire and covering letter mailed to the fall, 1965 and winter, 1966, student populations of Biological Science 211 F. Questionnaire administered to the fall, 1966, population of Biological Science 211 G. Questionnaire administered to the winter, 1967, population of Biological Science 211 xii PAGE 111 116 122 128 155 167 188 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION Psychologists and educators continue the search for relevant information which will facilitate a more compre- hensive understanding of the factors affecting college academic achievement. Many research studies in science, history, English and other academic disciplines have attempted to isolate factors which influence academic achievement. These studies, in the main, reveal a con- centrated interest in student intellectual capabilities and only a limited concern with nonintellectual factors. The purpose of many of the previous research studies concerned with college academic achievement has been to study such factors as intelligence, cumulative grade point average, and credit load with respect to the prediction of future academic achievement. The intention has been to use college grades achieved as predictive indices for future college achievement. Chansky1 suggested that use of a student's cumulative grade point average as a predictive index was inappropriate due to differences in grade assignment between instructors and courses. In a recent 1Norman A. Chansky, ”A Note on the Grade Point Average In Research." Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(1):95-99, 1964. compilation of related literature, Lavin2 reports that intellectual ability accounts for less than half of the variance in student performance and states that there exists a need for examination of nonintellectual factors related to academic performance. This study surveys certain selected nonintellectual variables as they influenced academic achievement in a begin- ning course in biological science. The findings may be of interest and of use to students, advisors and instructors. Background and design of the study. The investigator was involved in a research study during the academic year 1965-1966 which concerned a beginning college course in biological science (Biological Science 211) at Michigan State University. The main purpose of this investigation was to ascertain whether or not preparation in organic chemistry affected academic achievement in the course. While investi- gating this problem, the author recognized the need for an investigation of factors other than chemistry preparation which might affect student achievement in Biological Science 211. Following completion of the original study on the influence of preparation in organic chemistry on student achievement in Biological Science 211, the present study was initiated. The study was conducted during the fall term 1966 and the winter term 1967. The students in the study were those who were regularly enrolled in Biological Science 211 at Michigan State University during the above terms and David E. Lavin, The Prediction 9f Academic Perform- ance‘A Theoretical Analysis and Review 2; Research (New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1965), p. 64. also the students who had completed Biological Science 211 in the fall term 1965 and winter term 1966. The total enrollments in these four terms were: one hundred and ninety-eight (198) during the fall term 1965, one hundred and seventy-nine (179) during the winter term 1966, three hundred and thirty-one (331) for the fall term 1966 and two hundred and seventy-four (274) during the winter term 1967. Data were collected by the questionnaire technique from the students according to the term they were enrolled in Biological Science 211. The questionnaires were designed to assess student reaction to selected nonintellectual variables which could be related to academic achievement in Biological Science 211. Need for the study. A review of related literature indicated that many investigators felt there was a definite need for research on the effects of nonintellectual variables on academic achievement in college courses. The position of Lavin3 has been cited previously. Murstein4 has indicated a need for further study in the area of expected and received grades. It may be inferred fromMurstein's5 study that students may exhibit certain behaviors in relation to their anticipated achievement in 31bid. 4Bernard 1. Murstein, "The Relationship of Grade Expectations and Grades Believed to be Deserved to Actual Grades Received." The Journal 2f Experimental Education, 33(4):358, 1965. 5 Ibid. particular courses. The use of a course grade as a criterion of success has been challenged by Fishman6 and he stated that an increased interest in the examination of personality vari- ables might yield significant data with respect to success in a course. Fishman's7 study used the course grade achieved as a measure of course success, but with the emphasis placed on the examination of nonintellectual factors which poten- tially influenced the student's course grade achieved. Hardee8 has suggested the need for research that goes beyond a student's scholastic ability and examines non- intellectual variables such as attitude, motivation and personality traits. In another work, Meade suggested the ~ desirability of investigating study skills and indicates that "especially during the past 20 years, a number of investigators have realized that nonintellectual factors were affecting the accuracy of predictions of college grades.”9 The consideration of each student as an individual and com- plex organism becomes a vital necessity within any study which deals with personal, nonintellectual components of individual performance. Lynn states that, 6Joshua A. Fishman, "Unsolved Criterion Problems in the Selection of College Students." Harvard Educational Review, 28(4):342, 1958. 71bid. 8Melvene Draheim Hardee, "Research on College Students: The Student Personnel Worker's View." The Educational Record, 43(2):l35, 1962. 9 Martin Meade, ”Non-Intellectual Factors in Admission to Selective Colleges." The Journal 9; Educational Sociology, 35(6):314, 1962. It is clear that people differ considerably in their capacity for sustained and concentrated work and it seems likely that this personality characteristic contributes to good educationa attainment, perhaps to a considerable degree. The use of nonintellectual factors in the selection of college students was advanced by Fishman11 when he proposed that such factors as adjustment to pressure and clarity of a student's goals needed stronger consideration. Fishman proposed that each of these nonintellectual variables or categories of variables was capable of being influenced by student action and could potentially influence student academic achievement. Other nonintellectual variables besides personality, anticipated course grades, attitude and motivation have been proposed for further study. Trueblood12 suggested the need for research concerning the achievement of employed versus unemployed college students, and Samenfink and Millikenl3 jointly proposed further study looking at college achievement in relation to marital status. The need for additional research involving student attrition in an academic major 10R. Lynn, "Two Personality Characteristics Related to Academic Achievement." The British Journal 2f Educational Psychology, 29(3):213, 1959. llFishman, 29. cit., pp. 340-349, 1958. 12Dennis L. Trueblood, "Selected Characteristics of Employed Students in the Indiana University School of Business." Journal 2: Educational Research, 50(3):209-213, 1956. 13J. Anthony Samenfink and Robert L. Milliken, "Marital Status and Academic Success: A Reconsideration.” Marriage and Family Living, 23(3):226-227, 1961. was reported by Cole, Wilson and Tiedeman,14 Weitz, Clarke and Jones,15 Marks, Ashby and Zeigler,16 and Pierson.17 Within the complex topic of study habits, Maddox18 and Lavin19 have suggested the need for advancement in related research. Statement of the problem. The two major purposes of this study were: (1) to survey student reaction to selected nonintellectual variables with respect to the affects of these nonintellectual factors upon student achievement in Biological Science 211; and (2) to investigate certain interrelationships between the selected nonintellectual variables. 14Joseph W. Cole, Kenneth M. Wilson and David V. Tiedeman, ”Dispersion Analysis and the Search for Educational Goals in College: A Study in Duplicate.” The Journal 2; Educational Psychology, 55(3):121-131, 1964. 15Henry Weitz, Mary Clarke and Ora Jones, "The Relationship Between Choice of a Major Field of Study and Academic Preparation and Performance." Educational and Psychological Measurement, l5(l):28-38, 1955. 16 Edmond Marks, Jefferson D. Ashby and Martin L. Zeigler, "Recommended Curricular Change and Scholastic Performance." Journal_gf Counseling Psychology, 12(1): 17-22, 1965. 17Rowland R. Pierson, ”Changes of Majors by University Students." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 40(5):458- 461, 1962. 18H. Maddox, "Advice on How-To-Study Versus the Actual Practices of University Students.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, l6(1):202, 1963. 19Lavin,'9_p. cit., p. 69. ,Hypotheses of the study. the study, the following major hypotheses were tested in each of the separately investigated populations. 1. In addition to the above hypotheses, Achievement in Biological Science 211 was equal In view of the purposes of for students regardless of curricula (HO 1:M1=Mi). Achievement in Biological Science 211 was the same for all student classifications (H M) O, 2 M=1 Achievement in Biological Science 211 was equal for both sexes (H0 3:M1=Mi.) Achievement in Biological 1Science 211 was equal for all categories of student preparation in organic chemistry (H0,4:M1=Mi). Achievement in Biological Science 211 was the same for married and unmarried students (HO,5:M1=Mi)° Achievement in Biological Science 211 was equal for employed and unemployed students (HO,6:M1= Achievement in Biological Science 211 was equal regardless of a student's place of residence (HO,7:M1=Mi). Achievement in Biological Science 211 was the same regardless of individual study habits 010,8le M) was tested in order to show any interactions between the nonintellectual variables. 9. The interrelationship between selected non- intellectual variables was the same for all studied populations (HO,9:M1=Mi)' Mi)° the following hypothesis Each of the major hypotheses was surveyed with a single questionnaire item. Additional questionnaire items surveyed student response to specific facets of each major hypothesis. Assumptions of the study. The following statements represent the basic assumptions under which this investiga- tion was carried out. 1. Students were intellectually honest in their response to the survey instruments. 2. Information which was lost because of incomplete return of the questionnaires was random and the remaining samples were representative of each total population. 3. The questionnaires were valid instruments for the collection of data with respect to the selected nonintellectual variables. 4. The term a student enrolled in Biological Science 211 did not affect significantly the results of this study. 5. The students in each term constituted a specific population. Collection and treatment of data. Collection of data involved the retrieval of the questionnaire responses and placement of the responses on data sheets. The data were then keypunched for use in the Control Data Process 3600 Computer. Raw examination scores and final course grades were also retrieved and recorded for each individual student. The questionnaire variables were analyzed with the chi—square statistical technique. Examination scores were used as the source of data for both the critical ratio routine and the one-way analysis of variance statistic. Definition of terms. Due to the nature of the study, the following terms or phrases are defined as they were used in the investigation: course achievement, chemistry status, nonintellectual variable and population. Course achievement was the final letter grade achieved by a student enrolled in Biological Science 211. Chemistry status indicates whether a student had no organic chemistry preparation, was taking some initial organic chemistry or had completed organic chemistry. Nonintellectual variable was used within the frame- work offered by Lavin.20 The term as described by Lavin includes personal characteristics which are independent of intellectual ability. Types of nonintellectual variables are: (1) a student's interest or motivational state of being; (2) a student's individual personality; (3) a student's view of self; and (4) individual behavioral or study patterns. Population was used to denote the total student enrollment in any one specific term of Biological Science 211. Limitation of the study. The investigation was limited to a survey of the following nonintellectual vari- ables in relation to college student academic achievement in Biological Science 211 with respect to: curriculum major, classification in college, sex, marital status, student employment, place of residence and study patterns. 20Lavin,_2p.‘gi£., p. 64. 1 . . Lav1n, loc. c1t. 10 No attempt was made to determine the specific intellectual capabilities of the surveyed students. The survey was limited to paper and pencil responses by use of the questionnaire technique. Organization of the dissertation. This chapter presents a statement of the problem and supporting comments to build the rationale for the investigation. Attention was directed to the background of the study, need for the study, statement of the investigated problem, hypotheses which were tested, assumptions, collection and treatment of data, definition of terms and limitations of the study. The development of a detailed rationale for the study is found in the selected review of literature as presented in Chapter II. Chapter III describes the design of the investigation, sources of data, involved student population, methodology of the investigation, specific instruments used, statistical tools used, and the method of analysis. The presentation of collected data and related findings is located within Chapter IV. Chapter V is the concluding chapter and presents the conclusions which are supported by the findings of the study, presents some educational implications and proposes the need for future related research. CHAPTER II REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE Since the overall purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of selected nonintellectual variables in relation to student achievement in a college course in biological science, the literature reviewed in this chapter pertains mainly to the selected nonintellectual variables. The nonintellectual variables covered by this review were: selection and stability of an academic major; student classification; sex; marital status; student employment; place of residence; and student study patterns. In addition to a review of the studies concerned with the selected nonintellectual variables that pertained directly to this investigation, studies of other non- intellectual variables were reviewed. The additional nonintellectual variables are reported briefly as a matter of interest. Included in this coverage are such factors as: roommate influence on academic achievement; the influence of a student's cumulative grade point average; influence of the credit load carried; the importance of student motivation to academic achievement; the importance of student satisfaction with college life; student examination anxiety; and the time of initial enrollment in college. The general criterion under which studies were reported in this review was that the investigators related the nonintellectual variables to student academic achievement. ll 12 Crewsl studied science majors at Oregon State University and concluded that nonintellectual variables were not significantly related to the college academic success of the students. Meade2 conducted a review of literature and suggested that the research failed to demonstrate a definitive relationship between nonintellectual variables and student performance in college. A similar conclusion was drawn from a research study performed by Van'Wagenen3 at Syracuse University. In contrast to Crews,4‘Meade5 and VanWagenen, Barger and Hall7 investigated the adjustment of entering students at the University of Florida and stated that it was probably that a substantial portion of the variance in stu- dent achievement was accounted for by nonintellectual variables, such as personality and sociological differences. 1Graydon Talmadge Crews, "Selected Factors In Relation to College Success For Science Majors At Oregon State College." Dissertation Abstracts, 18(1):145, 1958. 2Martin‘Meade, "Non-Intellectual Factors in Admission to Selective Colleges." The Journal of Educational Sociology, 35(6):318, 1962. 3Donald Richard VanWagenen, ”The Relation of Selected Non-Intellectual Factors to Academic Achievement in Several College Groups." Dissertation Abstracts, 23(1):539, 1962. H Crews, loc. ci . 5Meade, loc fl . ci VanWagenen, loc. cit. 7Ben Barger, and Everette Hall, "Personality Patterns and Achievement in College.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(2):339, 1964. 13 Cohen and Guthrie8 have suggested that motivational factors influence student academic achievement as indicated by re- search which equated ability, but found differences in student achievement. An indication of the importance of nonintellectual variables upon academic achievement was suggested by Travers9 when he concluded that there seemed to be agreement that factors other than scholastic aptitudes are important to student academic achievement. Travers concluded that most of these other factors had not been adequately identified and researched. Levy11 surveyed undergraduates at the University of Michigan and reported a student belief that factors related to personal maturity influenced their college achievement. Academic major as a nonintellectual variable. The specific interest within this aspect of the review of literature is centered around the stability of a chosen academic major. The basic positions for consideration were students who had not changed their academic major and those who had changed academic majors. 8Arlene G. Cohen and George M. Guthrie, "Patterns of Motivation for College Attendance." Educational and Psychological Measurement, 26(1):89, 1966. 9Robert M. W. Travers, "Significant Research on the Prediction of Academic Success." In: W. T. Donahue and others (eds.). The Measurement of Student Adjustment and Achievement. p. 174. (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1949), pp. 256. lolbid.. 11Stanley Roy Levy, "An Exploratory Study of the Bases of Faculty Advisor Prediction of Scholastic Achievement." Dissertation Abstracts, 25(4):7llO, 1965. l4 Adamek and Goudy12 surveyed college juniors at a mid- western college with a mailed questionnaire and concluded that students who cannot identify with their selected major will be likely to change majors. A research study was conducted by Slocum13 at the State College of Washington to investigate academic major and college attrition. Slocum14 concluded from this study that students who were unsure of an academic major were likely to withdraw from college prior to graduation. A similar finding was reported by McCammon15 from his investigation of undergraduates at the University of Tennessee. Incoming freshmen at Kansas State Teachers College were surveyed in relation to their selected academic majors by Wygle.l6 The same students were resurveyed at a later time and he concluded that it was better to have a selected major, even a tentative one, than no definite plans. 12Raymond J. Adamek and Willis J. Goudy, "Identifi- cation, Sex, and Change in College Major." Socioloqugf Education, 39(2):184, 1966. 13 W. L. Slocum, "Social Factors Involved in Academic Mortality." College and University, 32(1):56, 1956. 14Ibid. 15William Howard McCammon, Jr., "The Use of Non- Intellectual Variables in Predicting Attrition of Academically Capable Students at the University of Tennes- see." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(5):7158, 1966. 16Ralph William.Wygle, "A Study of Factors Related to College Success of Freshmen Enrolled in Kansas State Teachers College." Dissertation Abstracts, 27(1):616A, 1967. lS Thistlethwaite17 and Piersonl8 investigated merit scholars and Michigan State University students respectively, in relation to academic major. They concluded that students most frequently change majors because of new information about their present major and other curriculum majors. A secondary reason for changing their major was a dis- enchantment with the courses in their present major. Undergraduates at Pennsylvania State University were surveyed by Marks, Ashby and Zeigler.19 They concluded that students who changed academic majors independently of counselor recommendation, did significantly better than any other group of changers. It is interesting to note that academic achievement significantly improved when students changed majors on their own volition. The research which deals specifically with the academic achievement of students who have changed majors is not devoid of contradictory findings. Hasan20 conducted a 17David L. Thistlethwaite, "College Press and Changes In Study Plans of Talented Students." The Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(4):230, 1960. 18Rowland R. Pierson, "Changes of Majors by Univer- sity Students." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 40(5): 460, 1962. 19 Edmond Marks, Jefferson D. Ashby and Martin L. Zeigler, "Recommended Curricular Change and Scholastic Performance." Journal of Counseling Psychology, lZ(l):21, 1965. 20Syed Hasan, "A Comparison Between Students Who Changed and Those Who Did Not Change Their Majors During Their Undergraduate Training at Southern Illinois University." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(5):6513, 1966. 16 study on seven hundred and twenty-seven undergraduates and concluded that those who changed majors made significantly poorer grades. A longitudinal study of entering freshmen at Auburn University led Cook21 to conclude that grades were not significantly affected by changing academic majors. In independently conducted studies, Alexander and Woodruff,22 Sherwood23 and Sexton24 concluded that there was a significant advantage in academic achievement of students who have a committment to some academic major. In agreement with.Woodruff,25 Sherwood26 and Sexton,27 Thompson concluded that "the original hypothesis that the committed student was different from the uncommitted tended to be upheld.”28 21M. Olin Cook, "College Students Change Majors.” School and Society, 93(2261):273, 1965. 22Norman Alexander and Ruth J. Woodruff, "Deter- minants of College Success." The Journal of Higher Education, ll(9):482, 1940. 23Emily J. Sherwood, ”An Investigation of the Relationship Between the Academic Achievement and Goal- Orientations of College Students.” Dissertation Abstracts, l7(2):313, 1965. 24Virginia Staudy Sexton, "Factors Contributing To Attrition in College Populations: Twenty-Five Years of Research." The Journal of General Psychology, 72(2):313, 1965. 25Alexander and Woodruff, loc. cit. 6Sherwood, loc. cit. 27 28O. E. Thompson, "Impact of Committment Upon Performance of College Students." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 44(5):503, 1966. Sexton, loc. cit. 17 Student classification in college as a nonintel- lectgal variable. The influence of student classification on college academic achievement has been investigated by rela- tively few researchers. Silver 29 conducted a research investigation on eight hundred and forty-nine college students and concluded that a student's cumulative achievement level increased with continuance in college. Heist30 and Habein independently concluded that freshmen college students are more stable than upperclassmen and consequently in a more favorable position for academic achievement. Sex as a nonintellectual variable. Schutter and Maher32 studied Iowa State University freshmen and the stu- dent response to a forced choice study skill scale led them to the conclusion that no significant difference in study 33 skills existed on the basis of sex. Johnson researched college freshmen at the Arkansas, 29Robert Eugene Silver, "The Effect of Self-Support Upon Student Success in Walla Walla College." Dissertation Abstracts, 16(2):l8l9-1820, 1956. 30 Paul Heist, ”Implications from.Recent Research on College Students." Journal of the National Association of Women Deans and Counselors, 22(2):ll7, 1959. 31Margaret L. Habein (ed.), Spotlight on the College Student (Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1959), p. 59. 2Genevieve Schutter and Howard Maher, ”Predicting Grade-Point Average With A Forced-Choice Study Activity ' Questionnaire." The Journal of Applied Psychology, 40(4): 256, 1956. 33Johnny Bernard Johnson, Sr., "The Relationship Between Type of Residence and Scholarship of Students at Arkansas Agricultural, Mechanical and Normal College.” Dissertation Abstracts, 24(1):586-587, 1963. 18 Mechanical and Normal College and concluded that academic achievement was not significantly related to a student's sex. A similar finding was reached by Hunt34 from an investiga- tion of Ball State freshmen who were resurveyed as seniors. In contrast to the above findings with respect to little or no difference in college achievement of sexes, the following sources have reported the presence of significant differences in course achievement based upon sex. Byrns35 studied more than one thousand college undergraduates at The University of Wisconsin and concluded that female students achieve at a level which is significantly higher than their male counterparts. Crews36 conducted a similar investiga- tion involving the undergraduate grades of three hundred and twenty-six college graduates and concurred with Byrns's findings. Campbell37 investigated the achievement of college freshmen at Louisana State University and concluded that the level of academic achievement of female students was significantly greater than that of the male students. 34James G. Hunt, "A Study of Nonintellectual Factors Related to Academic Achievement Among College Seniors at Ball State Teachers College." Dissertation Abstracts, 22(1):157-158, 1961. 35Ruth Byrns, "Concerning College Grades." School and Society, 31(803):685, 1930. 6Crews, loc. cit. 37Joe Watkins Campbell, "Factors Related to Scholastic Achievement (Louisiana State University's 1963-1964 Freshmen Class)." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(3):4360-4361, 1966. 19 In a somewhat different treatment of this issue, Morris states that "The psychologists have, I think, pretty well demolished the idea that females are weaker intellectu- 38 Jex and Merrill39 studied college ally than males." freshmen and suggest that it is not unexpected to observe higher achievement by college females because fewer females than males attend college and therefore it is already a selected population. Marital status as a nonintellectual variable. Several previous studies have considered student marital status as it related to academic achievement. It is interesting to note that consistent agreement does not appear in the literature. Jensen and Clark compared students who were married throughout their college experi- ence with students who remained single and concluded that "...the results tend to suggest rejection of the hypothesis that marrizd students achieve at a higher level than single "0 students. In a survey of married and unmarried students, Mueller41 concluded that married students are little if any ahead of unmarried students. In other related studies, 38VanCleve Morris, "Male, Female, and the Higher Learning." The Journal of Higher Education, 30(2):67, 1959. 