19W

45 3’31,
5- in" ‘3':
5% a”??? VP}

._.
D
“Mon-p

ABSTRACT
AN ANALYSIS OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE

RETURNING/NONRETURNING OLDER ADULT STUDENT
IN A COMMUNITY COLLEGE SETTING

By
MaryRose Lamb Hart

This study examined the characteristics of the older adult
student in a community college setting as compared to the charac-
teristics of the average older adult in Michigan. Differences in
characteristics could help the administrator in a community college
determine what type of older adult the institution was attracting.
This information could then be used to determine new recruitment
procedures, if desired, or to determine if present goals are being
met.

The study also examined the characteristics of the returning
older adult student as compared to the nonreturning older adult student.
Differences in characteristics could aid the administrator in determin-
ing what were factors in the retention rate of older adult students.

The survey population included all Lansing Community College
students who were the age of 60 or over at the time of registration for
the class during the six terms, Summer l974-Fall 1975. All classifi-
cations of students were included in the population. For the purposes

of this research, it was determined that the entire population of older

MaryRose Lamb Hart

adult students, 256 nonduplicated students, was a small enough
population to be handled effectively. 0f the original target
population of 256, 159 responded with usable responses.

The instrument used to collect the data to test the hypotheses
in this study was a revised, condensed form of the questionnaire used
by the Michigan Offices of Services to the Aging in the l975 Michigan
Older Adult Survey.

The data were collected by a mailed questionnaire. Additional
information from the Registrar's Office at Lansing Community College was
included at this point.

The hypothesis l and subhypotheses, which involved the
comparison of the older adult student sample with the sample of older
adults in Michigan, were tested using the Chi-square test for goodness
of fit. The hypothesis 2 and subhypotheses, which involved the compar-
ison of the returning older adult students with the nonreturning older
adult students, were tested using the Chi-square test for differences

in probabilities.
Conclusions of the Study

Hypothesis l

The older adult student at Lansing Community College has
characteristics statistically different from the average older adult
in Michigan.

The older adult students are younger, better educated, more apt
to be working, wealthier, feel healthier and more apt to be married and

living with spouse. They also are less likely to consider themselves

MaryRose Lamb Hart

senior citizens and enjoy associating with all ages of people. They
are less likely to go to senior/recreation centers.

They are much less likely to watch television or read for
leisure. They are more apt to spend their leisure on shopping, hobbies
or attending lectures/entertainment.

In other words, the older adult students present a picture not
unlike that of the average middle class adult. They view themselves as
still part of the main stream, not as a segregated group. Education
was the normal way for them. They felt comfortable in a learning

environment.

Hypothesis 2

The returning older adult student evidenced few significant
differences in characteristics tested from the nonreturning older adult
student.

The returning older adult students included twice the number
of widows as the nonreturning students. They were also more likely to
live in the city/suburbs, make less money, visit friends less and eat
out more.

Statistically there was not much difference between the
returning and the nonreturning older adult student. However, there
appeared to be a trend that could not accurately be measured by this
study. The returning students seemed to use the community college for
social contacts and needs not just cognitive skills, whereas the non-
returning student used the community college to obtain a desired set

of cognitive skills and then left.

AN ANALYSIS OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE
RETURNING/NONRETURNING OLDER ADULT STUDENT
A COMMUNITY COLLEGE SETTING

By

MaryRose Lamb Hart

A DISSERTATION

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY

College of Education

Department of Administration and Higher Education

1977

, .. ~15}.
bla‘leeu

DEDICATION

1'1'

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

To my chairman, Dr. Louis 6. Romano, who understands the true purpose
of the Ph.D. degree and guides his students accordingly;

To my husband, William, who knows how and when to give encouragement;

To my parents, whose faith, guidance and time contributed immeasurably;

To my daughter, Patricia for her understanding and challenges;

T Ann Siders (A.M.), a very special person;

0

To Lansing Community College, especially to Dean W. Schaar, Dale Herder,
and Ellen Sullivan whose professional and financial support made
this dissertation possible;

To my doctoral committee, Dr. Richard Gonzalez, Dr. Keith Groty,

Dr. Walter Johnson, Dr. James Nelson, and Dr. Donald Nickerson
for their time and excellent and constructive suggestions;

To Lillian Briggs, the best grandmother ever, for her countless
prayers;

To Lorraine Hull for timely assistance;

and finally,

To the 6.1. Bill, which financially made it feasible.

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

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

LIST OF FIGURES ........................ x
Chapter

I. THE PROBLEM . . . . .................. l

Introduction to the Study .............. l

Need ......................... 4

The Problem ..................... 5

The Purpose ..................... 6

Definition of Terms . . .............. 6

Limitations and Scope of the Study. ......... 8

Research Questions .................. 8

Overview of the Study ................ 9

II. REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................ lO

Gerontology ..................... ll

Philosophical Stage ............... ll

Biological Stage ................. l2

Psychological Stage ........ . ...... l2

Social Stage ................... l2

Political Stage ................. l3

Theories of Aging . . . . . . ............ 13

Myths of Aging .................... 20

Adult Education and the Older Adult ......... 29

Community College and the Older Adult ........ 33

Research . . . . . ...... . ......... 34

Practice ..... . ................ 36

Summary ....................... 37

III. DESIGN OF THE STUDY .................. 38

Introduction ..................... 38

Setting ....................... 39

Population .................. . . . . 42

Instrument ...................... 43

iv

Chapter Page

Data Collection Process ............... 45
Statement of Hypotheses ............... 46
Statistical Analysis ................. 49
Summary ....................... 50
IV. ANALYSIS or THE DATA ..... ' ............. 51
Introduction ..................... 51
Presentation of Data ................. 53
Summary ....................... 114
V. SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ........ 118
Introduction ..................... 118
Summary ....................... 118
Conclusions of the Study ............... 121
Hypothesis 1 ................... 121
Hypothesis 2 ................... 121
Implications of the Study .............. 122
Recommendations for Further Study .......... 124
Reflection ...................... 125
Appendix
A. QUESTIONNAIRE ..................... 128
8. COVER LETTER--FIRST MAILING .............. 136
C. COVER LETTER--SECOND MAILING .............. l37
D. REGISTRAR'S FORMS, LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE ...... 138
E. AREA SERVICED BY LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE ....... 140
BIBLIOGRAPHY .......................... 141

Table

N d d d —J H d d d .d d
O ‘0 m \I 01 01 «5 OJ N '-‘ O
. C . . O . . . . . .

\OQVOSU'l-DQN

Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data

on

on

on

on

011

on

LIST OF TABLES

Sex Distribution .................

Marital Status ..................

Living Arrangements ...............

Living With Spouses ...............

the Educational Level ..............

Age

Reorganized Data on Age .................

Data on Time in Neighborhood ...............

Data on Place of Residence ................

Data on Income (Working and Retired) ...........

Reorganized Data on Income (Working and Retired) .....

Data on Employment Status ................

Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data

on Employment Status ................

on Television Watching ...............

on Visiting .....................

on Reading .....................

on Hobbies .....................

on Travel ......................

on Church as Leisure Activity ............

on Cards and Bingo .................

vi

Page
54
55
55
56
57
58
58
59
6O
6O
61
62
62
63
64
64
65
65
66
67

Table
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
37.

38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.

Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data

Senior Citizen ......................

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

071

on

O"

on

Walking .....................
Outdoor Sports ..................
Taking a Drive ..................
Club and Group Activities . . ' ..........
Eating Out . . . .- ................
Shopping .....................
Recreation Center ................
Lecture/Entertainment ..............
Indoor Sports ..................
Volunteer Activities ...............
Sports Events . . . . ..............
Movies ......................
Bars/Taverns ...................
Health ......................
Social Need (Visiting Friend) ..........
Social Need (Visiting Friends) ..........
Whether Older Adults Consider Self a

Data on Joining Groups of Various Ages ..........

Data on Transportation Problems for Self .........

Data on Transportation Problems for Older Adults .....

Data on Sex Distribution .................

Data on Marital Status ..................

Data on Living Arrangements ...............

vii

Page
67
68
68
69
7O
7O
71
71
72
73
73
74
75
75
76
77

77
78
79
79
80
81
82

Table
44.
45.
46.
47.
48.
49.
50.
51.
52.
53.
54.
55.
56.
57.
58.
59.
60.
61.
62.
63.
64.
65.
66.
67.

Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

O"

on

on

on

on

on

O"

on

OH

on

on

Educational Level ................

Adult Education .................

High School Classes ...............

College/University Courses ............

Craft/Sewing/Hobby'Courses ........... .

Discussion Groups ................

Bible Groups . . ................ .

Vocational Courses ................

Pre-Retirement Programs .............

Library Programs .................

Consumer Buying Classes .............

Other Experiences ................

Time in Neighborhood ...............

Neighborhood Grew Up In .............

Neighborhood Now Live In .............

Income (Working and Retired) . . .........

Retirees' Pre-Retirement Income .........

Employment Status ................

Employment Status ................

Health .

Television Watching . ..............

Visiting .....................

Reading
Hobbies

viii

Page
83
84
84
85
86
86
87
88
88
89
9O
90
91
92
92
93
94
95
95
96
97
97
98
99

Table

68.
69.
70.
71.
72.
73.
74.
75.
76.
77.
78.
79.
80.
81.
82.
83.
84.
85.
86.
87.
88.
89.

Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data
Data

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

on

Travel ......................
Church as Leisure Activity ............
Playing Cards and Bingo .............
Walking .....................
Outdoor Sports . .' ................
Taking a Drive ..................
Club and Group Activities ............
Eating Out ....................
Shopping .....................
Use of a Recreation Center ............
Lectures/Entertainment ..............
Indoor Sports ..................
Volunteer Activities ...............

Sport Events ...................

Bars/Taverns ...................
Goals ......................
Community Involvement ..............
Transportation Problems for Self .........
Transportation Problems for Other Older Adults .

Perceived View of Aging .............

Which Age Group Preferred ............

ix

Page
99
100

102
103
103
104
105
105
106
107
107
108
109
109
110
111
112
112

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure Page
1. Summary of the Not Rejected/Rejected Hypotheses ..... ll5
2. Statistics on Older Adult Students ............ 117

CHAPTER I

THE PROBLEM

Introduction to the Study

In today's American society, one of the fastest growing segments
of the nation's population is the older adult citizen. At the present
time one out of every ten people is over 60. By the year 2000 this
proportion is expected to increase even further; one out of every
nine Americans will be over 60 (U.S. Bureau of Census, 1972). Recent
interest in the older population has been spurred by this growth. The
retired population has grown faster still. The question of the 19305
"what to do with the older worker," has resurfaced (Donahue, 1975).

The government is becoming more and more actively involved with the
aging. The community college is now becoming aware of the over-sixty
segment of the population.

The increasing odds of reaching 60+ years are the dividend of
our society. There are two new periods in aging--young old (60 to 75
years) and old age (over 75) (McClusky, 1975). At no other time in
American history has there been this large a number of older Americans.
And yet, less is known about this group than any other group of
Americans. The whole question of aging, until recently, has been

ignored by both the biological and social scienCes. "Everyone" though

has had an idea of what was meant by the term, aging. The question
of aging or growing old has occupied people's minds long before the
biological and social sciences were really interested scientifically
in the area of aging. This first scientific interest was Just in the
physical aspect of growing old. Studies on the intelligence, etc. of
old people started in the 19205 and 19305. These studies focused on
the individuals. In 1929 Lillian Martin opened an old age counseling
center. The term gerontology was first used in the 19305; social
gerontology emerged in the late 19505. Thus the most advanced research
on aging is in the biological areas. The social sciences are still
formulating their theories about aging. The Disengagement Theory of
Aging is the first real theory for the twentieth century, but it does
not transcend cultures or take personalities into account (Friis, 1968).

One of the problems appears to be that, not only must a new
body of knowledge be developed, but many of the formally held ideas
about aging must be discarded. Michel Philibert, a French gerontologist
and philosopher sums up the western perspective on aging in four main
points: (1) aging is a biological rather than a spiritual, social and
cultural process; (2) aging is unfavorable; (3) aging is universal and
eternal rather than differential and variable; and (4) aging is unman-
ageable (Philibert, 1975). Though gerontologists now accept the above
points as myths, our general population has not. Almost no one wants
to consider himself as elderly.

As these myths of aging are shattered, the tremendous need

for education among the older Americans is being revealed. This was

strongly pointed up by the recommendations of the White House Conference
on Aging, 1971 (McClusky, 1971). The state of the elderly was viewed as
serious. A list of priorities coming from this conference pushed for
integration of the older American back into the main stream of decision-
making for the solution of the elderly's problems. Education is needed
to prepare them to do this. There-is also a strong need for the train-
ing of personnel working with elderly or in the aging field. A need
also exists to view aging as a lifelong process. Aging has positive
aspects. The myths that pervade our society must be weeded out. As
more and more senior citizens realize these myths don't apply to them,
they seek out educational institutions to help them cope with the
realities of their world.

In a recent survey completed by the Michigan Area Agency on
Aging (Area Plan for Programs in Aging, 1975), education ranked fifth
among the expressed needs of the elderly themselves, while among the
pre-sixty population it ranked eleventh. The seniors are more aware
than the general population of their need to be helped by education.

The seniors' need to cope with their real world is but one
side of the need for education of the elderly. The other side is to
help the educational institutions. The size and needs of the senior
population become even more important to the school administrator as
the trend toward zero population growth continues. Already the
elementary schools are facing declining enrollments and all the
implications that brings. Now is the time for community colleges

to develop their programs to help both the elderly and themselves

as the declining enrollments become evident through the traditional
grades (Gleazer, 1974)., Andrew Korim, at a seminar for community
college administrators, stressed that the institutions themselves

need to be educated to the needs of the older adult. If good programs
can be established now, then credibility with the older adult will be
there when needed in the future (Korim, 1974).

Need

During the past five years there has been a proliferation of
materials on the older adult. The need for education to change the
negative image of the older adult and to help her cope with the
changing world has been stressed (DeCrow, 1974). Research has been
conducted to determine the "needs" of the older adult and general
' information on the older adult population. The whole question of
how to attract the older adult to the educational scene has been
explored from many different points of view (DeCrow, 1974; Goodrow,
1975; Manney, 1975; Moody, 1976; Peterson, 1976) and yet no current
studies have taken place on what are the characteristics of an older
adult student at a community college.

Before the administrators can act intelligently on designing
programs for older adults, they should know the characteristics of
the older adult students who are already attending the available
programs. Determination of these characteristics will enable the
administrators to judge from where the population of older adult stu-

dents is presently being drawn, and perhaps, to make some conjectures

as to why this population is being drawn to the community college.
The need exists for this groundwork to be laid by research, not
guesswork. I

A very important part of this research is the study of the
characteristics of the older adult student in the community college
setting. It is necessary for the administrators to see if their image
of who the older adult is and why she is there, is the same image the
older adult students hold of themselves. Only by exploring and com-
paring the expectations of students and institutions can the admin-
istrators fairly and accurately judge their programs and make changes
if needed. At present, not enough baseline data exists on expectations,
characteristics and viewpoint of the older adult student to allow the

administrators to incorporate this necessary data in planning.

The Problem

In Order for an administrator to adapt a program to meet the
needs of the older student, she must first determine the type of older
student that has been in attendance at the college. In this way the
administrator can determine which, and what proportion of the older
adult population is attracted to the community college. With this
information the administrator can then proceed to view the college's
current older adult population in relationship to the total service
district's older adult population. She can then decide if or where
the differences or discrepancies lie. The administration can also

use the information to see why some older adult students don't return

to the community college. The program can then be evaluated in light

of these findings.

 

The Purpose

The purpose of this study is to try to determine the charac-
teristics of the older adult student in a community college setting,
more specifically, Lansing Community College. This information will
then be used to make two different types of comparisons: (l) charac-
teristics which differentiate the older adult student from the average
older adult and (2) characteristics which differentiate the returning
older adult student from the nonreturning older adult student. This
information will be of importance since it will form the baseline data
for the Center for Aging Education (CAE). The population chosen for
this study was the last group of students over sixty to attend Lansing
Community College before the Center for Aging Education was established.
The Center was established in September 1975 as a coordinating center
at Lansing Community College in matters for and about aging. Using
the information provided from this study the Center can make comparisons

with its present population to see the impact of the Center.
Definition of Terms

The definition of terms which follow are presented to aid in
the interpretation and clarification of this study and to facilitate
any future replications of this study that may be initiated.

Older adult, senior, senior citizen, elderly: Any person sixty years
old or over.

Average older adult: The norm as determined by a Michigan survey of
older adults conducted by Market Opinion Research Co., Inc.,
for the Office of Services to the Aging.

Social needs: Perceived need to extend human contact beyond close
knit associates.

Educational experiences: May consist of either formal or informal
contact with an educational institution.

Educational institution: As utilized in this study, it pertains to any
organized structure that offers events; the primary purpose of
which, is instructional in nature, i.e., schools, churches,
youth groups, community organizations, etc.

Socio-Economic Status (SE5): For the purpose of this study, the SES
will be determined by a combination of income and subject's
self-perception of her social status.

Adhinistrator: The individual designated by a higher authority for

the responsibility of operational functions of a community
college.

Older adult student: An individual, sixty years of age or older, who
enrolled for at least one course at Lansing Community College.

a. Returning older adult student: An older adult student
who subsequently re-enrolled in a structured educational
experience at Lansing Community College.

b. Nonreturning older adult student: An older adult student
who did not re-enroll in a structured educational
experience at Lansing Community College.

Community college: "A two-year institution of higher education,
generally public, offering instruction adopted in content,
level, and schedule to the needs of the community in which
it is located. Offerings usually include a transfer curriculum,
occupational curriculums, general education and adult education"
(Handbook of Data and Definitions in Higher Education, 1972).