39Frank B. Jex and Reed M. Merrill, "Intellectual and Personality Characteristics of University of Utah Students." Journal of Educational Research, 53(3):ll9, 1959. 4OVern H. Jensen and Monroe H. Clark, ”Married and Unmarried College Students: Achievement, Ability; and Personality.” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 37(2): 125, 1958. 41Kate Hevner Mueller, "The Married Student on the Campus." College and University, 35(2):156, 1960. 20 Samenfink and Milliken,42 Cohen, King and Nelson,43 and Falk44 all concluded that marital status did not appear to be significantly related to college academic achievement. The research which prompted the conclusion reached by Samenfink and Milliken45 was conducted on forty-one married and forty-one unmarried South Dakota State College students. Their marital status had remained constant throughout four years of college enrollment. Falk's46 results were derived from an investigation of forty single and forty married students matched by age, sex, classifi- cation and academic ability. In contrast to the forenamed studies pertaining to marital status, several studies have reported the exist- ance of significant differences between married and unmarried students. Riemer47 conducted a study on veterans at The University of Wisconsin and concluded that married veterans achieve at a significantly higher level than 42J. Anthony Samenfink and Robert L. Milliken, "Marital Status and Academic Success: A Reconsideration." Marriage and Family Living, 23(3):227, 1961. 43David B. Cohen, F. J. King, and Willard H. Nelson, "Academic Achievement of College Students Before and After Marriage." Marriage and Family Living, 25(l):99, 1963. 44Laurence L. Falk, ”A Comparative Study of Problems of Married and Single Students.” Journal of Marriage and the Family, 26(2):208, 1964. Samenfink and Milliken, loc. cit. 46Falk, loc. cit. 47Svend Riemer, "Married Veterans Are Good Students." Marriage and Family Living, 9(l):ll, 1947. 21 unmarried veterans. Lantagne48 conducted a study on mar- ried male students at Santa Barbara College and was able to conclude that the grade point averages of married men were higher than single male students. In a similar study involving eight hundred and forty-three questionnaire re- turns at the University of Washington, Dickinson and New- begin49 concluded that married men achieve at significantly higher levels than their single male counterparts. Chilman and Meyer50 conducted a questionnaire study at Syracuse University and stated that married students have signifi- cantly higher personality scores for need associated with academic achievement. Student employment as a nonintellectual variable. A review of literature related to this specific nonintellectu- al variable revealed considerable variation in the reported impact of this variable on academic achievement. The majority of previous research studies have specifically examined the influence of employment upon academic achieve- ment, while a selected few chose to survey student reactions as to why they were employed. 48Joseph E. Lantagne, "Do Married Men Succeed In College? College Marriage Inventory.” The Journal of School Health, 29(2):9l, 1959. 49Carl Dickinson and Betty Newbegin, "Can Work and College Mix?" The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 38(4): 315, 1959. 50Catherine S. Chilman and Donald L. Meyer, "Single and Married Undergraduates' Measured Personality Needs and Self-Rated Happiness." Journal of Marriage and the Family, 28(1):67, 1966. 22 Isaacson and Amos51 surveyed undergraduate female students who were employed. They concluded that a stated advantage of part time employment was the increased ef- ficiency when studying and a stated disadvantage was the rigidity imposed upon their schedules. Wilson and Lyons52 concluded that part time employment led to better student awareness and orientation to the world of work. Jones has suggested that part time jobs offer a source of pre- career experience and often provide a new vantage point which favorably influences the choice of a particular curriculum. The view that employment was harmful to academic achievement has been advanced by some investigators. Fryer and Henry54 concluded that a general feeling existed which indicated that employment adversely affected achievement. Slocum,55 Dykstra,56 and McCammon57 independently concluded 51Lee E. Isaacson and Louise C. Amos, ”Participation in Part-Time Work by Women College Students." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 35(7):447-448, 1959. 52James W. Wilson and Edward H. Lyons, Work-Study Collegg Programs (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1961), p. 107. 53Guilford Jones, Jr., ”Missing A Bet on Part-Time Jobs?" Journal 9f College Placement, 24(2):50-53, 1963. 54Douglas H. Fryer and Edwin R. Henry (eds.), Handbook 2f Applied Psychology. Volume II (New York: Rinehard and Company, Inc., 1950), p. 452. 55$1ocum,,gp. cit., p. 59. 56John W. Dykstra, "'I WOrked Pbrway Through College.'" Phi Delta Kappan, 38(9):379, 1957. 57McCammon, loc. cit. 23 that working students are likely to blame work for their low grades or their withdrawal from school. Not all authors have reported either an adverse or favorable effect upon academic achievement exerted by student employment. Lins58 investigated two thousand male college students and concluded that the mean academic achievement was not lower for working male students. Trueblood59 conducted a research study on college seniors and concluded that current employment had no significant effect upon student academic achievement. Budd6O investigated the influence of employment upon the adjustment to college by incoming students and concluded that employment made no significant difference in the academic achievement level of the involved students. Silver61 and Bryant62 independently studied the influence of employment on college academic achievement and both concluded that the amount of employ- ment did not significantly influence achievement. 58L. J. Lins, "Pre-University Background and Effect of Various Factors Upon University Success.” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 33(3):158, 1954. 59Dennis Lee Trueblood, ”Selected Characteristics, Including Academic Achievement, of Employed and Non-Employed Students in the Indiana University School of Business." Dissertation Abstracts, 14(1):643-644, 1954. 60William C. Budd, "The Effect of Outside Employment on Initial Adjustment to College.” College and University, 31(2):220-221, 1956. 1Silver, loc. cit. 62Girard Thompson Bryant, "Here's How They Work." The Junior College Journal, 32(4):206, 1961. 24 The third side of the issue concerning the influence of employment upon academic achievement proposes that employment favorably influences the level of academic achievement. In a review of literature, Harris63 concluded that part time student employment aided academic achievement. Stright64 investigated the influence of employment upon academic achievement at Baldwin-Wallace College and con- cluded that employed female students achieve at signifi- cantly higher levels than their unemployed counterparts. Coolidge65 surveyed two hundred and sixty-four employed students and a similar number of unemployed stu- dents and concluded that a trend toward higher academic achievement was apparent for employed students, but the trend was not statistically significant. In another study which concluded that employment was beneficial to academic achievement, Dickinson and Newbegin stated, It is our feeling that this represents a tendency for those who succeed in organizing their time and efforts for accomplishment in one area t86carry this pattern of behavior to other areas. 63Daniel Harris, "Factors Affecting College Grades: A Review of the Literature, 1930-1937." Psychological Bulletin, 37(3):140, 1940. 641. L. Stright, "Some Factors Affecting College Success." The Journal 9f Educational Psychology, 38(4): 238, 1947. 65 Franklin Earl Coolidge, "A Study of the College Grades, Leadership Roles and Entrance Examination Scores of Employed and Non-Employed Students at Cortland State Teachers College." Dissertation Abstracts, l9(2):2015- 2016, 1958. 6Dickinson and Newbegin, loc. cit. 25 PIace of residence as a nonintellectual variable. Alexander and Woodruff conducted an investigation on fresh- men students and concluded: "This study reveals no definite correlation between residence on campus and the quality of 67 A similar study was conducted a student's academic work." on eight hundred and seven undergraduate students and led Griffeth68 to conclude that there was no significant difference in student achievement based upon the type of residence. Appleton69 reported in 1965 on his investigation which involved six hundred and seven undergraduate students enrolled in more than eleven credits and concluded that there was no significant difference in student achievement based upon place of residence. In a study which equated intelligence and marital status, Johnson7O concluded that the existing differences in grade point average between residence groups wasn't significant. The existance of significant differences in academic achievement when the student's place of residence was in- volved have been reported. Boyce71 conducted a study on 67Alexander and Woodruff, loc. cit. 68Paul Lyman Griffeth, "Type of Residence as a Factor in Academic Achievement at the State University of Iowa." Dissertation Abstracts, l9(1):1617, 1958. 69James Robert Appleton, ”A Comparison of Freshmen Commuter Students with Resident Students on Selected Characteristics, Experiences and Changes." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(3):4434, 1965. 70 Johnson, loc. cit. 71Ernest Marshall Boyce, "A Comparative Study of Overachieving and Underachieving College Students on Factors Other Than Scholastic Aptitude." Dissertation Abstracts, l6(2):2088-2089, 1956. 26 University of Wisconsin students who achieved at levels significantly above their predicted levels and concluded that a significant number of the over-achievers lived in private residences. In a similar type of investigation, Sharp72 concluded that place of residence was especially important to the students involved who were achieving below their predicted levels. Investigations of the specific type of residence and academic achievement appear in the literature. Harris73 reviewed previous studies on college students and concluded that when students are matched by intelligence, those who live at home achieve at higher levels than those who live in dormitories. He also suggested that the achievement level drops after a student has met the requirements for initiation into a fraternity. Olson74 conducted a study involving types of campus residency and concluded that the living-learning complexes on the Michigan State University campus were advantageous to student achievement. Slocum75 conducted a questionnaire study and concluded that college survival rates when listed in descending order favored students who resided in sororities, fraternities, men's 72Lawrence Jean Sharp, "Personal and Social Factors in Academic Over-and Underachievement of 1,716 Washington State University Freshmen." Dissertation Abstracts, 25(4): 6097-6098, 1965. 73Harris, pp. cit., p. 139. 74Leroy A. Olson, "Academic Attitudes, Expectations, and Achievement." Improving College and University Teaching, l3(l):39-41, 1965. 75 Slocum, 22. cit., p. 61. 27 dormitories, women's dormitories and off campus. In independently conducted studies, Byrns76 and Matson77 con- cluded that students residing in fraternities achieved at higher levels than those residing inchnrmitories and both achieved at levels higher than students residing off campus. Study patterns as a nonintellectual variable. Bell78 investigated undergraduate students and determined that the time when study was attempted or the amount of study had low correlations with academic achievement. DeSena79 investigated freshmen science majors at Pennsylvania State University and concluded that differences between over- achievers and underachievers was due to personality characteristics, not study habits. This particular investigation involved students who were classified as overachievers, normal achievers and underachievers. There were forty-two students in each group and they were matched by age, sex, race, classification in school, previous cours- es, residence and predicted grade point average. 6Byrns, loc. cit. 77Robert E. Matson, "A Study of the Influence of Fraternity, Residence Hall, and Off-Campus Living on Stu- dents of High, Average, and Low College Potential." Journal-2f the National Association 2f Women Deans and Counselors, 26(3):28, 1963. 78HughM. Bell, "Study Habits of Teachers College Students.” The Journal 9; Educational Psychology, 22(7): 538-543, 1931. 79Paul A. DeSena, "The Effectiveness of Two Study Habits Inventories in Predicting Consistent Over, Under- and Normal Achievement in College." Journal of Counseling Psychology, ll(4):390, 1964. 28 A study conducted on three hundred and thirty-one freshmen and sophomore students at the University of California investigated the influence of study habits on successful and failing students. The conclusion Brown80 reached in this investigation was that failing students were having difficulty for reasons other than study habits. Investigations concerning the influence of study habits have also indicated that the amount of time invested in study was not the crucial issue. Ross and Klise81 and Jex and Merrill82 conducted investigations which concluded that the efficiency of undergraduate study was more impor- tant than the amount of time spent studying. Gladstein83 conducted a study which concluded that it no longer was reasonable to expect to find any one best study pattern. It was previously indicated that divergent findings have been reported concerning the influence of study habits upon academic achievement. The following studies have suggested some specific relationship between study habits and academic achievement. 80C. W. Brown, ”The Study Habits of Failing and Successful Students In the First Two Years of College.” The Journal 9f Experimental Education, 9(3):207, 1941. 81Clay C. Ross and Nira A. Klise, "Study Methods of College Students in Relation to Intelligence and Achieve- ment." Educational Administration and Supervision, 13(8): 554, 1927. 82 Jex and Merrill, op. cit., p. 120. 83Gerald A. Gladstein, "A New Approach for Identi- fying Appropriate Individual Study Behavior." The School Review, 71(2):158-169, 1963. 29 Harris84 conducted a review of literature related to academic achievement in college and reported that a moderate positive relation existed between grades achieved and time spent studying. Curran85 investigated the study habits of underachieving, normal achieving and overachieving fresh- men at the University of Connecticut. The conclusions drawn from Curran's86 investigation were: (1) a signifi- cant difference in study habits existed between the three groups; (2) overachievers of both sexes have the best study habits; and (3) the amount of time spent studying was significant for successful male students but not for successful female students. Tussing87 suggested in a publication in 1962 that a student's ability to schedule study time and to produce meaningful outlines of course material were significantly related to academic achievement. Maddox, after a review of literature, reported that "An hour is said to be the best unit of time for study, and rigid adherence to a detailed timetable is advised.”88 With this finding in mind,‘Maddox89 conducted an investigation and found: 84Harris, 92. cit., p. 137. 85Ann Marie Curran, ”Non-Intellective Character- istics of Freshmen Underachievers, Normal Achievers, and Overachievers at the College Level." Dissertation Abstracts, 21(3):2584-2585, 1961. 86Ibid. 87Lyle Tussing, Study and Succeed (New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962), pp. 19-37. 88Maddox,.lgg..gig. 891bid. 30 (1) that students more often studied in cycles rather than on a time table; and (2) that students studied in two hour sections more often than one hour units. Brown90 surveyed freshmen home economics and science majors at Iowa State University and concluded that study habits function as a significant nonintellectual variable related to academic achievement. College roommates as a nonintellectual variable. Studies which have examined roommate influence upon aca- demic achievement do not exhibit cohesiveness within the findings. Brown investigated one hundred and eighty-seven undergraduate students at Iowa State University and con- cluded that, "Roommates often had a deleterious influence on study habits but rarely had a positive effect."91 An investigation conducted on freshmen male students residing in dormitories at Stanford University led Ohlson92 to conclude that evidence did not exist to indicate that roommates resemble each other in scholastic achievement. Townsend has collected information which suggests that roommate influence may not be significantly related to academic achievement but states that "Roommates are both a curse and a blessing...Keep you from being lonely but 90Frederick G. Brown, "Study Habits and Attitudes, College Experience, and College Success." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 43(3):287, 1964. 91 Ibid., p. 291. 92John Ohlson, "The Relationship Between College Room-mates In Scholastic Achievement." School and Society, 50(1295):544, 1939. 31 93 require you to be considerate of others." The other side of this issue has been taken by Sutherland and others94 when they concluded that roommates function as a close peer group which influences student achievement. Cumulated grade point average as a nonintellectual variable. Osborne conducted a study on pre-medical stu- dents at Columbia University and concluded that "Neither the need for achievement, the need for order, nor the need for affiliation was significantly correlated with grade point average."95 McQuary96 investigated freshmen at The University of Wisconsin and concluded that grade point average was a significant nonintellectual variable related to college achievement. Credit load as a nonintellectual variable. The number of credits carried by students has been investi- gated in relation to academic achievement by a number of O O O 97 O O O O indiViduals. Hayes, from an investigation concerning 93Agatha Townsend, College Freshmen Speak Out (New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1956), p. 45. 94Robert L. Sutherland and others (eds.), Person- ality Factors 93 The College Campus (Austin, Texas: The University of Texas, 1962), pp. 83-85. 5Duncan Osborne, ”The Relationship of Personality Factors To Academic Achievement In College.” Dissertation Abstracts. 24(3):3839, 1964. 96 John P. McQuary, "Some Relationships Between Non-Intellectual Characteristics and Academic Achievements. The Journal 9f Educational Psychology, 44(4):215-228, 1953. 97Ernest Hayes, "The Influence of Course Load on College GPA." College and University, 37(3):253, 1962. 32 credit load, concluded that the grade point average of a good student decreased when more than fifteen credits were carried. Dickinson and Newbegin98 conducted an investi- gation dealing with credit load and employment. They surveyed one thousand and twenty-five students at the University of Washington and concluded that students did not have to reduce their credit load to achieve satis- factorily while gainfully employed. Hotz and Trice99 studied the credit load of three hundred undergraduates at the University of Arkansas and concluded that a high credit load was related positively to high academic achievement. Reeder100 and Lins101 investigated academic achievement in relation to enroll- ment for an increased credit load. They concluded that academic achievement was not reduced by an increased credit load. Reeder102 investigated seven hundred and thirty-one undergraduates at The Ohio State University who enrolled for greater than fifteen credits. Lins103 surveyed achieve- ment of two thousand undergraduates at The University of Wisconsin. 98Dickinson and Newbegin, 22. cit., p. 317. 99H. G. Hotz and J. A. Trice, "The Relation of An Abnormal Weekly Schedule to Grade Point Average." School and Society, 39(1005):423, 1934. 100C. W. Reeder, ”Excess Schedules.” The Journal 9f Higher Education, 17(2):101, 1946. 101Lins, loc. cit. 102Reeder, loc. cit. 103Lins, loc. cit. 33 Merrill and Osborn104 worked with four hundred and seventy-two undergraduates at the University of Utah who were enrolled in more than the normal eighteen credits. They concluded that students performed much the same whether taking an overload or not. Sexton105 conducted a lengthy review of literature and concluded that a slight positive correlation was reported between the credit load carried and academic achievement. Motivation and student aspiration as a nonintellectu- al variable. The influence of a student's individual motivation and level of aspiration as a potential influence on academic achievement has been investigated. Tussing has ”...one of the big problems facing many H106 suggested that, students is developing interest in required courses. The importance of student motivation was indicated by De- Sena's following statement: It seems evident to most educators that a stu- dent's academic grades are a result of many factors such as study habits, interest and motivation, which are not represented in the ordinary intelligence or aptitude test used to predict scholastic success. 104Reed M.'Merrill and Hal W. Osborn, "Academic Over-Load and Scholastic Success.” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 37(7):510, 1959. 105 Sexton, 22. cit., p. 306. O6Tussing, 2p. cit., p. 3. 107DeSena,2p_. cit., p. 388. 34 MacKay108 investigated factors which influence college student academic achievement and concluded that the achieving student was influenced most by internal stimu- lation and controls. Ward109 studied first term freshmen at the University of Tennessee and concluded that achieving students expressed a common interest in academic matters. A somewhat similar study was conducted by Finger and Schlesser110 in which they concluded that underachievement suggested the pos- session of values which make it unnecessary to strive for academic success. Satisfaction and security of college life as a nonintellectual variable. The influence of student satis- faction in college and expectation for success was investi- gated by Brim.lll Brim112 investigated one hundred and three upperclassmen at The University of Wisconsin and concluded that students who expect higher grades get the higher grades. 108WilliamR. MacKay, "Interpersonal Relationships, A Factor In Academic Success." California Journal 9f Educational Research, 16(4):190, 1965. 109Annie W. Ward, ”Development of an Inventory of Noncognitive Predictors of Academic Success.” Disserta- tion Abstracts, l9(1):1294-1295, 1958. 110 John A. Finger and George E. Schlesser, "Non- intellective Predictors of Academic Success in School and College.” The School Review, 73(1):l4, 1965. 111Orville G. Brim, Jr., ”College Grades and Self- Estimates of Intelligence.” The Journal of Educational Psychology, 45(8):479, 1954. 112 Ibid. 35 Research related to student functioning within the college environment has frequently introduced the concepts of introversion and extroversion. Garrett113 conducted a research study and concluded that extroverted students achieve significantly higher grades than introverted students. Travers reported that, ”It seems that intro- version provides a condition which favors academic success, possibly by reducing the tendency for the student to be ”114 Lynn,115 and Blanton distracted by outside events. and Peck116 reported research investigations which tend to concur with the idea that introverted or asocial students achieve at higher levels than extroverted students. The study conducted by Blanton and Peck investigated fresh- men women at the University of Texas. First semester students were investigated at Purdue University and Bloomberg117 concluded that the typical achieving college student is secure, self confident and 113Harley F. Garrett, "A Review and Interpretation of Investigations of Factors Related to Scholastic Success in Colleges of Arts and Science and Teachers Colleges." Journal of Experimental Education, 18(2):119, 1949. 114Travers, op. cit., p. 172. 115Lynn,lgp. cit., p. 214. 116Wincie L. Blanton and Robert F. Peck, "College Student Motivation and Academic Performance.” Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(4):903, 1964. 117 Marvin Bloomberg, "The Prediction of Scholastic Success Through the Use of A Forced-Choice Problems-~and-- Attitude Inventory." Dissertation Abstracts, 15(2):2566, 1955. 36 appears somewhat introverted. Student satisfaction and security are closely related to examination anxiety which was selected for consideration at this time. Test anxiety as a nonintellectual variable. The influence of test anxiety upon academic achievement has been of interest to researchers. Zeaman118 surveyed students enrolled in an effective living course and con- cluded that underachieving men exhibit a significantly greater amount of test anxiety than the achieving students. A somewhat contradictory study was conducted at Pennsyl- vania State University on ninety-one students enrolled in an introductory psychology course. This study led Grooms and Endler119 to conclude that no direct significant relationship existed between test anxiety and academic achievement. Time of initial enrollment in college as a non- intellectual factor. Harris120 conducted a review of literature concerned with academic achievement and conclud- ed that the students who entered college with greater than a one year delay after secondary school graduation achieved at a significantly higher level than students who 118Jean Burgdorf Zeaman, "Some of the Personality Attributes Related to Achievement in College: A Com- parison of Men and Women Students." Dissertation Abstracts, l8(l):290-29l, 1958. 119Robert R. Grooms and Norman 8. Endler, ”The Effect of Anxiety on Academic Achievement." The Journal of Educational Psychology, 51(5):303, 1960. 120 Harris, pp. cit., p. 132. 37 immediately entered college. Garrett121 concluded from an investigation of college achievement that students who delayed their entrance into college by as much as one-half of a school year initially achieved at a low level. Summary. The review of literature relevant to the selected nonintellectual variables has indicated the presence of divergent findings. However, tentative con- clusions may be presented which are supported by the reported literature. These tentative conclusions represent generalized statements relevant to the selected nonintellectual variables. 1. The reviewed studies relevant to the influence of a college student's academic major and achievement indicate a value in the selection of an academic major of their own choosing. The research done by Adamek and Goudy (12)*, Slocum (l3), Wygle (16), indicates that a student's identification with an academic major aided continuance in college. This is further supported by Woodruff (22), Sherwood (23), Sexton (24) and Thompson (28). 2. The data relevant to student classification and academic achievement were not consistent. Silver (29) indicated that upperclassmen achieve at significantly higher levels than underclassmen but Heist (30) and Habein (31) indicate the advantage is in favor of the underclassmen. 3. The review of literature revealed inconsistency in findings relevant to the influence of a student's sex 121H. F. Garrett, loc. cit. * I O The number in parentheses refers to preViously Cited references. 38 on academic achievement. Schutter and Maher (32), Johnson (33), and Hunt (34) indicated that no significant difference in achievement existed. In contrast, Byrns (35), Crews (1), Campbell (37) and Jex and Merrill (39) found significantly higher academic achievement for college females. 4. Consistency in previous research was not apparent when a student's marital status was compared with academic achievement. Riemer (47), Dickinson and Newbegin (49) and Lantagne (48) indicated higher achievement for married students. In contrast, Samenfink and Milliken (42), Cohen, King and Nelson (43), Falk (44), Jensen and Clark (40) and Mueller (41) reported no significant difference in academic achievement based on marital status. 5. The data relevant to student employment and college academic achievement do not facilitate a firm conclusion. Isaacson and Amos (51) reported that academic achievement increased for employed students. Lins (58), Trueblood (59), Budd (60) and Bryant (62) reported no difference in achievement in relation to student employment. An indication that employment adversely affected academic achievement was reported by Fryer and Henry (54), Slocum (13), Dykstra (56) and McCammon (15). 6. Research on the importance of a student's place of residence to academic achievement has reported divergent findings. Alexander and Woodruff (22), Griffeth (68), Appleton (69) and Johnson (33) have reported that based on residence, no significant differences in academic achieve- ment existed. Significant differences in achievement by residence categories were reported by Harris (63), Boyce (71), Sharp (72), Olson (74), Slocum (13), Byrns (35), and Matson (77). 39 7. The data relevant to the influence of study habits on academic achievement show that opposite conclu- sions have been reached. Bell (78), DeSena (79) and Brown (80) concluded that study habits were not significant con- tributors to achievement. Tussing (87) and Brown (90) reported that study patterns significantly influenced college academic achievement. CHAPTER III DESCRIPTIVE FEATURES AND TREATMENT OF DATA This chapter presents: (l) the design of the study; (2) a brief description of the science course involved in the investigation; (3) the selection of student participants; (4) the preparation of the questionnaires; (5) the adminis- tration of the questionnaire; (6) the development of procedures for collection of data; and (7) the procedures for analysis of the data. Design of the study. The study was designed to investigate nonintellectual variables in relation to academic achievement. College students enrolled in a specific bio- logical science course at Michigan State University were the subjects in this investigation. Students enrolled in Biological Science 211 provided the study populations. The four specific periods of enrollment were: fall term 1965, winter term 1966, fall term 1966 and winter term 1967. Each of the four student populations was exposed to a multiple choice questionnaire instrument and the regularly scheduled course examinations. The questionnaires contained items related to the nonintellectual variables as tested by the hypotheses presented in Chapter I. The response to questionnaire items and raw examination scores was separately recorded for each student population. 40 41 The students were asked to sign and include their student numbers on the questionnaire and examination response sheets. All questionnaire responses became part of the data if the student making the responses could be identified by name or student number. The raw examination scores were included within the data only if they were achieved on the regularly scheduled rather than the make-up examinations. The 0.05 level of significance was selected as the criterion against which all statistical results were checked. Thus, each nonintellectual variable or examination category which produced results significant at the 0.05 level was considered to have originated other than from chance events. A brief description of the involved college biology course. Biological Science 211 was the specific content course involved in this study. Biological Science 211 is the first course in a two term sequence which is required of all biological science majors in the College of Natural Science. It is a five credit course with four hours of lecture and one three hour laboratory period each week for ten weeks. The course is normally taken the sophomore year and, at the time of this study, it was recommended that students taking the course should have had an introductory course in organic chemistry or that they take organic chemistry concurrently with Biological Science 211. Content stressed in Biological Science 211 was centered around molecular and biochemical concepts. Lecture presentation was the responsibility of Dr. James L. Fairley, Professor of Biochemistry. Multiple lecture sections were available for student enrollment in all of the involved terms The majority of lecture sections were presented via 42 television as taped lectures.* Coordination and development of laboratory exercises was the responsibility of Dr. Howard H. Hagerman, Assistant Professor of the Science and Mathe- matics Teaching Center. Student achievement within Biological Science 211 was based upon the percentage earned of the total points possible within the course. Contributing to the total points possible were the laboratory quizzes prepared by the individual laboratory instructor and the three common lecture examin- ations prepared by the instructional staff of Biological Science 211. The selection of student participants. As previously reported, the study involved four student populations which represented the fall 1965, winter 1966, fall 1966 and winter 1967 terms' enrollments in Biological Science 211. Inclusion of the four student populations permitted the investigator to survey nonintellectual variables both during and following periods of enrollment in Biological Science 211. All students enrolled in any one of these specified terms became part of the study if they returned signed, usable questionnaire response sheets and completed the course. The student enrollment in Biological Science 211 based on classification and academic major is presented in Tables 1 and 2 (p.44). It should be noted in Table 1 that most enrolled students were sophomores or juniors. Table 2 indicates a high incidence in Biological Science 211 of * Each lecture was initially presented as a live lecture to one lecture section and video taped for viewing by other enrolled students. 43 Table 1. Classification of the student populations in the study. Student Population Student Fall Winter Fall Winter Classification 1965 1966 1966 1967 Freshmen 3 8 l4 6 Sophomore 4O 68 174 178 Junior 33 26 120 74 Senior 18 9 23 14 Unconfirmed 3 O O 2 Total 97 111 331 274 44 Table 2. Academic majors of the student populations in the study. Student Population Fall Winter Fall Winter Academic Major 1965 1966 1966 1967 University College or No preference 3 7 20 6 Agriculture 27 13 99 34 Business or Economics 0 O l 1 Engineering 1 2 l 0 Home Economics 0 O 2 7 Mathematics or Science 35 42 103 62 Pre-professional or professional 27 46 93 127 Education 3 O 7 11 Social Sciences 1 l 5 6 Unconfirmed O O O 20 Total 97 111 331 274 45 students majoring in science or mathematics, professional (nursing or medical technology) or preprofessional (dentistry, medicine or optometry), and agriculture curricula. Preparation of the questionnaires. A series of questiOnnaire items was produced for each of the nonintel- lectual variables represented by the hypotheses. Each specific item was examined and revised by the author. The most appropriate items were incorporated into the questionnaires. The criteria for inclusion required the item to be relevant to a specific hypothesis and consist of mutu- ally exclusive alternative responses. Thus, each specific item referred to one nonintellectual variable and required the student to select a single most appropriate response or omit the item. The varied complexity of the involved nonintellectu- al variables influenced the structuring of the question- naires. It was necessary to survey a variable, such as study habits, with a larger number of specific items than appear for a less complex variable such as student classification. Thus, the final questionnaire used for each student population contained items relevant to each of the nonintellectual variables, but no attempt was made for equal numerical representation. The fall 1966 population was the first group surveyed and responded to a seventy-two item instrument. Questions relevant to the major tested hypotheses were selected from this instrument and incorporated as the thirty-five item questionnaire administered to the fall 1965 and winter 1966 student populations. The author did not consider that usage of different questionnaire instruments biased the student responses. 46 Each of the four student populations was considered separately when the questionnaires were developed. The major consideration was that each population have an oppor- tunity to react to a questionnaire containing items involving the same nonintellectual variables for each population. The fall 1965 and winter 1966 populations were surveyed with identically the same questionnaire. The fall 1966 and winter 1967 populations were surveyed with nearly identical questionnaires during their enrollment in the respective terms of Biological Science 211. A thirty-five item multiple choice questionnaire was prepared for use on the fall 1965, winter 1966 student populations. The fall 1966 student population was surveyed with a seventy-two item questionnaire and the winter 1967 student population responded to a seventy-five item questionnaire. The fall 1965, winter 1966 questionnaire contained only thirty-five items to avoid response fatigue on the one part instrument. Information relevant to a student's sex and curriculum major were retrieved from university records and recorded with the questionnaire responses. The fall 1966, winter 1967 questionnaires were administered in three parts and contained additional items related to the sur- veyed nonintellectual variables. The difference in item numbers between the fall 1966 and winter 1967 questionnaires was the result of adding items which surveyed student sex, marital status and curriculum major to the winter 1967 questionnaire. This information was retrieved for the fall 1966 population from university records. Administration of the questionnaires. Since the fall 1965 and winter 1966 student populations of Biological Science 211 had completed their enrollment in the course, 47 they were mailed the thirty-five item questionnaire. A copy of the covering letter, questionnaire and response sheet is shown in Appendix E. The fall 1966 population of Biological Science 211 responded to the seventy-two item.questionnaire found in Appendix F. The winter 1967 population responded to the seventy-five item questionnaire as presented in Appendix G. Both populations responded to the questionnaires during laboratory periods. These questionnaires were divided into three separate portions to minimize the class time required for completion during any one laboratory period. The first and second portions of the questionnaire contained three identical questions which were recorded only once for each student. This provided an internal consistency check and permitted the categorizing of students who missed one of the initial two questionnaire portions. Omission of the three duplicate responses produced a survey instrument consisting of seventy-two usable items. The researcher presented the first portion of the questionnaire in all involved laboratory sections both the fall 1966 and winter 1967 terms. This presentation occurred the week following the first midterm examination. A brief introduction to the study was presented and the students were assured that their responses would be treated con- fidentially by the researcher. Students were advised that two additional portions of the questionnaire would appear later in the term. They were requested to sign and pro- vide their student numbers on all three response sheets. Administration of the second and third portions was performed by the individual Biological Science 211 laboratory 48 assistants. The second part was distributed the week prior to the second midterm examination and the concluding portion the week prior to the final examination. Collection of data. Data collection involved the retrieval of questionnaire responses and raw examination scores. Examination scores were included for those students in each population who returned usable questionnaire re- sponses, took the regularly scheduled examinations, and completed the course. The raw examination scores were recorded from the examination answer sheets or from student record cards. The students within each term were arranged according to the survey information which indicated their preparation in organic chemistry. The students were grouped into no preparation, taking an initial course and previous completion of organic chemistry categories. Raw examination scores were recorded with their name as categorized by chemistry preparation. Data sheets were produced which contained an alphabetical listing of the student population in each in- volved term of Biological Science 211. Student numerical responses to the questionnaire items were recorded on these data sheets. Retrieval of questionnaire responses from the fall 1965 and winter 1966 populations took place via United States and Michigan State University mailing facilities. The fall 1965 study population included one hundred and ninety-eight (198) students whose mailing addresses could be determined. Ninety-seven (97) of these students returned the completed questionnaire response sheet. This return represents a 49 forty-nine percent (49%) return from the fall 1965 total population of Biological Science 211. 7 The winter 1966 surveyed population contained one hundred and eighty-one (181) students with known mailing addresses. One hundred and eleven (111) returned completed questionnaire response sheets. This represents a sixty-two percent (62%) return from the winter 1966 Biological Science 211 population. The fall 1966 and winter 1967 questionnaires were retrieved from the laboratories the day they were administered. Final student enrollment in Biological Science 211 fall 1966 was three hundred and thirty-one (331) students. Two hun- dred and ninety-four (294) of these signed and returned completed response sheets to all three parts of the questionnaire. This represents an eighty-nine percent (89%) return of completed data. The corresponding student enrollment in the winter term 1967 of Biological Science 211 was two hundred and seventy-four (274) students. Two hundred and twenty-seven (227) of these students signed and returned all three parts of the questionnaire. This represents an eighty-three percent (83%) return of completed data. The retrieved questionnaire responses were recorded numerically on the alphabetized data sheets for each student population of Biological Science 211. The data could then be directly transcribed onto computer keypunch cards for analysis. Analysis of data. The data collected in this study originated from the questionnaire items which surveyed nonintellectual variables, and from student raw examination scores. Each questionnaire item contained discrete 50 alternative responses. Thus, the questionnaire responses produced ordinal data which were appropriate for nonpara- metric statistical analysis. Raw examination scores were obtained along a continuum representing interval data which was appropriate for parametric statistical analysis. Use of nonparametric, distribution free, statistics permitted the researcher to manipulate the data without meeting an assumed normality of distributed responses within the studied populations. The data collected through use of the multiple choice questionnaires were analyzed with the chi-square statistic”, described by Garrett.l Application of the chi-square statistic requires that exclusivity exist such that no respondent can be categorized more than once in any of the produced contingency tables. Thus, students were requested to make a single response to each questionnaire item. Items containing multiple responses were omitted from the data. Contingency tables were produced as matrices when all levels of alternative response to two independent vari- ables were crossed. Each separate matrix contains a number of exclusive cells. This number was determined by multi- plying the number of levels for one involved variable times the number of levels of the other involved variable. 1Henry E. Garrett, Statistics lg Psychology and Education (New York: David McKay Company, Inc. 1962), pp. 253-266. if x2 = (fobs. - fexp.)2 where fobs = frequency f ' observed exp. = and fexp. frequency expected 51 Expected values were calculated for each cell by multiplying the row and column marginal totals of which the cell is a part and then dividing by the total number of responses in the contingency table. After the expected values were produced, a chi square was generated for each separate cell using Garretts2 formula. A total chi-square (x2 total) for each contingency table was then produced by summing the individu- al cell chi-squares (xzi) within the contingency table. The level of response to one variable in each chi- square matrix must be independent of the response to the second variable. The two variables involved in the pro- duction of a chi—square matrix are referred to as the control and spread variable. The control variable was positioned along the vertical margin of the matrix and the spread variable along the horizontal margin. Control variables were selected to test the nine research hypotheses and were crossed with relevant spread variables. A student's level of course achievement, as defined in Chapter I, was used as a control variable against all other questionnaire items which then functioned as spread variables. Student response to specific nonintellectual variables was surveyed with more than one questionnaire item for some of the variables. Therefore, it became desirable to select other control variables and produce matrices which involved all other variables related to that Specific nonintellectual variable. This procedure resulted 2Ibid. 52 in the production of many contingency tables which showed interrelationships between nonintellectual variables, but did not include course achievement. The chi-square computer routine was available through the computer services library at Michigan State University. Descriptive format cards were prepared for computer analysis of the questionnaire data. The format cards and student responses to the questionnaire items were keypunched onto computer data cards. Separate data decks, consisting of the descriptive format and data cards, were prepared for each of the four populations. When each separate data deck was completed and verified for accuracy, it was then submitted to the computer center for analysis by the Control Data Corporation 3600 Computer. The printed computer output was labeled by population and placed in data books. Several contingency tables con- tained a large number of individual cells with an expected frequency < five (5). Where it was meaningful, the low frequency cells were regrouped and the data resubmitted for computer analysis. This procedure was followed for all four student populations. The need for regrouping was based on Siegel's3 criteria for meaningful chi-square use which re- quires the existance of fewer than twenty percent (20%) of a matrix's cells with an expected frequency as low as five (5). 3Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences ‘(New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956), p. 110. 53 The level of significance for each produced chi—square matrix was obtained from Hays. The analysis of variance and critical ratio statistical techniques were used with the student raw examination scores. The inclusion of raw examination scores introduced data which was continuous and satisfied the criteria for parab- metric, distribution bound, statistical treatment. As previously indicated the students were grouped into: no organic chemistry preparation; taking an initial concurrent course in organic chemistry; and previous successful com- pletion of organic chemistry categories. Raw examination scores were included within these chemistry groupings if the scores were achieved on the regularly scheduled examinations. A one-way analysis of variance on the final course examination was calculated using student raw examination scores grouped by chemistry preparation. The F statistid' described by Hays5 was used to test for significant differences between examination scores achieved by students in the three chemistry categories. This computation was performed for each of the four sampled student p0pulations of Biological Science 211. The procedure for the analysis 4William L. Hays, Statistics for Psychologists (New ‘York: Holt, Rinehard and Winston, 1965), pp. 675-670. 51bid., p. 369. *_ MSbetween where MSbetween = mean sum.of F = squares between MSwithin gr°ups and MS . . = mean sum of Within squares within groups 54 of variance was modified from Johnson's6 format. The produced F statistics were checked for significance in Hays. Garrett's8 critical ratio statistic (CR)*was incor- porated to analyze mean differences between the chemistry categories on all three course examinations. The critical ratio test represents a test of mean differences when N.) 30 exists. Use of the critical ratio routine produces a statistic which reflects the difference and direction of difference in examination scores achieved by any two com- pared groups of students. Critical ratios were produced for all possible combinations of chemistry preparation within each population. Critical ratios were produced for each of the three course examinations. The statistics were checked for significance in Garrett. Summary. Data related to various nonintellectual variables were collected from four terms of students en- rolled in Biological Science 211 at Michigan State University. The emphasis of the investigation was to survey the influence of selected nonintellectual variables on academic achievement. The questionnaire technique was used to survey re- action to nonintellectual variables by the fall 1965, winter 1966, fall 1966 and winter 1967 student populations enrolled 6Palmer 0. Johnson, Statistical Methods 13 Research (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1950), pp. 246-254. 7Hays,,9_2. cit., pp. 677-679. Difference 41. BGarrett, .92- cit., pp. 212-223. CR = 0’1) fi' 9Garrett,_gp. ci ., p. 449. 55 in Biological Science 211. A one part questionnaire was mailed to the fall 1965 and winter 1966 populations. The fall 1966 and winter 1967 pOpulations responded to a three part questionnaire during their respective laboratory periods. Raw examination scores were recorded for students within the four study populations. The scores became part of the data if the related student had taken the regular examination, responded to the questionnaire and completed Biological Science 211.‘ The questionnaire data were analyzed with the Control Data Corporation 3600 Computer and the chi-square routine. Raw examination scores were analyzed with the one-way analysis of variance and the critical ratio routines. It should be noted that each term was analyzed separately within this investigation. Therefore, this study represents a four part repetition of responses to similar nonintellectual variables and corresponding course examinations. CHAPTER IV ANALYSIS OF DATA AND RESULTS This chapter presents an analysis of the data collected on the four separately enrolled student populations in Biological Science 211 during the fall term 1965, winter term 1966, fall term 1966 and winter term 1967. The chapter was organized to present data from each of the four popu- 1ations within separate sections of the chapter. The first part of each specific section presents the final course grades and questionnaire returns for the population. The critical ratio and one~way analysis of variance for raw examination scores are then reported, followed by data relevant to the analysis of significant chi-square ques- tionnaire matrices related to the selected nonintellectual variables. The chapter closes with a summary of the chi square findings. It is to be noted that the same statistical techniques were used for analyzing the data collected with respect to the students enrolled in each term. These techniques are described in detail in the treatment of the data collected fall term 1965 and are not repeated in the subsequent discussions. Data tables produced for the fall term 1965 population appear in the text to provide the format of data reporting for the reader's consideration. The corresponding tables for the winter term 1966, fall term 56 57 1966 and winter term 1967 populations appear as Appendices A, B and C respectively. Analysis of the fall 1965 data Data were collected to test the hypotheses that aca- demic achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal: (1) for students regardless of curricula; (2) for all student classifications; (3) for both sexes; (4) for all student categories of organic chemistry preparation; (5) for married and unmarried students; (6) for employed and un- employed students; (7) for all categories of place of residence; and (8) for all students regardless of their study habits. An additional hypothesis tested the inter- relationships between the selected nonintellectual variables. For each population: (1) student responses to questionnaire items were analyzed by the chi-square statistic; (2) student raw examination scores were grouped by three categories of chemistry preparation and analyzed for significant differ- ences with the critical ratio statistic; and (3) student raw final examination scores, grouped by chemistry prepa- ration, were tested for significant difference with the one-way analysis of variance and the F statistic. The minimum criterion for significance was placed at the 0.05 level for all statistical treatments. Final course grades achieved and questionnaire returns. The final letter grades achieved by the fall 1965 Biological Science 211 students appear in Table 3.‘. It should be noted in Table 3‘ that although the total number of respon- dents to the questionnaire was relatively low, (49%), there was at least a forty percent (40%) return for all letter grade categories. 58 Table 3. Final letter grade distribution for the students ' in Biological‘Science 211, fall term, 1965 -- total enrollment, respondents to the questionnaire and percentages. Letter NUmber in Number in* Percentage Grade Total Population Respondent Population Returned A 24 14 58 B 67 37 55 C 90 38 42 D 13 6 46 F 4 2 50 Totals N = 198 N = 97 49 * These students constituted the student population of this study for fall term 1965. 59 Analysis of raw examination scores of the fall 1965 questionnaire respondents. The production of tables involving raw examination scores was developed in respect to the three possible organic chemistry categories involved within this study. These categories were: (1) students without pre- vious preparation in organic chemistry; (2) students who were concurrently taking organic chemistry; and (3) students who had completed at least a beginning course in organic chemistry. Garrett'sl critical ratio (CR) statistic was employed to test for significance between examination means for students grouped by preparation in organic chemistry. The data necessary for determining critical ratios appear in Table 4., Examination of the raw data revealed a pattern in the means between the three chemistry groups. On corresponding examinations the completed chemistry group exceeded the taking chemistry and no chemistry groups with the exception‘ of the final examination where the taking chemistry group surpassed the completed chemistry group. The taking chemistry group surpassed the no chemistry group on all examinations. Thus, one could infer from this apparent trend that some preparation in organic chemistry may have _ been significant to student achievement in Biological Science 211. However, the critical ratios produced when the various group means were compared indicated that there were no 1Henry F. Garrett, Statistics in Psychology and Education (New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1962), pp. 212-223. 