Limitations and Scope of the Study

The study will be limited to one community college, Lansing
Community College. The college serves a divergent population, such as,
rural, suburban and urban. The study will be limited by the sample that
responds. The study is further limited by the subjects' willingness
both to participate and to complete the questionnaire accurately and
honestly. The validity of the results is also limited by the extent

to which some of the people asked did not answer all of the questions.
Research Questions

This study was designed to answer the following research
questions:

1. What selective characteristics does an older adult student
have? I

2. Does the older adult student have significantly different,
definable, selected characteristics from the average older
adult?

a. What are these characteristics?
b. How do they differ?

3. Does the returning adult student have significantly different,
definable, selected characteristics from the nonreturning older
adult student?

a. On which selected characteristics do they differ?

b. How do they differ?

Chapter III contains the detailed hypotheses to be studied.

Overview of the Study

 

This study is divided into five chapters. The setting for
the study is presented in Chapter I. It includes an introduction to
the study, the statement of need and the purpose of the study, limi-
tations of the study, the statement of the hypotheses to be tested
and definitions of terms used in this study.

The review of the literature is contained in Chapter II. This
review is divided into three general areas: (1) adult education,
(2) community college and (3) gerontology. The review includes sources
since 1960 with emphasis on the period since 1970.

A description of the research design and procedure is found in
Chapter III. Included in this description is information relating to:
(1) the sample, (2) the instrument used, (3) collection of the data
and (4) statistical methods used.

The in-depth analysis of the data is found in Chapter IV. Each
hypothesis is presented followed by the pertinent data.

A summary of significant findings, conclusions, implications

and recommendations for future studies is presented in Chapter V.

CHAPTER II

REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature was reviewed in this chapter to provide a
background necessary to understand more fully the position of an older
adult in a community college setting. This review is divided into three
main conceptual areas: (1) gerontology, (2) adult education as it is
related to the older adult, and (3) community colleges as they are
related to the older adult.

Two factors have influenced the literature found in these
areas. The first was the relative newness of recognition of the older
adult as a distinct group and the second factor was the increase of
both state and federal funding available for work in these areas.

The result has been an outpouring of nonscientific or "critical"
articles and a proliferation of descriptions of programs and "suc-
cesses." This review incorporated both the “critical" and the
scientific literature that was most pertinent to this study.
Howard McClusky (1971) best summarized the state of the art by
writing:

When we search the world of scholarship for "hard data"

related to the education of older people, we emerge from
our inquiry with several substantial impressions. First,
such data on the education of older persons is extremely

limited: obviously, this is a domain much neglected by
educational research. Second, with respect to the amount

10

11

of formal education attained, older persons are extremely
disadvantaged. Third, rates of participation by the aging
in activities designed for the education of adults are
very low, in fact the lowest for all age segments of the
population. Fourth, the ability of older people to learn
continues at a high functional level well into the later
years, age, therefore, in itself, being no barrier to
learning.

In brief, then, older people are for the most part
seriously deficient in formal education, generally non-
participant in educational activities, but at the same
time capable of an educational response far greater than
that offered by existing opportunities and presumably
expected by the society. (p. 9)

Gerontology

 

The section on gerontology is divided into three subsections.
The development of gerontology is the theme of the first subsection.
The second subsection contains the main theories of aging. Literature
on some myths of aging that influence educators is presented in the
third subsection.

Gerontology has been broken down into five stages by Leonard
Breen (1971). Although each stage is considered separately, they are
not mutually exclusive and, in fact, are interrelated. The five stages
developed approximately in the order presented but are overlapping and

may all still be in existence.

Philosophical Stagg_

The first stage was the philosophical stage. Early writers,
including the Greeks and Romans, discussed the time of aging as lessen-
ing of passion and control of the intellect. This stressed the long

term importance of aging.

12

Biological Stagg_

The next stage was the biological stage. This was a concern
for the causes of aging. "Cures" were searched for. It was hoped
industry and science could provide the reversal of the aging process.
The first people scientifically interested in aging were biologists
and medical doctors. The interest was just in the physical aspects

of aging (Donahue, 1975).

Psychological Stagg_

Studies on the intelligence of old people started in the 19205
and 19305. This ushered in the psychological stage. In 1929 Lillian
Martin opened an old age counseling center. The term gerontology was

first used in the 19305.

Social Stage

The start of Breen's next stage, the social stage, is disputed
by several known gerontologists. Clark Tibbitts placed the start of
scientific social gerontology as late as the 19505 (Tibbitts, 1960).
It was he who coined the phrase "social gerontology“ in the late 19505
(Donahue, 1975). Strieb and Orbach (1967) date the beginning much
earlier. They felt interest in gerontology was started with Francis
Bacon's History of Life and Death (1645). Attempts were made in the
nineteenth century to systematically study aging. Burgess (1960) and
Hanighurst (1957) place the start with the industrial revolution. It
was recognized by all that things begin to advance in the field of
gerontology toward the end of the 19505. Wilma Donahue (1975) became
the first gerontologist listed in Who's Who.

13

Political Stage

 

The growth of the older population not only has spurred recent
interest, but has ushered in the last stage, the political stage. Both
state and federal governments are becoming more and more involved with
the question of aging. There is an increased number of people who have
worked with problems of aging and are now in influential positions in
the government; i.e., Vice President Walter Mondale and Juanita Krepps,

Secretary of Commerce.
Theories of Aging

Because the area of aging encompasses the entire man, the
theories of aging also deal with different aspects of man aging.
Ewald W. Busse (1969) grouped the theories into three main aspects
of aging: the biological, the psychological and the sociological.

The biological theories are divided into three components.
The first component of theories concerns the central idea that cells
multiply throughout the life span. Theories that deal with this area
focus on the idea that new cells in old animals are not as good as new
cells in a young animal (Busse, 1969; Smith & Smith, 1965; Sonneborn,
1957; Hayflick, 1968).

The second component of theories centers on cells that are
incapable of division. These theories focus on the idea that this
type of cell is totally lost or declines in function as an organism

ages (Busse, 1969; Hayflick, 1968; Curtis, 1966).

14

The third component of theories centers on the noncellular
or interstitial material. These theories (Barrows & Strehler, 1968;
Shock, 1962; Kallman & Jarnik, 1959; Busse, 1969) focus on the idea
that damage "occurs in the noncellular material of the body, inter-
fering with nutrition, respiration, and excretion" (Busse, 1969,

p. 17).

Although the biological aspects of aging are important, the
main emphasis of this review is on the psychological and the sociolog-
ical theories of aging. The adherence to a theory or set of theories
in these two areas will determine the type of strategies an adminis-
trator will use in older adult course planning.

Henning Friis et a1. (1968) suggested that the underlying
question for all theories of social gerontology was: “Are old people
integrated into society or are they separated from it" (p. 3)?
According to Friis et al. the theories of social gerontology break
down into three areas of interest: (1) the historical perspective,
(2) the individual aging within a life span and (3) relationships
between the aged and the young (Friis et a1., 1968).

The first group of theories is concerned with historical
changes in the relationships, roles and attitudes of the elderly.
Much of the early sociological theories alleged the disruptive effects
of industrialization on the rural communities and extended families.

Friis et a1. (1968) disputed this idea:

15

Just as the family unit was said to have diminished in

size, so also the functions of the family were said to have

diminished in number and importance. In consequence the

elderly were assumed to be losing their function and to

be largely isolated. . . . Really good information on the

family life of older people in the past is lacking. What

information is available does not, in general, support the

theories that old people in thETTamily have been isolated

as a result of industrialization. Evidence for pre-

industrial periods suggest that three-generation households

were rare in the pa5t in both the United States and Great

Britain and that a great number of old people lived alone

in towns and villages alike. (pp. 3-4)
Two important ideas must be considered when comparing the life of the
aged in industrial societies to the life of the aged in preindustrial
societies. "First, old people tend to be rare in pre-industrial but
not in industrial societies. Second, in both pre-industrial and
industrial societies a differentiation is made between relatively
active and relative infirm old age which has been ignored by family
theorists" (Friis et al., 1968, p. 4).

The group of theories that has received the most attention
in recent years is the individual aging within a lifespan. Two key
theories in this group are the disengagement theory and the activity
or atrophy of disuse theory.

The disengagement theory was proposed by E. Cummings and
W. Henry (1961). In essence, the disengagement theory is two
theories in one. One concerns society's gradual disengagement
from the individual in order to maintain continuity as the chance
of death increases and to eliminate inefficient members. The other
relates to the individual, who at the same time, is disengaging from

society. This is occurring from an inner need to reflect on self.

16

These conclusions were drawn from a cross-sectional study in Kansas
City over a five year period.

Newell (1961), who contributed to the Cumming and Henry
theory of disengagement, conducted a study to measure the amount of
social disengagement. He determined the variety of roles an individual
plays decreases with age. He further concluded that the density of
interaction decreased with age.

A number of other investigators have attempted to explore the
patterns of personality in middle and late life. S. Richard et a1.
conducted a study of 87 older men, half retired and half working. The
study indicated the "real personality crisis comes before, not after,
retirement“ (Tunstall, 1966, p. 235). The study reported five main
patterns of adjustment. Of these, two were considered successful.
One of the successful "rocking-chair" men fits very closely to the
disengagement theory (Richard, Linson & Peterson, 1967).

Neugartin and associates, using the developmental approach,
determined there was an increasing separation from the environment as
age increased (Neugarten et al., 1964). They further concluded that
sixty-year olds, where compared to forty-year olds, seemed to see the
environment as more complex and dangerous.

The disengagement theory stirred up considerable controversy.
Jeremy Tunstall pointed out the problems arising from the conclusions

of Growing Old and Aging and Personality (Tunstall, 1966). Current

 

social trends suggest that disengagement, while an attractive option

for some older people, is by no means inevitable (Manney, 1975). The

17

main challenge to the disengagement theory is the activity theory.
According to Busse (1969), the activity or atrophy of disuse theory
holds the maintenance of activities is important to most individuals
as a basis for obtaining and maintaining satisfaction, self-esteem
and health. "In one study the change in activities and attitudes of
127 aged subjects were studied over a span of 10 years. It was found
there was no significant overall decrease in activities or alternation
in attitudes among men, while there was a slight decrease among women"
(Maddox, 1963, p. 195). Robert Atchley (1972) extends the activity
theory by stating the activity theory “holds that the norms for old
age are the same as those for middle age" (p. 34).

Atchley then proceeds to explain the prime difficulty with
this theory is that it says nothing about what happens to people who
cannot maintain the standards of the middle-aged. It is at this stage
the two theories work together. The theory of societal disengagement
would explain why older adults may not be successful, but the activity
theory would explain why they keep trying.

A minor theory developed by Stephen Miller (1965) and discussed
by Manney (1975), is the identity crisis theory. This theory focuses
on people whose primary self-identity is as a worker, and who are
unable to rebuild an identity in leisure pursuits. As a response,
they withdrew.

So far the research has not produced an all encompassing theory

of life span aging.

18

The last group of theories deal with the relationship between
the aged and the young. Within this group the major theories that are
contributing to the growth of a third are the developmental and the
historical theories. Irving Rosow (1967) best described these two
as follows:

The developmental would assume generic processes of growth
and change which are fairly common to all people as they
traverse the life span. Therefore, there should be few
differences between generations when they are compared at
similar points in their life cycles. Consequently, apparent
differences between age groups at any given time are essen-
tially a function of their different stages in their life
cycle (aging). On the other hand, the historical emphasizes
differential socialization of successive enerations in the
culture. The historical identifies them differences between
age groups) with differential socialization or coming to
maturity at different times under different social influences
and explains them by social change. (p. 11)

The merger of the developmental and the historical theories
is the continuity theory. The continuity theory holds that "the
individual's reaction to aging can be explained by examining the
complex interrelationships among biological and psychological changes;
the person's habit, preferences, and associations; situational oppor-
tunities for continuity; and actual experience" (Atchley, 1972, p. 26).
Research on the continuity theory is just beginning so it probably will
be awhile before the full impact of the theory will be felt on social
gerontology.

Two other theories which should be mentioned but which have not
generated much research are: the subculture of aging (Rose, 1965) and

aged as a minority group (Strich, 1965).

19

The subculture of aging theory holds that by virtue of their
characteristic old age, older people are being forced to interact with
each other. At present this does not appear to be occurring across
social class lines.

The other theory holds that older people are being discriminated
against because they share a common biological trait. The main flaw in
this theory appears to be the lack of explanation of why this happens
in some situations and not others (Atchley, 1972).

To the casual observer, there may be a question as to why no
one theory for aging has been found. David Gutmore (1975) proposed
that it was for these reasons: (a) researchers lack concepts definite
to aging; (b) researchers relate losses to youthful ideals; whereas,
the question of priority for the aged may be different from the young.
The problem is the aged can become the stranger to his society. Then
why hasn't society studied the aged to develop an understanding? The
main reasons for this are irrational but include: (a) fashion--no
thought was given it; (b) covert fear of aged; (c) developmental
psychology looks for younger ideas; (d) psychologists want the unique
ideas and differences and older adults are governed by normatives; and
(e) psychologists only study what can be measured. What is needed is
more longitudinal studies. The researcher must watch that society's
impact on the person; i.e., "act your age," is filtered out.

Tunstall (1966) suggested that "any social theory of old age
must recognize these two basic complexities; first, patterns of aging
stretch far back into the individual's past and secondly there is great

variety in social relations in old age" (p. 268).

20

Myths of Aging

Presented in this section are thirteen common myths about
aging and evidence that challenges these ideas. These myths have been
divided into two sections: environment and self. The section on the
environment contains myths about the surroundings of older adults.

The section on self contains two parts: the section on the physical
aspects and the section on the mental aspects; i.e., attitudes and
intelligence.

The first myth that was challenged was that all old people
are isolated from their families. Corollaries to this myth are the
myth that all old people are lonely, should not live alone, and want
to live with their families. Researchers have shown all these to be
myths. McClusky (1974) reported that according to a recent survey of
70,000 older people in 50 states "87 percent said they were pleased
with thier life style and pleased with relationships with families and
other persons" (p. 344). Palmore (1969) reported that 87 percent of
the older adults in the United States saw one or more relatives during
a week. Shanas (1968) concluded: ". . . persons aged 65 and over are
more strongly integrated into industrial society than is often assumed
either by the general public or by social theorists . . . in the
frequency of their contacts with children and other relatives, most
older people are fairly securely knitted into the social structure"
(p. 425). Tunstall (1966) added that the idea of functional detachment

of the family is not the same as the family disintegration. He referred

21

to Rosenmaye and Koskeis' idea of "intimacy at a distance." Zena
Smith Blau (1973) maintained that one contemporary was worth twelve
family members for the promotion of the feeling of well-being. Rosow
(1967) at an earlier date stated there was little specific research on
friendships. Despite this, "most investigators consistently report
that life satisfaction and psychological well-being in later life
is positively associated with high social interaction rather than
withdrawal" (p. 26). "Furthermore, working class people are syste-
matically more dependent on neighbors as a source of friends than
members of the middle class" (p. 28).

The second myth was that older adults expected to receive
or wanted financial support from their children. McClusky (1974)
reported that they are not dependent nor do they want to be. Blau
(1973) found that most older people when asked whether money should
be given to them, or saved for their grandchildren, felt their children
should use the money on the grandchildren. Atchley (1973) stressed the
high value placed on independence by older people.

The third myth that was challenged was that older adults move

to warmer climates. In fact, according to Time Magazine (1970), less

 

than 1 percent of the elderly leave their own states. Riley (1969)
found most retired people do not move away from their place of long
term residence. This was further pointed out by interviews on a public
broadcasting system series, "Images of Aging" (1975).

The next myth to be challenged was the idea that older people
are poorly housed. The problem with this myth is that the term "poorly

22

housed" is relative. The standards are set by younger people.

Hoffman (1974) reported that middle age children complain that their
mother's places are messy or their yards are full of weeds. Atchley
(1975) reported that older people tend to live in dwellings that are
slightly older than average, that have lower values and that are more
often dilapidated. Despite this, McClusky (1974) reported the Peterson
and LeBlanc (1973) survey showed 88 percent were satisfied with their
housing arrangements. Even 80 percent of those who had an annual
income below $3,000 expressed contentment.

The fifth and last environmental idea to be challenged was
the idea that a sick older adult should be moved to a hospital or
nursing home. Researchers reported that it was an aid to keep an
older person in familiar surroundings as long as possible (Hoffman,
1974; Blenkner, 1967; Kasl, 1972; Lawton, 1970). This was achieved
by cooperative effects of family, friends, neighbors and community
services.

The sixth through eighth ideas involved mainly the physical
aspects of self aging.

The sixth idea that has been challenged is the idea that
elderly need different types of food than younger people. This idea
has been challenged by Dr. Cederquist (1974). She stressed the need
for the same types of nutritional food but with a slight decrease in
calories and increase in protein. This has been backed by the inde-
pendent research of Dr. Olaf Mickelsen (1976). Hoffman (1974)

concurred.

23

The seventh idea that was challenged was the notion that older
adults are sickly. The corollaries to this idea, old people shouldn't
see doctors, senility is common, operations shouldn't be discussed with
older people and sickness is caused by age were also challenged. Simon
(1976) and Butler (1973) reported the negative attitude of the doctors
toward older adults ("crocks" is the "medical" term used to describe
them). Bettinghaus (1976) reported that this carried over into the
treatment. The older person was treated as an object or talked down to.