60 .COHDNGHEMXH Hmcfim«*a N # EMOUUHZix H # EHmpUfi20 00.0 00.404 000.00 000.00 04.44 040.4 04 0 044040000 00.4 00.40 004.44 000.04 00.40 000.4 00 0 0400040 40. 40.00 000.00 400.40 00.00 000.4 44. 4 000040000 04.4 04.004 000.00 000.00 00.44 444.4 40 0 000040000 40.0 04.00 400.00 000.00 40.00 040.4 40 0 0400040 00.4 40.40 000.44 400004 44.00 004.4 00 4 004400 00.0 00.044 004.00 400.00 00.00 000 00 0000 004040000 00.0 04.00 000.04 000.04 00.00 440 04 000 0400000 04.4 00.00 004.00 000.00 00.00 440 00 04 02 ED Nb 2 wa. .LM xw Z c0440c480xm mnumHEmso 0 0~wa xw .mOHOUm 36H GOflHMGHEMNO 11:04umnmmmum anamHEmso 04:0040 so @0009 COHUMHDQOQ ucmpsum 44m mocowom HMUHmOHOHm .mmmH .HHMW 04.3. HON mOflUMH HMUHHHHU OED mGHGHEHOHOU 0...... #GM>0HO.H mvmn 3v magma. 61 differences between any of the groups. This would indicate that no significant advantage or disadvantage was apparent for student examination achievement when compared with respect to preparation in organic chemistry. The data supporting this conclusion are found in Table 5. Further analysis of the final examination scores were made by a one-way analysis of variance using the technique described by Johnson.2 This statistical treatment involved the three categories of the variable, preparation in organic chemistry. Table 6 (p.63) summarizes this treatment. Examination of Table 6 indicates that no significant differ- ence existed between the three categories of organic chemistry as gauged by final examination performances. This finding is in agreement with the results secured when the raw scores of the three groups were subjected to the critical ratio technique. Chi-square analysis of questionnelre responses. The questionnaire items were analyzed with the chi-square sta- tistic described by Garrett.3 The chi-square matrices formed by crossing two independent questionnaire items were produced by the Control Data Process 3600 Computer at Michigan State University. The significance of each produced chi-square value was determined by reference to Hays's4 table of chi-square values. The matrices were also checked 2Palmer 0. Johnson, Statistical Methods lg Research (New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1950), pp. 247-252. 3Garrett,_qp. cit., pp. 253-266. 4Hays,.9_p.,p__l_t., pp. 675-676. 62 .00004040040 000000 .m504m U4cmm4o 0: 0:» mo 0008 004 0044 4000040 40.4 0008 04cmm4o @0440» 000 0443 @5040 0400040 00 ocm >4404E0£U U4cwm4o @04404 40 mcme 0003404 00000404440 wumo4o0400 .044 .m ..meldmm .0004400 04 ooxowao 000004440m4m 40 4m>040 040045000 m2 40 mo. 00. I 40.N 4004b U4cmm4o @04008 .w> mz 00 04. 4o. m4.m N # E40004: 040048000 0400040 mz 40 00. mm. 44.4 4 # E400o4z 000040000 >4um4Ew£U mz om m0.4 mo.m mm.m 40040 0400040 oz .m> 00 00 00.4 00.4 40.0 0 0 0400040 040040000 0400040 mZ mm mh.4 h®.N mm.4 4 # E4muo42 omum4mfioo 040048000 mz mm m0.4 m4.m 04.m 4004b U400m4o oz .m> 00 04 00.4 00.0 00.0 0 0 0400042 040040000 U4cwm4o 00000 00 04.4 0040.4 00.4 4 0 0400040 004x00 00000444cm4m mo mo 0:002 000300m no 004400450xm 00004400500 0.45 40>04 0000400040 040040000 .004000 304 0040004me011004um4mmu4m 044048000 0400040 so owwwn 0040045mom 0000500 44m 000040m 400400404m .0004 .4404 040 404004004 40040440 .0 04409 63 .mo.o 40 40004440040 4020* .mhmlhhw .Qm .Am004 .0040043 000 4400004m .4402 "440% 342v 0404004000000 404 0044044040 .0002 .4 5044443 "04 00400000 000.04 00u4uz 40000 0000.4 00.000 040 0n4IM 0003000 00.004 004.04 00nsz 040043 04 02 mm 40 004000. 0000440> 40 04004004 0031000 u<>02¢ 000.04 040 000.04 40004 404002 I KWN 404002 I 42 N 42 _I xww 044E404 044000 0 044400 04000 44040 0 40004 0003000 040042 0040000 40 800 000.004 000.004 000.004 000.0 00 n 40004..z n 40 w 4M0owww 400mwww "400000 000000 04400 0 000.00, 000.00 00.40 000.4 00 040040000 0400040 000040000 000.00 000.00 00.40 4404.4 00 040040000 0400040 004000 004.00 400.00 00.00 000 00 040040000 0400040 02 40000 4 4 ammmwllm. 4 2 wxw 4 2 4NW 42 04000400 044048000 00, 0040 00.440 .44 .00440400040 044040000 0400040 00 00004 440 0000400 400400404m 04 0044040000 4000040 .m004 .4404 004 40 004000 304 004400480x0 40044 004 404 0000440> 40 04004000 003I00O .m 04409 64 for compliance with Siegel's5 criteria. Siegel's6 criteria requires that twenty percent (20%) or fewer of the cells in a matrix have expected frequencies as low as five (5). The chi-square matrices which produced a significant difference for the selected nonintellectual variables in this study at the 0.05 level of significance and which also satisfied Siegel's7 criteria are shown in Table 7. Examination of this table indicates that study patterns and student motivation influenced academic achievement. This table also shows significance in the analysis made between the following combinations of variables: student classifi- cation and declared major; reason for taking Biological Science 211 and factors influencing decision to take the course; and student residence compared with student classifi- cation, conditions conducive to study, sex and marital status respectively. Analysis of the winter 1966 data Final course grades achieved and questionnaire returns. Table 8 ' (p.66) presents the final letter grade distri- bution for the winter term 1966 student population of Biological Science 211. It was assumed that the sixty-two (62%) response to the questionnaire provided a representa- tive sample of the total population. 5Sidney Siegel, Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences (New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956), p. 110. 6Ibid. 7Ibid. 65 .0440000440000 .0004 .404043 .0004 .4404 004 00 0400 00004 0400440> 000403 04404000000 aWHmIWmm4 .0000 4004000 0000000 000004440040 40 40>040 044m 0000400 4004004040 04 4008440400 00040 004400 mo. 4 00.m 4040: 0000000 :00 0>00 000 144400040 4000040 m moo. 4 m4.o4 054040 4044402 m0 000004000 4m mo. 4 o4.v x00 40 000004000 4m 00. m 00.0 000000 00 040044440 002 003 00 000004000 40 moo. 4 Nv.0 00440044400040 4000040 m 000004000 4m 4004000 000030 44m 44m 0000400 mo. N mo.0 0000400 4004004040 04 003 00 4004004040 04 003 mm 004400 mmo. 4 vm.m 40402 04 000000 0504>04m m I44400040 4000040 m 00. m 04.0 0040004002 40 0000 00 00>04000 00040 4 00402 mmo. v oN.44 0404004 0400000004 44 mm 00>0400< 00040 4 000. m 00.0 0400000 00000 00 00004000 00040 4 0000004440040 40 040:00l400 000400 000400 0300 0400440> 0300 40 40>04 40409 0400440> 4o 00440440000 0400440> 4o 00440440000 0400440> .04404440 0.400040 0404400 000 44m 0000400 4004004040 40 0044040000 4000040 .0004 .4404 004 404 040500l400 40004440040 0 00000040 00403 00044400 0440000440000 .0 04008 66 Table 8. Final letter grade distribution for the students in Biological Science 211, winter term, 1966 —- total enrollment, respondents to the questionnaire and percentages. Letter Number in Number in Percentage Grade Total Population Respondent Population Returned A 26 14 54 B 61 39 64 C 90 57 63 D l l 100 F l O 0 Totals N = 179 N = 111 62 67 Analysis of raw examination scores of the winter 1966 questionnaire respondents. Appendix A” Table'lfl- (p.112) presents the data required to produce critical ratios testing for mean differences.8 The examination means for the groups classified as to preparation in organic chemistry show a trend very similar to that found in the analysis of student scores, fall term 1965. The mean of the completed chemistry group exceeded both the taking chemistry and no chemistry preparation group means on all three of the examinations. The taking chemistry group mean exceeded the no chemistry preparation group mean on all examinations except the final examination where no chemistry category surpassed the taking chemistry category. Critical ratios for the comparisons between the mean scores of the students in the designated groups on the various examinations are given in Appendix A, TablelS (p.113) Examination of this table reveals that the completed group achieved significantly higher on midterm.#2 and the final examination than did the taking chemistry group on these two tests. This finding is of some interest due to the fact that the completed group did not do significantly better than the no organic group on any of the examinations. Thus, one could infer that the taking of organic chemistry along with Biological Science 211 was a hindrance to achievement in Biological Science 211 winter term 1966. It is recognized that this result is different from that observed with the students in Biological Science 211, 86arrett,_92, cit., pp. 212-223. 68 fall term 1965 and that further research is needed to clarify the above inference. A further analysis of the final examination raw scores using the one-way analysis of variance technique illustrated in Appendix A, Table 16 (p.114) showed that there was a significant difference in the performance of the students in the three groups. The F value produced was 4.15 which indicated significance at the 0.025 level of significance. Chi-square analysis of questionnaire responses. Appendix A, Table 17 (p.115) represents the chi-square matrices which produced significant differences at the 0.05 level of significance and satisfied Siegel's9 criteria. This table shows that only student motivation was an influencing nonintellectual variable related to academic achievement. Analysis of the fall 1966 data LFinal courseggrades achieved and questionnaire returns. Table 9 presents the final letter grade distri- bution for the fall 1966 population of Biological Science 211. The total number represents the students who completed Biological Science 211 and received a final letter grade. Student responses to the three part questionnaire are shown in Table 10 (p.70). Eighty-nine percent (89%) of the stu- dents returned all three parts of the questionnaire. Analysis of raw examination scores of the fall 1966 questionnaire respondents. Examination of Appendix B, Table 18 (p.117) shows that on all three of the examin- ations, the taking chemistry group exceeded both of the other chemistry categories as judged by the examination 9Siegel, loc. cit. 69 'Table 9. Final letter grade distribution for the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211. Letter Number in Grade Total Population A 41 B 95 C 162 D 28 F 5 Totals N = 331 70 Table 10. Response to a three part questionnaire by the fall, 1966, student population of Biological Science 211. Questionnaire Number of Percentage Part ~Respondents of Total Population 1 320 97 2 312 94 3 310 ' 94 *1, 2, 3 294 89 *1, 2, 3 represents all three parts of the question- naire. The number of student respondents in this row represents the students who completed and returned all three parts of the questionnaire. 71 means and that the completed chemistry group surpassed the no organic chemistry group on all examination means. However, upon comparing the means of the groups by the critical ratio technique, no significance was found between the means of the compared groups. Appendix B, Table 19 (p.118) supports this finding. A one-way analysis of variance of the raw scores of the students is shown in Appendix B, Table 20 (p.119) and supports the critical ratio analysis which found no significant differences between the chemistry groups. Chi-square analysis of questionnaire responses. The data in Appendix B, Table 21 (pp.120-121) present the questionnaire items which produced significant chi square matrices and at the same time satisfied Siegel's10 criteria. There were sixteen (16) matrices which produced significant results when one of the selected nonintellectual variables was combined in a matrix with academic achievement and nineteen (l9) matrices that showed significant interrelation- ships between variables. It was assumed that this increased number of significant matrices was due to the larger number of questionnaire items which facilitated an in depth survey of the selected nonintellectual variables. Examination of Table 21 shows the following signi- ficant matrices relating nonintellectual variables to achievement: grade point average; organic chemistry course completed; amount of text reading; self evaluation of the effectiveness of study habits; view of time required by Biological Science 211; value in employment; particular lolbid. 72 study pattern; why studied?; value of a pretest; reaction to their start in the course; view of lecture importance; what the student did if lecture notes were inadequate; what study was needed for the final; amount of examination anxiety; student level of aspiration; and sex. This table also shows significant interrelationships for the following combinations of variables: chemistry preparation and classification; concern about the chemistry content in Biological Science 211, why concerned about chemistry, sex and curriculum major; student classification and marital status; curriculum major and previous change in academic major; grade point average with reaction to start in the course and sex; employment and sex; place of residence and classification, why not difficult to study at residence, amount of study prior to 10 p.m., sex and marital status; sex and credit load carried; marital status and examination anxiety; and curriculum major with sex. Examination of Table 11 (pp.73-77) and those which appear in Appendix D shows‘ the major .contr'ibutingfifaCt'or to most of the above significant matrices for the fall 1966 term. Major contributors to significant matrices involving academic achievement were: (1) achievement of an "A" when more than one organic chemistry course had been taken; (2) achieved £"C" when few if any reading assignments were Completed; (3) students who achievedé"D" considered that they had not studied effectively; (4) "A" students considered that Biological Science 211 required less study time than Other equal credit courses; (5) "A" students viewed employ- ment as beneficial for reasons other than monetary; (6) "A" Students studied more after the first midterm examination; 73 .m v.2 Suaz RON V mo MHH0UflHU may hmmflumm no: moon* mom coax Hoacmm cam Meagan aoo. moma gonna: aaoamz ca wmcmno m50a>oamv 0 mm» spas Meadow mam Hoacpn Hoo. coma Hawk .m> oz coma gonna: mm» sua3 wacfiosmom cam awesomum mNo. mood Hamm ACOHumoamammmao ucwvsumv m *aoo. soma noucaz Hmcoammmmoamlmam a . _ . s ;.. Ho oocmaoaoam on sua3 maumaEwso oz aoo. ooma aamm aaoamz asammwansov ms ao. ooma aoucaz mz coma aamm Amuumasoao uaqmmuov N «Hoo. boma amucflz Hon Es soaans aaoo. coma aamm a .mz a.m> ov mm mz ooma “coca: om. moma aamm aom>manom momuov a moo. moma awucaz auoamz ca mmcmno maze oa *ao. coma aamm .m> oz ooma umucaz mz coma aamm aom>oasom oomaov a >00aoam ca mmammo spas a cam omoaomocs spas o.m aoo. moma amucaz *aooa coma aamm amcmam manusmv m : coma gonna: .m> coma aamm aom>maso< momaov a GUCMUHMACOHm OD mHOUDQHHuCOU .HOth H0>0Q ERG—H. mGHQMHHM»? XHHHMS oucmoacaomao . .ucoao>oanoc anopmom co HOnmfi Esasoaaaso mo mucosamca may mcacawocoo mammnuom>£ any on ucm>oamu mmoanumfi whamccowumwso pcmoHMflnmflm .HH magma 74 *aoo. mcma gonna: anonmz asasuauasov mm acme. coma aamm .m> mac. coma amucaz oc. coma aamm aaam .m.m ca mczc cm *ao. coma uwucaz amamam manusmc o *aoo. coma aamm .m> coma amuaaz coma aamm Aaam .c.m ca maze cm *ao. mcma amucaz Anecmz asasoauusov mm oa. coma aamm .m> mz coma umucaz cm. coma aamm momaosuc some ma *aoo. mcma “coca: aa0nmz asasuaausoo mm cm. coma aamm .m> c2 coma conga; c2 coma aamm ammmum>4 ucaom mcmaoc c mcfluomcwoco paw moaeocooo Dawson vaE cmmnmnu mHOficmm cam macacsb Hood Roma Mmuaaz mcauwocwmco.©cm moweocouo pumzou ., - ::4 a: Aaohmz Ezasoanuavv mm umOE Ummumnu maoacmm paw wuoccsb Hoo. coma aamm .m> taco. coma gonna: acme. coma aamm acoaumoacammmao ucmcsucv m mocwodwdamdm Ou mHOUSQHHUGOU .HOHMZ H0>0A EH09 meQMHHm> “Ahab: . . . . . woamowmacmam : € g.. gw_.§ :«.m-: I ll 11. .poscaucoo efifi manme 75 cm. moma amucaz acamamoamam co 3oa>v cm mac. coma aamm .m> cz coma nmucaz aco. coma aamm anecmz asasoanasov mm *co. scma conga: Aaam .c.m ca maze cm acoo. coma aamm .m> coma awucaz coma aamm aneccz amasoaaasov mm cm. mcma conga: Acoauumo cmoa uaconoc mm «cmo. coma aamm .m> oz coma umuaaz cm. coma aamm aaohmz asasuaausoc mm *aoo. mcma amucaz Amamam mususmv o *aoo. coma aamm .m> coma conga: coma aamm anecmz asasoaausoc mm acoo. mcma conga: flaccmz asasoaaasov cm oc. coma aamm .m> coma gonna; coma aamm accumuc amuaumzv mm mmwflflmflnm HO wHDDHDUHHDM £¥H3 mDQEwU HMO H00. 5004” Hmpflflg AHOHMS ESHSUHHHSUV mm. oz coma aamm .m> coma gonna; coma aamm awoamcammmc am mam>oq . cosmoamwcmam on maousnfluucoo “ohm: moamoamacmam Enos moanmaum> xfluumz .Umscaacoo .HH QHQMB 76 .muamsdoaummfio pmHHmE.o£u Go kaco poms.fiouH¥« coma “coca: coapooacammmao camcsumc c coma aamm .m> cma coma Hmuaaz . no» ava3 oHOEonmom a0 qmenmoam mo. mcma aamm Aaam.nmom wocam mubnmz . owmcmso so» w>gmvxxm 0HmE Sunni, mmmfiflmfim HO 0H5¥HDUHH04 HOO. 5.me HGHGHZ Axwmv .2. cacaoc spa; mmonamsm no casuasoaamc aoo. coma aacm .m> oa. coma “coca: *co. coma aamm amenmz asasoaaasoc mm cm. coma umucaz Aao>ca coacmuammmc on oz coma aamm .m> mcmo. coma “mama: oz coma aamm Aaommz asasoaaasoc mm acme. mcma gonna: Amuoaxca coaumcasmxmc cc cm. coma aamm .m> coma “mama: coma aamm agenmz asasoaaasoc mm «aoo. ncma gonna: aaam .c.m ca compo ou aoauummmc mo ccmo. coma aaom .m> oa. coma gonna: c2 coma aamm agenmz Esasoaaasoc mm EHoHUHE uma aoumw hpsum umOE suaz mmmcflmsm Ho manuasuaumd Hoo. coma kucaz Acamuumm wpsumv mm oc. coma aamm .m> cz coma umucaz cm. coma aamm Auocmz asasoauusoc mm maw>mn oucmoflmacmam ou mucusnaaucoo “ohms mocmoamacmam EH09 moanmaum> xaaumz .UoSCHucoo .HH magma 77 momH HwHCHS Aommaw>¢ ucflom oomuwv o .m> AHHN .m.m oocam macho: ommcmao so» m>mmrtm cocooawacmam on muousnauucoo HOnmz ooma Hawk coo. ooma Houcaz mm. moma Hawk mao>oa Emma wochHMHcmam wmaflmaam> Naaumz .UwDCHHSOU .HH manna 78 (7) "A" students did not value exposure to a pretest; (8) "A" students were relaxed by a good start in the course; (9) "C" students did not consider lecture attendance as an influencing factor in their achievement; (10) "B" students attempted to get by if they realized their leCture notes were inadequate; (11) students Who achieved"‘D's" indicated the need for cramming prior to the final examination; (12) "A" students ‘were able to reduce test anxiety by confidence in their own ability; (13) "A" students considered that their desired level of achievement would be reached or exceeded; and (14) female students achieved at the extremes of the letter grade scale. Major contributors to significant matrices involving interrelationships of the nonintellectual variables were: (1) sophomores had completed organic chemistry; (2) students who had completed organic chemistry were not concerned about the chemistry in Biological Science 211 and felt they still were inadequately prepared in organic chemistry; (3) a significant number of females had no organic chemistry preparation; (4) upperclassmen had experienced a change in their curriculum major; (5) upperclassmen were more commonly married; (6) females were less likely to be employed; (7) upperclassmen tended toward residency off campus; (8) off campus students indicated less disturbance to their attempted study; (9) a significant number of off campus students did‘ 100% of their studying prior to 10 p.mw; (10) more female students lived off campus; (11) a significant number of off campus students were married; and (12) married students indicated an inability to reduce test anxiety by placing confidence in their ability. 79 Analysis of winter 1967 data Final course grades and questionnaire returns. The final letter grades achieved by the winter 1967 population of Biological Science 211 are presented in Table 12. Table 13 (p.81) presents student response to the three part questionnaire and shows that eighty-three (83%) of the students responded to all three administrations of the questionnaire. Analysis of raw examination scores of the winter 1967 questionnaire respondents. The data required for computation of examination critical ratios appear in Appendix C, Table 22 (p.123). The specific examination means shown in Table 22 indicate a consistent relationship between the three chemistry categories. On all examinations the mean of the completed chemistry category surpasses the corres- ponding means for the other categories. Also, the mean of the taking chemistry category exceeds the no chemistry category on all examinations. The comparisons of the means between the groups is shown in Appendix C, Table 23 (p.124). Significance appears in all comparisons except three and allows one to infer that preparation in organic chemistry was advantageous for success in Biological Science 211 winter term 1967. An additional analysis of the final examination raw scores through the use of the one-way analysis of variance as shown in Appendix C, Table 24 (p.125) gave an F value of 6.74 which indicated significance at the 0.01 level. This result tends to substantiate the significance indicated by the critical ratio statistics. 80 Table 12. Final letter grade distribution for the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211. Letter Number in Grade Total Population A 42 B 80 C 113 D 26 F 13 Totals N = 274 81 Table 13. Response to a three-part questionnaire by the winter, 1967, student population of Biological Science 211. ‘ Questionnaire Number of Percentage' Part Respondents of Total Population 1 .252 92 2 256 93 3 255 93 *1, 2, 3 227 - 83 *1, 2, 3 represents all three parts of the questionr naire. The number of student respondents in this row represents the students who completed and re- turned all three parts of the questionnaire. 82 Chi—square analysis of questionnaire responses. Appendix C, Table 25 (pp.126-127) presents the significant chi-square matrices which satisfied Siegel's11 criteria. A review of the table shows that there were twenty-one (21) significant combinations involving one nonintellectual variable and academic achievement and twenty-four (24) matrices which showed significant interrelationships between nonintellectual variables. Analysis of Table 25 shows the following significant matrices involving selected nonintellectual variables and academic achievement: chemistry preparation; grade point average; projected plans; why material was read; student appraisal of the effectiveness of their study habits; view of credit load carried; time required by Biological Science- 211; reason for employment; place of residence; amount of difficulty in studying at their residency; specific study pattern; why studied?; value of a pretest; reaction to their start in the course; concern about the chemistry in Biological Science 211; specific lecture time; view of lecture importance; examination anxiety; source of motivation; aspiration level; and sex. The table includes the following combinations of significant interrelationships between selected nonintellectual variables: organic chemistry and student classification and concern about chemistry content in Biological Science 211; student classification with grade point average, future plans, previous change in major, employment, examination anxiety, marital status, and curri- culum major; grade point average with concern about chemistry in Biological Science 211, examination anxiety, motivation source and aspiration level; employment and aspiration level; # 11Ibid. 83 place of residence with classification, grade point average, why not difficult to study at residence, sex, curriculum major, and specific time of their lecture; time of lecture and aspiration level; sex and reaction to their start in the course; and curriculum major with particular study pattern and sex. Specific contributors to the significant chi—square matrices for winter term.1967 are shown in Table 11 (pp.73-77) and the tables in Appendix D. Contributors to significant matrices which involve academic achievement by the winter 1967 student population were: (1) students who achieved é"D's" had no organic chemistry preparation; (2)5: "D" students were undecided about an academic major; (3) 5. "D" students would attend lecture in preference to text reading if their schedule was busy; (4)i£’"D" students indicated they had not studied effectively; (5) "B” students believed they could have carried a heavier credit load; (6) ”A" students indicated that Biological Science 211 required less study time than other courses of equal credit; (7) .6. "D" students who were employed indicated that money was their only reason for employment; (8) a significant number of ”A" students lived off campus; (9) "A” students indicated a difficulty in studying at their residency; (10) "A" students studied more after the first midterm.examination; (11) "A" students did not value exposure to a pretest; (12)£:"D" students attributed their difficulty to discourage- ment caused by a poor start in the course; (13).4.”D" students were concerned about the organic chemistry in Biological Science 211; (l4).‘."D" students did not consider lecture attendance influenced their achievement; (15)é"D" students 84 indicated an ability to reduce test anxiety and motivation primarily from within themselves; and (16) a significant number of females achieved "A's". Additional matrices reflect the following significant contributors to interrelationships between the selected nonintellectual variables: (1) sophomores tended to be taking an initial course in organic chemistry; (2) students who were taking organic chemistry were not concerned about the chemistry content in Biological Science 211; (3) upper- classmen tended to be undecided about a major, had experienced a previous change in major, were employed-$11 hours per week, felt they could reduce test anxiety by plac- ing confidence in their ability and were married; (4) stu- dents who were employedéll hours per week doubted if they would achieve at their hoped for level; (5) upperclassmen tended to live off campus; (6) students living off campus indicated less study disturbance than on campus students; (7) a significantly large number of off campus students were female; and (8) females indicated that they were aided by a good start or challenged by a poor start in Biological Science 211. Summary of chi—square findings Analysis of the data relevant to the tested hypotheses. Data collected for the eight tested hypotheses relevant to the selected nonintellectual variables are separately pre- sented in this section. Significant interrelationships are also presented. The reported findings include the results which reached the 0.05 level of significance and those which indicate possible trends. Each specific nonintellectu- al variable is identified with a table which contains all chi- square matrices produced to test that specific hypothesis. 85 The specific cells within each significant matrix which produced the largest chi-square values are reported. The reported cells were considered to represent the major con- tributors to the significance of the matrix. Table 11 (pp.73-77) presents the chi-square matrices relevant to the hypothesis which tested the significance of curriculum major to academic achievement in Biological Science 211. Table 11 was included to present the format for the reader's examination. Tables relevant to each of the additional tested hypotheses appear in Appendix D. The initial hypothesis for discussion was that achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (HO,1:M1=Mi) for all students regardless of their curriculum major. The data failed to reject the hypothesis as indicated by matrix (1 vs. 73) in Table 11. Additional chi-square questionnaire matrices were produced to test this hypothesis at the 0.05 level of signi- ficance. The following matrices produced significant results: (1) winter 1967 students who were undecided about a chosen academic major achieved.