The idea seemed to be that old people are sick because they are
old and nothing can be done about that. In reality, less than 6 percent
of people 65 and over are in care facilities or homebound and only 13
percent have a major limitation of activity (McClusky, 1974; Hoffman,
1974; Riley & Forner, 1969). The Duke longitudinal study found no
decline in physical functioning in over 50 percent of the returning
people and in some cases there was an improvement. Palmore (1969)
reported a study in which a "one year program of exercise for men 70
and over that so improved their health and fitness that their body
reactions became similar to those 30 years younger" (p. 49). :133;
(1970) summed it up by saying: "a man is as sick as his arteries,
and that sickness is caused by diet and stress not age" (p. 50).

Dr. Swartz (1975) stressed that there are no diseases of aging only
birth. A person is predisposed to the ailments, he doesn't get them
because he ages. Atchley (1973) reported that on the average, the

older person is less likely to be afflicted with an acute condition.

Most older people have chronic conditions. Palmore (1969) reported

24

that the percentage "was only one-half more times those aged 17 to 64
and included such minor conditions as needing glasses, mild hearing
loss and allergies" (p. 48). Butler (1973) concluded: "Until 1960
most of the medical, psychological, psychiatric and social work lit-
erature on the aged was based on experience with the sick and the
institutionalized even though only 5 percent of the elderly were
confined to institutions. A few research studies that have con-
centrated on the healthy aged give indications of positive potential
for the entire age group. But the general almost phobic dislike of
aging remains the norm, with healthy old people being ignored and the
chronically ill receiving half-hearted custodial care (p. 18)."

The eighth idea not only involved misconceptions about the
topic but also strong taboos. The idea is that sexual activities and
interest decline sharply with age. This idea has been strongly chal-
lenged by all researchers that have interviewed old people. Pfeiffer
(1969) reviewed the major research studies in the area: Kinsey,
Masters and Johnson and the Duke University longitudinal publications.
However, the information still lags behind other age groups. Essen-
tially the taboo against sex in old age has not been broken down as
in the other age groups. The conclusions of the researchers have been
that most older adults can function sexually presuming both reasonably
good health and an interested and desirable partner (Hoffman, 1974;
Butler, 1973; 119g, 1970; Pfeiffer, 1969; Masters & Johnson, 1966;
Bergston, 1974; Felstein, 1973).

25

As a corollary to the eighth idea, was the idea that marriages
in later years are a mistake. Hoffman (1974) reported a study of older
adults who had married after the age of sixty-five. After five years
three-fourths of them were still happy..

The ninth through the thirteenth ideas involved mainly the
mental aspects of self aging. These are broken down into attitudes
(ideas nine through twelve) and intelligence (idea thirteen).

The ninth idea that was challenged was that older adults should
be discouraged from dwelling in the past. Hoffman (1974) and Butler
(1973) suggested that reminiscing about the past is important to the
older adult's happiness. Erik Erickson in Hoffman (1974) calls the
final stage of life "ego integrity." To achieve it the person must
first review and understand his life. The older adult is the keeper
of the past.

The tenth idea that was challenged was the idea that it is
cruel to talk about death with an old person. Jeffers (1969) reported
the conclusions of different studies show the apposite. Older people
need to work out their idea of death. Dr. Leon J. Epstern of Langley-
Porter Neuropsychiatric Institute (Hoffman, 1974) said: "In my
experience the older person often wants to talk about death; the
younger person doesn't want to hear because it makes him feel anxious
and uncomfortable" (p. 175). Butler (1973) said that in a National
Institute of Mental Health study, 55 percent of old people in good
health seemed to have resolved the problems of their death, 30 percent

manifested denial, and 15 percent candidly expressed fear. There is a

26

growing interest in the area of death and dying. One of the key

researchers in the area is Dr. KUbler-Ross (1973). Her work has

opened doors for future studies. She is best known for the five

stages of dying. The concensus of opinion of the researchers was
that talking about dying is necessary for the older person if he

wants to discuss it (Hoffman, 1974; Atchley, 1972; Butler, 1973;

KUbler-Ross, 1973; Jeffers & Verwoerdt, 1969).

The eleventh idea that was challenged was really a combination
of false notions about retirement. Some of the various forms of these
notions are: life is less satisfying after retirement; the older a
person is the more unproductive he is; older people have loads of time
on their hands; older people are "tranquil." Researchers have shown
productivity of the older worker and the older adult (Palmore, 1969;
Hoffman, 1974; Butler, 1973; Hanighurst, 1970; Boyack, 1973; Wass,
1977). The amount of time and attitude of the older adult is not
dependent on the age but rather on the previous behavior of the older
adult. "If you've enjoyed life before retirement, you'll enjoy it
afterwards" (Hoffman, 1974, p. 175).

The twelfth idea that was challenged was the idea that people
grow more conservative the older they get. Bergtson (1974) has
disproved this by his own research into generational continuities
and differences in three-generation families. McClusky (1974) pointed
out the small amount of difference in priorities of problems between

the youth and the elderly. Butler (1973) pointed out that “the adult

27

character structure is remarkably stable, but the ability to change
depends more on previous and lifelong personality traits than anything
inherent in old age. Often when conservatism occurs it derives nOt
from aging, but from socioeconomic pressures" (pp. 22-23).
The last idea is one that can most influence the behavior
of an educator. The idea, that older people can't learn because
intelligence decreases as a person ages, has been dismissed by
researchers in the field of gerontology. Dr. Ruth Glick emphasized
that "studies show that general intellectual decline as a function
of normalizing is pretty much a myth" (Glick, 1976, p. 13). This was
reiterated by Carl Eisdorfer (1969): "The findings from long-term
longitudinal investigations of middle-aged and aged persons have
raised doubts about the validity of the simple hypothesis that there
is a progressive, generalized loss of intellectual and learning ability
in all older persons" (p. 237). Alexander Simon (1976) reported that
"the better the education and the social and cultural background, the
greater the resistance to mental impairment with age" (p. 39).
Roger DeCrow (1974) went even further in support of the older
learner:
The older learner is often the best learner. In
general, older people have more and better organized
experience which provides a meaningful context into which
new information can be assimilated. They know themselves
better and more clearly perceive what new learning will
be truly useful to them. Being under no compulsion, they
shun learning things that seem irrelevant. (p. 12)
Woodruff and Walsh (1975) reported the opposite: "Older

cohorts have repeatedly been found to be poorer learners than young

cohorts even when noncognitive factors have been controlled" (p. 430).

28

Hulicka and Wheeler (1976) gave limited support to Woodruff
by concluding: "Because of a general slowing of the central nervous
system with advanced age, old people may need more time for information
processing rather than simply want more time because of cautiousness
and a desire for certitude" (p. 371).

Baltes and Schair (1974) speculated about the reasons for
generational differences in intelligence. Their conclusions were that
the answer lies in the substance, method and length of education
received by the different generations. Their overall conclusions
supported the idea that "intelligence does not slide downhill from
adulthood through old age. By many measures, it increases as time
goes by" (p. 35).

Okun and Siegler (1977) suggested that the reason for poor
performance by the older adults was lack of persistence at a task.
Their study showed that "younger men perceived that effort is an
important determinant of outcome. In contrast, older men perceive
that outcome and effort expenditure are only weakly related“ (p. 30).

Two recent comprehensive reviews of the studies done in the
areas of intelligence were done by Baltes and Labouvie (1973) and
Labouvie-Vief (1976). Baltes and Labouvie concluded their review
stating "that intellectual ontogeny is alterable and that cross-
sectional performance decrements are largely due to environmental
deficits" (p. 205). Labouvie-Vief summarized: "As evidence is
accumulated showing that intellectual performance of the older person

responds favorably to a variety of ecological, training and motivational

29

conditions, it is argued that intellectual development in later life
is characterized by plasticity rather than universal decline" (p. 75).
The general trend of intellectual research in the literature
appeared to reflect the conclusions reached by Lorge in 1955:
Age as age probably does little to affect his power to
learn or to think. Aging brings different values, goals,
self-concepts, and responsibilities. Such changes in values
together with the physiological changes may affect performance
but not power. Adults learn much less than they might partly
because of the self-underestimations of their power and wisdom,
and partly because of their own anxieties that their learning

behavior will bring unfavorable criticism. Failure to keep on
learning may affect performance more than power itself. (p. 49)

Adult Education and the Older Adult

The literature in this area is divided into two main sections:
research and practice. The research section is composed of two over-
lapping subsections: (1) theory as to why there should be adult edu-
cation for older adults and how adult education for older adults should
be conducted and (2) studies conducted in the area of older adult educa-
tion. The practice section consists of types of educational experiences
offered older adults.

The basis for the knowledge of education for older adults has
been Dr. Donahue's book, Education for Later Maturity (1955). It was
the first book of its kind. Experts were gathered from all fields and
asked to contribute ideas. According to Peterson (1976) little has
changed since that time. Activities have been added ad hoc rather
than being based on a "comprehensive, philosophical framework" (p. 62).

DeMott (1975) supported Peterson's view, "lifelong learning cries out

30

for a philosophy that's adequate to its elements of uniqueness and to
its potential as a social force. And no such philosophy can emerge
from those who continue to treat 'adult ed' as a stopgap, a filler,

a way of staving off Doomsday for one more brief season" (p. 29).

The theories that have emerged express different views of
the purpose of education of the older adult. Heyman (1969), DeCrow
(1974), and Boyack (1973) were representative of the idea that edu-
cation becomes a "work substitute." Educational program planners
that follow this theory offer courses in ceramics, arts and crafts,
jewelry making, painting, literature study, etc. (London, 1970).
Other scholars in the field feel that use of leisure time should not
be the main purpose of education. Peterson (1975), Londoner (1971),
London (1970), and McClusky (1971) represented the idea that new
competencies, that are needed by the older adults to cope with their
world, should be obtained through education. McClusky (1971) went
further to state that "education for Old Persons is an investment
by society in resource development" (p. 8). Londoner stressed the
advantages of instrumental over expressive education for older adults.
Education in this light is the means of growth for older adults.

Kidd (1959), state (Toward A National Policy on Aging: A
Report on Michigan's Preparations for the White House Conference on
Aging, 1971) and federal agencies (DeCrow, 1974) have supported the
theories that education should implement and expand the use of leisure

and help the older adult with the present world.

31

Moody (1976) has proposed a philosophical justification for
educating older adults incorporating all the above theories. He
maintained that there are four stages in elderly education development.
Stage I, rejection, was the rejection of education for older people.
Stage II, social services, "could best be described as entertainment
or 'keeping busy.‘ Older people are still outside society" (p. 5).
Stage III of the educational setting "should be designed to avoid the
unhealthy aspects of disengagement and instead should focus on second
careers and on the discovery of new ways of participating more vigor-
ously in society" (p. 6). This is the stage he saw Peterson (1975),
Londoner (1971), etc. were at. Moody's Stage IV is to "make available
to older people the great ideas of the humanities and the social
sciences that can nourish (humanistic) psychological development
in old age" (p. 11). The direction of Stage IV should be inner
directed according to Moody. ‘

Despite the theories as to why there should be education for
the older adult, researchers have found a low level of concern and
an underrepresentation of older adults in the educational system
(Peterson, 1975; Robinson, 1972; Arbeiter, 1976; Wasserman, 1976;
and Carp, 1974). Heimstra (1976) found learning activity occurring
in older adults but that experts were not often used as a source of
information or content. Arbeiter (1976) reported James Broschart's
study which concluded the major pool of adult would be learners is
made up of middle income individuals. Goodrow (1975) suggested six

recommendations for practitioner as a result of his Knox County study:

32

1. Educational opportunities designed for older adults should
be offered within the immediate neighborhood.

2. Older adult learning programs should be designed to encourage
active participation from each person with little emphasis
placed on evaluation procedures.

3. Academic goals of older adults differ greatly from that of
the younger student. Therefore, differing evaluative
procedures should be employed for each group.

4. Initial attempts to organize older adults should relate to
overcoming past apprehensions and provide the participant
with positive experiences relevant to present needs and
interests.

5. Well-designed learning programs should be scheduled around
the time periods desired by the population to be served, not
the educational institution.

6. Written materials should be selected with consideration for

the visual limitations of the older person.

Sweeney (1975) expanded on the ideas presented by Goodrow.
He presented a range of variables that might be encountered in an
older adult class. The work on adult learners by Carp (1974) and
Broschart (1976) found that: (1) the pool of adult learners was
made up of middle income individuals. "The better off a person is
financially, the more likely he or she is to be involved in learning"

(Arbeiter, 1976, p. 24); (2) that adults who engaged in learning

33

activities tended to be relatively well educated and the use of formal
educational systems increases with the education level of the learner;
and (3) more urban than rural residents prefer educational institutions
for study. Rural residents prefer self study.

Examples of the adult education classes for the older adult
abound in the literature. Some representative types were reported by
Maeroff (1975), Gage (1975), Glick (1976), DeGabriele (1967), and
"Adult Education Classes in Pittsfield" (1977). These classes covered
a range of different types from "academic" to "leisure." Gage discussed
the adult education in Scandinavia. An unbelievably high proportion of
adults take part in adult education. His discussion opened the door
to American educators to look closely at our educational system.

McClusky (1976) summed up the status of adult education for
older adults by saying: "Adult education is a stepchild of the edu-
cational establishment. Education for older people is an orphan living

in the stepchild's attic" (p. 13).
CommunityACollege and the Older Adult

The literature in this area is divided into two main sections:
research and practice. The research section is composed of two over-
lapping subsections: (1) theory pertaining to the place of older adults
in a community college setting and how higher education should conduct
classes for older adults and (2) studies conducted in the area of higher
education for older adults. The practice section consists of types of

classes that were conducted for older adults.

34

Research

The researchers have basically decried the lack of theory
or philosophy present in the community college scene. Moody (1976)
stated: “The problem, very simply, is that as educators, we have no
clear idea of why older adults should be educated, and this absence of
fundamental philosophical reflection is ultimately dangerous for the
whole enterprise" (p. 14). Peterson (1976) expanded this complaint by
writing: "Evaluation of teaching techniques, instructional formats,
curricular materials, or participant achievement has generally not
been addressed; rather, when evaluation is reported at all, it typi-
cally consists of a more subjective, client satisfaction scale or an
enumeration of attendance pattern of participants" (p. 63). Ehrlich
(1976), disgruntled by the lack of coordination of federal and state
monies for education of the elderly, stated: "As is frequently the
case, seed-money-stimulated growth is characterized by uneven devel-
opment. Neither an acceptable philosophy nor an operational framework
for higher education has resulted" (p. 252).

Stetar (1974) offered a theory on what a community college

should not be. He asserted that: "The college which relinquishes

' its role as a teaching/educational institution and assumes the function
of a social agency loses a measure of its value to the community. The
risk is that public perception of a conmunity college may have changed
from one of an institution of higher education to one of a social
service agency, a role whichthe college cannot hope to fulfill

adequately" (p. 720).

35

Ehrlich (1976) suggested four specific roles that higher
educational institutions are responsible to provide to the older
adults: (1) provide appropriate learning opportunities for elderly
consumers to broaden options in late life; (2) provide education on
the life cycle and the meaning of aging; (3) provide continuing edu-
cation to all service practitioners; and (4) develop new knowledge,
initiate new services and raise standards within the service community.
Trent (1977) stated, "A major purpose of education is to provide all
individuals with the capacity to participate in society" (p. 231).

In order to collect enough information to establish a base-
line data, it was necessary for researchers to conduct varying types
of studies. Theorists could then review this data and attempt to
derive a comprehensive philosophy for community colleges in the area
of aging.

At present, the literature is composed of conflicting studies.
Daniel (1977) reported the persons aged 60+ were social-culturally
oriented toward education. Graney (1976) reported that most older
people were interested in liberal arts courses. He further stated
that a "substantial minority of older people eXpressed interest in
taking college classes" (p. 357). In a survey conducted for School-
craft College District, Elizabeth Andrews (1972) found most older
adults were not interested in attending college classes.

One of the problems with the available study is the lack of
uniformity of definitions. Who is the older adult? What is a course?
etc. Peterson (1976) also decried the lack of application of insights

36

that have been gained by research. Aldridge (1976) further expanded
this complaint by writing: "At present, such programs are being
established with little or no knowledge of comparable developments
elsewhere. . . . Although a few nationwide studies have been carried
out by educational organizations, there is no agency or association,
educational and/or governmental to collect, assess and disseminate
information about experimental projects on a continuing basis" (p. 200).
In an effort to counteract the problem posed by Aldridge in
the above paragraph, different community colleges are banning together
in consortia to share information. One such example is the Aging and
Retirement Consortium. The consortium publishes a monthly newsletter
that shares programs that are being used by different community/four-

year colleges (Hart, 1975).

Practice

The types of programs or classes offered by colleges can be
divided into three types: (1) straight leisure, (2) academic, and
(3) a mix of leisure and academic. These courses may be offered for
seniors only or be all-ages class. They may be for credit or non-
credit. The college may or may not offer free tuition or tuition
assistance. DeCrow (1975), Korim (1974b), Grabowski (1974), Jacobs
(1970), Hendrickson (1964), and Hart (1975) reviewed different types
of programs and classes. Some, such as Hawaii, believed in social
service (Amor, 1973). Others, such as the Third Age College of France

("White Hair College," 1974), have a mix of classes just for seniors.

37

Summary

The literature reviewed contained both nonscientific articles
and highly technical articles pertinent to a post-secondary educator.
The section on gerontology contained: ‘(1) a historical perspective on
the development of social gerontology; (2) a refutation of common myths
of aging (among these was the notion that intelligence declines with
age which researchers have proven to be false); and (3) common theories
of aging. The three most current theories are: (1) disengagement,

(2) activity, and (3) continuity.

The sections on adult education and the older adult and com-
munity college and the older adult contained: (1) research in these
areas and (2) types of classes and programs used in these areas.

In essence, the researchers pointed out that an older adult
should be treated as a regular student. However, it should be recog-
nized that older adults set their own goals and needs. The majority
of older adults do not view formal education as a means to solve their
problems. This may change as more formally educated people become
older adults.

Ruth Glick (1977) recently summed up the spirit of education
for older adults when she wrote:

A professor of philosophy once asked me in great per-
plexity, "But what is the point of it?" In a setting intended
to encourage human beings to think, to solve problems, to
create, and to discover, older people can demonstrate their
capacity for intellectual stability, lifelong development and
perhaps even the flowering of wisdom. We believe that for many
people education can become the functional equivalent of work.
That, professor, is the point of it. (p. 10)

CHAPTER III

DESIGN OF THE STUDY

Introduction

The purpose of this study was to determine the characteristics
of the older adult student in a community college setting as compared
to the older adult in Michigan. The secondary purpose was to try to
define, if possible, the characteristics that differentiate the
returning older adult student from the nonreturning older adult
student in a community college setting. The following questions were
asked: ”In what characteristics does the older adult student differ
from the average Michigan older adult?" And, "In what characteristics
does the older adult returning student differ from the older adult non-
returning student?" To gather information on these questions, Michigan
data on older adults were studied and facts related to older adult
students at Lansing Community College were gathered. This chapter
includes: a description of setting for the study (of the metropolitan
area Lansing and Lansing Community College), a description of the
sample, a description of the questionnaire, a description of the data
collection process, a restatement of the hypotheses and a statement

of the statistical analysis employed.

38

39

Setting

Lansing, the capitol of the State of Michigan, is the fourth
largest city in the State and ranks 76th in size among the nation's
231 standard metropolitan statistical areas. Total square miles
encompassed are 3,377. Lansing is located in the northeast corner
of Ingham County, 80 miles west-northwest of Detroit. Because of the
excellent network of expressways connecting it to the North, South,
East and West, Lansing is within two hours of 90 percent of Michigan's
population (Facts and Figures on the Greater Lansing Metropolitan Area,
1971).

The City of Lansing has a population of 131,403. The 1973
metropolitan population had climbed sharply to 438,000, an increase
of 26 percent since 1960. The labor force is a mix of government,
industry and agriculture. Almost 50 percent of the non-agrarian work
force is employed by either government or educational facilities (U.S.
Bureau of the Census, 1975). This has worked to the benefit of the
economic condition of the city in times of automobile industry cutbacks.
The median family income for Lansing is slightly higher than the median
for the State of Michigan ($11,211 vs. $11,029), but the median income
per capita for Lansing is slightly lower than the median income per
capita for the State of Michigan ($3,343 vs. $3,357) (U.S. Bureau of
the Census, 1973).

Lansing is then, a metropolitan area of almost a half-million
people, the government seat for the State of Michigan, and yet it

retains a small town flavor. Founding families are still prominent

40

names. It is possible to get from one side of the town to the other
during the rush hour in less than 15 minutes. People feel as if they
are in the "town" (Lansing Centennial, 1959). In the midst of this
change and growth is Lansing Community College.

Lansing Community College, serving the Tri-County area, is
located in the heart of downtown Lansing. A commuter's college with
a wide diversity of programs and offerings, Lansing Community College
offers a post-secondary experience to the community at one of the
lowest costs per student in the State of Michigan. Present tuition
rate is $8.50 per credit hour, as compared to other community college
rates as high as $14 per credit hour and state university rates of
$19.50 per credit hour.

Because of the close proximity to a larger state university
(Michigan State University--45,000 students), Lansing Community Col-
lege can avail itself of the qualified and varied faculty and staff
present in its service area. (See Appendix E for a map of the service
district.)

Lansing Community College opened its doors in 1957 to 224
students. At the time classes were held in a few modernized rooms
of Lansing Central High School. Seven faculty and staff were employed.
Since then, it has grown to over lS‘downtown campus buildings and more
than 20 off-campus locations with 17,000 students, a full-time faculty
and staff of over 400.

The recognized primer mover behind the growth and direction

is its president, Philip J. Gannon. President Gannon stresses that

41

the future of the community college is directly related to the future
of the community. "It is through the use of community advisory com-
mittees, involving the expertise of over 500 individuals, that Lansing
Community College remains aware of the needs of the people and the kinds
of offerings that are required by a changing society" (Open Letter from
the President, 1975).

The goals of Lansing Community College are best summed up in
the opening paragraphs of its catalog.

The College measures its vitality by how well it
responds to the educational needs of the individual and
the community. Its flexible programs and instructional
techniques reflect the basic assumptions that learning is
a lifelong process and that learners are individuals with
different degrees of preparedness, different reasons for
seeking instruction and different modes of learning.

The College is committed to community service programs,
college transfer programs, and career training programs.
The College believes that both the individual and his
community are best served when the programs allow the stu-
dent to integrate his learning with his experiences. The
programs are designed to support and guide the student in
his achievement of career, social and personal identity
through his mastery of skills and his search for meaning
and belief. Confronted by the values of his contemporaries
and their heritage, he gains insight into his own values.

Consequently, the College is committed by purpose and
process to a learning environment built on individualized
instruction, a student-oriented faculty, an urban campus,
and flexible programs. By maintaining open admissions, a
relatively low cost tuition and fee structure, and an
awareness of special group needs, the College endeavors
to provide equal educational opportunity for all in its
service district.

42

Population

 

The survey population included all Lansing Community College
students who were the age of sixty or over at the time of registration
for the class and who registered forva class during the six terms,
Summer 1974-Fa11 1975. .

These six terms were chosen for the following reasons:

(1) Lansing Community College was starting an active program to
recruit older adults and Fall term 1975 was the last term before the
Center for Aging Education started its program and (2) because of the
variation among terms (i.e., winter-—bad weather, different type of
enrollment), it was determined at least four terms should be included.
Six were chosen to allow a comparison 0f the same term, different year
(Summer terms 1974-75, Fall terms 1974-75).

The age of sixty was chosen for two reasons: (1) It is the
age used by Michigan survey of older adults (Beck, 1975b) and (2)
increased gerontological research writing, including Howard McClusky's
(1975) define young-old as 60-75 years.

The demographic data requested from the Registrar's Office,
Lansing Community College included name, student number, home address,
birth date, sex, marital status, curriculum, classes taken, grades,
and high school degree. Since this information was available it was
eliminated from the questionnaire, except as a reliability check, but

will be included in the analysis.

43

All classifications of students were included in the population.
For the purposes of this research, it was determined that the entire
population of older adult students, 256 nonduplicated students, was a
small enough population to be handled effectively. Of the original
target population of 256, 159 responded with usable responses. The
97 unusable responses included the-following:
4 returned unanswered
2 returned-~student had died
15 returned by U.S. Post Office as undeliverable
76 nonrespondents
l§2_usable responses
256 Total Population
The total return was 70.3 percent. The 159 returns (62.1
percent) were usable in this study. From this point on, whenever
the term sample is used, it will refer to the 159 usable responses.
Of this sample 54 percent were women and 46 percent were men.
They ranged in age from sixty to seventy-nine, with 92 percent in their

sixties. Over 94 percent of the sample had completed high school.
Instrument

The instrument, used to collect the data to test the hypotheses
in this study, was a portion of the questionnaire used by the Michigan
Office of Services to the Aging in the 1975 Michigan Older Adult Survey.
This questionnaire was developed by the Michigan Office of Services to

the Aging with the assistance of Market Opinion Research Corporation of

44

Detroit and was based on a prototype instrument developed by RMC
Corporation of Washington, D.C. for the United States Administration
on Aging (Beck, 1975). See Appendix A for revised questionnaire. For
the original questionnaire refer to Beck (1975b).

The decision to use part of this questionnaire was made so
that direct comparisons could be made between the responses of this
study's sample and responses of the Michigan survey. Some modifications
were made and were as follows:

1. The method used for data collection was changed from
interview to mailed questionnaire. Time, number and cost were the
factors which made personal interviews impossible.

2. Because of the focus of this study, not all questions
asked on the Michigan survey were pertinent to this study. Therefore,
the number of questions were reduced. This was accomplished through
discussions with Dr. A. Beck who directed the Michigan Survey. Dr.
Beck suggested the best questions to be retained and gave permission
to use parts of the Michigan questionnaire.

3. Detailed knowledge of the Lansing Community College
experience was desired to compare the returning older adult student
with the nonreturning older adult student. This necessitated the
addition of questions pertinent to the older adult student's expe-
riences at Lansing Community College. The questions were constructed
with the help of the Center for Aging Education at Lansing Community
College.

45

The composite questionnaire was then reviewed to determine
the readibility, flow, and the validity of the new instrument. The
questionnaire was given to an independent group for suggestions.
This group consisted of (1) three professors in the Administration
and Higher Education Department at Michigan State University and (2)
four administrators in the Student Personnel Services Department at
Lansing Community College.

As a result of this critique, several changes were made.
These included: (1) a shorter version was adopted and (2) ambiguous
questions were honed. The revised questionnaire was resubmitted to
the group. The group approved the changes and a field test on ten
senior adults was conducted. The field test was deemed satisfactory
and the questionnaire was put in final form to be mailed out to the

population of senior adult students.
Data Collection Process

Data for this study were collected during the late spring
and early summer of 1976. This time was chosen primarily because
more of the older adults are apt to be home during spring and summer.
The questionnaires were numbered and then mailed to each older adult
student. Included in the mailing was a cover letter (see Appendix B)
explaining the purpose of the questionnaire and a self-addressed,
stamped return envelope. The subjects were asked to return the
questionnaires within a three-week period. This was done to allow

each time for mailing and completing the questionnaire, without giving

46

a surplus of time which might cause the subject to postpone and
eventually forget answering the questionnaire.

Since the desired 60 percent return was not achieved by this
initial mailing, a second mailing was done to the nonrespondents. The
second mailing included another copy of the questionnaire, a follow-up
cover letter (see Appendix C) and a self-addressed, stamped return
envelope. A time of three weeks was maintained for the second mailing.
A desired return rate of 60 percent was achieved by the two mailings.

Information from these questionnaires along with the information
provided by the Registrar's Office (see Appendix D) at Lansing Community
College was coded and then keypunched on data cards so that appropriate

computer analysis could be accomplished.

Statement of Hypotheses

 

This study was designed to test the following hypotheses. All
hypotheses will be tested at .05 level.

gypothesis 1::

Older adult student at Lansing community college will show

no measurable difference in characteristics from the average
older adult.

 

[gyppthesis 1.4:

There is no difference in sex distribution between the
older adult student and the average older adult.

Hypothesis 18:

There is no difference in marital status between the
older adult student and the average older adult.

47

Hypothesis 10:

There is no difference in living arrangements between
the older adult student and the average older adult.
Hypothesis ID:

There is no difference in educational level between
the older adult student and the average older adult.
Hypothesis 1E:

There is no difference in age between the older adult
student and the average older adult.

Hypothesis 1F:

There is no difference in residency (time or place)
between the older adult student and average older
adult.

Hypothesis 10:

There is no difference in income between the older
adult student and the average older adult.

Hypgthesis 1H:

There is no difference in employment status between
the older adult student and the average older adult.

Hypothesis 1J:

There is no difference in the subject's health as

perceived by the subject between the older adult
student and the average older adult.

Hypothesis 1K:

There is no difference in social need as perceived
by the subject between the older adult student and
the older adult.

Hypothesis 1L:

There is no difference in selprerceived attitudes
toward aging between the older adult student and
the average older adult.

Hypothesis 1M:

There is no difference in attitudes toward desire

to associate with her own age group as an older adult
between the older adult student and the average older
adult.

48

Hypothesisle:

There is no difference in attitudes toward transportation
problems as an older adult between the older adult
student and the average older adult.

Hypothesis 10:

 

There is no difference in perception of senior problems
between the older adult student and the average older
adult.

Hypothesis 2:

 

There are no differences in characteristics between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student at Lansing
Gemmunity Cbllege.

Hypothesis 2A:

 

There is no difference in the sex distribution between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis 28:

 

There is no difference in marital status between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis ZC:

 

There is no difference in living arrangements between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis ZD:

 

There is no difference in educational level between
the returning and nonreturning student.

Hypothesis 2E:

 

There is no difference in educational experiences
between the returning and nonreturning older adult
student.

Hypothesis 2F:

 

There is no difference in residency (time or place)
between the returning and nonreturning older adult
student.

Hypothesis 26:

 

There is no difference in income level between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

49

Hypothesis 2H:

There is no difference in the employment status between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.
Hypothesis 2I:

There is no difference in selprerceived health between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis 2J:

 

There is no difference in use of leisure time between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis 2K:

There is no difference in goals between the returning
and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis 2L:

 

There is no difference in community involvement between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Hypothesis 2M:

 

There is no difference in perception of transportation

as a personal problem between the returning and non-
returning older adult student.

Hypothesis 2N:

 

There is no difference in selfeperceived view of aging
between the returning and nonreturning older adult
student.

Hypothesis 20:

 

There is no difference in desire to associate with own

age group between the returning and nonreturning older
adult student.

Statistical Analysis

Hypothesis 1 and subhypotheses, which involved the comparison
of the older adult student sample with the sample of older adults in

Michigan, were tested using the Chi-square test for goodness of fit.

50

The expected X2 for comparison with the older adult student sample
were obtained by using the responses from the Michigan Survey. The
percentage of each cell was converted back into numbers using 159 as N.
Hypothesis 2 and subhypotheses, which involved the comparison
of the returning older adult students with the nonreturning older adult
students, were tested using the Chi-square test for differences in
probabilities. The Pearson product moment correlation was used to
test for significant linear relationships between responses to scaled

questions on the questionnaire.

Summary

In summation, this chapter provided a description of the
development of study design.

The population was obtained from Lansing Community College.

The questionnaire was based on a questionnaire used by the
Michigan Office of Services to the Aging. Modifications were made
by the researcher with the assistance of an interested group and the
Office of Research Consultation at Michigan State University.

The hypotheses were developed by the researcher with the
assistance and advice of the guidance committee and the Center for
Aging Education, Lansing Community College.

The statistical procedures were determined with the aid of

the Office of Research Consultation at Michigan State University.

CHAPTER IV

ANALYSIS OF THE DATA

Introduction

 

The purpose of this study was to determine the characteristics
of the older adult student in a community college setting as compared
to the older adult in Michigan. The secondary purpose was to try to
define, if possible, the characteristics that differentiate the
returning older adult student from the nonreturning older adult
student in a community college setting. The population was composed
of 256 older adult students who had registered for a class at Lansing
Community College during one of six terms, Summer 1974 through Fall
1975. Of the original target population, 159 older adults returned
usable samples.

The basis of the instrument used to test the hypotheses in
this study was a questionnaire used by the Michigan Office of Services
to the Aging in the 1975 Michigan Older Adult Survey. This question-
naire was developed by the Michigan Office of Services to the Aging
with the assistance of Market Opinion Research Corporation of Detroit
and was based on a prototype instrument developed by RMC Corporation
of Washington, D.C. for the U.S. Administration on Aging.

The decision to use part of this questionnaire was made so

that direct comparisons could be made between the responses of this

51

52

study's sample and responses of the Michigan survey. Some modifications
were made as follows:

1. The method used for data collection was changed from interview
to mailed questionnaire. Time, number and cost were the
factors which made personal interviews impossible.

2. Because of the focus of this study, not all questions asked
on the Michigan survey were pertinent to this study. Therefore
the number of questions were reduced.

3. Detailed knowledge of the Lansing Community College experience
was desired to compare the returning older adult student with
the nonreturning older adult student. This necessitated the
addition of questions pertinent to the older adult student's
experiences at Lansing Community College.

Two main hypotheses were formulated to compare: (1) the older
adult student with the Michigan Older Adult and (2) the returning older
adult student with the nonreturning older adult student. Fifteen sub-
hypotheses were formulated for the first major hypothesis in order to
test for significant differences in characteristics between the sample
and the Michigan Survey. Fifteen subhypotheses were formulated for the
second major hypothesis in order to test for significant differences in
characteristics between the returning older adult student and the non-
returning older adult student.

The Chi-square test for goodness of fit was used for the first
major group of hypotheses to compare the older adult student sample

with the Michigan older adult sample. The expected X2 for comparison

53

with the older adult student sample were obtained by using the
responses from the Michigan Survey. The percentage of each cell
was converted back into numbers using 159 as N. For the second major
group of hypotheses, Chi-square test for independence was used to
compare the returning and nonreturning older adult students. The
Pearson product-moment correlation was used to test for significant
linear relationships between responses to specific questions on the
questionnaire.

All hypotheses were tested at .05 level for apprOpriateness
of significance. The N value for each hypothesis may change since

not all subjects answered all questions.
Presentation of Data

The study produced a number of significant findings. The null
hypotheses and the results of the hypothesis tests are presented below.

Hypothesis 1:

 

The older adult student at Lansing community college will show
no measurable difference in characteristics from the average
older adult.

Hypothesis 1A:

There is no difference in sex distribution between
the older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test hypothesis 1A were gathered from information
provided by the Registrar, Lansing Community College and checked with
responses to question 23 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The
tabled T which marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of

freedom. The test statistic t was 1.28. Therefore, HlA was not

54

rejected since the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile

of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom (see

Table 1).

Table 1. Data on Sex Distribution

 

 

 

Male Female Total
Observed X2 72 87 159
Expected X2 65 94 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a: .05; df= 1; test statiStic=l.28;
3.do not reject HlA'

Hypothesis 18:

There is no difference in marital status between the
older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test hypothesis 1B were gathered from responses to
question 6 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 9.488 with four degrees of freedom.
The test statistic t was 18.731. Therefore, "18 was rejected since
the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of Chi-square random

variable with four degrees of freedom (see Table 2).

55

Table 2. Data on Marital Status

 

 

Single Married Divorced Separated Widowed Total

 

Observed x2 15 98 13 l 31 158
Expected X2 8 82 6 2 60 158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=9.488; a = .05; df=4; test statistic = 18.731; ..reject H13.