‘.-"D" grades in Biological Science 211; and (2) fall 1966 and winter 1967 juniors and seniors changed majors in significantly large numbers after their initial enrollment at Michigan State University. The second hypothesis was similarly tested at the 0.05 level. This hypothesis considered that the achieve- ment in Biological Science would be equal (HO,2:M1=Mi) for all student classification categories. The data failed to reject the hypothesis at the 0.05 level of significance. Failure to reject the hypothesis may be noted in Appendix D, Table 26 (pp.129-l3l) by the exclusion of matrix (1 vs. 3) from the significant matrices. 86 Various questionnaire items were crossed with the classification item.and the results checked at the 0.05 level. Significant findings were produced by these ‘matrices: (l) sophomores during the fall 1966 term had completed organic chemistry and during the winter 1967 term were likely to be taking organic chemistry; (2) juniors and seniors in the winter 1967 group had grade point averages ‘<2.51; (3) winter 1967 juniors and seniors were undecided about a curriculum major; (4) fall 1966 and winter 1967 juniors and seniors had already changed majors once; (5) winter 1967 juniors and seniors were employedgll hours/week; (6) winter 1967 juniors and seniors felt they could reduce examination anxiety by confidence in their own ability; and (7) fall 1966 and winter 1967 juniors and seniors were married. Influence of a student's sex was the concern of the third hypothesis. It was stated that student achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (H0’3:M1=Mi) for both sexes. The hypothesis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and was rejected for the fall 1966 and winter 1967 groups as shown in Appendix D, Table 27 (pp.132-l33) by matrix_(l vs. 71). The significant difference indicated that female students in the fall 1966 student population were likely to achieve either at the "A" or "D" level and a significant number of the winter 1967 female students achieved at the ”A" level in Biological Science 211. The relationship of sex to other questionnaire items was investigated. The following matrices produced significant findings: (1) winter 1966 females were taking organic chemistry and fall 1966 females had no previous organic chemistry; (2) fall 1966 female students had a grade point 87 average in the 3.01-3.50 range or in the 2.01-2.50 range; (3) winter 1967 females felt they were aided by a good start in Biological Science 211 or challenged by a poor start; and (4) fall 1965, fall 1966 and winter 1967 female students were likely to live off campus. Examination of the importance of student compliance with the course prerequisite constituted the fourth hypothesis. It stated that student achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (Ho’AleaMi) regard- less of their individual preparation in the organic chemistry prerequisite. This hypothesis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and was rejected in the winter 1967 group as indicated by Appendix D, Table 28 (pp.134-136) matrix (1 vs. 2). The rejection indicated that students with no organic chemistry preparation would achieve.‘.”D" grades in Biological Science 211. This finding supports the results reported in the discussion of the critical ratios and analysis of variance for the winter 1967 group. Additional questionnaire matrices were generated to test the hypothesis concerning a student's chemistry preparation. The following combinations produced significant findings: (1) fall 1966 "A" students indicated previous exposure to more than one organic chemistry course; (2) win- ter 1967 students who received£-."D" grades in Biological Science 211 were concerned about the chemistry in biology; (3) fall 1966 students who received "A's" and winter 1967 students who received "C's" in Biological Science 211 felt they were well prepared in chemistry; and (4) fall 1966 students who had completed organic chemistry and winter 1967 students who were taking organic chemistry were not concerned about the chemistry in biology. 88 Student marital status was involved in the fifth hypothesis. It was stated that academic achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (H =Mi) for 0,5‘M1 married and unmarried students. The hypothesis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and was not rejected by the data. Failure to reject the hypothesis may be noted by the exclusion of matrix (1 vs. 72) from Appendix D, Table 29 (pp.137-l38) which presents significant matrices involving student marital status. Consideration of other questionnaire items in relationship with marital status produced the following significant findings: (1) off campus living when combined with the married classification was a significant consis- tency check within the fall 1965 and fall 1966 terms; and (2) fall 1966 married students felt they were unable to control test anxiety by having confidence in their own ability. The influence of student employment upon academic achievement was investigated by the sixth hypothesis. The hypothesis states that achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (HO,6:M1=Mi) for employed and unemployed students. This hypothesis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and the data failed to reject it as shown by the omission of matrix (1 vs. 27) from Appendix D, Table 30 (pp.139-l40). Additional questionnaire matrices investigated the influence of employment. The following matrices produced significant findings: (1) the fall 1966 employed students who achieved "A's" felt that reasons other than money motivated their employment, the winter 1967 employed students 89 who achieved 5:"D's" viewed money as the only reason for employment; and (2) winter 1967 students who were employed 511 hours per week felt they could not reach their desired level of achievement. A student's place of residence was involved in the seventh hypothesis which stated that achievement in Biological Science 211 would be equal (H0,7'M1=Mi) for all students regardless of their campus residency. The hypothe- sis was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and was rejected by the winter 1967 data. This is shown by matrix (1 vs. 31) in Appendix D, Table 31 (pp.141-l43). The significance indicated that students living off campus would be more likely to achieve an "A" in Biological Science 211 than on campus students. Various additional questionnaire matrices were pro- duced to check the influence of place of residence upon academic achievement. The following matrices produced significant findings: (1) winter 1967 "A" students found it difficult to study at their place of residence; (2) fall 1966 and winter 1967 juniors and seniors were likely to reside off campus; (3) a significant number of winter 1967 off campus students had 3.51-4.0 grade point averages; (4) fall 1965, fall 1966 and winter 1967 off campus students felt they had little disturbance in,their study; (5) fall 1966 off campus students did 100% of their studying prior to 10 p.m.; (6) a significant number of the fall 1965, fall 1966 and winter 1967 off campus students were female; and (7) a significant number of the fall 1965 and fall 1966 off campus students were married. The final hypothesis involving a specific nonintel- lectual variable, concerned study habits as they relate to 90 academic achievement. The hypothesis stated that academic achievement would be equal (H0,8:M1=Mi) for all students, regardless of their individual study habits. This hypothesis ‘was tested at the 0.05 level of significance and was rejected by the fall 1965, fall 1966 and winter 1967 groups as shown by matrix (1 vs. 38) in Appendix D, Table 32 (pp.144-154). The significant difference indicated that students who achieved "A's" in Biological Science 211 studied more after the first midterm examination. Additional questionnaire matrices were produced to test this hypothesis. The following matrices showed significant findings: (1) fall 1966 students who achieved é"C's" read few if any of the text assignments; (2) the winter 1967 students who achievedé"D's" .viewed lecture attendance to be more valuable than;reading; (3) fall 1966 and winter 1967 é"D" students felt they had missed the important material tested by the first examination; (4) winter 1967 "B" students felt they could have handled a heavier credit load; (5) fall 1966 and winter 1967 "A" students considered that Biological Science 211 required less of their time than other equal credit courses; and (6) fall 1966 and winter l967é"D" students studied more after the first midterm because of their poor initial performance. Other significant findings were: (1) the fall 1966 and winter 1967 "A" students did not value exposure to a pretest; (2) the fall 1966 group of "A" students felt they were relaxed by a good start in the course while the winter 1967 £"D" group considered they were discouraged by a poor start in the course; (3) fall 1966 "C" students and winter 1967 é."D" students felt that lecture attendance 91 was not important to their achievement; (4) fall 1965 "B" students did extra reading to clarify lecture material but the fall 1966 "B" students did not attempt extra reading for clarification; (5) the fall 1966 é"D" students viewed the study needed for the final as a cramming session of new material; and (6) fall 1966 "A" students and winter 1967 €E”D" students felt they could reduce test anxiety by confidence in their own ability. 2 Additional significant matrices dealing with study habits were: (1) the fall 1965, winter 1966 and winter 1967 é"D" students considered their source of motivation was internal; (2) fall 1966 "A" students said their desired achievement would be reached or surpassed while the winter l967é"D" students felt they could not reach their desired level of achievement; (3) winter 1967 juniors and seniors believed they could reduce test anxiety by confidence in their own ability; (4) fall 1966 students with grade point averageséZ.5 felt they were mislead by a good start in the course; (5) winter 1967 students with a 3.01-3.50 grade point average did not express an ability to reduce test anxiety by internal confidence; (6) the winter 1967 students with a§3.51 grade point average viewed their source of motivation as extrinsic; and (7) winter 1967 students who only read and did not underline the material studied< three hours per day. CHAPTER V SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The purpose of this study was to survey college student reaction to selected nonintellectual variables. Within this general purpose was the specific intention to relate student responses to the selected nonintellectual variables, which were thought to influence their academic achievement, with academic achievement. Review of literature. A selected review of literature established the need for research concerning the general area of nonintellectual variables and academic achievement. The following specific nonintellectual variables were identified as needing further investigation relating each of them to academic achievement: academic major; classifi- cation; sex; marital status; employment; place of residence; and study habits. The literature which was reviewed included studies related to each of these stated nonintellectual variables. The reported findings were not consistent for any of the nonintellectual variables. This divergence within the findings provided the rationale for research which would extend the present information. Design of the study. The study involved the fall 1965, winter 1966, fall 1966 and winter 1967 student populations enrolled in Biological Science 211 at Michigan State University. Data were collected from each population 92 93 relevant to raw examination scores, course grades achieved and the responses to items designed to ascertain the effects of selected nonintellectual variables on student achievement. The data collected were recorded and-treated separately for each specific population. Raw examination scores and course grades achieved were recorded respectively from examination response sheets and student record cards maintained by the Biological Science 211 staff. A multiple choice, single best response, questionnaire was employed to survey student reaction to selected nonintellectual variables.- Analyses of the data involved the critical ratio, one-way analysis of variance and chi-square techniques. The students within each population were categorized by their preparation in organic chemistry into no organic chemistry, taking an initial course in organic chemistry and previous completion of organic chemistry categories. Raw examination scores were recorded for each student within the designated chemistry categories if the scores had been achieved on the regularly scheduled examinations. Critical ratios were used to test for mean differences between the chemistry categories on all examinations. The one-way analysis of variance was employed to test for differences between the chemistry groups on the final examinations and the chi—square statistic was used to analyze student response to the selected nonintellectual question- naire items. The chi-square analysis was produced by the Control Data Corporation 3600 Computer. Hypotheses tested. The hypotheses tested were that student academic achievement in Biological Science 211 94 would be equal: regardless of a student's curriculum major; for all student classifications; for both sexes; regardless of preparation in organic chemistry; for married and un- married students; for employed and unemployed students; regardless of place of residence; and for all students regardless of their study habits. In addition, interrela- tionships between the selected nonintellectual variables were examined. While data were treated separately for each student population, the study did look for similarity in responses between the populations. Data for each tested hypothesis were required to show significance at the 0.05 level of significance to permit rejection of the hypothesis. This level of significance was the criterion against which all data were compared. Results and overall conclusions. Hypothesis (H0’1:M1:Mi) tested the influence of a student's curriculum major on academic achievement and was not rejected by data from any of the involved student populations. That is, enrollment in a particular curriculum major was not a significant contributor to student academic achievement. However, when an analysis was made of additional items related to the influence of a student's academic major, it was found that students in the winter 1967 student popu- lation of Biological Science 211 who were vacillating between majors achieved significantly lower grades than students with identified majors. This latter finding supports the literature reported by Adamek and Goudy (12)*, Slocum (13), Wygle (l6), Woodruff (22), Sherwood (23), * The number refers to a reference cited in Chapter II. 95 Sexton (24) and Thompson (28). The conclusion contradicts the reported findings of Cook (21). Hypothesis (HO 2:M =Mi) involved student classification 9 as it related to academiclachievement. The data failed to reject the hypothesis that achievement would be equal for all classifications of undergraduate students. However, upper- classmen in the fall 1966 and winter 1967 student populations indicated a higher incidence of instability toward a future goal. This finding concurs with Heist (30) and Habein (31), but disagrees with the reported findings of Silver (29). Academic achievement in Biological Science 211 in .relation to a student's sex was investigated by hypothesis “(HO,3:M1=Mi). The data from the fall 1966 and winter 1967 loopulations rejected the hypothesis-and indicated that :Eemale students were more likely to-achieve "A's" in Iiiological Science 211 than male students. Additional in- formation revealed that female students were likely to Jreeside off campus and the winter 1967 female students in- Clecated that they were motivated by.a good start in the <:<:urse or challenged to do better by a poor start. The Conclusion that females achieve at significantly higher levels than males supports the findings of Byrns (35), (Erews (1), Campbell (37), Jex and Merrill (39), but (zontradicts the findings of Schutter and'Maher (32), .Johnson (33) and Hunt (34). Hypothesis (H0’4zM1=Mi) tested the influence of a student's preparation in organic chemistry in relation to achievement in Biological Science 211. The winter 1967 data rejected the hypothesis that chemistry preparation made no difference and indicated that no preparation in organic 96 chemistry was related toé"D" grades in Biological Science 211. Academic achievement in Biological Science 211 in relation to student marital status was tested by hypothesis (H0,5'M1=Mi)' The data failed to reject the hypothesis that marital status made no significant difference. However, fall 1966 married students indicated an inability to reduce test anxiety by placing confidence in.their own ability. Failure to reject the major hypothesis supported the findings of Samenfink and Milliken (12), Cohen, King and Nelson (43), Falk (44), Jensen and Clark (40) and Mueller (41). The data disagrees with the findings of Riemer (47), Lantange (48) and Dickinson and Newbegin (49) who concluded that married students achieved significantly better than unmarried students. Hypothesis (H0,6'M1=Mi> involved the influence of student employment on academic achievement in Biological Science 211. The data failed to reject the major hypothesis that achievement would be equal regardless of a student's employment status. However, a significant number of the fall 1966 employed students indicated a derived value from employment other than monetary. The data support the conclusions reached by Lins (58), Trueblood (59), Budd (60), Bryant (62), but contradict the findings.of Harris (63), Stright (64), Coolidge (65), Isaacson and.Amos (51), Wilson and Lyons (52) and Jones (53) who indicated an improvement in the academic achievement of employed students. Similarly, the data disagrees with Fryer and Henry (54) who reported a decrease in academic achievement by employed students. Student residency and its influence on academic achievement was investigated by hypothesis (HO 7:M1='Mi). , 97 The data rejected the hypothesis of no difference for the winter 1967 student population of Biological Science 211 and indicated that off campus residency was advantageous. Additional significant items indicated that the fall 1965, fall 1966 and winter 1967 off campus students felt they had little disturbance to their study efforts and that a significant number of off campus students were married and were female. Rejection of the hypothesis of no differ- ence supports the findings of Harris (63), Boyce (71) and Sharp (72), but contradicts the reported findings of Alexander and Woodruff (22), Griffeth (68), Appleton (69), Johnson (33) and Olson (74). Hypothesis (H0,8'M1=Mi) involved academic achievement in Biological Science 211 in relation to study habits. The hypothesis stated that achievement wouldibe equal for all students, regardless of their individual study habits. The data from the fall 1965, fall 1966-and winter 1967 study populations rejected the hypothesis. Additional items indicated that achievement was favorably.influenced by a consistent study effort and avoidance of last minute condensed study sessions. Rejection of the major hypothesis supports the findings of Tussing (87) and.Brown (90), but disagrees with the findings of DeSena (79) and Brown (80). Educational implications. In view of the findings of this study the following educational implications appear to be justified. 1. Students need to be encouraged to identify with a curriculum major of their own choice. Programs should be developed which facilitate exposure to many college curricula both during pre-college and early undergraduate enrollment. 98 2. Academic advisors should have the interest and freedom to structure individual college programs around their advisees' interests rather than advisees around a structured program. 3. Permission to enroll in a.given course should be detennined on factors in addition to the student's compliance with the course prerequisite. 4. Awareness of the importance of an early develop- ment of the self-directive attribute needs to be stimulated by a student's educational experience. 5. Requiring students to reside on campus does not seem justified in relation to predicted college achievement. 6. Study habits are of significant importance to academic achievement and students could profit from exposure to assistance in developing effective study procedures. Some problems which seem to be worthy of further research. A selected review of literature indicated a recognized need for research which studied nonintellectual factors in relation to academic achievement. This study considered some selected nonintellectual factors as they related to college student academic-achievement. The findings of this study, although tentative, portray the importance to academic achievement of variables other than intellectual ability. The college student of today is placed in a highly competitive environment and there is no reason to expect this competition to reduce in future years. Wherever possible, colleges must provide the students with information which will benefit their level of academic achievement. Additional research in the area of non- intellectual variables seems highly important and this study 99 points to further research that needs to be undertaken. Some problems are: 1. What results would be produced by a study of these same nonintellectual variables which equated students by intellectual ability? 2. What predictive value can be provided by investigating nonintellectual student characteristics? 3. Does the higher level of academic achievement by female students indicate that female college students represent a selected rather than cross-sectional sample from the total population? 4. What type of institutional cooperation could be developed to faciliatate student employment in positions which provide experience valuable to a specific curriculum interest? 5. Does a particular type of off campus residency contribute most to high academic achievement? 6. To what extent does the selected term.of enroll- ment influence academic achievement in a particular college course? BIBLIOGRAPHY BOOKS Fryer, Douglas H., and Edwin R. Henry (eds.). Handbook 2; Applied Psychology. Volume II. New York: Rinehart and Company, Inc., 1950. 842 pp. Garrett, Henry E. Statistics i3 Psychology and Education. New York: David McKay Company, Inc., 1958. 478 pp. Habein, Margaret L. (ed.). Spotlight 33 the College Student. Washington, D.C.: American Council on Education, 1959. 89 pp. Hays, William L. Statistics for Psychologists. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1963. 719 pp. Johnson, Palmer 0. Statistical Methodinp Research. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1949. 719 pp. Lavin, David E. The Prediction 2f Academic Performance A Theoretical Analysis and Review pf Research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1965. 182 pp. Siegel, Sidney. Nonparametric Statistics for the Behavioral ' Sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1956. 312 pp. Sutherland, Robert L., Wayne H. Holtzman, Earl A. Koile and Bert Kruger Smith (eds.). Personality Factors pp Ehg College Campus. Austin, Texas: The University of Texas, 1962. 242 pp. Townsend, Agatha. College Freshmen Speak Out. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1956. 136 pp. Tussing, Lyle. Study and Succeed. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1962. 157 pp. 100 101 Wilson, James W., and Edward H. Lyons. Work-Study College Programs. New York: Harper and Brothers Publishers, 1961. 240 pp. BOOKS: PARTS OF SERIES Travers, Robert M. W. ”Significant Research on the Pre- diction of Academic Success." In: Donahue, W. T. and others (eds.). The Measurement_gf Student Adjustment ‘agg Achievement. pp. 147-190. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 1949. 256 pp. PERIODICALS Adamek, Raymond J., and Willis J. Goudy. "Identification: Sex, and Change In College Major." Sociology 2; Education, 39(2):l83-l99, 1966. Alexander, Norman and Ruth J. Woodruff. "Determinants of College Success." The Journal 2f Higher Education, 11(9):479-485, 1940. Barger, Ben and Everette Hall. "Personality Patterns and Achievement in College." Educational and Psychological ‘yeasurement, 24(2):339-346, 1964. BeLl, Hugh M. "Study Habits of Teachers College Students." The Journal 2; Educational Psychology, 22(7):538-543, 1931. Bendig, A. W. "The Reliability of Letter Grades.” Education- 31 and Psychological Measurement, 13(2):311-321, 1953. Blanton, Wincie L. and Robert F. Peck. "College Student Motivation and Academic Performance." Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(4):897-912, 1964. Brim, Orville 0., Jr. "College Grades and Self-Estimates of Intelligence." The Journal pf Educational Psychology, 45(8):477-484, 1954. Brown, C. W. "The Study Habits of Failing and Successful Students in the First Two Years of College." The Journal ,2; Experimental Education, 9(3):205-208, 1941. 102 Brown, Frederick G. "Study Habits and Attitudes, College Experience, and College Success." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 43(3):287-292, 1964. Bryant, Girard Thompson. "Here's How They Work." The Junior College Journal, 32(4):205—206, 1961. Budd, William C. "The Effect of Outside Employment on Initial Adjustment in College." College and University, 31(2):220-223, 1956. Byrns, Ruth. "Concerning College Grades.” School and Society, 31(803):684-686, 1930. Chansky, Norman M. "A Note On The Grade Point Average In Research." Educational and Psychological Measurement, 24(1):95-99, 1964. Chilman, Catherine S., and Donald L. Meyer. "Single and Married Undergraduates' Measured Personality Needs and Self-Rated Happiness." Journal 9f Marriage And The Family, 28(1):67-76, 1966. Cohen, Arlene G. and George M. Guthrie. "Patterns of Motivation For College Attendance." Educational and Psychological Measurement, 26(1):89-98, 1966. Cohen, David B., F. J. King, and Willard H. Nelson. "Academic Achievement of College Students Before and After Marriage." ‘Marriage And Family Living, 25(1): 98-99, 1963. Cole, Joseph W., Kenneth M.‘Wilson and David V. Tiedeman. "Dispersion Analysisand The SearChffor.EducationallGoals In College: A Study In Duplicate." The Journal 2f - Educational Psychology, 55(3):121-131, 1964. Cook, M. Olin. "College Students Change Majors." School and Sociepy, 93(2261):271-273, 1965. DeSena, Paul A. "The Effectiveness of Two Study Habits Inventories in Predicting Consistent Over, Under-- and Normal Achievement In College." Journal_gf Counseling Psychology, 11(4):388-394, 1964. 103 Dickinson, Carl and Betty Newbegin. "Can Work and College Mix?” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 38(4):314-317, 1959. Dykstra, John W. ”'1 Worked My Way Through College.'" Phi Delta Kappan, 38(9):379-381, 1957. Falk, Laurence L. "A Comparative Study of Problems of ‘Married and Single Students." Journal 2: Marriage And The Family, 26(2):207-208, 1964. Finger, John A., and George E. Schlesser. "Non-intellective Predictors of Academic Success in School And College." The School Review, 73(1):l4-29, 1965. Fishman, Joshua A. "Unsolved Criterion Problems in The Selection of College Students." Harvard Educational Review, 28(4):340-349, 1958. Garrett, Harley F. "A Review And Interpretation of Investi- gations of Factors Related To Scholastic Success in Colleges of Arts and Science and Teachers Colleges." Journal 2f Experimental Education, 18(2):91-138, 1949. Gladstein, Gerald A. "A New Approach For Identifying Appropriate Individual Study Behavior." The School Review, 71(2):158-169, 1963. Grooms, Robert R., and Norman S. Endler. "The Effect of Anxiety on Academic Achievement.” The Journal 2f Educational Psychology, 51(5):299-304, 1960. Hardee, Melvene Draheim" "Research on College Students: The Student Personnel Worker's View." The Educational Record, 43(2):132-138, 1962. Harris, Daniel. ”Factors Affecting College Grades: A Review of the Literature, 1930-1937." Psychological Bulletin, 37(3):125-166, 1940. Hayes, Ernest. ”The Influence of Course Load on College GPA." College and University, 37(3):251-253, 1962. Heist, Paul. ”Implications From Recent Research On College Students." Journal pf the National Association 2; Women Deans And Counselors, 22(2):ll6-124, 1959. 104 Hotz, H. G., and J. A. Trice. "The Relation of An Abnormal Weekly Schedule To Grade Point Average." School and Society, 39(1005):422-424, 1934. Isaacson, Lee E., and Louise C. Amos, "Participation in Part-Time Work By Women College Students.” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 35(7):445-448, 1959. Jensen, Vern H., and Monroe H. Clark. "Married and Unmarried College Students: Achievement, Ability, and Personality." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 37(2):123-125, 1958. Jex, Frank B., and Reed M. Merrill. "Intellectual and Personality Characteristics of University of Utah Students." Journal pf Educational Research, 53(3): 118-120, 1959. Jones, Guilford, Jr. ”Missing A Bet on Part-Time Jobs?" Journal,gf College Placement, 24(2):50-55, 1963. Lantagne, Joseph E. "Do Married Men Succeed In College? College Marriage Inventory.” The Journal Q; School Health, 29(2):81-91, 1959. Lins, L. J. ”Pre-University Background and Effect of Various Factors Upon University Success." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 33(3):157-158, 1954. Lynn, R. "Two Personality Characteristics Related to Academic Achievement." The British Journal 9f Educational PsycholggY, 29(3):213-216, 1959. MacKay, William R. "Interpersonal Relationships, A Factor in Academic Success." California Journal 2f Educational Research, l6(4):l89-196, 1965. " Maddox, H. "Advice on How-To-Study Versus the Actual Practices of University Students.” Perceptual and Motor Skills, l6(1):202, 1963. Marks, Edmond, Jefferson D. Ashby, and Martin L. Zeigler. "Recommended Curricular Change and Scholastic Performance." Journal 9f CounSeling Psyphology, 12(1): l7-22, 1965. 105 Matson, Robert E. "A Study of the Influence of Fraternity, Residence Hall, and Off-Campus Living on Students of High, Average, and Low College Potential." Journal 2; the National Association gf'Women Deans And Counselors, 26(3):24-29, 1963. McQuary, John P. "Some Relationships Between Non-Intellectual Characteristics and Academic Achievement." The Journal .2: Educational Psychology, 44(4):215-228, 1953. Meade, Martin. "Non-Intellectual Factors in Admission to Selective Colleges." The Journal 2; Educational Sociology, 35(6):314-319, 1962. Merrill, Reed M., and Hal W. Osborn. "Academic Over-Load And Scholastic Success." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 37(7):509-510, 1959. Morris, Van Cleve. ”Male, Female, and the Higher Learning." The Journal 2: Higher Education, 30(2):67-72, 1959. Mueller, Kate Hevner. ”The Married Student on the Campus." College and University, 35(2):155-163, 1960. Murstein, Bernard I. "The Relationship of Grade Expectations and Grades Believed to be Deserved to Actual Grades Received." The Journal 9f Experimental Education, 33(4): 357-362, 1965. Ohlson, John. "The Relationship Between College Roomrmates In Scholastic Achievement." School and Society, 50' (1295):543-544, 1939. Olson, Leroy A. ”Academic Attitudes, Expectations, and Achievement.” Improving College and University Teaching, 13(1):39-41, 1965. Pierson, Rowland R. "Changes of Majors by University Students." The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 40(5): 458-461, 1962. Reeder, C. W. "Excess Schedules." Education, l7(2):99-101, 1946. The Journal 2: Higher 106 Riemer, Svend. "Married Veterans Are Good Students." Marriage and Family Living, 9(1):ll-12, 1947. Ross, Clay 0., and Niva A. Klise. "Study Methods of College Students In Relation to Intelligence and Achievement." Educational Administration And Supervision, 13(8): 551-562, 1927. Samenfink, J. Anthony, and Robert L. Milliken» ”Marital Status and Academic Success: A Reconsideration." 'Marriage And Family Livipg, 23(3):226-227, 1961. Schutter, Genevieve, and Howard Maher. "Predicting Grade- Point Average With A Forced-Choice Study Activity Questionnaire." The Journal 2; Applied Psychology, 40(4):253-257, 1956. Sexton, Virginia Staudt. ”Factors Contributing To Attrition In College Populations: Twenty-Five Years of Research." The Journal pf General Psychology, 72(2):301-326, 1965. Slocum, W. L. "Social Factors Involved In Academic Mortality." College and University, 32(1):53-64, 1956. Stright, I. L. "Some Factors Affecting College Success." The Journal pf Educational Psychology, 38(4):232-240, 1947. Thistlethwaite, Donald L. "College Press and Changes In Study Plans of Talented Students.” The Journal pf Educational Psychology, 51(4):222-234, 1960. Thompson, 0. E. "Impact of Committment Upon Performance of College Students.” The Personnel and Guidance Journal, 44(5):503-506, 1966. Trueblood, Dennis L. "Selected Characteristics of Employed Students In The Indiana University School Of Business." Journal,gf Educational Research, 50(3):209-213, 1956. Weitz, Henry, Mary Clarke, and Ora Jones. ”The Relationships Between Choice of a Major Field of Study and Academic Preparation and Performance." Educational and Psychologi- cal Measurement, 15(1):28-38, 1955. 107 DISSERTATION ABSTRACTS Appleton, James Robert. ”A Comparison of Freshmen Commuter Students With Resident Students on Selected Character- istics, Experiences, and Changes.” Dissertation ' Abstracts, 26(3):4434, 1965. Bloomberg, Marvin. ”The Prediction of Scholastic Success Through The Use of A Forced-Choice Problems-And- Attitudes Inventory." Dissertation Abstracts, 15(2): 2566, 1955. Boyce, Ernest Marshall. "A Comparative Study of Overachiev- ing and Underachieving College Students on Factors Other Than Scholastic Aptitude.” Dissertation Abstracts, l6(2):2088-2089, 1956. Campbell, Joe Watkins. "Factors Related To Scholastic Achievement (Louisana State University's 1963-1964 Freshmen Class)." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(3): 4360-4361, 1966. Coolidge, Franklin Earl. ”A Study of the College Grades, Leadership Roles and Entrance Examination Scores of Employed and Non-Employed Students at Cortland State Teachers College.” Dissertation Abstracts, 19(2): 2015-2016, 1958. Crews, Graydon Talmadge. "Selected Factors In Relation To College Success For Science Majors At Oregon State College." Dissertation Abstracts, l8(l):l45, 1958. Curran, Ann Marie. ”Non-Intellective Characteristics of Freshmen Underachievers, Normal Achievers, and Over- achievers at the College Level." Dissertation Abstracts, 21(3):2584-2585, 1961. Griffeth, Paul Lyman. ”Type of Residence As A Factor in Academic Achievement At The State University of Iowa." Dissertation Abstracts, l9(1):1617, 1958. Hasan, Syed. "AComparison Between Students Who Changed And Those Who Did Not Change Their Majors During Their Undergraduate Training at Southern Illinois University.” Dissertation Abstracts, 26(5):6513, 1966. 108 Hunt, James G. "A Study of Nonintellectual Factors Related to Academic Achievement Among College Seniors at Ball State Teachers College." Dissertation Abstracts, 22(1): 157-158, 1961. Johnson, Johnny Bernard, Sr. "The Relationship Between Type of Residence and Scholarship of Students At Arkansas Agricultural, Mechanical and Normal College." Dissertation Abstracts, 24(1):586-587, 1963. Levy, Stanley Roy. "An Exploratory Study of the Bases of Faculty Advisor Prediction of Scholastic Achievement." Dissertation Abstracts, 25(4):7110, 1965. McCammon, William Howard, Jr. "The Use of Non-Intellectual Variables in Predicting Attrition of Academically Capable Students at the University of Tennessee." Dissertation Abstracts, 26(5):7158, 1966. Osborne, Duncan. "The Relationship of Personality Factors To Academic Achievement In College." Dissertation Abstracts, 24(3):3839, 1964. Sharp, Lawrence Jean. ”Personal and Social Factors in Academic Over-and Underachievement of 1,716 Washington State University Freshmen.” Dissertation Abstracts, 25(4):6097-6098, 1965. Sherwood, Emily J. "An Investigation of the Relationship Between The Academic Achievement and Goal-Orientations of College Students." Dissertation Abstracts, 17(2): 2924, 1957. Silver, Robert Eugene. "The Effect of Self-Support Upon Student Success in Walla Walla College." Dissertation Abstracts, 16(2):1819-1820, 1956. Trueblood, Dennis Lee. "Selected Characteristics, Including Academic Achievement, of Employed and Non-Employed Students In The Indiana University School of Business." Dissertation Abstracts, l4(l):643-644, 1954. VanWagenen, Donald Richard. "The Relation of Selected Non- intellectual Factors to Academic Achievement in Several College Groups." Dissertation Abstracts, 23(1):539, 1962. 109 Ward, Annie W. "Development of an Inventory of Noncognitive Predictors of Academic Success." Dissertation Abstracts, l9(1):1294-1295, 1958. Wygle, Ralph'William, "A Study of Factors Related to College Success of Freshmen Enrolled In Kansas State Teachers College." Dissertation Abstracts, 27(1):616A, 1967. Zeaman, Jean Burgdorf. "Some of the Personality Attributes Related to Achievement in College: A Comparison of Men and Women Students.” Dissegtation Abstracts, 18(1): 290-291, 1958. APPENDICES APPENDIX A .Coflumcflfimxm Hosamsse N # Eumuoflzss H # EkuoHS* ha.a o¢.mm omm.m¢a ONN.oma av.v¢ NvN.m mm m maumafiooo .. mo.a a¢.ho oom.Noa ohm.ooa mo.ow Nom.N mo N oacmmao mN. m¢.ma a¢m.>oa ¢¢H.moa Na.o¢ moo.N no a ooumamfioo ov.N mo.om m¢5.¢m Nmo.om hm.mm wmm MN m mapmafioao mm.N mm.mo Nmo.mN wNm.mN mh.mm ooh NN N oacmmao 2 on. c~.ma coo .cm cam on emcm can ma a mcaxme l .1 oo.b no.moa m¢¢.MN mao.mN mm.mm mmm ma «cam NHHMHEoSU >H.m oo.oaa omn.ma omo.ma mm.mm ooo NH «*N oagmmuo mm.a am.ha mum.ma muo.ma mo.om mmm ma *a oz So 0 z NXW .LM NW 2 coaumcafimxm maomoumo N N Nwam xw huumafimso .moaoom Sou coauocamemllcoaumammoam mnumafiooo oacmmuo co comma coaumasmom ucwosum HAN oocoflom amoemoHoam .ooma .awuca3 map How moaumu Hmuauauo may mcwcafiaouoo on ucm>oaoa mama .va magma 113 .hmo .m ..uHo .mo .uuoaamo Ga omxooso mocmoamacmam mo Hm>oa* haumHEoso oacmmao ao. em om.m ec.c am.a aoaaz maaxme .m> mo. mm va.N om.¢ ao.N N # Eamuocz maumanoU oacmmao mz em om.a cm.a mm. a # samuonz cmumamsoo haumflfimnv mz om am.a mm.¢ om.N amcam oacmmno oz .w> oz em am.a o~.c om.m ma sumucnz maumasmco oacmmuo cz cm ac.a. ao.~ am.a a # sumucaz cmumamsoo maumaaoou cz cm am. cc. 1 mo.m amcam oazmmao oz .m> oz mm ac. om.a me.m m # samucaz maumaamco oacmmao mz on cc. on. me.a a # sumpcaz mzazme mocmoamacmaw no mo mammz coo3umm no coaumcafimxm mcomaummfiou h._r.ao ao>oa oucouomwan maumanao .mwnoom 3mm coaumzafimxo II coaumammonm huumafimoo oacmmao co momma coauwazmom ucoosum HAN oocoaom Hooamoaoam .ooma .aouca3 man How weapon Hmoauwao .ma wHQMB 114 .cmo.u d um HGMUHMHGmHmsx .mholhmo .mo ..uao .mo cohom umzammm ooxoosos mam.m OHHHHJZ HMUOB smoa.v 00.0mm oom NHHIM G003uwm fiv.vm mHH.m mOHflMI EHSUHB mm mm mo mUHDOm monounamaw .uao mammamcd >m3ioco "$572. mac.m com maasm acuoe amuoez n xww amommr. u az w . n zww mazaaom maxwwc m mazwwc mach waxwow m amuoe coospom casuaz moamzmm mo 55m ~m¢.ao~ mma.mom am~.aam mmm.e new nammmmm n az w amuowww amwmww :amoonz maxwwc mach m I oom.mea omm.oca ae.ee m¢m.m ms maumasoco oaommuo couoamsoo mes.vm mco.om mc.cm vmc mm maumasoso oazmmuo mcaxmn mvv.mm mao.cm mc.mm mmc ca zaumasoso oacwmuo oz amuO£z Hz wxw a2 HNW az maomoumo muumafimno m o . . H a maa u nxwwc «A zwc .zw .coaumummonm huumaEmoo oacmmuo co comma HHN ooaoaom amoamoaoam Ca coaumasmom ucoosum .ooma .Hmflflflaa $3“ MO mmHOUm 3MH COHUNCHEwunw HMCHW 33H HON GUCMHHM> NO MmewHMCM \wM3IOCO .oH magma 115 .oholmho .mm ..uao .mo .mmmm ca poxoozo oucmofiwacmflm Mo ao>GQ% cmo. m am.c soc as moccasoco oacmmao m cmo. m we.m coaum>aooz co ooze cc coooazoc ocmuo a *oUCMUHMHcmHm mo ouwzmmlaoo muouo< mmoaom c3om mHQmaHm> c309 mo ao>oa Hmuoe manmaam> mo aoaumaaommn oaflmaam> mo coaumaaummm mannaam> .maaouaao m.awmmam humaumm can HAN oocoaom amoamOHOHm mo coaumasmom uzoozum .ooma .amucas on» How mamzmmlano ucmoamacmam m omusooam £UH£3 mooflhpmfi oaflwccoaumoso .ma magma APPENDIX B 117 .GOAumCAmem AmaAm*«* N # EHGUUdzaa A # EHmuUHSs om. om.OAA mom.hAm om5.Nmm hm.bv ONo.o mMA m mnuwAEmoo Am. mm.¢¢ moN.Oh Amo.ob OA.NN AmA.m woA N 0Acmmao 0A. hm.vA Amo.mo mNo.mo o¢.AN «hm.N mMA A ooumAQEoo mA.A om.mAA mmA.m¢N mom.va ho.mv omm.¢ AOA m waumafioco mm. Am.ov mmo.mm oom.hm mm.NN omm~N 50A N oAcmmHO MA. Ao.¢A OMA.Am mNo.Nm om.AN mmm.N 50A A mGAme h¢.m Nm.AMA Aom.oo onm.mm oA.o¢ vmh.A mm «ssh waumcfimao mm. oN.om mmm.oA owm.hA mm.ON mom mm ssN UAammHO Av. Nb.¢A mon.mA mMN.oA mm.ON th om *A oz So 0 z wa z xw z coAumzAmem whomoumu m m mflzwm aw muumaaono o mUHOUm 3MH COAuchmeollcoAumammoam muumAEooo UAcmmHo no comma COAumAsoom ucoosum AAN oozoAum AMUAmvoAm .oomA .AAmm on» How moAuma AMUAHAHU mop chcAEHouoo ou pcm>vou mama .wA wAQmB 118 .uAU .ooA .uuoaamw GA ooxoooo oUGMUAMAcmam mo Ao>oA« muumaaooo mz smm mm.. aa.a: o¢.a amzaz oazmmao moaxme .m>fl mz mwN mm. mN.I mm. N # Enoundz maumAEwnu UAGmmHO cz ewm cm. ce.u me. a # snouczz couoamsoo muumAEmnv mz whA mm. Am.A no.N AMCAm UAcmmHO oz .m> oz aca cm.a ac.a aa.a N # sconce: moccasozo UAcmmHO mz mhA Nb. Am. A5. A # Enoquz ooqumeoo haumAE®£U oz mma cm.a am.~ ca.m amzaz oacmmao oz .m> oz eea oc.a oc.a aa.a m # snouoaz maumasozo UAammHO cz aea mm.a am. mm. a # smouonz moaxmn oocmoAMAcmAm mo mo memo: coozuom no coauchmem maOmAHmmEou opmo Ao>mA mocmuwMMAQ_ maumAEwoo .mvaoom 3mm GOAUMCAmeo II cowumnmmoam muumafiono co comma coAumAsmom unmasum AAN oUGvom AMUAmOAOAm.oomA .AAmw on» How mOAuwH AwUAuAHU .mA oAnme 119 omOoO Hm UCMUHMHGOHM “Czech .mbojhho .mm ..uflo qua .mhmm :A ooxuosos moA.Nm obNuAJz Amuoa ammo.A om.0NA AvN NnAIM Goo3uom Nm.oAA th.Am whNHMJz CASHAS mm mo moasom anMAHm> mo mAmmAmcfi mo31mco n<>oz<. cca.~m smm.am aouoe amoonz . zww amuonz mm.w .z u zww cazsnozu mazwwc m mazwwc name Nazwmw m amuon ooozuom casuaz moamzmm mo 55m one.aec mas.aec eec.msc omm.ma acconz oz amuoe amuoe new u u w u zww uxww yamuon maxwwc «Name m I z ccc.mam oms.mmm mm.sa omc.o cma_ muumaaozo oazmmao cocoamsoo mma.mem ecc.ec~ so.mc ccm.e aoa zuumasoco oaammaocmoaxme acm.oo osm.co ca.ce ecm.a cm zaumasoco oaommao oz amuoe a a ammmHILm. a z New Aim. axw az moomoumo zuomasozo ma xwwc mx.zwc .zw .zoAumammon muumAEooo UAcmmHo co comma AAN mocvom AMUAmoAOAm CA GOAumAsmom ucoozum .oomA .AAwm mop mo monoom 3mm COAuchmeo Achm may now oUCMAam> mo mAmmAmcm >m3loco .ON wAQmB 120 .ohoimbo .Qm ..pAU .mo .mhmm CA ooxuono oucmoAMAzmAm mo Amazon».0 co. N ce.c xoc as moccasoco oacmmuo m mzaumaaozo Aoo. v mN.mm usonm omcaoocoo >53 mm maumAEoso UAcmmao N maam .m.m ca Aoo. N mm.0N maumafimno uzonm caoocou ow maumAEooo UAcmmHO N aoo. N ms.ca coaumoacammmao poocsac m maumanzo oacmmuo m ao. m mm.Na zoo as co>oazo< compo a Aoo. o om.mm Ao>mA :oAumHAmw< on ow>wA£U¢ momhw A mo. o mm.NA huwacm COAuchmem mo oo>oA£U¢ momnw A ao. o oa.sa amcaz now cocooz mczuc ac co>oazo< woman a mo. m m¢.hA:mouoz ousuvwa oumzonMCH MA mm oo>oA£o< momma A mo. m om.m wocmuaomEH ousuowq mo 3oA> hm oo>oAnU¢ momma A Aoo. NA hh.om AAN.%m CA unmum ou :OAuumom mm oo>oA£Um momma A aoo. m mm.sa umouuoam o co 3oa> ow co>oanoa woman a aoo. ma oc.ms moan so» no coacsuc ms: mm co>oazo< ocmao a aoo. o em.mm caouumm zczuc cm co>oazoa compo a mo. m mm.mA ucmfihoAQEm How Cowmmm amnuo mN om>wA£U¢ momuw A aam .c.m aoo. c sc.e~ mo coaaomom osan co 3oa> em co>oazo< oomao a zczuc aoo. c oo.me co mmoco>aoooacm co 3oa> om co>oano< woman a aoo. c cc.mm moon mcacmom axon ca co>oanoa oomuo a me500 A00. m Ao.ON >HumAEw£U m50A>me SOASZ vA om>0A£U¢ womuw A Aoo. m mm.NBA mmmum>¢ ucAom oomuw v ow>oA£U¢ womaw A awocmoAmacmAm mo mumzvmlano moonofi mmoaod :309 oAQMAam> :300 MO Ao>mA Amuoa oAQMAHm> mo COAumAuowa mAQMAHm> mo coAumAHomwQ wAQmAHm> .MAHoUAao m.AmmoAm wmmAumm ocm AAN oozonm AmoamoAOAm mo COAUMASQOQ ucwozum .oomA .AAmm on» How oamsomlaoo unmoAMAcmAw m ooozoonm soaoz mooaaumfi oaamccoaumoso .AN OAQMB 121 oo.vM Aoo. w xom Am Hohmz ESASUAHHDU mm mo. N mo.o muoaxca zoAuchmem mo mzuwum Amuaamz Nb mNo. N mm.h ooaaamo omoa uaooau NN xom A5 A00. A m¢.mN msumum Amuaamz Nb oocooamom Am Aoo. A mN.mA xom Ah oocooamom Am cmo. c as.ea .e.m oa op aoaum zczoc ac oococamom am NoucmoAmmm um >05»m .. .1 --m Q aoo. v am.am op uazoaccaz uoz zzz mm oooocamom am Aoo. A mm.NN coproAmammMAU ucoozum m oozooamom Am co. m c~.o xoc as uooszoacam em mo. v mm.0A xom Ah .>m pcaom oomaw v omasou mo. oA AA.mN ca pamum ou coauomom mm .>¢ ucaom oomaw v coapmo Aoo. v mA.m¢ Hohmz EonoAaazU mm lamammwAU uaoozum m coaumo A0. A vA.h mzumum AmuAawz Nb lamammon ucoosum m coAuoo . Aoo. A mo.oN a0nmz ca omcmoo m50A>oam m IawammMAo ucoozum m Aoo. m mo.om a0nmz EDASUAHHSU mm >HUmanoU 0Acmmao N moocmoamacmam mo oumzmmlaoo mmoaum mmouom c309 oAQmAHm> c309 mo Ao>oA Amuoe oAnmaam> mo coaumaaomon mAQMAHm> mo coapmaaowon oAnmaam> .oochucoo .AN vomE APPENDIX C /Z< 123 .COAuchmem AwaAmsss N # Bumpoflzsa H # EHOHGHE¥ am. oo.ae osc.NaN mmm.mNN Ne.oe mom.c mma z zapmasozo ea. Nc.cN sme.mc mcc.cc oc.ON cmo.m aca N oacmmao Na. ca.ma esc.maa NeN.caa oc.sN cco.e sea a cocoamsoo mN.a cc.oe coc.ac eNo.mc mc.mm coc.a mm z zuumaaooo mm. cm.aN Nsc.oN moc.aN Nc.ma aaa.a oc N oaommuo mm. Nc.NN mmc.ce coo.ce Nc.cN eec.a No a maaamn ms.c om.eaa cac.ma ooe.aN mm.Nm csc ma coca maumasoco os.a oo.Nm NNm.c omm.c eN.ca mam. ma msN oacmmuo cN.a cm.em mmm.oa smo.aa ce.mN moo 0N ca oz Em No z wa .Lm MW .z COApchemxm whomwumuc N NNNNM aw maumasozo .monoom 3mm COAuchmeoI:0Aumammoam maumafiooo oazmmao co comma GOAumAsmom ucoosum AAN oocvom AMUAmvoAm .bomA .aoucAB map How wOAuma AMUAuAao on» chcAEHouworou uzm>oAmH mama, .NN mAQMB 124 .qu .ooA .uuoaamw GA ooxuwoo oocmoAMAcmAm mo Ao>oAs zaumasozo cz eca Ne. mo. eN.a amcaz oaaomao mcaamn .m> ao. mON ms.N om.a as. N# cocoon: zuumasoco UAcmmHo cz NON mm.a oN.a on. a# saoucaz cocoamsoo mhumafimou No. mea me.N mc.c cc.N amoaz oacmmuo oz Om> ao. cca NN.N cs.m cm.a Na snouocz muumasoco UAcmmao ao. cca ca.m cm.e am.a ac snoucaz cocoamaoo mhumafiono co. me No.N os.c Nc.N amcaz oacmmuo oz .m> oz ms eN.a ms.a ac.a Na snoucaz mauanozo :. t “am.a , . . a .. . M_ a. oacomuo co. om oa.N mc.c ce.a a# suooocz moazmn wocmoamacmam mo m0 mammz cwmsumm Q. coauwcafimxm mcomAHmmEoo . . . o . . «mo Am>oA mocoawMMAQ maumAEmno .mouoom 3mm COAUMCAmeoIIcoAumummoam huumAfiwno co comma GOA“ ImAzmom ucoosum AAN oucoaom AMUAmOAOAm .homA .aoucAS map How mOAumH AMUAUAHO .MN oAnme 125 .ao.o om uzmoacacmacoc .mbolbbo .mm ..uAU Hum .mmom CA ooxom£0* 00v .m NwAHAIz AquB ss¢5.o om.th mmo NHAIM zoo3uom mm.m¢ m¢5.m omAusz GASUAB *m m: mm mo moazom oUGMAHm> mo mAmaAmcm mozlmco m¢>oz< oo¢.m ccc ces.m acuoH amuoaz u xww amuoez u mm.w az i xww cazaaoz Naxwwv N Naxwwv Naxwv NNNNVN N Awuoe zoospom CAnqu wmamzmm mo Ezm sav.ocN amuoaz Nso.ch nao.mmN ch.s mma n Illlilll. z Amuoa Amuoa m o H I u 0 Nxa u nzwwc Nazwcw u waw nxww ac» oz osc.naN mmm.mNN mo.ov mom.c mma zaumasooo oazmmao couoadaoo coc.ac eNo.mc oc.mN com.a mm moccasozo oaommoo moaxme cac.ma oo¢.aN cc.Nm cmc ha maumaaooo oacmmao oz amooez Az a HMUOB A .2 H A. A .xw .. .NN .z maomwumo mhumAEmzo Na ammo Na zwc N New .COAumammon maumAEooo OACMmHo co comma AAN oozvom AmoAmoAOAm GA coAAMAzmom Homozum .homA .HouzA3 may mo moaoom 3mm cOAuchmeo AMCAM map How moamAHm> mo mAmmAmcm >m3loco .dN mAQmB 126 .oholmbo .mm ..uAU .mo .mhmz zA omxooao moamoAMAcmAm mo Ao>mqs aoo. c mo.oc ao>oa coaumoammm on co>oacoa woman a moo. m mo.oA zoApm>Auoz mo mouzom oo oo>oA£o< oomaw A aoo. o mm.om zuoaxcm coaumoaemxm cc co>oazoa compo a mason aoo. m cs.aN naodsa.oazoooa mo 3oa> Ac co>oaooa woman a Aoo. m Ao.ON oasuooA moo» mo oEAE mm oo>voom momma A NAAN .m.m :A A0. m Ab.AA maumAEooo uzonm caoozou av oo>oAsom oomaw A AAN .m.m Aoo. NA mA.m0A cA unmum on zoAuumom mv oo>oA£o¢ oomaw A mo. m mm.h umouloam mo 3oA> ov oo>oA£o¢ oomao A Aoo. m mo.om moAQ 50» mm ovosum >53 .mm oo>oAzU< oomaw A aoo. .c Ao.Nm cuouuom zcsoc cm co>oazo< ocmac a oocmoAmom um monum mNo. m mm.OA on quzoAmmAQ mo ooamon mm oo>oA£o¢ oomnw A A0. m N>.NA oucooAmom Am oo>voo¢ oomaw A ucoemoAmEm mNo. m mv.mA now commmm aozpo mN om>oA£o< oomaw A aaN .c.m mo aoo. c ce.cN coaasmoz osae co 3oa> eN oo>oanoa compo a . . coaaaoc. . . ., r . .. moo o mv AN omoa quoao mo 3oA> mN oo>oA£o¢ momma A mosuc «0 Aoo. o No.hm mmoco>Auoommm mo 3oA> ON oo>voo¢ oomaw A co. m Nc.ca moon was moacmom so: ma co>oazom compo a Aoo. NA hm.mo mcmAm mazpzm m oo>voo¢ momma A Aoo. m no.>mA ommao>¢ ucAom oomaw v oo>oA£o< oomaw A moo. o no.0N NAAmAEoSU UAzmmHo N ow>voo¢ oomaw A «oocmoAMAcmAm mo mamsomleo mmoaué mmoaofl c300 mAQmAam> asoa Mo Ao>oA Amuoa oAQMAHm> mo zoAumAaomoQ oAQMAHm> mo coAumAaomwn mAQMAHm> .mAHouAao m.AmmAmm hmmAumm pom AAN oucvom AmUAmoAOAm mo zOAumAsmom uzoozum .bomA .HoACA3 on» How oumzmmleo uzmoAmAzmAm m voodooam 30A£3 mooAaumE oAAMCQOAumoDO . mN OAQmB 127 aoo. v Nm.aN xoo aA HoAmz soaooauaoo mA aoo. m Nc.mN coooomm zoooo mm aoAmz soasoaauoo mA ao. e am.ma aaN do ca compo oo ooaoomom me xoo aA coo. N ac.aa ao>oa ooaomoaooa oA ooouooa co osan cc coo. a mo.oa cococaoom am ououooa co osan cc aoo. e Am.aN avoz soaooaoaoo NA oococaoom am coo. a ee.oa zoo aA oooocaoom am GUGOUHmmm ”Am aoo. e oc.cN Acooo op oaooaocao uoz mos A Am oooocaoom am coo. o cc.ca ommao>a ocaom ocmzo e oooocaoom ac aoo. a me.Am coaumoacaoomao ooocooo m oococaoom am cNo. c cc.ca ao>oa coauouaoom oA ozoszoamam AN aoo. c mo.om aoooa coauooamoo oA .>o poaom ocmac o cNo. v ae.Na coaum>aooz co ooouooo cc .>< ooaoo cocoa e coo. c mc.vN zooaxoo coauooasmxm cc .>a uoaom ocmno o aaN .o.m ca mNo. w mA.AA maumAEoSU usonm zaoocoo av .>¢ uonm momaw w GOAumo aoo. e co.aN HoAmz soasoaoaoo NA naoaoomao unoczoo m GOAAMU coo. a co.o ooompo amoaamz NA uaoaoocao pooczuo m zOApmo ao. N No.oa zooaxom ovomoasmxm co uamaoomao ococooo m COAumu co. m cm.A ocoszoamem AN naoaoomao ooocsoo c :OAuoU Aoo. N bN.mN Hohmz CA omcmoo m50A>on m IAMAmmMAU pcoozpm m zOAumo aoo. e cc.mN cacao mucosa o uaoaoomao ucocouo m COAumU cNo. e cc.Na ommuo><.ozaom ocmoo e uacaoooao oomcooo N aaN .o.m ca mo. N HO.® \whumHEwSU HDOQM FHOUQOU VAV \wHHMHEOSU UHSMOHO N mo. N mo.o coAumoAmAmmon Homozum m maumAEmso 0Acmmao N coo. m Ac.ma xoo aA co>oaooa compo a *mUGmUAAAcmAm mo mamsomlAso mmouofl mmoaofi G3CQ mAQMAHm> z3on mo Ao>oA Amuoe oAQMAam> mo GOAuQAHUmoG oAAMAHm> mo GOAumAHomoQ oAQMAHm> .omDCAucoo .mN mAQme APPENDIX D 129 A3\ao AA.N oomoAmEo nuA3 aoAcooIHOAzzb mo. oomA HmuzAz AuzoENOAmEmv AN mN. oomA AAmz .m> mz oomA nouzAz om. momA AAmm AzOAuwoAMAmmon “consumv m mo» sz3 HoAcomIHOAzzb Aoo. oomA HoucAB Aaohmz CA omzmou m50A>oamv m mom ouA3 HOAcomIHOAzzb Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> mz oomA aouzAS no» ouA3 oHOEonmomlzofiomoam mNo. momA AAmz AzoAumoAmAmmMAU uzoozumv m povooocs ouA3 HoAcomIHoAczb Aoo. oomA HouzAB AmzoAm oasusmv m 0A. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HouzAz z momA AAmm AGOAumoAonmMAU ucoozumv m om.NIN zuAS aoAcom no HoAczb mNo. oomA HwACAZ Aommao>¢ uonm oomawv w om. oomA AAmm .m> mz oomA amuzAz 0A. momA AAmz AGOAumoAmAmoon uzoozumv m ouogonmoo coa3_Aouoasoco moazmn co. Acma Houoaz Acoauooaoaoomao uoocouoo m ouoaoomom ouA3 mauwAEono ooquQEoo Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> 0A. oomA HouzAz cN. coma aamz azuooasoco oaommooo N mocmoamacmam ou oaouznaaucoo Homo: Ao>oA Emma moAnmaam> xauumz . . . . . mozmoAmAzmAw . . .uzoEo>oA£om UAEoomom co GOAumoAmAmmMAo mo oUGoSAmzA mop chznoocoo vooopOQNo mop 0p pcm>voa mooAaumE oaAmzcoAuoozo ucmoAMAcmAm .oN mAQMB 130 .m Vz nuA3 NON Vwao cAaouAHo mafia zooAuaco uoz coon % mN. bomA HoucAZ AQOAumoAMAmmMAU uzmozumv m 0A. oomA AAmm .m> *Aoo. oomA HmucAS oa. coma aamz aaaN .o.m ca A5: cN mCAaooCAmzo ozm mUAEozooo onw3ou umoE oomzmoo mHOAzmmlmHOAczb Aoo. bomA HoucAB Aaohmz EDASUAHHSUV Mb mzAHooaAmco ocm mUAEocooo onmzou umoe oomcmoo mMOAzomLWHOAcob Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> *Aoo. oomA amuaAz «mNo. oomA AAmm AcoApmoAMAmmMHu usooopmv m ooAHHmE SHAz aoAzomIHOAzob moo. bomA HmucAS Amspwum AmuAHmzv Nb ooAaHmE SUA3 AOAcomIHOACDb Ao. oomA AAmm .m> om. oomA HoucAS 0A. momA AAmm AzoAumoAmAmmMAU unwozumv m muAAAnm CA mozwoAmzoo ha mquxcm oozoma zoo npAS aoAcmmIHOAczb Ao. bomA HmACAz Azumszm GOAAMGAmemV mo mN. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HouzAz momA AAmm AcoAumoAmAmmMAU unwozumv m *mNo. bomA amHCAz Ammuoz onduomA mo omDv mm mz oomA AAmm .m> mz oomA HoucAz mN. momA AAmm ACOApmoAMAmmMAU usoosumv m oozmuamazmaw ou maouznanuzoo H0nmz Ao>mA Enos moAnmaHm> xaaumz . . . . . oucmoAMAcmAw . . .ooscAucoo .oN oAQMB 131 .oAAmGGOAuooDo ooAAmE onu Go zAco woos EmuA as Acma nouoaz AGOAumoAAAmmMAo uzoozumo m oomA AAmm sm> mN. oomA HouzAZ mom ouA3 oaoEonoomlzoEomoam mo. momA AAmm AAAN .m.m oUzAm maohoz oomamoo 50m o>mmv saw msmEmo moo ouA3 HOAzomIHOAzzb Aoo. bomA HouzAB AGOAumoAAAmmMAU ucoozumv m msmEmo co ouAS HOAzomIHOAczb Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> . mN. oomA HoucAz ozoaoo no nuAB aoAcoouAOAaDm moo. momA AAmm AmocovoomV Am AoboA oucmoAMAzmAm ou maouzQAauzou H0nmz wuzmoamazmam Enos moAQMAHm> xAHumz .owchucoo .oN mAQMB 132 .c v_z oua3.on vwoo mauopauo on» Acoaomo poo ooooo cN. Acma gonna: Axooo aA oacsoc cca; x3\oo oa.m co. coma aamz .o> oz coma “ocean oc. coma aamz Aucoazoacsmo AN «coo. Acma Houoaz Axooo aA cN. coma aamz .o> «cN. coma Houoaz oc. coma aamz acoacooo 3ozo ma oa. Acma “coca: Axooo aA oamsoo spas o.N v ooam com oaosoo spas oc.msao.m co. coma aamz .o> oz coma noucaz oz coma aamm aommoo>a ucaom ocmuoo e oa. Acma gonna: axooo .aA macsoo ooa3 Aucanogo oz co. coma aamz .o> oacsoo spas Auooaaoco mcaxme cNo. coma “coca: oz coma aamz Azuuoaeooo oaccmnoo N - oamsoo coax =a= coo. Acma cocoa: axooo aA oamsoo zoaz go: ooam o macsoo spas o.m ao. coma aamz .o> oz coma “coca: oz coma aamz Aco>oaooa cocooo a OOCMUHMHGOHm OD mHOUSQHHnACOU .HOHMS HON/04H EH95 mQHQMHHw> XHHUMZ . . . . . oozmoAmAcmAm . . . .ucmfim>oAnom UAEmomom co xom w.uzoozum m mo oozozAmzA mop chcaoocoo mAmonpomhnmnu 0A ocm>onH meAHumE mHAmccoAumsz ucmoAmAcmAm .bN oAflme 133 mAmE nuA3 moocAmsn ocm maszzoAnm< Aoo. bomA HoucAB Axomv Ab mamsoc cca3 oomoaooo com ooocasoaoma aoo. coma aamz .o> oa. coma oopoaz mco. coma aamm aooAmz aoaooaooooo cA oz Acma oopzaz aoopoz oozcoma co mono mc cho. ocma.aamz .o> oz coma ooccaz oc. coma aamz axooo aA mmcoAAmno ooom o no cacao zoom m ouA3 oAmEom ooAm AAAN .m.m com compo coom m mo cocam spas mamaoz ao. Acma oocoaz ca compo op moapomozo mo oz . coma aamz .o> oz coma oopoaz oz coma aamo axooo aA oz Acma oopoaz Acoaoomo cmoa pacoooo NN opacooo ma.N spas oamamc ooam com opacmoo Na.m spas oamEmz cNo. coma aamo .o> oa. coma oopcaz oz coma aamz axmoo AA mamEoc spas oomsmo coo coo. Acma oopcaz axooo aA mamamo cca; oomsmo coo aoo. coma aamz .o> oz coma oopcaz oamsoc spas osmEmo coo co. coma aamz aoooocaoomo am Ao>oA mocmoAMAcmAm ou mHOHDQAHucoo HOHMZ oocmoamacmam Emma moAQMAHm> xAHumz .omscAucoo .bN OAQMB 134 .m sz CuA3LXoN V mo mAHmuAHo mop mwoAumm AOC mmons cN. Acma oopcaz amaaN .o.m ca mopoaaooo so mCamUCo a *cNo. coma aamz p .om c .ow mac cm oomA HmuCAB coma aamz aco>oaoom ocmooo a 0C opA3 =D:.M omAm c om» CpA3 =Q=.M Ao. bomA HmpCAB ANAAN .m.m CA maumAEmCU do mCHmUCo oz coma aamz p no c .o> oo mm mz oomA HmuCAB oa. coma aamo Aco>oaco< ocmooo a mz bomA HmuCAB Amman IoAEmCU UACmmHO omumAm maumAEmCU IEOU >AmCOA>mHm COAszv mA mCOA>mHm mo Eamu mCo Coop mHOE CAA3 =<= Aoo. oomA AAMh .m> oomA HmuCAz momA AAmm Aom>mACo< momuwo A cN. Acma oopoaz amzoz mcaxmn zopoasozo UACmmHO amACUAuHmm COAzzv mA *mo. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HmUCAz momA AAmm Aom>mACU¢ momuwv A muumAEmCo UACmmHo 0C CpA3 Q.M moo. bomA HmuCAZ AhaumAEmCU UACmmaov N mz oomA AAmm .m> *mNo. oomA umuCAz 0A. momA AAmm Aom>mACo¢ momawv A Am>mA moCmoAMACmAm on mnouzoAHuCoo Hohmz mUCmoamaCmam Eama mmAQmAam> anumz .pCmEm>mACom UAEmomom Co oCsoamxomn moumAEmCo UACmmao m.quozum o no moszAmCA may mCACHmoCOU mAmmCuom>C may on qu>mAmH mmoAaumE mHAmCCOAummCU ACMUAMACmAm .oN mAQma 135 *cNo. Acma oopoaz AaaN .o.m ma moccasoco maumAEmCo mo mmomA3OCx “Dona omCHmUCoo NCBV mm ca mococaoaoo coxoma spas cocoaoaoo aoo. coma aamm .o> coma ompoaz coma aamz azopoasmoo oaommooo N o: cpa3_zopoa2oco moazme co. Acma oopcaz_ AaaN .o.m ca zopoa IEmCU “send omCHmUCoov av on spas zopoaaoco cocoaoaoo aoo. coma aamz .o> oa. coma oopcaz cN. coma aamz “moccasozo oaommooo N mN. bomA HmuCAz AmaumAEmCU UACmmHov N cN. ccma aamm .o> oz coma omcoaz *co. coma aamo Acooemoamsmo AN mHOEOCmom m mm haumAEmCo mCAxme mo. bomA HmuCAS ACOAumoAmAmmMAU quoCumv m mHOEOCmom m on maumAEmCU ompmAmEou Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> oa. coma oopcAz cN. coma aamo Amocoaeoco oaommooo N muumAEmCm CA ANAAN .m.m coomcmoo aaos oms a commons spas =0: cNo. Acma omccaz ca mopoasozo psoom maumAEmCU omCamoCoo AOC mzzv om ca cmommmoo aaoz commons cpa3 =m= co. coma aamm .o> coma ompcaz coma aamz aom>oamoa ocmooo a Am>mA moCmoAMACmAm ou maouznAHuCoo Hohmz moCmoawaCmam Emma mmAQMAHND xAHumz .omsCAuCOU .mN mAQMB 136 om spas oc.muao.m oms mooao zoo> poo mom spas oc.muao.m cNo. Acma oopcaz aaN .o.m ca zopoa IO OD cN. coma aamz a no psooa mm> mooo we coma oopcaz coma aamo aommoo>< caaom ocmooo m mmoaaoo Acaooo>aoo maoo. Acma oopoaz aooAmz soazoaoosoo mA Ho mUCmHmmmam 0C CpA3 maumAEmCm oz Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> oa. coma oocoaz oz coma aamz azopoaamco oaommooo N oa. Acma oopcaz axooo aA mAmEmm CpA3 maquEmCo UACmmHo oz mo. oomA AAmm . > oamaoc spas Aopoasozo moaxmn cNo. coma cocoa: o oz coma aamz zopoaaozo oaommooo N Acma oopoaz Aachz one ooc cocooz Acscoo mo coma aamm .o> oc. coma ooczaz cco. coma aamo Amocoasozo oacmmooo N aaaN .o.m ca Aocoasozo *ao. Acma oopcaz cocoa coooooooo poz zozo co maoo. coma aamz .o> coma oocoaz coma aamz Azopoaaozo oammmooo N Am>mA moCMUAwACmAm ou muouzQAHUCou Coho: moCmoaAACmam Emma mmAQMAHm> xAHumz AI .UmDCAACOU.mN mAQMB .m v.2 £HH3.¥ON V m0 MAHOAAHU 05p wmmAAMm DOC mOOQx mao. Acma ooccaz Apoopuoom co 3oA>o am oz coma aamz .o> coma oopmaz coma aamo aoopmpo ampaomzo NA mcoo. Acma oopcaz Aaooppmo mcopoo cm oz ccma aamz .oo oz coma oopoaz oc. coma aamz aoocmco ampaomzo NA cN. Acma oopcaz acooazoaosm co 3oa>o oN mco. coma aamz .o> oz coma oocoaz oz coma aamm aoocmpo ampaomzo NA «aoo. Acma ompcaz Aoopmpo ampaomzo NA 7, coaoome cca3 ososmo cco aoo. coma aamo .o> B cN. coma omccaz COHHHME £UH3 mDQEMU HMO moo. momd Hawk Awucmflflmwmv Hm «cNo. Acma omccaz aoopmpo ampaomzo NA *coo. coma aamo .o> cN. coma oopcaz oz coma aamo accmazoamsmo AN mco. Acma oopaaz aoopmpo ampaomzo NA oz coma aamo .o> cN. coma oopcaz oz coma aamo aaaN .o.m ca Aczo cN am>oa mUCmkoACmAm ou muouCAAHuCoo Mono: Bums mmAncAHm> xAHumz mUCmoAMACmAm .quEm>mACom UAEmomom Co monopm AmuAAmE mo moszAmCA mCu mCACamoCoo onmCuommn mCu ou qu>mAmH mmoAHumE maAmCCoAummsU pCmkoACmAm .mN mAQMB 138 mcoo. Acma oopaaz aooAmz omasoaooooo mA oc. ocma aamo .o> coma oocmaz coma aamo aoopmpo ampaomzo NA *cNo. Acma ooccazaoocmzacoa oaomooomz poozo cc oa. coma aamm .o> cN. coma oopmaz cN. coma aamo aoopmpo ampaomzo NA mpmwu. GO mN. Emma HOHGHS Awflmfléfi COHUNGHEMKMV mo Apoaxcm aoopooo p.mmo spas coaoomz co. coma aamo .o> coma oopoaz coma aamz Aoopmpo amcaomzo NA cN. Acma oopoaz aamoaz ooc cocooz Acopoo mo oz coma aamo .o> oz coma oopmaz *co. coma aamm aoscmpo amcaomzo NA cN. Acma oopoaz zmc\aaN .o.o coacspo cososao oo oz ccma aamo .o> mao. coma oopoaz cN. coma aamo Aoocmpo amcaomzo NA oc. Acma oocmaz Amocoz moopooa co mono mc oz coma aamm .o> mco. coma oopzaz cN. coma aamm aospmco amcaomzo NA HO>OA moCmoAMACmAm on maousflAauCoo Hohmz moCmoamaCmam Emma mmAQMAHm> anpmz .omCCAuCOU .mN mAQMB 139 .m V.z CuA3_$0N V mo MAampAHU mop momAumm pOC mmonm caoo. Acma oocoaz p.msm ooc ooomom omopoo mN *aoo. coma aamz .o> coma ooccaz coma aamz Acmoszoaoamo AN *aoo. Acma oocmaz Apaoezoaoso co 3oa>o cN caoo. coma aamz .o> maoo. coma ooccaz *aoo. coma aamo apomszoameoo AN cN. Acma oopcaz Azopoasozo oaommooo N cN. coma aamz .o> oz coma ooccaz *co. coma aamz accoszoamsmo AN x3\HC AA.N om>0AQEm CpA3 HOACmoIHoACzb mo. bomA HmuCAB AquEMOAQEmo bN cN. coma aamo .o> oz coma omcoaz oc. coma aamm acoacmoacaoomao camcopoo m zoos oc coomoo zaco oa zoaos cca; =o=.m cNo“ Acma oopmaz zaosm ooc zoomoo oocpoo mN >mCOE mmoAme . .. , .p . . . . an. MHO3 Cu. GOmMOH HOSHO 00m QHH3 :AN: mo. 000..” Hawk . m> coma oocmaz coma aamz Aco>oaoom ocmooo a Am>mA mUCmoAMACmAm 0p muousnAHuCoo Hohmz moCmoawaCmam Same mmAQMAHm> xAHumz .quEm>mA:Um UAEmomom Co quE>oAmEm mo moCmCAuCA mop mCAComoCoo mAmmCuomho mCA ou “Cm>mAma mmOAHme mHAMCCOApmmCo quoAmACmAw .om mAQmB 140 cN. Acma omccaz accosmoamsm co 3mA>o mN *ao. coma aamz .o> oz coma oopoaz «co. coma aamz aooAmz soaooaooooo NA cN. Acma oocoAz accoszoaosm co 3ma>o cN mco. coma aamm .o> oz coma oopmaz oz coma aamz aoopmpo amcaomzo NA cho. Acma oopzAz Aozpmco ampaomzo NA «coo. coma aamz .o> cN. coma oopoaz oz coma aamm apmoazoamsmo AN omnumma mo p.mmo cca; x3\oc aa.N cmzoaoeo cNo. Acma ooccaz. aao>oa ooapmoamo oz coma oopcaz oa. coma aamm apamszoamsmo AN oz Acma oopcaz Aoocoz ooscooa co mono mc oz coma aamo .o> *co. coma ooczaz oz coma aamz apooazoaosoo AN moCmoawaCmam on muouCQaHuCoo coho: Am>mA some mmAnmaum>.xaHumz . . . . . moCmoAMACmAm . ., . . .coscapooo .om maomn 141 .m Viz CuA3.XON V mo mAamUAao mop momApmo pOC mmoas om.NIAo.N CHA3 mCdEmm moo oCm o.¢lm.m CUA3 msmEmu moo moo. bomA HmuCAB. Ammmam><,uCAom momaov v oz coma aamz .o> oc. coma oopoaz oz coma aamz aoooocaoomo ac mzmfimo wmo CuA3 HOACmmIHOACCb Aoo. bomA HmuCAz ACOApmoAAAmmmAO quozumo m omosmo coo spas ooamoouooaaoo aoo. coma aamz .o> « cN. coma ompoaz msmamo Co CuAs HOACmmIHOACoo moo. momA AAmm AmUCmoAmmmv Am mUCmOAmmH Am Acapo op camoaccac ca caac spas =¢= cNo. Acma oopoaz aoococaooo pm Amoco op Apazoaocao co ooommoo cm oz coma aamo .o> mN. oomA HmuCAz mN. momA AAmm Aom>mACo¢ momawv A mz bomA HmuCAz Amsmfimo moo so» CHAN; m>AA 0C3 HmnAEsz om smo. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HmuCAz momA AAmm Aom>mACU¢ momawv A mszmu coo cca; =o=.m m oomsmo coo spa3 gm: ao. Acma ooccaz aoocmcaoomo am oc. coma aamo .o> oz coma oopoaz oz coma aamz Accomacom ocmooo a Am>mA moCMUAMACmAm ou maouCnAuuCoo Hohmz moCmmamaCmam EHmB mmAQMAHm> xAHumz .quEm>mAC0m UAEmomom Co moCmoAmmH mo mUMAQ m.quoCum m mo moCmCAMCA mop mCACHmoCoo mAmmCuommo map on qu>mAma mmoAHme maAmCCoAummCU UCmUAAACmAm .Am mAQmB 142 mamEoc spas ooosmo cco coo. Acma ompcaz axmoo aA oamsoo cca; oomamo coo aoo. coma aamm .oo oz coma oopcaz oamsmc cca; oomamo coo co. coma aamo aoooocaoomo ac oz Acma omcoaz ago oa op ooaom Acocoo ac sooa cca; ososmo coo cNo. coma aamz .o> coma oopoaz coma aamo aoooocaoomo ac ooomoospoac co coma spas oomsmo oco aoo. Acma omcoaz . accoco op camoaccao coz Aczo Ac commooopoac co coma spas oomamo coo aoo. coma aamo .o> oz coma oopaaz moomooopoac co coma cca; osmamo coo co. coma aamo amooocaoomo ac caoo. Acma oocoaz azcoco op paooacoao zozo cc *ao. coma aamm .o> oz coma occaAz oz coma aamo Amococaoomo ac osmsmo coo spas ooopoma so coo. Acma oopoaz aoooocaommo ac oc. coma aamz .o> ccma oopcaz coma aamo zooocooa co meano cc oco. Acma oopmaz acmacoco zomo ma oa. ccma aamo .o> oz coma oopsaz oz coma aamo amooocaoomo ac HON/ma” mUCmoAMACmAm on muouznAHuCou HOHMZ mUCMUAMACmam Emma wmAQMAHm> xAHumz .UmCCAuCOU .Am OAQMB 143 mmmCAmzm Ho mHCuACUAHm¢ CAA3 mzmfimo moo Aoo. bomA HmuCAZ AHOHMS ECACUAHHCUV Mb oz coma aamz .o> coma oopaaz coma aamz aoooocaommo ac *aoo. Acma oopoaz Aompmpo ampaomzo NA coaooms cca3 oocamo coo aoo. coma aamz .o> cN. coma oopoaz cmaoome spas osmamo coo coo. coma aamm aooomcaomzo ac Am>mA mUCmvoACmAm ou mHOACQAHuCOU Coho: moCMUAMACmam Emma omAQmAHm> xAHumz .omCCAuCOU .Am mAQme 144 .c V z CuA3.XON V wo mAHmpAHo mCu mmoApmo AOC mmono maoo. Acma oopmaz Acoaoomo cmoa pacmooo NN oc. ccma aamo .oo oz coma oopoaz cN. coma aamz acm>oaco< ocmoco a EHOHCHE umH HON HMHHOHME compoomsa coooaa m>mc op ammo opa3 =oam aoo. Acma oopoaz Azcopo co Ewuflflfi HmH HOW HMHHOUME mm®C0>HuAO0MnAM m0 3OH>V ON compoomaa commas comm oc ammo ccaz =oam aoo. coma aamo .o> coma oocoaz coma aamo accomacom ocmooo a mco. Acma ooccaz. Acmacopo soup ma cho. coma aamo .o> oz accma ooccaz *cNo. coma aamz Aco>oapo< mcmooo a mumwu Sway. OHDUUOH cooccm op oaomoamo woos cca3 =oam co. Acma oopoaz Amomoo moacmoz Aczo ca oc. coma aamo .o> oz coma oopcaz oc. ccma aamz aco>oazoa mcmooo a maoo. Acma ooccaz Amoco moacmom cxoeo ca mquECmAmom ccc co moo: oo 3oo cmoo cca; o.m aoo. coma aamo .o> oz coma oopcaz oz coma aamo aco>oamo< ocmooo a HON/QM mOCmoAMACmAm 0p muouCnAHuCoo Coho: Same mmAQMAHm> anumz mUCmoAMACmAm .quEm>mACom UAEmomom Co muAQms mozum mo mUCmCAMCA mop mCACamUCoo mAmmCuommo mCu ou qu>mAmH mmoAHumE mHAMCCOAummCm quoAMACmAm .Nm mAQMB 145 pomplmam m uCcs u.Coo CUA3 =¢= mo. bomA HmuCAz. Aummumum mo 3mA>o om. poopnoom m com3 p.moc cca3 =<= aoo. coma aamz .o> coma ompcaz coma aamo Aco>oamom mcmooo a mquomo Hoom mo mosmomn Sump ucas poa omccm moon Amoco spas =o=.m aoo. Acma omcoaz Amoco ooz om coacopo mono mc mquomH zoom mo mosmomn Eamu scan coa ooccm woos Amoco cca3 =o=.m aoo. coma aamz .o> oa. coma ompoaz mco. coma aamz acm>oaco< ocmooo a soopcas poa omcom woos Amoco spas =<= aoo. Acma oopcaz Acoopcmm Acopoo cc soopcas coa oopcm moon Amoco cca3 =m= aoo. coma aamz .o> oa. coma oopoaz soopcae coa oopom moon Acopo spas =c= cNo. coma aamz acm>oacoo ocmooo a mqumHo Amsvm Nc.mmmazoo oompo omcc osap oooa cooaomoo pcaa =m= aoo. Acma oocoaz aaaN .o.m mo .qumao Amzmm mo ommazoo omoAzmmm mEAE mo 3mfl>o «N oocco mmcp msap coca cooaomoo cpa3 =m= aoo. coma aamz .o> coma oopoaz coma aamz aco>oacoo ocmooo a cmoa ooaomoc coaoomo o>mz caooo cca; =m= coo. Acma oopoAz Acmoa cacooo co 3oa>o cN cN. coma aamo .o> coma oopcaz coma aamz acoooazoa ocmooo a H0> ONH moCMOAAACmAm ou muouznAHACoo aohmz moCMUAAACmam Bums mmAQMAHm> xAHumz .omzCAuCOO .Nm mAQMB 146 quEm>mACUm >8 Op pCmuHOQEA AmUCmuHomEH pOC mos moCmoCmupm mascomA CpAS :CRM Aoo. bomA HmpCAz mazuoma mo 3mfl>v bm quEm>mACom NE ou quuHomEA AOC mos moCmoCmupm mascomA CAAS :0: mo. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HmpCAz momA AAmm Aom>mACo¢ momaoo A *mo. bomA HmuCAS AmoCmoCmpum manuUmA mo Camuummv om mz oomA AAmm .m> mz oomA amuCAz oz coma aamo acmooacom ocmooo a *Aoo. bomA HmuCAz AAMCAz mop 0p HOAHm pooh mmCAAmmzv b¢ *Aoo. oomA AAmm .m> ono. oomA HmuCAz oc. coma aamz aco>oaooo ocmoco a pCmozum mop commoooooac compo ooom m spas =oam aoo. Acma omcoaz aaaN .o.m CA pamum 0A COAuommmv mo quEm>mACom >8 omoAm com coxmamo compo coom m cca; =4. aoo. coma aamo .mA *Aoo. oomA HmuCAz *Aoo. momA AAmm Aom>mACo< momaoo A cN. Acma oopcAz acoocoom co 3oa> mozo am mmoo. oomA AAmm .m> oomA HmuCAB momA AAmm Aom>mACo¢ momuwo A Am>mA moCmoAMACmAm on muouzQAanoo coho: moCmoamaCmam Eama mmAnmAHm> xAHumz .coomacooo .Nc oaomn 147 cocomoo on c.omo cca; =o=.m aoo. Acma oopoaz aaoooa ooapmoamoa co 3oa>o oA omCUmmH comma co oo cocoooxo mo aaas cca3 =a: aoo. coma aamz .o> coma oopoaz coma aamz aco>oazoc ocmooo a COAum>AAOE AMCHmUCA CAA3 :Q=.M moo. bomA amACAS ACOAum>Muoz mo muazomv oo oz coma aamo .o> coacm>apos amcoopca cpaz =o= cNo. coma omccaz coapmoapos amooocoa opaz =o= W co. coma aamz acoooazoa ocmooo a Apaaaom As ma moCmoAmCom an mumAme mozoma Cmo :QRM Aoo. bomA HmuCAB AmumAxCé COAAMCAmemV mo Acaaaom on ma mococac uooo Ao Acmaxcm ooocoo omo spas :4: co. coma aamz .o> coma oopoaz coma aamz acmooacom.ocmooo a cN. Acma oopmaz aamcaz mop ooc omommz mozum mo 3mA>V mo Cvoomo mCAEEmao CpA3 =Q:.M Ao. oomA AAcz .m> oc. coma oocaaz cN. coma aamo aco>oacoa ocmooo a oz Acma oocmaz a. . . oopoz mascoma mumzmmoMCH MHV mm m>mc a cmc3 spas mcoam pom.pooA cca3 =m= co. coma aamm .o> oc. coma oopcaz zoapmoacaomao ooc moacmoo mocxo spas =m= cNo. coma aamz aco>oazoa ocmooo a mOCmoamaCmam on muouCQaHuCOU o0nmz Am>mA Emma mmAQmaum> xaaumz . . . . . moCmoAMACmAm . . .coscapcoo .Nc oaomn 148 voo. bomA amuCAB AAAN .m.m CA compo ou COAuommmv mm unmum ooom m CpA3 oomAmAE CpA3 o»NV omAm oCm unmum coom m on cmoaoas spas oc.Nuao.N co. coma aamo .o> omo. oomA HmpCAz oa. coma aamz aommoo>< pcAom ocmooo o mz bomA HmUCAS AumEoom COACMCAmem mo 3mA>v No mmo. oomA AAmm .o> oomA HmpCAz momA AAmm Ammmom>¢ pCAom momuoo o Acaaaom ca oooocacooo No mpmAme mozomo Cmo CcA3 HoACmmIHOACzb Ao. bomA HmuCAz AmpmAme COAmeAmemv mo mN. oomA AAmm .m> oomA amuCAz momA AAmm ACOAumoAonoMAU ACmozpmo m ocNo. Acma oopzaz Aoopoz cospooa co coco mc mz oomA AAmm .m> mz oomA HmuCAS mN. momA AAmm ACOApmoAMAoocAU quoCumv m bomA HmuCAB AAmCAm mCu ooc cocooz Acopoo mo oomA AAmm .m oc. coma omcmaz > «mo. momA AAmm “mapoAEmCU UACmmHoo N moCmoamaCmam ou mHOUCQNHpCoo Coho: Am>mA Emma mmAQmaam> xaaumz . . . . . moCmoAMACmAm . . .coooapooo .Nc oaome 149 oco. Acma oopoaz Amoco mCAommm NHMUCmEmAmmCmv bA cN. coma aamo .o> cN. coma omcoaz oc. coma aamo Aooacoco some ma maoo. Acma oopoaz Amoco moacmoz pxoeo ca oaoo. coma aamz .o> oaoo. coma oopmaz oaoo. coma aamo Aooacoco 3ozo ma oz Acma cocoaz aommoo>< poaoo ocmooo m cN. coma aamo .o> oz coma oopoaz , oco. coma aamm Acoacsco some ma Umflomwh Ammma ”Am .HO cocomoxo mo aaaz opaz o.muac.c ooam com cozomoo mo p.mmo cca; oc.N-ao.N aoo. Acma ooccaz Aavoa ooapmoamooo oA cN. coma aamm .o> cN. coma oopoaz oa. coma aamz aommoo>4 pcaom ocmooo o ooapm>acos ocooaopxo spas o.ouac.c cNo. Acma oopcaz aooapmoapoz co moosooo cc oz coma aamz .o> oa. coma omcoaz «co. coma aamz aommooAa poaom ocmooo m moCmoAMCOU CHA3 Acoaxom moocmo c.omo spas oc.cuao.c coo. Acma oopcaz azpoaxoa ooapmmaamxmo cc oz coma aamm .o> coma oopoaz coma aamo Aommoo>< pcaom ocmooo m HON/OH moCmoAMACmAm ou mHOACQAauCoo coho: mUCmoamaCmaw Emma mmAQMAHm> xAHumz .omCCAuCOU .Nm mAQme 150 ocNo. Acma oopmaz Ago oa op ooaom Acapoo ac oc. coma aamz .o> coma oopcaz coma aamm Acoacsco soup ma hmo\HC m V cca3 cocaapso poo poo cmoo zaco ao. Acma omccaz azmc\aaN .o.m coacspo acooaao oc ocoo. coma aamo .o> oa. coma oopcaz ocoo. coma aamz acoacsco somo ma Acma oopoaz Aooomcooccaonoopooao cc coma aamo .o> oz coma oopcaz maoo. coma aamz acmacopo somo ma cN. Acma oocoaz acao so» om coacspo Aczo mc cN. ccma aamo .o> oco. coma ooccaz oa. coma aamz Acmacoco 3ozo ma oao. Acma oocoaz aaaN .o.m ma Aczo cN oz ccma aamz .o> oz coma oopoaz oz coma aamz acoacoao somo ma oa. Acma oopoaz. amcao coz om cmom mono ca oao. coma aamz .o> oa. coma oocoaz oz coma aamz acoacsco soap ma Am>mA ooomoacazmao oc ooopsoaopcoo ooAmz ooomoacaomao some ooaomaom> xaopmz .coocapmoo .Nc oaome 151 cco. Acma oopoaz Acoacspo 305 ma oa. coma aamz .o> oz coma oocoaz oz coma aamz Aoooocaoomo ac omaummn mo p.mmo cca; x3\oc aa.N cvoaoso cNo. Acma oopcaz Aao>oa moapmoaooao oA oz coma aamo .o> oz coma oopoaz oa. coma aamz apooezoamamo AN oz Acma oopoaz aoocoz ooopooa co oooo mc oz coma aamz .o> oco. coma oocoaz oz coma aamz accoszoaosmo AN oaoo. Acma ooccaz. Acoopoom co 3oA> mono am coma oopmaz coma aamo aaaN .o.m ca Asap cN oao. Acma oopoaz aooAmz soaooaooooo cA oa. coma aamo .o> oz ccma ooccaz cN. coma aamo acoacmpo somo ma «coo. Acma oocoaz .amcam ooc cocooz Acopoo mo cN. coma aamo .o> oa. coma ooccaz oaoo. coma aamz acoacopo soap ma mOCmoamaCmam ou muouznaauCoo Honz Am>mA Emma omAnmaamb xaaumz . . . . . moCmoAMACmAm . . .omsCAuCOU .Nm mAQmB 152 ocoo. Acma oocmaz. Aoomppmo zczpoo cc mo-oz p.ccma,aamz .o> oz coma oopoaz oc. coma aamz aozpmpo ampaomzo NA oz Acma oopoaz Aoopoz moopooa co oooo mc ocNo. coma aamz .o> oz coma oopoaz oc. coma aamm axooo aA compo coom so: cocam spas oamsoo ao. Acma oocoaz aaaN .o.m CA uamum on CoAuommmv mo oz coma aamz o> oz coma oopoaz oz coma aamz axooo aA oz Acma ooccaz Acoaoomo cmoa cacoooo NN opacooo ma N cca; mamaoc com opacooo Na.m zpaa oamEoo cNo. ccma aamo .o> oa. coma oopoaz -_ oz coma aamo axmoo aA omCommo ma Cmu CpA3 mozpoma a9“ moo. bomA amuCA3. AAm>ma COAumaAmodv 0b oz coma aamo .o> coma oocoaz coma aamz aoozcooa co maaeo cc oz Acma oopaaz Asm oa oc ooaoo Acocoo ac Nooa spas oomgmo coo cNo. coma aaoo .o> coma oocoaz coma aamo Amoomcaoomo ac moCMUNMACmam ou muouznaauCoo coho: Am>mA EHmB mmAQmaam> xaaumz . . . . . moCmoAmACmAm . . .omzCAuCOO .Nm mAQma 153 cN. Acma oopoaz acoaoomo cmoa pacoooo NN ocNo. coma aamo lo> oz coma oopcaz cN. coma aamo AooAmz soaooaooooo cA cN. Acma oopoaz Azpoaxoa ooapmoaemxmo cc CO huwflxcm HOHUSOO Alamo Spam? GOHHHQA m0. woman Hawk .m> coma ooccaz coma aamz Aoscmpo amcaomzo NA cN. Acma oopmaz aamcao mop ooc Acsco cocoozo oc oz coma aamo .o> oz coma oopoaz oco. coma aamz aoocmco ampAomzo NA cN. Acma oopoaz azmc\aaN .o.m coacspo pzooaco oc oz coma aamz .oo oao. coma oopcaz cN. coma aamz aoscmco ampaomzo NA oc. Acma ooccaz Aoocoz mospoma co mono mc oz coma aamz .o> oco. coma oopoaz cN. coma aamo aoopmpo amcaomzo NA oao. Acma oocmaz apoocoom co 3oA>o am oz coma aamo .o> coma oocaaz coma aamz aoocmpo amcaomzo NA m>mA moCmOAMACmAm ou mHOACnAHUCOU coho: moCMWAMACmAm Emma mmAnmAHm> xAHAmz L Al .comoapcoo .Nc oaome 154 cN. Acma oopoaz aavoa ooacmoaoomo oA oz coma aamo .o> ocNo. coma ooccaz oz coma aamm AooAmz azaooaoosoo cA ocNo. Acma oocoaz aAcoaxcc ooapomasmxmo cc cN. coma aamo .o> coma oopoaz coma aamz zooAmz soaooaooooo cA oaoo. Acma oocoaz AaaN .o.m CA pamum OH COAuummmv mo ocNo. coma aamz .oo oa. coma oopoaz oz coma aamo AooAmz soasoaooooo cA EhmpoAE umA Hmumm modum mumAmEoo pooa spas ooocaooo oo ooopaooaoma aoo. Acma oopzaz acooppmm Acopoo cc oc. coma aamm .o> oz coma oocoaz cN. coma aamo AooAmz soaooaooooo cA mUCmoamaCmam ou maouznaHUCoo Comm: Am>mA fiahmB mmAAmaHm> xaaumz . . . . . moCmoAMACmAm . . .omsCAuCOU .Nm mAQmB APPENDIX E 156 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY East Lansing Science and Mathematics Teaching Center - E30 Holmes Hall TO: Individuals who completed B.S. 211 at Michigan State Uni- versity (Fall 1965 or Winter 1966) SUBJECT: Doctoral study being conducted at Michigan State University. This study has the endorsement of the Science and Mathematics Teaching Center and you are encouraged to assist in the collection of the requested data. Data is being collected relative to factors, other than those associated with the personalities or instructional technique involved in the instruction, which may operate in affecting student achievement in B.S. 211. Students now taking B.S. 211 are being surveyed in order to get their immediate reactions and your cooperation in this study is solicited to secure reactions after a period of time has elapsed since taking B.S. 211. Your participation will consist of: (1) completing the response sheet for the enclosed questionnaire; (2) completing the enclosed insert; and (3) returning the signed materials in the enclosed stamped addressed envelope by February 20, 1967. You may retain or destroy the questionnaire at the time you return your response forms. I realize that you have many demands upon your time but it is sincerely hoped that you will cooperate in providing the requested information. Sincerely, Julian R. Brandou Charles W. Gee Acting Director Graduate Assistant 157 This questionnaire is designed to collect information relative to; your status in school at the time you were en- rolled in B.S. 211 and, some factors which may have affected student achievement in the course. You are requested to sign the questionnaire and give your student number in order that various analyses may be made which are necessary to arrive at some conclusions relative to the factors which affect student achievement. Directions: Select what you consider to be the most appropriate response for each item and circle its number on the response sheet. 1. This item relates to your preparation in organic chemis- try at the time of your enrollment in B.S. 211. 1. I had not completed and was not currently enrolled in a course in organic chemistry. 2. I had not successfully completed a course in organic chemistry but I was taking organic chemistry at that time. 3. I had successfully completed a course in organic chemistry prior to that time. 2. Had you changed your academic major while enrolled in ‘Michigan State University at the time of your enrollment in B.S. 211? 1. Yes. 2. No. 3. Have you changed your academic major since your enroll- ment in B.S. 211? 1. Yes. 2. No. 4. Answer this item.on1y if you had previously had a change in your academic major prior to your enrollment in B.S. 211. My change in academic major was because of I. experienced difficulty which reduced my interest in the previously chosen major.‘ 2. a personal awareness that the previous major did not satisfy my future plans. 3. information provided by another person about my previous and present majors. 158 Complete this item.only if you had previously success- fully completed a course in organic chemistry. ‘My most recent exposure to an organic chemistry course prior to my enrollment in B.S. 211 was Fall Term 1965 Summer Term 1965 Spring Term 1965 Winter Term 1965 Fall Term 1964 Prior to Fall Term 1964 O‘UI-l-‘UJNH This item is designed to elicit your reactions to the text. ‘Modern Biology by Nason and your use of the text. 1. I read every assignment in the text. 2. I read most of the assignments in the text. 3. I read only a few of the assignments in the text. 4. I read none of the assignments in the test. The following statements are designed to elicit your response to suggested supplementary readings for B.S. 211. l. I read all of the supplementary readings. 2. I read most of the supplementary readings. 3. I read only a few of the supplementary readings. 4. I read none of the supplementary readings. The amount of text and supplementary reading which I did in B.S. 211 was determined by my 1. recognizing a need for immediate usable biological knowledge that term. 2. recognizing a need for the retention of the biologi- cal knowledge beyond that term. 3. recognizing that I had a sufficient grasp of the biological material to meet the demands of the course. 4. recognizing that lecture attendance was of more value than spending time on reading assignments. This question is designed to survey your method of attack when studying textbook materials in B.S. 211. 1. I usually only read the material but did not underline or outline. 2. I usually read and underlined the material, then I reviewed the underlined material. 3. I usually read, underlined and outlined the material. 4. I usually did not read the text material. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 159 At the time I took B.S. 211 I was enrolled for 1 2. 3. 4 Ni—‘H 3. 1-6 credits. 7-12 credits. 13-18 credits. 19 or more credits. was enrolled in B.S. 211 because it was a required course for my major. as an elective course to meet the science require- ment for graduation. as a free elective course. This item concerns your employee work schedule at the time you were enrolled in B.S. 211. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. I was not regularly employed that term. I was regularly employed but my job only involved Saturday and Sunday work. I was regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of 1-10 hours each week. I was regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of 11-20 hours each week. I was regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of more than 20 hours each week. This item is designed to assess your reaction to your work schedule at the time you were enrolled in B.S. 211. 1. 2. 3. 4. I think it was an advantage to my course achieve- ment that I was not employed that termd I think that it was of no advantage to my course achievement that I was not employed that term. I think that it was an advantage to my course achievement that I was employed that term. I think that it was of no advantage to my course achievement that I was employed that term. This item is designed to determine your place of resi- dence in the campus community at the time of your enrollment in B.S. 211. 1. I lived on campus as defined by the area enclosed: on the west by the western edge of the Brody Com- plex and Harrison Road, on the south by Mt. Hope Road, on the east by Hagadorn Road, and on the north by Grand River Avenue and that part of ‘Michigan Avenue from Grand River to the west edge of the Brody complex. 15. 16. 17. 18. 160 2. I lived off campus as defined by a location not enclosed in the previous description. This item.is to be answered only by those students who lived on campus as defined by the previous question while enrolled in B.S. 211. A NOTE: A living-learning unit is defined as a multiple dwelling dormitory which contained classrooms. l. I lived on campus in one of the living-learning dormitory complexes. 2. I lived on campus in a non-living-learning dormitory complex. This item is to be answered only by those students who lived off campus while enrolled in B.S. 211. l. I lived off campus with my parents or another relative of my family. 2. I lived off campus in a rooming house for single students. 3. I lived off campus in an apartment for single students. 4. I lived off campus in housing for married students only. 5. I lived off campus in a sorority or fraternity. This item.is designed to assess your perceived ability to study at your place of residence while you were enrolled in B.S. 211. 1. I found it difficult to study where I lived. 2. I did 22; find it difficult to study where I lived. 3. I had not attempted to study where I lived and therefore I can't make this judgment. Answer this item only if you found it difficult to study where you lived. 1. The major difficulty was from the distractive interruptions from.my roommate(s). 2. The major difficulty was the general disturbance surrounding my room. 3. The major difficulty was the quiet produced by the loneliness where I lived. 4. The major difficulty was the demand which occurred from.my family activities. 5. The major difficulty was my own inability to avoid distractions which occurred. 19. 20. 21. 161 Answer this item.only if you did not find it difficult to study where you lived. I. The major contributor to my ability to study where I lived was the cooperative help I received from my roommate(s). The major contributor to my ability to study where I lived was the lack of a general disturbance where I lived. V The major contributor to my ability to study where I lived was the quiet but not lonely environment. ' The major contributor to my ability to study where I lived was the relaxation from participating in family activities. The major contributor to my ability to study where I lived was my own ability to exclude or ignore the distraction which occurred. This question is designed to elicit your pattern of study at various points within the term. 1. 2. I studied B.S. 211 material more completely after the lst midterm examination. I studied B.S. 211 material in the same depth after the lst midterm as prior to the lst midterm examination. I studied B.S. 211 material less completely after the lst midterm examination. This item is designed to assess the reason for your study pattern indicated by the prior items 1. 2. I studied more completely because of my poor results on the lst midterm examination.‘ I studied more completely because the material after the lst midterm examination demanded more of my efforts for its comprehension. I studied the new material in the same depth as prior to the lst midterm examination because it seemed to be effective on that examination. I studied the new material in the same depth as prior to the 1st midterm examination because I recognized no increase in content difficulty. I studied less completely after the lst midterm examination because the new material seemed similar in difficulty to the earlier material which I had over studied for. 22. 23. 24. 25. 162 6. I studied less completely after the lst midterm examination because the recent material seemed to demand less of my efforts fOr its comprehension. This item will elicit your reaction to the impact of the level of success achieved by you on the lst midterm examination in B.S. 211. 1. A good start in the course relaxed me and aided my future success. 2. A good start in the course mislead me and contri- buted to my future difficulty. 