Hypothesis IC:

There is no difference in living arrangements between
the older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test hypothesis lc were gathered from responses to
question 7 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom. The
test statistic t was 9.968. Therefore, ch was rejected since the test
statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with two degrees of freedom (see Table 3).

Table 3. Data on Living Arrangements

 

 

 

Live With Live With
Live Alone Others Spouse Total
Observed X2 50 8 101 159
Expected X2 50 21 88 159

 

 

 

 

 

Table T= 5.991; a= .05; df= 2; test statistic= 9.968; reject HlC'

56

When the data were reorganized by collapsing cells 1 and 2
to reflect those who live with spouse and those who do not, the
hypothesis 1C was still rejected. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test

statistic t was 4.334 (see Table 4).

Table 4. Data on Living With Spouses

 

 

Living Living
Without Spouses With Spouse Total

 

Observed x2 57 101 158
Expected X2 70 88 158

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df =1; test statistic=4.334;
:.reject HlC'

Hypothesis ID:

 

There is no difference in educational level between
the older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test the hypothesis lD were gathered from question 9
on the questionnaire which asked the last grade of school completed
(see Appendix A). The table T which marked the rejection point was
14.067 with seven degrees of freedom. The test statistic t was
459.621. Therefore, ”10 was rejected since the test statistic t
exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with seven

degrees of freedom (see Table 5).

57

Table 5. Data on the Educational Level

 

 

 

Observed x2 Expected X2

No schooling 1 3
First to eighth grade - 2 35
Completed eighth grade 6 37
Ninth to twelfth grade 11 33
Completed twelfth grade 30 29
Some college 44 11
College graduate 38 8
Advanced degree 27 3

Total T59' 1137

 

 

 

Tabled T=14.067; a= .05; df= 7; test statistic= 459.621; reject H1D‘

Hypothesis 1E:

There is no difference in age between the older adult
student and the average older adult.

Data to test the hypothesis 1E were gathered from information
provided by the Registrar, Lansing Community College and checked with
responses to question 8 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The
tabled T which marked the rejection point was 11.070 with five degrees
of freedom. .The test statistic t was 51.896. Therefore, HlE was
rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a

Chi-square random variable with five degrees of freedom (see Table 6).

58

 

 

 

Table 6. Data on Age
60-64 55-59 70-74 75-79 80-84 35+ Total
Observed x2 86 55 10 3 o o 155
Expected x2 35 40 33 25 15 5 155

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 11.070; a= .05; df= 5; test statistic= 51.896; reject HlE'

When the data were reorganized by collapsing the last three

cells into one (75+), the hypothesis 1E was rejected by an even greater

number.

had no members in the last two cells.

The last three cells were collapsed because the observed cells

The tabled T which marked the

 

 

 

rejection point was 7.815 with three degrees of freedom. The test
statistic t was 132.06 (see Table 7).
Table 7. Reorganized Data on Age
60-64 65-69 70-74 75+ Total
Observed X2 86 56 10 3 155
Expected X2 35 4O 33 47 155

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 7.815; a= .05; df= 3; test statistic = 132.06; reject H1

E0

59

Hypothesis 1F:

There is no difference in residency (time or place) beWeen
the older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test the hypothesis 1F were gathered from responses to
questions 1 and 2 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Question 1
asked about time in neighborhood. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 12.592 with six degrees of freedom. The test
statistic t was 37.84. Therefore, HlF (time) was rejected since the
test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with six degrees of freedom (see Table 8).

 

 

 

Table 8. Data on Time in Neighborhood

Less All

than 1-4 5-9 10-14 15-19. 20+ My

1 yr. yrs. yrs. yrs. yrs. yrs. Life Total
Observed x2 2 22 30 17 27 50 10 158
Expected x2 6 16 19 17 14 78 8 158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

'(Tablec)! T=12.592; a= .05; df=6; test statistic= 37.84; reject H":
time .

Question 28 concerned type of neighborhood the older adult now
lives in. The tabled T which marked the rejection point was 5.991 with

two degrees of freedom. The test statistic t was 8.774. Therefore,
HlF (place) was rejected since the test statistic exceeded the .95
quantile of a Chi-square random variable with two degrees of freedom

(see Table 9).

60

 

 

 

Table 9. ‘Data on Place of Residence
.City Suburb Rural Total
Observed x2 78 32 45 155
Expected X2 93 31 31 155

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.991; a= .05; df=2; test statistic=8.774;
s.reject HlF (place).

Hypothesis JG:

There is no difference in income between the older adult
student and the average older adult.

Data to test hypothesis 16 were gathered from responses to
questions 24 and 30 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Question 24
included responses from both retired and working respondents. The
tabled T which marked the rejection point was 11.070 with five degrees
of freedom. The test statistic t was 464.461. Therefore, ”16 was

rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a

Chi-square random variable with five degrees of freedom (see Table 10).

 

 

 

Table 10. Data on Income (Working and Retired)
$15,000
$1,000- $3,000- $6,000- $10,000 and
O-$999 2,999 5,999 8,999 14,999 Over' 'Total
Observed X2 1 6 14 35 42 52 150
Expected x2 8 47 52 26 10 7 150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=11.070; OF .05; df= 5; test statistic=464.461; reject H16.

61

When the data were reorganized to show income less than $6,000,
the hypothesis 1G was still rejected. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test

statistic t was 241.12 (see Table 11).

Table 11. Reorganized Data on Income (Working and Retired)

 

 

 

$5,999 or Less $6,000 or More Total
Observed x2 21 129 150
Expected X2 107 43 150

 

 

 

 

Table T=3.81; a= .05; df=l; test statistic=24l.12; .‘.reject HlG°

Hypothesis 1H:

 

There is no difference in employment status between the
older adult student and the average older adults.

Data to test hypothesis 1H were gathered from responses to
question 31 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 12.592 with six degrees of
freedom. The test statistic t was 372.72. Therefore, HlH was
rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of
a Chi-square random variable with six degrees of freedom (see

Table 12).

Table l

2. Data on Employment Status

62

 

 

Observed X2

Expected X2

 

Working full time
Working part time
Retired working full time
Retired working part time
Retired
Unemployed disabled
Homemaker

Total

 

57

01...;
thkO-D-b

d

A
01
U‘l

 

CD
xowmmmwoo

b

d
01
U1

 

Tabled T=12.592; a= .05; df=6; test statistic= 372.72; ..reject H1H°

When the data were reorganized to show all working, the

hypothesis 1H was still rejected. The tabled T which marked the

 

 

 

rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 274.34 (see Table 13).
Table 13. Data on Employment Status
Working Not Working Total
Observed X2 84 71 155
Expected X2 18 135 155

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a: .05; df=l; test statistic=274.34;

:.reject HlH'

63

Hypothesis II:

 

There is no difference in use of'leisure time between the
older adult student and the average older adult.

Data to test hypothesis 11 were gathered from responses to
question 27A on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). There were
twenty different areas of leisure that were compared.

1. Watch television. The tabled T which marked the rejection

 

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
285.766. Therefore, HlH was rejected since the test statistic t
exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 14).

Table 14. Data on Television Watching

 

 

 

Didn't Watch Watched Total
Observed X2 152 7 159
Expected X2 52 107 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=285.766;
:.reject H11.

2. Visit friends and relatives. The tabled T which marked
the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 2.089. Therefore, H112 was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi—square random

variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 15).

54

Table 15. Data on Visiting

 

 

 

Didn't Visit Visited Total
Observed x2 101 58 159
Expected x2 92 67 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.821; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.089;
:.do not reject H112.

3. Read. The tabled T which marked the rejection point was
3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 23.315.
Therefore, H”2 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the

.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 16).

Table 16. Data on Reading

 

 

 

Didn't Read Read Total
Observed X2 126 33 159
Expected X2 97 62 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=23.315;
£.reject H113.

4. Hobbies. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 4.045.
Therefore, H114 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the
.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 17).

65

Table 17. Data on Hobbies

 

 

 

Don't Spend 00
Time on Hobbies Hobbies Total
Observed X2 108 ' 51 159
Expected X2 119 40 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.48l; a= .05; df= 1; test statistic=4.045;
:.reject H114.

5. Igaygl, The tabled T which marked the rejection point was
3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 2.790.
Therefore, H115 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom.

Table 18. Data on Travel

 

 

 

Didn't

Travel Traveled Total
Observed X2 117 42 159
Expected x2 121 38 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.790;
:.do not reject H115.

66

6. 932395, The tabled T which marked the rejection point was
3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 3.61.
Therefore, ”116 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 19).

Table 19. Data on Church as Leisure Activity

 

 

 

Church Not Church

as Leisure as Leisure Total
Observed X2 123 36 159
Expected X2 132 27 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; e= .05; df=1; test statistic= 3.61;
:.do not reject H1I6'

7. Cards and Bingo. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t
was 1.70. Therefore, H117 was not rejected since the test statistic
t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 20).

67

Table 20. Data on Cards and Bingo

 

 

 

Don't Play 00 Play Total
Observed X2 140 19 159
Expected x2 134 25 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T = 3.841; a= .05; _df = 1; test statistic = 1.70;
f-do not reject H117.

8. Walking. The tabled T which marked the rejection point was
3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 15.9.
Therefore, “118 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the
.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 21).

Table 21. Data on Walking

 

 

 

Didn't Walk Did Walk Total
Observed x2 153 6 159
Expected X2 135 24 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; a= .05; df= 1; test statistic=15.9;
:.reject “118'

9. Outdoor sports. The tabled T which marked the rejection

 

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
0.475. Therefore, H119 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 22).

68

Table 22. Data on Outdoor Sports

 

 

 

Don't Do Do Do
Outdoor Sports Outdoor Sports Total
Observed x2 134 25 159
Expected X2 137 22 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .475;
3.do not reject H119.

10. Taking a drive. The tabled T which marked the rejection

 

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
13.37. Therefore, H1110 was rejected since the test statistic t
exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 23).

Table 23. Data on Taking a Drive

 

 

 

Don't Take 00 Take
a Drive a Drive Total
Observed x2 157 2 159
Expected X2 143 16 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=l3.37;
:.reject H1110.

69

11. Club and group activities. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statis-
tic t was .08. Therefore, H111] was not rejected since the test
statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 24).

Table 24. Data on Club and Group Activities

 

 

 

Don't , Do
Participate Participate Total
Observed x2 146 13 159
Expected X2 145 14 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .08;
3-d0 not reject H111].

12. Eatingyout. The tabled T which marked the rejection joint

 

was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 5.01.
Therefore. H1112 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the
.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 25).

70

 

 

 

Table 25. Data on Eating Out
Don't Do
Eat Out Eat Out Total
Observed x2 152 6 158
Expected x2 144 14 158

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=5.01;

3.reject H1112.

13. Shopping.

was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The tabled T which marked the rejection point
The test statistic t was 8.38.

Therefore, H1113 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the

.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 26).

 

 

 

Table 26. Data on Shopping
Don't Shop 00 Shop Total
Observed x2 135 23 158
Expected x2 145 13 158

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=8.38;

{.reject H1113.

14. Recreation center.

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The tabled T which marked the rejection

The test statistic t was

10.671. Therefore, H1114 was rejected since the test statistic t

71

exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 27).

Table 27. Data on Recreation Center

 

 

 

Don't Use 00 Use Total
Observed x2 159 0 159
Expected X2 149 10 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=10.671;
0.0 reject H1114.

15. Lectures/Entertainment. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 42.65. Therefore, H1115 was rejected since the test
statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with one degree of freedom (see Table 28).

Table 28. Data on Lecture/Entertainment

 

 

 

Don't Attend Do Attend Total
Observed X2 133 26 159
Expected X2 151 8 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=42.65;
:.reject H1115.

72

16. Indoor sports. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
.000. Therefore, ”1116 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 29).

Table 29. Data on Indoor Sports

 

WW
Don't Do
Participate Participate Total
Observed x2 151 8 159
Expected X2 151 8 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .000;
:.do not reject H1Il6'

17. Volunteer activities. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 2.11. Therefore, H1I17 was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 30).

73

Table 30. Data on Volunteer Activities

 

 

 

Don't Do
Volunteer Volunteer Total
Observed X2 147 - 12 159
Expected X2 151 8 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.11;
:.do not reject H1117.

18. Sports events. The tabled T which marked the rejection

 

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
3.291. Therefore, "1118 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 31).

Table 31. Data on Sport Events

 

 

 

Don't Watch 00 Watch Total
Observed x2 155 4 159
Expected x2 151 8 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=3.29l;
:.do not reject “1118'

74

19. Hongg, The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 2.77.
Therefore, H1119 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 32).

Table 32. Data on Movies

 

 

 

Don't Attend Do Attend Total
Observed X2 149 10 159
Expected X2 153 6 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.77;
.tdo not reject H1119.

20. Bar/Tavern. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .70.
Therefore, H1120 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 33).

75

Table 33. Data on Bars/Taverns

 

 

 

Don't Attend Do Attend Total
Observed X2 155 . 4 159
Expected X2 153 6 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; o'-' .05; df=1; test statistic=0.70;
:.do not reject H1120.

Hypothesis 1J:

There is no difference in the subject's health as

perceived by the subject between the older adult

student and the average older adult.

The data for hypothesis lJ were collected from responses to
question 4 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 9.488 with four degrees of freedom. The
test statistic t was 16.652. Therefore, HlJ was rejected since the test

statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with four degrees of freedom (see Table 34).

Table 34. Data on Health

 

 

Much Somewhat Somewhat Much

Better Better Same Worse Worse Total
Observed x2 64 41 44 6 3 158
Expected X2 44 4O 57 14 3 158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=9.488; a= .05; df=4; test statistic=16.652; .‘.reject H”.

76

Hypothesis 1K:
There is no difference in social need as perceived by the

subjects between the older adult student and the older

adult.

The data used to test hypothesis 1K were collected from the
responses to question 34 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The
tabled T which marked the rejection point was 12.592 with six degrees
of freedom. The test statistic t was 47.25. Therefore, HlK was
rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of

a Chi-square random variable with six degrees of freedom (see Table 35).

Table 35. Data on Social Need (Visiting Friend)

 

 

 

Observed X2 Expected X2
Every day 30 40
Several a week 59 44
Once a week 20 24
Once every two weeks 12 9
Once a month 10 18
Less often 15 12
Never 4 3
Total TTRT TERI

 

 

 

Tabled T=12.592; a= .05; df=6; test statistic=47.25;
{.reject HlK'

If the data were reorganized to lessen the choices possible,
there was a different result. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom. The test statistic t was
0.8. Therefore, HlK was not rejected since the test statistic t did
not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with two

degrees of freedom (see Table 36).

77

Table 36. Data on Social Need (Visiting Friends)

 

 

 

More than More than Once a

Once a Once Every Month
Week Two Weeks or Less Total
Observed x2 89 32 29 150
Expected X2 84 33 33 150

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.99l; 01" .05; df=2; test statistic=0.8; do not reject HlK'

Hypothesis 1L:

 

There is no difference in attitudes toward self’aging
between the older adult student and the averaged older
adult.

The data to test hypothesis 1L were gathered from the responses
to question 5 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.
The test statistic t was 37.337. Therefore, HlL was rejected since the
test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 37).

Table 37. Data on Whether Older Adults Consider Self a
Senior Citizen

 

 

 

Yes No Total
Observed x2 50 107 157
Expected X2 88 69 157

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=37.337;
:.reject HlL' '

78

Hypothesis 1M:
There is no difference in desire to associate with own

age group between the older adult student and the average

older adult.

The data to test hypothesis 1M were collected from responses
to question 12 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
‘which marked the rejection point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom.
The test statistic t was 28.945. Therefore, H1M was rejected since the

test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with two degrees of freedom (see Table 38).

Table 38. Data on Joining Groups of Various Ages

 

 

Only
55 Years ‘ Makes No All
or Older Difference Ages Total

 

Observed X2 11 39 107 157
Expected x2 35 45 77 157

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.991; a= .05; df=2; test statistic=28.945;
3.reject H1".

Hypothesis 1N:

 

There is no difference in attitudes toward transportation

problems as an older adult between the older adult student

and the average older adult.

The data to test hypothesis 1N were collected from the
responses to questions 3A and 200 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A).
For question 3A the tabled T which marked the rejection point was 3.841

with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .956. Therefore,

79
H1" was not rejected since the test statistic t did not exceed the .95
quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 39).

Table 39. Data on Transportation Problems for Self

 

 

 

No Problem Problem Total
Observed x2 144 15 159
Expected x2 140 19 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; o= .05; df=1; test statistic=0.956;
:.do not reject H1".

For question 200 the tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 0.
Therefore, HlN was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 percentile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 40).

Table 40. Data on Transportation Problems for Older

 

 

 

Adults
No Problem Problem Total
Observed x2 128 31 159
Expected x2 128 31 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=0;
:.do not reject H1".

Hypothesis 2:

 

80

There is no difference in characteristics between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student at
Lansing community college.

Hypothesis ZA:

There is no difference in the sex distribution between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data on test hypothesis 2A were gathered from information

provided by the Registrar, Lansing Community College and rechecked

with responses to question 23 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A).

The tabled T which marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree

of freedom. The test statistic t was .003. Therefore, H2A was not

rejected since the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile

of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom (see

 

 

 

Table 41).
Table 41. Data on Sex Distribution
Male Female Total
Returning 37 44 81
Nonreturning 35 43 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T = 3.841; a=
3.do not reject HZA'

.05; df=1; test statistic= .003;

81

Hypothesis 28:

There is no difference in marital status between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 28 were gathered from responses to
question 6 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 9.488 with four degrees of freedom. The
test statistic t was 9.75. Therefore, H28 was rejected since the test
statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with four degrees of freedom (see Table 42).

Table 42. Data on Marital Status

 

 

Single Married Divorced Separated Widowed Total

 

Returning 4 48 5 1 22 80

Nonreturning 10 50 8 O 10 _jH;
Total 158

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=9.488; a= .05; df=4; test statistic=9.75; reject H23.

Hypothesis 20:

 

There is no dfifference in living arrangements between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 2C were gathered from responses to
question 7 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom. The
V test statistic t was 1.471. Therefore, H2c was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with two degrees of freedom (see Table 43).

82

 

 

 

Table 43. Data on Living Arrangements

Live Live With Live With
Alone Others Spouse Total
Returning 29 4 - 48 81
Nonreturning 21 4 53 _Z§_
159

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.991; a= .05; df=2; test statistic=1.47l;
3-do not reject HZC'

Hypothesis 20:

There is no difference in educational level between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

 

Data to test hypothesis 20 were gathered from responses to
question 9 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 14.067 with seven degrees of freedom.
The test statistic t was 7.540. Therefore, HZD was not rejected since
the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with seven degrees of freedom (see Table 44).

83

Table 44. Data on Educational Level

 

 

 

Returning Nonreturning

No schooling 0 1
First to eighth grade -1 1
Completed eighth grade 1 5
Ninth to twelfth grade 3 8
Completed twelfth grade l6 14
Some college 27 17
College graduate 20 18
Advanced degree _;E; _13_

Total N = 159 l 78

 

 

 

Tabled T=14.067; a= .05; df=7; test statistic=7.54; do not reject
H .
20

Hypothesis 28:

 

There is no difference in educational experiences between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 2E were gathered from responses to
question 10 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Ten different types
of educational experiences were examined. The tabled T which marked
the rejection point for each of the ten experiences was 3.841 with
one degree of freedom.

The test statistic t for lOa--Adu1t Education--was .006.
Therefore, H2El was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 45).

 

 

 

Table 45. Data on Adult Education
Yes No Total
Returning 39 42 81
Nonreturning 39 39 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= -0053

:.do not reject H2E1'

The test statistic t for lOb--High School Classes--was .258.

Therefore, H2E2 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 46).

Table 46. Data on High School Classes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 8 73 81

Nonreturning 5 73 _jH;

Total 159
Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df= 1; test statistic= .258;

:.do not reject H2E2.

The test statistic t for 10c--College/University Course--was

.467. Therefore, H2E3 was not rejected since the test statistic t did

not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 47).

 

 

 

Table 47. Data on College/University Courses
Yes No Total
Returning 50 31 81
Nonreturning 43 35 _Z§.
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .467;
f-do not reject H2E3’

The test statistic t for lOd--Craft/Sewing/Hobby Course--was

.708. Therefore, H2E4 was not rejected since the test statistic t did

not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 48).

Table 48. Data on Craft/Sewing/Hobby Courses

86

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 29 52 81
Nonreturning 34 44 _JH§
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df= 1; test statistic= .708;

:.do not reject H2E4'

The test statistic t for lOe--Discussion Groups--was 1.273.

Therefore, H2E5 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table

49).

 

 

 

Table 49. Data on Discussion Groups
Yes No Total
Returning 12 69 81
Nonreturning 18 6O _Z§_
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a: .05; df=1; test statistic=1.273;

:.do not reject H2E5'

87

The test statistic t for 10f--Bib1e Study Groups--was .122.
Therefore, H2E6 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 50).

Table 50. Data on Bible Groups

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 29 52 81
Nonreturning 31 47 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; o= .05; df=1; test statistic= .122;
3.do not reject H2E6'

The test statistic t for lOg--Vocational Courses--was .017.
Therefore, H2E7 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 51).

Table 51.

Data on Vocational Courses

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 18 63 81
Nonreturning 19 59 _Z§_
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .017;

:.do not reject H2E7'

The test statistic for th--Pre-Retirement Program--was .560.

Therefore, H2E8 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 52).

Table 52. Data on Pre-Retirement Programs

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 11 7O 81
Nonreturning 15 63 _jH;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; 0L= .05; df=1; test statistic= .560;

.2 do not reject H2E8'

89

The test statistic for lOi--Library Programs--was .042.
Therefore, H2E9 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 53).

Table 53. Data on Library Programs

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 8 73 81
Nonreturning 6 72 _HH§
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .042;
:.do not reject H2E9°

The test statistic le--Consumer Buying/Protection Classes--
was .003. Therefore, HZElO was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 54).

90

Table 54. Data on Consumer Buying Classes

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 4 77 81
Nonreturning 3 75 _Z§_
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .003;

J.do not reject H2E10‘

The test statistic lOk--Other Experiences--was 3.112.

Therefore, H2Ell was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 55).

Table 55. Data on Other Experiences

 

 

 

Yes No Total

Returning 19 62 81
Nonreturning 9 69 _Z§_
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T= 3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=3.112;

:.do not reject H2E11'

Hypothesis 28:

91

There is no difference in residency (time or place) between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 2F were gathered from responses to

questions 1, 2A and 28 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A).

Question 1 asked about time in neighborhood.

The tabled T which

marked the rejection point was 14.067 with seven degrees of freedom.

The test statistic t was 8.826. Therefore, H2F was not rejected since

the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with seven degrees of freedom (see Table 56).

 

 

 

Table 56. Data on Time in Neighborhood
Returning Nonreturning

1 year 1 7
1-2 years 3 29
3-4 years 7 10
5-9 years 17 6
10-14 years 11 13
15-19 years 17 7
20+ years 22 5
All of life __;1 __11

Total N = 158 81 77

 

 

 

Tabled T=14.067; a= .05; df=7; test statistic=8.826;

:.do not reject H2Fl'

Question 2A concerned the type of neighborhood the older adult

grew up in. The tabled T which marked the rejection point was 7.815

with three degrees of freedom.

The test statistic t was 5.027.

Therefore, H2F2 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

92

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with three

degrees of freedom (see Table 57).

Table 57. Data on Neighborhood Grew Up In

 

 

 

City Suburb Small Town Country Total

Returning 38 4 19 19 80
Nonreturning 25 4 24 25 _jg;
Total 158

 

 

 

 

 

 

:l'abled T = 7.815; a= .05; df= 3; test statistic = 5.027; do not reject
2F2'

Question 28 concerned type 0f neighborhood the older adult now
lives in. The tabled T which marked the rejection point was 7.815 with
three degrees of freedom. The test statistic t was 15.673. Therefore,
H2F3 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile
of a Chi-square random variable with three degrees of freedom (see

Table 58).

Table 58. Data on Neighborhood Now Live In

 

 

 

City Suburb Small Town Country Total

Returning 41 23 6 7 77
Nonreturning 37 9 17 15 _Z§_
Total 155

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=7.815; o= .05; df=3; test statistic= 15.673; reject H2F3'

93

Hypothesis 20:

 

There is no difference in income level between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 26 were gathered from responses to
questions 24 and 30 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Question 24
included responses from both working and nonworking subjects. The
tabled T which marked the rejection point was 11.070 with five degrees
of freedom. The test statistic t was 11.299. Therefore, ”261 was
rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of

Chi-square variable with five degrees of freedom (see Table 59).

Table 59. Data on Income (Working and Retired)

 

 

$15,000
$1,000- $3,000- $5,000- $10,000- and
0-5999 2,999 5,999 9,999 14,999 Over Total

 

Returning O 4 7 22 23 18 74
Nonreturning l 2 7 13 19 34 _Z§_
Total 150

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=11.070; a= .05; df= 5; test statistic= 11 .299; reject H261 .

Question 30 referred only to retirees' income average for five
years prior to retirement. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 11.070 with five degrees of freedom. The test statistic t
was 2.029. Therefore, "263 was not rejected since the test statistic
t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

five degrees of freedom (see Table 60).

94

Table 60. Data on Retirees' Pre-Retirement Income

 

 

$15,000
$1,000- $3,000- $5,000- $10,000- and
0—5999 2,999 5,999 9,999 14,999 Over Total

 

Returning O 1 3 9 19 17 49

Nonreturning O O 2 6 20 15 ‘_1H
Total ' 92

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=11.070; 01= .05; df= 5; test statistic= 2.029; do not reject
H .
263

Hypothesis 2H:

 

There is no difference in the employment status between
the returning and nonreturning student.

Data to test hypothesis 2H were gathered from responses to
question 31 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 12.592 with six degrees of freedom. The
test statistic t was 3.923. Therefore, H2H was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with six degrees of freedom (see Table 61).

95

Table 61. Data on Employment Status

 

 

_

 

 

 

Returning ' Nonreturning

Working full time 28 28
Working part time . 1 3
Retired, working full time 3 1
Retired, working part time 11 8
Retired 26 27
Unemployed, disabled 3 2
Homemaker 8 __j;

Total N = 155 T80 75

 

 

 

Tabled T=12.592; a= .05; df=6; test statistic= 3.923; do not reject
H
2H'

When the data were reorganized to show all working, the H2H
was still not rejected. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 1.108

(see Table 62).

Table 62. Data on Employment Status

 

 

 

Working Not Working Total

Returning 43 37 80
Nonreturning 4O 35 ._Z§
Total 155

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.108;
:tdo not reject H2”.

96

Hypothesis 2I:

 

There is no difference in selprerceived health between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data used to test hypothesis 21 were gathered from responses
to question 4 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom.
The test statistic t was 1.345. Therefore, HZI was not rejected since
the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with two degrees of freedom (see Table 63).

Table 63. Data on Health

 

 

 

Better Same Worse Total

Returning 53 24 3 80
Nonreturning 52 20 6 _j§;
Total 158

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.991; a= .05; df=2; test statistic=l.345;
.:do not reject H21.

Hypothesis 2J:

 

There is no difference in use of leisure time between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 2J were gathered from responses to
question 27A on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). There were twenty
different areas of leisure that were compared.

1. Watch television. The tabled T which marked the rejection

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was

97

.003. Therefore, H21 was not rejected since the test statistic t did

not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 64).

 

 

 

Table 64. Data on Television Watching
Didn't Watch Watched Total
Returning 78 3 81
Nonreturning 74 4 _jg;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .003;
.;do not reject ”201'

2. Visit friends and relatives. The tabled T which marked
the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 3.972. Therefore, H2J2 was rejected since the test
statistic t exceeded the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with one degree of freedom (see Table 65).

Table 65. Data on Visiting

 

 

 

Didn't Visit Visited Total

Returning 58 23 81
Nonreturning 43 35 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=3.972;
.1reject H2J2'

98

3. Read. The tabled T which marked the rejection point

was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The test statistic t was .015.

Therefore, H2J3 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 66).

 

 

 

Table 66. Data on Reading
Didn't Read Read Total
Returning 64 17 81
Nonreturning 62 16 _Z§_
159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic= .015;
.zdo not reject H203.

4. Hobbies.

was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The tabled T which marked the rejection point
The test statistic t was 2.910.

Therefore, H2J4 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 67).

99

 

 

 

Table 67. Data on Hobbies
Don't Spend 00
Time on Hobbies Hobbies Total
Returning 50 ' 31 81
Nonreturning 58 20 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.910;
a do not reject H2J4.

5. Ipaygl, The tabled T which marked the rejection point was
3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .104.
Therefore, H205 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 68).

Table 68. Data on Travel

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't
Travel Traveled Total
Returning 61 20 81
Nonreturning 56 22 _j§l
Total 159
Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .104;

a do not reject H2J5'

100

6. Qflgpgfl, The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 1.277.
Therefore, H2J6 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 69).

Table 69. Data on Church as Leisure Activity

 

 

 

Church Not Church
as Leisure as Leisure Total
Returning 65 16 81
Nonreturning 58 20 _j§l
Total * 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.277;
a.d0 not reject H2J6'

7. Cards and Bingo. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
.008. Therefore, H2J7 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 70).

101

 

 

 

Table 70. Data on Playing Cards and Bingo
Don't Play 00 Play Total
Returning 71 10 81
Nonreturning 69 9 _jH;
159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 0= .05; df=1; test statistic= .008;
.: do not reject.

8. Walking. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .136.
Therefore, H2J8 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 71).

Table 71. Data on Walking

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Didn't Walk Did Walk Total
Returning 78 3 81
Nonreturning 75 3 _HH;
Total 159
Tabled T= 3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic= .136;

.:do not reject H2J8'

102

9. Outdoor sports. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
.011. Therefore, H2J9 was not rejected since the test statistic t did
not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 72).

Table 72. Data on Outdoor Sports

 

 

 

Don't Do 00 Use
Outdoor Sports Outdoor Sports Total
Returning 69 12 81
Nonreturning 65 13 _jH;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic- .011;
.tdo not reject H2J9'

10. Taking a drive. The tabled t which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
.469. Therefore, H2J10 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 73).

103

 

 

 

Table 73. Data on Taking a Drive
Don't Take 00 Take
a Drive a Drive . Total
Returning 79 2 81
Nonreturning 78 O _j§1
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; ot= .05; df=1; test statistic= .469;
.ndo not reject H2J10’

11. Club and group activities. The tabled T which marked

the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was 1.18. Therefore, H2J11 was not rejected since the test
statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 74).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 74. Data on Club and Group Activities
Don't Do
Participate Participate Total
Returning 72 9 81
Nonreturning 74 4 _j§1
Total 159
Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.l8;

.zdo not reject H2Jll'

104

12. Eatiggout. The tabled T which marked the rejection joint
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 4.138.
Therefore, H2J12 was rejected since the test statistic t exceeded the
.95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of freedom

(see Table 75).

Table 75. Data on Eating Out

 

 

 

Don't 00
Eat Out Eat Out Total
Returning 75 6 81
Nonreturning 78 O _Z§_
Total ‘ 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=4.l38;
a.reject H2J12'

13. Shopping. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .125.
Therefore, H2J13 was not rejected since the test statistic t exceeded
the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree of

freedom (see Table 76).

105

 

 

 

Table 76. Data on Shopping
Don't Shop 00 Shop Total
Returning 68 13 81
Nonreturning 68 10 _jg;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic= .125;
a.do not reject H2J13.

14. Recreation center.

rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The tabled T which marked the
The test

statistic t was 0. Therefore, H2J14 was not rejected since the test

statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random

variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 77).

 

 

 

Table 77. Data on Use of a Recreation Center
Don't Use 00 Use Total
Returning 81 O 81
Nonreturning 78 O _j§1
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; 0= .05; df=1; te5t statistic=0;

:.do not reject H2J14.

106

15. Lectures/Entertainment. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was .012. Therefore, H2J15 was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 78).

Table 78. Data on Lectures/Entertainment

 

 

 

Don't Attend 'Do Attend Total

Returning 68 13 81
Nonreturning 65 13 _Z§.
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic= .012;
.zdo not reject H2J15'

16. Indoor sports. The tabled T which marked the rejection

 

point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
1.069. Therefore, H2Jl6 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 79).

107

 

 

 

Table 79. Data on Indoor Sports
Don't Do
Participate Participate Total
Returning 75 6 81
Nonreturning 76 2 _JH;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.069;
.:do not reject H2J16'

l7. Volunteer activities. The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test
statistic t was .054. Therefore, Han was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 80).

Table 80. Data on Volunteer Activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't Do
Volunteer Volunteer Total
Returning 75 6 81
Nonreturning 72 6 _j§;
Total 159
Tabled T= 3.841; 0= .05; df=1; test statistic= .054;

:.do not reject H2J17.

108

18. Sports events. The tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was
.001. Therefore, H2Jl8 was not rejected since the test statistic t
did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 81).

Table 81. Data on Sport Events

 

 

 

Don't Watch 00 Watch Total

Returning 80 1 81
Nonreturning 76 2 _j§1
Total . 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 0= .05; df=1; test statistic= .001;
:.do not reject H2J18'

19. prjpp, The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was 1.085.
Therefore, H2J19 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not
exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one

degree of freedom (see Table 82).

109

 

 

 

Table 82. Data on Movies
Don't Attend Do Attend Total
Returning 78 3 81
Nonreturning 71 7 _j§1
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.085;
:.do not reject H2019.

20. Bar/tavern. The tabled T which marked the rejection point
was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t was .219.
Therefore, H2J20 was not rejected since the test statistic t did not

exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable with one degree

of freedom (see Table 83).

Table 83. Data on Bars/Taverns

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Don't Attend Do Attend Total

Returning 79 2 81

Nonreturning 76 2 _JH;

Total 159
Tabled T=3.84l; 0= .05; df=1; test statistic= .219;

3.do not reject H2J20'

110

Hypothesis 2K:

 

There is no difference in goals between the returning
and nonreturning older adult student.

Data used to test hypothesis 2K was gathered from responses
to question 28 (see Appendix A). The tabled T which marked the
rejection point was 9.488 with four degrees of freedom. The test
statistic t was 5.175. Therefore, H2K was not rejected since the

test statistic t did not exceed the Chi-square random variable with

one degree of freedom (see Table 84).

 

 

 

Table 84. Data on Goals
Very Very
Cognitive Cognitive Equal Affective Affective Total
Returning 30 20 19 8 3 80
Nonreturning 35 13 20 2 2 _zg_
Total 152

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=9.488; 0= .05; df=4; test statistic=5.175; do not reject
H .
2K

Hypothesis 2L:

There is no difference in community involvement between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data used to test hypothesis 2L'was gathered from the responses
to question 36 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.

The test statistic t was .018. Therefore, H2L was not rejected since

111

the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of the Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 85).

Table 85. Data on Community Involvement

 

 

 

00 Don't
Participate Participate Total
Returning 69 12 81
Nonreturning 68 10 _j§;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic= .018;
:.do not reject HZL'

Hypothesis 2M?