3. A poor start in the course challenged me to do better and aided my future success. 4. A poor start in the course discouraged me and contributed to my future difficulty. 5. I don't think my start in the course had any significant affect upon me. Knowing that the prerequisite for B.S. 211 was the previous successful completion or concurrent enrollment in organic chemistry, were you concerned about the importance placed on organic chemistry in B.S. 211? 1. Yes. 2. No. This item will assess the pattern of your lecture attendance in B.S. 211 throughout the term of your enrollment. 1. My attendance was most regular prior to the lst midterm.examination. 2. My attendance was most regular between the two midterm examinations. 3. My attendance was most regular after the 2nd midterm examination. 4. MW attendance was essentially the same throughout the entire term. If you felt that your comprehension of the day's lecture material was inadequate you 1. attended another lecture for clarification. 2. looked over a friend's notes to supplement your own material. 3. did some extra reading for clarification. 4. just planned to get along on the amount of comprehension you had obtained. 26. 27. 28. 29. 163 This item is designed to stimulate your response to the use of your lecture notes during your enrollment in B.S. 211. 1. I studied my lecture notes with a regular daily review pattern. 2. I studied my lecture notes with a regular weekly, but not daily review pattern. 3. I studied my lecture notesirregularly but more than just prior to examinations. 4. I only studied my lecture notes just prior to examinations. 5. I did not study my lecture notes. If my total weekly study time spent on B.S. 211 material was divided into equal amounts for each of the seven week days, it would show that I studied B.S. 211 material an average of 1. 0-1 hour(s) per week day. 2 1.1 - 2.0 hours per week day. 3. 2.1 - 3.0 hours per week day. 4. 3.1 - 4.0 hours per week day. 5 more than 4 hours per week day. This item is designed to assess the normal length or duration in time of the study periods which you used for B. S. 211 material. 1. 0 - l hour(s) at a time. 2 1.1 - 2 hours at a time. 3. 2.1 - 3 hours at a time. 4 longer than 3 hours at a time. This item is designed to assess your expectation for needed study prior to the final examination in B.S. 211. l. I had completed the assigned reading material and expected by studying for the final to function as a review. 2. I had not completed all of the assigned reading material and expected my studying for the final to involve covering some new material but mostly a review process. 3. I expected my preparation for the final to be a cramming session stressing temporary retention of much new information supplemented with some review. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 164 This item is designed to determine the type of motivation which had most influenced your level of aspiration in B.S. 211. 1. intrinsic (internal) motivation. 2. extrinsic (external) motivation. My enrollment in B.S. 211 was primarily because of the influence on my decisions provided by a high school teacher. a high school guidance counselor. a parent. a friend. a college guidance counselor. my academic advisor. my own judgment. \IO\U14-\WNH Which of the following motivational sources do you consider to have most favorably influenced your efforts in B.S. 211? I was most favorably influenced by l. a personal desire to increase my understanding of the biological material. 2. the recognized demand for good grades then and for future plans. 3. the use of television as a means of presenting the course content. 4. the mutual and cooperative interests of other students within B.S. 211. 5. the stabilizing affect of my social situation. Which of the following motivational sources do you consider to have most unfavorably influenced your efforts in B.S. 211? I was most unfavorably influenced by l. the fact that it was a required course for me. 2. the use of television as a means of presenting the course content.. 3. the worry over achieving a satisfactory course grade. 4. a lack of interest in the biological material presented. 5. the distractions produced by my social situation. As you reflect back upon the grade you received in B.S. 211 do you feel the grade represented l. a higher level of achievement than now appears to have been accurate. 35. 165 2. an accurate level of your course achievement. 3. a lower level of achievement than now appears to have been accurate. I was 1. a single student at the time of my enrollment in B.S. 211. 2. a married student at the time of my enrollment in B.S. 211. 166 Name Student Number You have been asked to respond to questions about several factors which perhaps influenced your achievement in B.S. 211. This space is provided to give you an opportunity to indicate other personal factors not associated with the course organization or presentation, which you consider influenced your level of achievement in B.S. 211. A sincere thank you for your cooperation in this research study. APPENDIX F 168 Biological Science 211 (BS,211) Fall Term 1966 Questionnaire #1 This questionnaire instrument is part of a research study on the student population in Biological Science 211. Your responses to the items will be more meaningful if the investigator can identify the involved participants and therefore you are asked to include your name and student number on the provided answer sheet. Individual student responses will not be made available to the instructional staff of Biological Science 211. The analysis of responses will not be completed until final course grades have been issued for this term” If you have reservations about signing the questionnaire, you may complete the question- naire without signing it. However, for research purposes it is hoped that you will sign the completed questionnaire. DIRECTIONS: Read each item and its possible responses carefully before making your selection. Mspk only one response for each item. 1. This item relates to your preparation in organic chemistry. 1. I have not completed and am not currently enrolled in a course in organic chemistry. 2. I have not successfully completed a course in organic chemistry but I am taking organic chemistry at this time. 3. I have successfully completed a course in organic chemistry prior to this time. 2. My present classification status is that of a l. Freshman (less than 40 credits): 2. Sophomore (40 to 84 credits) 3. Junior (85 to 129 credits) 4. Senior (130 and more credits but no degree) 5. Graduate student. 3. My cumulative grade point average at the beginning of this term was 1. between .01 and 1.99 2 between 2.00 and 2.50 3. between 2.51 and 3.00 4. between 3.01 and 3.50 5 between 3.51 and 4.00 6. 7. 169 undetermined because I am a lst term freshman. undetermined because I am a transfer student. This item pertains to your reaction to the time at which you entered college. 1.: Isentered college within 6 months after my high school graduation and I now consider this to have been a fortunate occurrence. I entered college within 6 months after my high "school graduation and I now consider this to have been an unfortunate occurrence. I entered college with greater than a 6 month delay after my high school graduation and I now consider this to have been a fortunate occurrence. I entered college with greater than a 6 month delay after my high school graduation and I now consider this to have been an unfortunate occurrence. My high school course work as it relates to B.S. 211. 1. 2. 3. 4. Did not include the area of biology but I don't consider this to be a handicap. Did not include the area of biology and I consider this to be a handicap. Included the area of biology and I consider that this was beneficial. Included the area of biology but I don't consider that this was beneficial. My high school course work as it relates to B.S. 211. 1. 2. 3. 4. Did not include a course in chemistry but I don't consider this to be a handicap. Did not include a course in chemistry and I consider this to be a handicap. Included a course in chemistry and I consider that this was beneficial. Included a course in chemistry but I don't consider that this was beneficial. This question concerns yOur academic plans. 1. I intend to qualify for enrollment in the College of Veterinary Medicine to become a Doctor of Veterinary Medicine. I intend to qualify for enrollment in the College of Human Medicine to become a Medical Doctor. I intend to become a registered nurse or medical technologist. 170 4. I intend to complete a degree program in a specific content area of the biological sciences. 5. I intend to complete a degree program in biochemistry or another content area of chemistry. 6. I intend to complete a degree that is different from the above categories. 7. I am undecided about future academic plans at this time. 8. Have you changed your academic major since your initial enrollment in Michigan State University? 1. Yes 2. No 9. Answer this item only if you have had a change in your academic major. My change in academic major was because of 1. experienced difficulty which reduced my interest in the previously chosen major. 2. a personal awareness that the previous major did not satisfy my future plans. 3. information provided by another person about my previous and present majors. 10. This item is designed to survey your college biology background prior to this term. This includes the areas of: botany, zoology, microbiology, pathology, entomology and physiology. 1. I have previously completed no credits in college biology. 2. l have previously completed 1 - 6 credits in college biology. 3. I have previously completed 7-- 12 credits in col- lege biology. 4. I have previously completed 13 or more credits in college biology. 11. Considering your answer to the above questions did you 1. take the previous biology courses to prepare you for this course? 2. take the previous biology courses without planning on their value for this course? 3. not take any previous biology courses because you chose to avoid them? 4. not take any previous biology courses because they wouldn't fit into your planned schedule? 12. l3. 14. 15. 16. 1171 5. not take any previous biology courses because you're a lst term freshman? Complete this item only if you are presently enrolled in your lst course in organic chemistry. The course which I am presently enrolled in is 1. Chem. 103 2. Chem. 241 3. Chem. 351 Complete this item only if you have successfully com- pleted a course in organic chemistry prior to this term. The organic chemistry course(s) which I have completed are 1. Chem. 103 2. Chem. 241 3. Chem. 351 4. Chem. 241 and Chem. 242 5. Chem. 351 and Chem. 352 6. Chem. 103 and Chem. 241 7. Other combinations (write in on the answer sheet). Complete this item only if you have previously success- fully completed a course in organic chemistry. My most recent exposure to an organic chemistry course was 1. summer term 1966 2. spring term 1966 3. winter term 1966 4. fall term 1965 5. prior to fall term 1965. This item is designed to elicit your reactions to the text. ‘Modern Biology by Nason and your use of the text. l I have read every assignment in the text. I have read most of the assignments in the text. 2. 3. I have read only a few of the assignments in the text. 4. I have read none of the assignments in the text. The following statements are designed to elicit your response to suggested supplementary readings for B.S. 211. 1. I have read all of the supplementary readings. 2. I have read most of the supplementary readings. 3. I have read only a few of the supplementary readings. 4. I have read none of the supplementary readings. 17. 18. 19. 20. 172 The amount of text and supplementary reading which I have done in B.S. 211 has been determined by my 1. recognizing a need for immediate usable biological knowledge this term. 2. recognizing a need for the retention of this biolog- ical knowledge beyond this term. 3. recognizing that I have a sufficient grasp of the biological material to meet the demands of the course. 4. recognizing that lecture attendance is of more value than spending time on reading aSsignments. This question is designed to survey your method of attack when studying textbook materials in B.S. 211. 1. I usually only read the material but do not un- derline or outline. ‘ 2. I usually read and underline the material, then I review the undeolined material. 3. I usually read, underline and outline the text material. 4. I usually do not read the text material. This item is designed to elicit your reaction to the effectiveness of your studying with the lst midterm as your criterion. 1. I seem to have missed the important concepts to be grasped by the students prior to the lst midterm. 2. I seem to have uncovered the important concepts to be grasped by the students prior to the lst midterm. 3 3. I think I understood the important concepts but I was just unlucky in my selection of answers on the lst midterm. Considering your response to the previous question it seems likely that I will 1. have to change my study procedures to improve my level of success. 2. continue to study in the same way as for the lst midterm.examination. 3. be able to study less and still achieve at my desired level. 173 Biological Science 211 (B.S. 211) Fall Term 1966 Questionnaire #2 This questionnaire instrument is part of a research study on the student population in Biological Science 211. Your responses to the items will be more meaningful if the in- vestigator can identify the involved participants and therefore you are asked to include your name and student number on the provided answer sheet. Individual student responses will not be made available to the instructional staff of Biological Science 211. The analysis of responses will not be completed until final course grades have been issued for this term. If you have reservations about signing the questionnaire, you may complete the questionnaire without signing it. However, for research purposes it is hoped that you will sign the completed questionnaire. DIRECTIONS: Read each item and its possible responses carefully before making your selection. Mark only one response for each item. I l . This item relates to your preparation in organic chemistry. ‘ 1. I have not completed and am not currently enrolled in a course in organic chemistry. 2. I have not successfully completed a course in organic chemistry but I am taking organic chemis- try at this time. 3. I have successfully completed a course in organic chemistry prior to this term. 2 . My present classification status is that of a 1. Freshman (less than 40 credits). 2. Sophomore (40 to 84 credits). 3. Junior (85 to 129 credits). 4. Senior (130 and more credits but no degree). 5. Graduate student. 3 . My cumulative grade point average at the beginning of this term was l Question is a duplicate from the lst part of the questionnaire. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. \IONUI-DWNH DWNl—‘H 174 between .01 and 1.99. between 2.00 and 2.50. between 2.51 and 3.00. between 3.01 and 3.50. between 3.51 and 4.00. undetermined because I am a lst term freshman. undetermined because I am a transfer student. am enrolled this term for l - 6 credits. 7 - 12 credits. 13 - 18 credits. 19 or more credits. This item is designed to assess your views about your class load this term. 1. 2. 3. I believe that I am taking too many credits this term. I believe that my credit enrollment this term is sufficient but not excessive. I believe that I could have adequately carried more credits this term. Do you consider that the credits in a science course such as B.S. 211 demand 1. 2. AnbaA I-‘H N more of your study time than an equal number of credits in your other courses? the same amount of your study time as an equal number of credits in your other courses? less of your study time than an equal number of credits in your other courses? am enrolled in B. S. 211 because it is a required course for my major. as an elective course to meet the science require- ment for graduation. as'a free elective course. primarily enrolled in B.S. 211 this term because I prefer to be potentially able to complete the B.S. 211-B.S. 212 sequence prior to spring term. was required by my advisor to take it at this time. was informed that this might be the only term.this year which offered a "live" (untelevised) lecture 'section for my enrollment. 26. 27. 28. 29. 4. 5. 175 now have completed the stated prerequisite for the course. just decided to take some science credits this term. This item concerns your employee work schedule this term. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. I am.not regularly employed this term. I am regularly employed but my job only involves Saturday and Sunday work. I am regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of 1 - 10 hours each week. I am regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of 11 - 20 hours each week. I am regularly employed Monday thru Friday for a total of more than 20 hours each.week. This item is designed to assess your reaction to your work schedule this term. 1. 2. 3. 4. I think it is an advantage to my course achievement that I'm not employed this term. I think that it is of no advantage to my course achievement that I'm not employed this term. I think that it is an advantage to my course achievement that I'm employed this term. I think that it is of no advantage to my course achievement that I'm employed this term. Considering your reactions to the two previous questions, select one of the following responses. 1. 2. 3. 4. Financially not needing to work, I see no other reason to become employed. Financially not needing to work, I see another reason for becoming employed. Needing to work because of my financial situation, is my only reason for becoming employed. Needing to work because of my financial situation, is not my only reason for becoming employed. Answer this item.only if you consider a student's employment beneficial other than for financial reasons. 1. Being employed is of value because it effectively takes my mind off schoolwork and faciliatates a needed change of pace in my schedule. Being employed requires that I am more efficient when I do study. Being employed provides an exposure to new ideas which may influence my choice of a vocation. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 176 This item is designed to determine your place of resi- dence in the campus community. 1. I live on campus as defined by the area enclosed: on the west by the western edge of the Brody Com- plex and Harrison Road, on the south by Mt. Hope Road, on the east by Hagadorn Road, and on the north by Grand River Avenue and that part of Michigan Avenue from Grand River to the west edge of the Brody complex. 2. I live off campus as defined by a location not enclosed in the previous description. This item is to be answered only by those students who live on campus as defined by the previous question. NOTE: A living-learning unit is defined as a multiple dwelling dormitory with contained classrooms. l. I live on campus in one of the living-learning dormitory complexes. 2. I live on campus in a non-living-learning dormi- tory complex. This item is to be answered only by those students who live off campus. 1. I live off campus with my parents or another relative of my family. 2. I live off campus in a rooming house for single students. 3 I live off campus in an apartment for single students. 4. I live off campus in housing for married students only. This item is to be answered only by those students who live off-campus in a rooming house or an apartment for single students. 1. I am the only student living at my place of residence. 2. I am Egg the only student living at my place of residence. This item is designed to assess your perceived ability to study at your place of residence. 1. I find it difficult to study where I live. 2. I do g2; find it difficult to study where I live. 3. I have not attempted to study where I live and therefore I can't make this judgment. Answer this item.only if you find it difficult to study where you live. 36. 37. 38. 177 The major difficulty is from the distractive interruptions from my roommate(s). The major difficulty is the general disturbance surrounding my room. * The major difficulty is the quiet produced by the loneliness where I live. The major difficulty is the demand which occurs from family activities. The major difficulty is my own inability to avoid distractions which occur. Answer this item only if you do not find it difficult to study where you live. 1. The major contributor to my ability to study where I live is the cooperative help I receive from my roommate(s). The major contributor to my ability to study where I live is the lack of a general disturbance where I live. The major contributor to my ability to study where I live is the quiet but not lonely environment. The major contributor to my ability to study where I live is the relaxation from participating in family activities. The major contributor to my ability to study where rd live is my own ability to exclude or ignore the distractions which occur. This question is designed to elicit your pattern of study at this point in the term. 1. 2. 3. I have studied B.S. 211 material more completely since the lst midterm examination. I have“studied B.S. 211 material in the same depth as prior to the lst midterm examination. I have Studied B.S. 211 material less completely since the lst midterm examinatibn. This item is designed to assess the reason for your study pattern indicated by theprior item. 1. 2. I have studied more completely because of my poor results on the lst midterm examination. I have studied more completely because the material since the lst midterm examination has demanded more of my efforts for its comprehension. I have studied the recent material in the same depth as prior to the lst midterm examination because it seemed to be effective on that examination. 39. 40. 41. 178 4. I have studied the recent material in the same depth as prior to the lst midterm examination because I recognized no increase in content difficulty. 5. I have studied less completely since the lst mid- term examination because the recent material seems similar in difficulty to the earlier material which I had over studied for. 6. I have studied less completely since the lst midterm examination because the recent material seems to demand less of my efforts for its comprehension. Would you value exposure to a pretest examination on B.S. 211 content at the beginning of the term? 1. Yes. 2. No. My response to the previous questiOn is primarily because I 1. think a pretest would give me an insight into the important course content to be acquired in B.S. 211. 2. think a pretest would give me an opportunity to become aware of the type of questions I will be required to react to in B.S. 211. 3. think a pretest might give me seme answers to future questions on other examinations in B.S. 211. 4. ‘would intentionally do poorly on the pretest and hope to be graded on my future improvement. think a pretest would be a waste of course time. think a pretest fails to provide any real insight into the course content or procedure. 7. never can decide whether to try to do well or to do poorly, so my final achievement will be more favorably influenced. mm This item is designed to assess your reaction to the course examination format as an indication of your progress during the term in B.S. 211. l. The two midterm.examinations and final examination now used is a good procedure. 2. I think one midterm and a final examination would be more desirable. 3. I think a pretest, two midterm examinations, and a final examination would be desirable. 4. I think a pretest, one midterm examination and a final examination would be desirable. 5. I think a single final examination would be desirable. 179 Biological Science 211 (B.S. 211) Fall Term 1966 Questionnaire #3 This questionnaire instrument is part of a research study on the student population in Biological Science 211. Your responses to the items will be more meaningful if the investigator can identify the involved participants and therefore you are asked to include your name and student number on the provided answer sheet. Individual Student responses will not be made available to the instructional staff of Biological Science 211. The analysis of responses will not be completed until final course grades have been issued for this term. If you have reservations about signing the questionnaire, you may complete the question- naire without signing it. However, for research purposes it is hoped that you will sign the completed questionnaire. DIRECTIONS: Read each item and its possible responses carefully before making your selection. Mark only one response for each item. 42. This item will elicit your reaction to the impact of the level of success achieved by you on the lst midterm examination in B.S. 211. l. A good start in the course relaxed me and aided my future success. 2. A good start in the course mislead me and contri- buted to my future difficulty. 3. A poor start in the course challenged me to do better and aided my future success. 4. A poor start in the course discouraged me and contributed to my future difficulty. 5. I don't think my start in the course had any signi- ficant affect upon me. 43. Knowing that the prerequisite for B.S. 211 is the previ- ous successful completion or concurrent enrollment in organic chemistry, were you concerned about the impor- tance placed on organic chemistry in B.S. 211? 1. Yes 2. No 44. 45. 46. 47. 180 Answer this question only if you responded with a ”yes” to qpestion No.9§ ' 1. My concern about the importance of organic chemistry in B.S. 211 was primarily because of my lack of adequate preparation in that academic area. 2. My concern about the importance of organic chemistry in B.S. 211 was primarily because of my anxiety about being able to coordinate biology with organic chemistry material. 3. My concern was primarily because I was afraid that my disinterest in organic chemistry would inhibit my achievement in B.S. 211. Answer this question only if_you responded with a "no” to question No. 93 1. My lack of concern about the organic chemistry in B.S. 211 was primarily because I considered myself well prepared in the area of organic chemistry. 2. My lack of concern about the organic chemistry in B.S. 211 was primarily because I had an even stron- ger apprehension about the biological content in B.S. 211. 3. My lack of concern about the organic chemistry in B.S. 211 was primarily because I was confident that I could sufficiently supplement by background to successfully handle the organic chemistry material. This item is designed to reflect your feelings about B.S. 211 just prior to the start of this term and at this point just prior to the final examination. 1. I think my expectation of a difficult challenge was accurate. 2. I do 22; think my expectation of a difficult chal- lenge was accurate. 3. I did not expect a difficult challenge but have realized one in B.S. 211. 4. I did not expect a difficult challenge and have .22; experienced one in B.S. 211. If one of the lecture sections in B.S. 211 was presented on television in your place of residence, would you if possible, arrange to be enrolled in that lecture section? 1. Yes 2. No 48. 49. 50. 51. 181 Answer this item only_if_you responded with a "yes" to question No.47. I would attempt to be in the lecture section which is televised where I live because 1. of the convenience of being close to my place of study and residence. 2. ‘many of my other classes will require that I be in this same campus location at other times during the day. Answer this item only if you answered question No.¢7 "no”. I would not attempt to be in the lecture section which is televised where I live because 1. I would prefer enrollment in the "live"