There is no difference in perception of’transportation
as a personal problem between the returning and
nonreturning older adult student.

 

Data to test hypothesis 2M were collected from responses to
questions 3A and 200 (see Appendix A). For question 3A, the tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom.
The test statistic t was 2.407. Therefore, H2" was not rejected since
the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 86).

112

Table 86. Data on Transportation Problems for Self

 

 

 

No Problem Problem Total

Returning 70 ll 81
Nonreturning 74 4 _JH;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; 01= .05; df=1; test statistic=2.407;
.tdo not reject HZM'

For question 200, the tabled T which marked the rejection
point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The test statistic t
was 3.553. Therefore, H2M was not rejected since the test statistic
t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square random variable

with one degree of freedom (see Table 87).

Table 87. Data on Transportation Problems for Other
Older Adults

 

 

 

No Problem Problem Total

Returning 60 21 81
Nonreturning 68 10 _HH;
Total 159

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.841; a= .05; df=1; test statistic=3.553;
.1do not reject H2".

113

Hypothesis 2N:

 

There is no difference in self’perceived view of’aging
between the returning and nonreturning older adult student.

Data to test hypothesis 2N were gathered from the responses
to question 5 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T which
marked the rejection point was 3.841 with one degree of freedom. The
test statistic t was 1.13. Therefore, H2N was not rejected since the
test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of the Chi-square

random variable with one degree of freedom (see Table 88).

Table 88. Data on Perceived View of Aging

 

 

 

Senior Not a Senior
Citizen Citicen Total
Returning 27 53 8O
Nonreturning 23 54 _jQ[
Total 157

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=3.84l; 0= .05; df=1; test statistic=l.l3;
3.do not reject H2".

Hypothesis 20:

 

There is no difference in desire to associate with own

age group between the returning and nonreturning older

adult student.

Data used to test hypothesis 20 were gathered from responses
to question 12 on the questionnaire (see Appendix A). The tabled T
which marked the rejection point was 5.991 with two degrees of freedom.

The test statistic was 3.821. Therefore, H20 was not rejected since

114

the test statistic t did not exceed the .95 quantile of a Chi-square

random variable with two degrees of freedom (see Table 89).

Table 89. Data on Which Age Group Preferred

 

 

 

55+ Makes No All
Years Difference Ages Total
Returning 7 16 57 80
Nonreturning 4 23 50 _ZZ_
Total 157

 

 

 

 

 

Tabled T=5.991; a= .05; df=2; test statistic=3.821;
J-do not reject H20.

Summary

An in depth analysis of the data is presented in Chapter IV.
Each hypothesis was presented followed by the pertinent data. After
each discussion a table relating to the data discussed, was presented.
Each table summarized the key points of the data. Figure 1 summarizes
the not rejected/rejected hypotheses at the .05 level and Figure 2
presents a statistical overview of the older adult student p0pulation.
In Chapter V the summary, conclusions, implications and

recommendations for future studies are presented.

115

 

 

 

Hyppthesi 5 Not Rejected/Rejected
1A There is no difference in sex distribution between the older
adult student and the average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
18 There is no difference in marital status between the older
adult student and the average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
10 There is no difference in living arrangements between the
older adult student and the average older adult. t d
1 0 all groups 0 O O O O O C O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O rej’ec e
2. with/without spouses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
ID There is no difference in educational level between the older
adult student and the average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
18 There is no difference in age between the older adult student .
and the average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
IF There is no difference in residency (time or place) between
the older adult student and the average older adult. ,
1. time in neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
2. place in neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... rejected
10 There is no difference in income between the older adult _
student and the average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
18 There is no difference in employment status between the older
adult student and the average older adult. .
1. all groups . ....... . . . . . . . . . ...... reJECted
2. working/nonworking . . . . . . . .......... . . FEJECted
II There is no difference in use of leisure time between the
older adult student and the average older adult. _
1 watch television . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . reJeCtgd
2 visit friends and relatives . . . ........... "Gt FEJECtEd
3 read. .......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
4. hobbies . . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . rejected
5. travel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
5. church ........ . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . not rejected
7. cards and bingo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... "0t rejected
a. walking . ...... . . . . . . . . . . ....... rejected
9. outdoor sports . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "Ct rejected
10. taking a drive ............... . . . . . . rejected
11. club and group activities . ........ . ..... "0t rejected
12. eating out . . . . . . . ........ . ..... . . rejected
13. shopping . . . . . . ....... . . . . . ..... . reJECtEd
14. recreation center . . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . reJECted
15. lectures/entertainment ..... . ..... . . . . . . rejected
16. indoor sports . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . OOt PEJECted
17. volunteer activities . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . "Gt FEJECted
18. sports events . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . DOt rejected
19. movies . . . . . . . . . . ......... . . . . . . not rejected
20. bar/tavern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
1J There is no difference in the subject's health as perceived
by the subject between the older adult student and the .
average older adult. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TeJECtEd
1K There is no difference in social need, as perceived by the
subjects, between the older adult student and the older adult. .
1. visiting friends, all choices. . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
2. visiting friends, limited choices . . . . . . . . . . "0t reJECtEd
1L There is no difference in attitudes toward self aging between .
the older adult student and the average older adult. . . . . . . rejected
1M There is no difference in desire to associate with own age
group between the older adult student and the average older
adult . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . rejected
1N There is no difference in attitudes toward transportation
problems as an older adult between the older adult student
and the average older adult. _
1. self. ..... . . . . . . ..... . ..... not rejected
2. other older adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... "Gt rejected
2A There is no difference in the sex distribution between the '
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . "0t rejected
28 There is no difference in marital status between the

returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . VEJECtEd

 

Figure 1. Sunmary of the Not Rejected/Rejected Hypotheses.

 

116

 

 

Hmthesis ‘ Not Rejectedlkejected ‘

26‘ There is no difference in living arrangements betmen the
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . not rejected

20 There is no difference in educational level between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . not rejected

28 There is no difference in educational experiences between

 

the returning and nonreturning older adult s t.

1. Adult Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
2. High School courses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

3. College/university ceurses . . . . ... . . . . . . . . .

4. craft/Sewing/Hobby Cburses . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

5. Discussion Group . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . .

6. Bible Study Group . . . . . ..... . ..... . . .
7.VocationalCourses...................

8. hwdwmnmmeanm. .... .... ... .....

9. Library Prom . ....... . . . . . . . . . .
10. Cbnsumer Buying BClass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
11.0therExperiences................... notrejected

2? There is no difference in residency (time or place) between
the returning and nonreturning older adult student.
1. time . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . "0t rejected
2. place grew up in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
3. place now live in . . . . . . . . . .y. . . . . . . . . rejected

20 There is no difference in income level between the returning
and nonreturning older adult student.

1. income (working and retired) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected
2. income (retired) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
28 There is no difference in the employment status between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . not rejected
2I There is no difference in selprerceived health between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . not rejected

ZJ There is no difference in use of leisure time between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student.

1.watchtelevision.................... notrejected
2. visit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . rejected

3. read . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
4. hobbies . . . . . ........ . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
5.travel...... .. .. notrejected
6. church . . . . . ......... . . . . ....... not rejected
7. cards and bingo .............. . . . . . . not rejected
8. walking . . . . . ...... . ........... . not rejected
9.outdoorsports..................... notrejected
10. takingadrive...... ......... notrejected
11. club and group activities . . ....... . ..... not rejected
12. eating out . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... . . . rejected
13. shopping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
14. recreation center . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected

15. lecture/entertainment
16. indoor sports . . . .
17. volunteer activities .

. not rejected
. not rejected
not rejected

18. sports events . . . . . : . . . . . not rejected
19. mvies O O O O O O O O I O O O O O O 0 not rejected
20. bars/taverns..... .. notrejected
2K There is no difference in goals between the returning and
nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected
21. There is no difference in conmunity involvement between the
returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . . . not rejected

2M There is no difference in perception of transportation as a
personal problem between the returning and nonreturning
older adult student.
1.self.... notrejected
2. other older adults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . not rejected

2” There is no difference in selprerceived view of'aging between

the returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . . . . . not rejected
20 There is no difference in desire to associate with own age group ‘
between the returning and nonreturning older adult student. . . not rejected

 

Figure l--Continued.

 

ll7

 

 

The statistics on the older adult sample (N==159) were:

1.
2.

10.

ll.

12.

l3.
14.

54% were female, 46% were male.

62% were married, 10% were single, 28% were divorced,
widowed or separated. -

92% were 69 years old or less with the majority between
the ages of 60 and 64 years old.

94% were Caucasian.

55% grew up in the country/small town; 45% grew up in the
city/suburbs.

90% described themselves as middle class; of this number
69% described themselves as upper middle class.

52% were workingfull or part time.
86% belonged to clubs or activities.
56% visited friends at least twice a week.

100% had some exposure to educational programs during
their adult years.

94% have at least a high school diploma with the average
having at least 2 years of college.

89% reported that they got what they wanted from
Lansing Community College.

46% attended Lansing Community College with friends.
52% chose Lansing Community College because of the

location. 65% chose it because of the type of course ‘
offered.

 

Figure 2. Statistics on Older Adult Students

 

CHAPTER V

SUMMARY, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

Introduction

Chapter V is divided into four main sections: the summary,
conclusions of the study, implications of the study and recommendations

for further research.

Summary

This study examined the characteristics of the older adult stu-
dent in a community college setting as compared to the characteristics
of the average older adult in Michigan. Differences in characteristics
could help the administrator in a community college determine what type
of older adult the institution was attracting. This information could
then be used to determine new recruitment procedures, if desired, or
to determine if present goals are being met.

The study also examined the characteristics of the returning
older adult student as compared to the nonreturning older adult stu-
dent. Differences in characteristics could aid the administrator in
determining what were factors in the retention rate of older adult
students.

The survey population included all Lansing Community College

students who were the age of sixty or over at the time of registration

118

119

for the class during the six terms, Summer 1974-Fall l975. All
classifications of students were included in the population. For
the purposes of this research, it was determined that the entire
population of older adult students, 256 nonduplicated students, was
a small enough population to be handled effectively. Of the original
target population of 256, 159 responded with usable responses.

The instrument used to collect the data to test the hypotheses
in this study was a revised, condensed form of the questionnaire used
by the Michigan Offices of Services to the Aging in the 1975 Michigan
Older Adult Survey. A more detailed description of the instrument is
found in Chapter III.

The data were collected by a mailed questionnaire. Additional
information from the Registrar's Office at Lansing Community College
was included at this point.

The hypothesis 1 and subhypotheses, which involved the compar-
ison of the older adult student sample with the sample of older adults
in Michigan, were tested using the Chi-square test for goodness of fit.
The hypothesis 2 and subhypotheses, which involved the comparison of
the returning older adult students with the nonreturning older adult
student, were tested using the Chi-square test for differences in
probabilities.

The literature reviewed contained both nonscientific articles
and highly technical articles pertinent to a post secondary educator.
The section on gerontology contained: (1) a historical perspective

on the development of social gerontology; (2) a refutation of common

120

myths of aging. Among these was the notion that intelligence
declines with age. Researchers have proven this is false; and

(3) common theories of aging. The three most current theories are
(l) disengagement, (2) activity, and (3) continuity.

The sections on adult education and the older adult and
community college and the older adult contained: (1) research in
these areas and (2) types of classes and programs used in these areas.
Londoner (l97l) referred to the two types of programs as: (l) expres-
sive programs which provide activities for older adults and (2)
instrumental programs which have a goal outside the set activity.

In essence, the researchers pointed out that an older adult
should be treated as a regular student. However, it should be recog-
nized that older adults set their own goals and needs. The majority
of older adults do not view formal education as a means to solve their
problems. This may change as more formally educated people become
older adults.

McClusky (1976) summed up the status of adult education for
older adults by saying: "Adult education is a stepchild of the
educational establishment. Education for older pe0ple is an orphan

living in the stepchild's attic“ (p. l3).

12]

Conclusions of the Study

 

Hypothesis 1

The older adult student at Lansing Community College has
characteristics statistically different from the average older adult
in Michigan.

The older adult students are younger, better educated, more
apt to be working, wealthier, feel healthier and more apt to be married
and living with spouse.

They also are less likely to consider themselves senior citizens
and enjoy associating with all ages of people. They are less likely to
go to senior/recreation centers.

They are much less likely to watch television or read for
leisure. They are more apt to spend their leisure on shopping, hobbies
or attending lectures/entertainment.

In other words, the older adult students present a picture not
unlike that of the average middle class adult. They view themselves
as still part of the main stream, not as a segregated group. For more
specific information on the subhypotheses, see Figures 1 and 2 at the

end of Chapter IV.

Hypothesis 2
The returning older adult student evidenced few significant
differences in characteristics tested from the nonreturning older

adult student.

122

The returning older adult students included twice the number
of widows as the nonreturning students. They were also more likely to
live in the city/suburbs, make less money, visit friends less and eat
out more. For more specific information, see Figures l and 2 at the

end of Chapter IV.
Implications of the Study

This study has shown that there are differences between the
older adult students at Lansing Community College and the average older
adult in Michigan. The type of older adult that was attracted to the
community college was younger, better educated and had previous exposure
to adult learning experiences. Education was the normal way for her.
She felt comfortable in a learning environment.

With this information, an administrator can then decide if this
is the type of older adult the institution wants to attract. If so,
the institution should continue aiming at this segment of the older
adult population. It must be realized that the community college does
not function in a vacuum. Other educational institutions may or may
not be providing services to the older adults. If the administrator
decides that education should be aimed at a broader spectrum of the
older adult population and the community college is the institution
to provide this education, and if she further decides, like Eklund
(l969), that in the future "the only meaningful terminal degree will
be granted by the Mortician" (p. 327), then definite steps must be

taken to reach the other types of older adults. The actual steps to

123

be taken will again be dependent on the philosophy, funding and
dedication of the particular community college. They may include
free tuition or tuition grants, more classes taught away from campus
at local sites, less structured classes, as just a few ideas.

The second part of the study looked at the returning/
nonreturning student.

Statistically there was not much difference between the
returning and the nonreturning older adult student. However, there
appeared to be a trend that could not accurately be measured by this
study. The trend was evidenced in several nonstatistical ways: (l)
written comments by respondents; (2) discussions with industry; (3)
reflections with students; and (4) information obtained from other
administrators and instructors. The returning students seemed to use
the community college for social contacts and needs not just cognitive
skills, whereas the nonreturning students used the community college to
obtain a desired set of cognitive skills and then left.

The administrator can use this information to realize there may
be two types of students within the institution. One type uses the
institution to solve a present need and sees no necessity to return
until a new problem arises. The other type enjoys the learning expe-
rience, in and of itself. If this is indeed true, the institution is

serving its population even though some students do not re-enroll.

124

Recommendations for Further Study

Because of the lack of research in this area, there is a vast

field of studies that could be attempted in the area of education for

older adults. This study suggests five areas pertinent to it that

would be fruitful to investigate:

1.

Test an older adult community college student population
with a refined instrument for determination of social needs
of the returning/nonreturning students;

Survey the older adult student population enrolled at
Lansing Community College after Fall of 1977 and compare
the characteristics to this study to determine the effects
of the Center for Aging Education on the older adult
population;

Compare the older adult students to other students in the
community college to determine differences in character-
istics;

Expand this study to other community colleges to see if
the older adult population attending community colleges
are similar;

Compare the older adults in the community college setting
with older adults in other educational settings, i.e.,
adult education classes, local universities, to determine

differences in characteristics.

125

These studies would build a framework for future decisions
in the field of older adult education. Hopefully, this will correct
Peterson's (1976) statement that "much [program and classes] is already

being attempted, but without training or insight" (p. 170).
Reflection

This study pointed out what a population of older adults at
a city community college was like. The older adults who attended
Lansing Community College were not typical of the average older adult
in Michigan. The college was not attracting the typical average older
adult.

The older adult students.did not view themselves as part of
the senior citizen group. In their eyes, they were still active middle
aged people. They rejected the senior citizen label, recreational
centers, and association with older people. They wanted a mix of all
ages. The older adult students viewed themselves in better health than
others their age. In other words, they did not feel alienated from
society in Rosow's (1967) sense.

Several differences, both real and perceived, may account for
this. The older adult students were better educated. A greater number
of the nonreturning older adult students did not complete high school.
But the average educational level of the older adult students was two
years of college instead of ninth grade that was the educational level
of the average older adult. All had had some exposure to educational

experiences during their adult years. They, therefore, felt closer to

126

the younger generation. The older adult student had a larger income
than the average older adult. This may be the result of a combination
of different effects: (l) they may actually make more money; (2) they
may not be retired, or (3) inflation may have caused the salaries to be
higher in the last few years. Whatever the reason the older adult stu-
dents have more income than the average older adult and view themselves
more as middle aged in spending capacity.

The older adult students viewed their leisure time differently
from the average older adult. They responded differently on watching
television. The older adult students may in reality, watch television
as much as the average older adult but do not view this as a leisure
pastime. A

The same is true about reading. The older adult students may,
in reality, read more than the average older adult but again not for
leisure.

In other words, the actions of the older adult students may be
very similar to the average older adult but how they view their actions
and themselves may be one difference in whether an older adult will seek
out a post-secondary educational experience.

Given the differences, perceptual and actual, the real question
for the colleges still should-be which older adults are the colleges
trying to attract? Are the institutions making these choices or are
the fates deciding them?

At Lansing Community College the older adults felt comfortable

in an educational setting. Some had started with leisure courses and

127

progressed to academic courses. Others used the institution for a
single course and left. But they all made the initial choice to come.
If the college wishes to attract a larger number or more diverse group,
other than traditional methods should be employed. These might include
classes aimed at senior housing residents, classes in nursing homes or
classes in outlying areas.

Each community may have a different mixture of older adults
to tailor its program to. The problems within the older adult community
may vary. But it is the responsibility of the institution to determine
the local mixture.

This study and experience has shown me that most colleges will
only attract the most active segment of the older adult population
unless more effort is put forth to reach the other segments.

But why should colleges concern themselves with the other
segments of the older adult population? The best reason for this
study and the work and efforts in the field of education for older
adults was given by Ruth Glick (l977) when she wrote:

A professor of philosophy once asked me in great

perplexity, "But what is the point of it?" In a

setting intended to encourage human beings to think,

to solve problems, to create, and to discover, older

people can demonstrate their capacity for intellectual

stability, lifelong development and perhaps even the

flowering of wisdom. ‘Ne'believe that for many people

education can become the functional equivalent of work.
That, professor, is the point of it. (p. 10)

APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE

APPENDIX A

 

 

QUESTIONNAIRE
1. How long have you lived in your less than 1 year
neighborhood? l-2 years
3-4 years
5-9 years
lO-l4 years
l5-l9 years
20 years or more
"all my life“
no response/don't know
2A. What type of community did you city
grow up in? suburb
small town
country
8. What type of community do you city
now live in? suburb
small town
country
3A. In general, do you have any yes
trouble getting around; that no
is, does lack of transportation
keep you from doing things you
need or would like to do?
8. If yes, please explain:
4. Compared to other people your much better than others

somewhat better
about the same
somewhat worse
much worse
don't know

own age, would you say your
health is:

128

129

Do you think of yourself as yes

 

a senior citizen? no
Why?
Are you now ' single/never married
married
divorced
separated
widow/widower
What is your present living live alone
arrangement? live with husband/wife

(includes with children)
live with others

(not husband/wife)

don't know

live with others your
own age

What is your approximate age? 50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80-84
85 and over

What was the last grade of no schooling at all
school you completed? some elementary (l-8)
completed 8 grades

some high school
completed high school
some college

college graduate

advanced degree

not applicable categories
specify:

 

 

 

10.

11.

12.

13.

130

Please mark any of these
educational programs that you
have gone to during your adult
years.

Have you had any job training
or vocational education in
addition to your years in
school?

 

When you think of recreational
activities you might do, would
you rather join in activities
which are just for people age

55 or older, or would you rather
join in activities for people of
all ages?

Where do you get most of your
information about what goes on
in the community? (check one)

adult education
high school course
college/university course
craft/sewing/hobby course
discussion groups such as
book review, senior or
community center

bible study/church class
vocational course
pre-retirement programs
library programs

consumer buying/protection
other (specify):

 

 

don't know

no

on the job/while working/

experience
apprenticeship
vocational or business
school

adult education
other (specify):

 

 

55 and over
all ages

makes no difference

\

TV

newspapers

radio
family-relatives
other pe0ple (not family)
magazines

other (specify):

 

 

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

131

 

 

Did any of your friends attend yes

Lansing Community College with no

you?

Did you get what you wanted . yes

from the courses at Lansing no

Community College?

Explain:

Were there any particular prob- time of class

lems that you faced when you
decided to attend Lansing
Community College?

choosing a class
transportation
finding class

Such as: (check as many as enrolling

apply) parking
class wasn't what you
expected

course took more of your
time than you expected
keeping up with class
dealing with other
students in class

other (explain):

 

 

What did you enjoy most about your experience at Lansing Community
College?

 

 

 

What did you enjoy least about your experience at Lansing Community
College?

 

 

 

132

19. If you could change your experiences at Lansing Community College,

how would you do it?

 

 

20. Read the list of areas which people say are problems for older
Americans. For each area, please mark if it is g9_problem to you,
a somewhat important problem, or a very important problem.

Somewhat

No Im ortant
Pr651em Problem

Income (money) .......
Health care ........
Housing ..........
Transportation .......
Getting more education . . .
Age discrimination .....
Employment opportunities . .
Spare time activities
Crime . ..........
Nutrition and food .....
Services and business
misleading their users . .

Very
Im ortant
Problem

 

2l. If you had $25 more to spend each month, how would you spend it?

 

entertainment visiting/talking with friends or
hobbies relatives

food savings

clothes medical expenses

travel other (explain):

 

 

22. What is your race?

 

23. Sex? male
female

24.

25.

26.

27A.

133

Which of the categories describes no income
your average annual income for O-$999
1975 (last year)? $l,OOO-$l,999

$2,000-$2,999
$3,000-$3,999
$4,000-$5,999

. $6,000-$9,999
$10,000'$149999
$15,000 and over

What kind of housing do you high rise apartment
think of when we say "senior other apartment/townhouse/
citizen housing"? condominium

house

apartment, condominium/
townhouse which is cheaper
house which is cheaper
nursing care/place to live
with nursing

old folks care home/home
for aged

somebody looks out after

Y

_____0

cu
ther (specify):

 

 

don't know

If you thought of senior citizen housing as an apartment specially
designed for older people to live in, and you had to move, would
you like to move into that kind of senior citizen housing?

yes no

What three things do you doaor which three places do you go to
most often in your leisure time?

1. 2. 3.

 

 

 

. What three things would you like to do or three places you would

like to go in your leisure time?
l. 2. 3.

 

28.

29.

30.

31.

134

What were your reasons for
attending Lansing Community
College? (check as many as

apply

brush up on past skills
learn a new skill/trade
acquire new information
solve a problem

plan for life

meet other new people
share ideas

get out of the house

learn new uses for leisure
time

other (specify):

 

 

 

 

Would you suggest that any of yes

your friends attend Lansing no
Community College?

Why or why not?

(If retired), which of the no income
categories describes your O-$999

average annual income over
the last five years before
you retired?

Are you currently:

$1,000'$1s999

$2 ,000'$2 9999
$3,000-$3,999
$4,000-$5,999
$6,000-$9,999
$10,000-$14.999
$l5,000 and over

working full time

working part time

retired and working full time
retired and working part time
retired

unemployed/looking for a job
disabled/unable to work, but
not retired

housewife

retired/lookin for a job
other (specifygz

 

 

32.

33.

34.

35.

36.

135

Are you satisfied with the way
you are now spending your
leisure time? If no, how
would you like it to be
different?

yes
no/don't know

 

 

Why did you choose Lansing
Community College? (check
all answers that apply--
circle most important reasdn)

How often do you "visit"
or call with any of your
close friends and neighbors?

llllllll

How would you describe
yourself?

Do you belong to or join
in:
(check as many as apply)

 

[ THANK YOU?

reputation
suggestion of a friend/family
location

type of course

financial
other

every day/almost every day
several times per week
once a week

once every two weeks

once a month

less often

never

no response/don't know

lower lower class

upper lower class
lower middle class
upper middle class
lower upper class
upper upper class

club/group activities

recreation center/senior
citizen center/community
center

volunteer activities
church

other

APPENDIX B

COVER LETTER-fFIRST MAILING

APPENDIX B
.Cansin Communih Calla c
9 .I J

 

419 N. CAPITOL AVE, lANSING, MICHIGAN 48914

 

11 June 1976

Serving the Hon"
0' Michigan

Would you believe just 20 minutes?!?! That is all; just 20 minutes of
your time to participate in a study in the field of Higher Education. It will
take 2 minutes to read this cover letter and about 15 minutes to complete the
enclosed questionnaire.

This questionnaire, as the last part of my Ph.D. work, is an attempt to
find out some information about people over fifty who have gone to a community
college class in the last three years. We hope to use this information to find
out what we, at Lansing Community College, can better do to serve your needs.

The success of this project depends on YOU since only a limited number of
people were chosen to answer these questions. Without your help, we can't
really determine what you want.

All information given will be kept secret. Your name will not appear
on the questionnaire. If you have any further questions about this project,
please feel free to contact me at my office or at home. I will be glad to answer
any questions.

Take the final 3 minutes to return this questionnaire in the enclosed,
stamped, self-addressed envelope by 30 June 1976.

Thank you for your time and effort.

 

Office Home

Lansing Community College Michigan State University
208A, Student Personnel Services 922 J Cherry Lane

419 N. Capitol Avenue East Lansing, Michigan 48823
P. O. Box #40010 (517) 355-8021

Lansing, Michigan 48901

(517) 373-9980 136

APPENDIX C

COVER LETTER-~SECOND MAILING

APPENDIX C
£ansing (Lnummity College

419 N. CAPITOL AVE., lANSING, MICHIGAN 48914

 

Surving the Hour?
of Michigan

8 July 1976

I'm sorry I haven't heard from you! I know you meant to mail in
your questionnaire but didn't get a chance because of work, vacation
trips or other things that may have come up.

I would appreciate it if you could fill out the enclosed question-
naire and return it to me by the first week in August. I need your re-
sponses to complete this area of my research. All information will be
in strictest confidence.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please contact me. I
will be glad to hear from you.

Thank you for your time.
S' erel %
W

Office Home

Lansing Community College Michigan State University
208A, Student Personnel Services 922 J Cherry Lane

419 N. Capitol Avenue East Lansing, Michigan 48823
P. O. Box #40010 (517) 355-8021

Lansing, Michigan 48901

(517) 373-9980 137

APPENDIX D

REGISTRAR'S FORMS
LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

APPENDIX D
W COMMUNITY COLLEGE

HEAD! “All mm“ m PRINT nu. I'm.” m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BINGO“.

‘ F MMMHInmcoII-p)
D W ml.

wmwummmmmd)
mummsm ummmmmmmmmm
WMIAIIIMMNMIMHLLU‘I’TIIIOIIOTIOI

mm
mm H I 1 1 l l -
Nunc f '
an 'm m mum-
mm! I
nae-a no.
Adda. ‘
Inn- and
3 an. ape-u in.» M
ofti «mm aim Iodionho- "not 61
moth m- M W?- m) M 810.00 Will
I [j I mmmtmwwcwm)
3mm m m a 1 MmlmWLOClutbm)
D I MIIMLCCMMIWNM)
sumwm [j I Dual EnmIIMIcm-nnfly mulled Inhkhuchooll
(Mom) 0 l F0010"
U I Sink Male [3 2 Transfer In (mmwb)
D 2 81ml. Fan-Io [j 3 800::th
D 4
D 5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

wmm‘ .
an :1- v.-

Anyuamm uh- Dhflmnuh“dhl&mmmm

mmmhmb , ' '1 . a... "

mama-tummy ‘: ~; .i ~ ..‘ "3.1,: f

aluminum-flout, » a w" * WdWMuou-UP

00 I MEETING mm
IIIIIII mun cm 8.8 IIIIM I APZAprI TITIIF sou

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1’on OFFICE USE rwu

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mnmfim App F00 A

NM 0' mum _ mums VALIDATION Wuition A
0 Call . Activity Foo ____A__..
El Chck Lab-Math Foo __L___.
D M m Tot-I Tun & Fm _.A___4.

Ant Pd 4

 

 

 

 

MOIWNNBHM Ill-ID». A

138

APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION

TYPE OF ADMISSION
(Check One)
Appheation Iefivmflmw application

D—l New Regular ($10.00)

D—l Dual Enrollment (Still in high school— $10.00) LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE
D—l Foreign Student ($10.00)

[j—2 Re—Admission (Attended LCC before) Eh ' / OFFICE OF ADMISSIONS
D-S Transfer In (Attended another college— $10.00) I _‘ l/ 430 N. C APITOI. AVE.
[j—5 Guest (Currently enrolled in another college — $5.00) "'

[j-B Seminar MNSING, MICHIGAN 48914

     
       
 

._\
-/ tax 4\

“mm
\
\ .a

7

PLEASE READ CAREFULLY AND COMPLETE ALL ITEMS WITH A TYPEWRITER OR IN BLACK INKI

 

YOU MUST HAVE A SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER TO APPLYI I I 1 H I H 1 I I I
SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Last Name First Name Middle Name Maiden Name
STUDENT
ADDRFQQ-
. Street No. Street Name Apt. No. City State Zip
County Township
PfEI-‘sMANEI‘lT ADDRESS
(1 Street No. Street Name City State Zip County Township
I presently live in the following high school district and have lived there——
Yearl Month:
Are you a Foreign Student? [1 Yes [1 No. If yes, please contact the Admissions Office before applying. '
I attended LCC [3 Yes D No __ _. I applied but did not attend I] Yes D No — .___..___.
Term Year Tenn You
I plan to start (Check one): D Fall E] Winter [:1 Spring E] Summer 19—
Last Employer Date: Employed

TELEPHONE NUMBER: (Blleinpu) (Home)

Area Code Number Area Code Number
SEX (Circle number): 1. Single Male 2. Single Female 3. Married Male 4. Married Female.

. BIRTH
DATEz—_/—/___.
Last High School Attended City Year Graduated Birthplace

 

What do you plan to study? (See page: 3 and 4) Cull-lieu!“ No. Iron 9.". 3 or 4

Please indicate any health or physical problems

 

OFFICE USE ONLY

If you would like to apply for financial aid, please check this box: [I Adm Stal

If you are not planning to use the course work taken at LCC for credit or degree, please check Term E t
IIIIS box: D n m Yr.
Have you attended another college? Please list name and dates attended: Res. 1 2 3 4

2 3 4

Sex 1
NAME LOCATION FROM T0 3.5

Grad. Yr
Curr. #

 

Math—..____

Reading______
English—.—
N am

 

 

139

APPENDIX E

AREA SERVED BY LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

APPENDIX E

AREA SERVED BY LANSING COMMUNITY COLLEGE

US 27

 

r- ------

I a .
MAPLE RAPIDS EUREKA EL S IE.

S HEPARDSI’I LLE

   
 
  

: FOWLER

' ST. JOHNS

 
 
   
   
  
  
 
   
  
 
 

 
   

 

   
  
 
  

PEWAMO ' OVID | BURTON
I ' owoss

l l WE'STPHALIA ~ ENNIN-GTON
LAINGSE

   
 

”5 PORTLAND ' URG , PITTSBURG

     
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
  
  
 
    
      
    
 
     
 

 

 

 

 

    
   
 

   
 
 

  
 

.MORRICE
SEBE'WA
-

SUNFIELD lamp LEDGE ' SHAFTSBURG

r - - - - - - - - - j

I MULLIKEIV BELL OAK..

I

| GRESHAM IAMSTON I
I : RVILLE'
L POTTERVI '

RMO ILLE' WEBBE’RVILL

CHESTER

I
CHARLOTTE

DANSVILLE

I
EDEN IMI LL LE
' BUNKERHI LL
I

I
AURELIUS
I

LES E FITCHBU-G
. - .

SPRINGPO '

-....-J

STOCKBRIDGE

    
  

 

US 27

140

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

"Adult Education Classes in Pittsfield.“ Perspective on Aging.
January/February I977, p. 28.

 

Aldridge, G. J. "Lifelong Education and the Aging: Opportunities
for Communicating." In Agipg and Communication. Edited by
Oyer and Oyer. Baltimore: University Park PFess, I976.

 

Amor, Charles. "Community College Teaching and Programming." Report
for the l973 Summer Institute on Social Gerontology. University
of Michigan, l973. (Mimeographed)

Andrews, Elizabeth. A Survey of Educational and Informational Needs
of Older People Living in the Schoolcraft College District.
Institute of Gerontology, The University of Michigan. ’Wayne
State University Report, September l972.

Arbeiter, Solomon. "Profile of the Adult Learner." The College Board
Review 102 (Winter 1976-77): 20-27.

 

Area Plan for Programs on Aging. Administration on Aging, Lansing,
Michigan, 1975.

Atchley, Robert C. The Social Forces in Later Life: An Introduction
to Social Gerontology. Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth Publishing
Company, 1972.

Baltes, Paul, and Labouvie, Gisela. "Adult DevelOpment of Intellectual
Performance: Description, Explanation, and Modification.“
In The Psychology of Adult Development and Aging. Edited by
Eisdorfer and Lawton. iwashington, D.C.: American Psychological
Association, 1973.

Baltes, Paul 8., and Schair, K. Warner. "Aging and 1.0.: The Myth of
the Twilight Years." *Psychology Today7 (March l974): 35-40.

 

Barrows, C. H., and Strehler, B. L. "Program Biological Obsolescence."
John ngkins Medical Journal 19 (l968): 8-19.

Beck, Amanda. "Michigan Aging Citizens." Institute of Gerontology,
Ann Arbor, Michigan, l975.

141

142

Michigan Aging_Citizens: Characteristics, Opinions, and
Service Utilization Patterns. Office of Services to the Aging,
Department of Management and Budget, State of Michigan, Lansing,
August 1975.

 

Bergtson, Vegn. "Aging Myths Shattered." Modern Maturity 17 (JUIY
1974 I 40. .

Bettinghaus, Carole, and Bettinghaus, Erwin. "Communication Consider-
ation in the Health Care of the Aging." In A in and
Communications. Edited by Oyer and Dyer. Baltimore, Md.:
University Park Press, l976.

Blakely, R. J. The Next Human Nature. An Address Before the Joint
Meeting of the Adult Education Association of the U.S.A. and
the National Association of Public School Adult Educators.
Denver, Colorado, l6 October l960.

Blau, Zena S. Old Age in a Changing Society, New Viewpoints, l973.

Blenkner, M. "Environmental Change and the Aging Individual." Ipp_
Gerontologist 7 (l967): l02-l05.

Boyack, Virginia. Time On Our Hands. Los Angeles: Ethel Percy Andus
Gerontology Center,Tl973.

 

Breen, Leonard F. "The Discipline of Gerontology." In The Daily Needs
and Interests of Older People. Edited by Adeline M. Hoffman.
Springfield, 111.: Charles C. Thomas, l970.

 

Broschart, James. A Synthesis of Selected Manuscripts About the
Education of Adults in United States. Washington, D.C.:
Government Printing Office, Office of Education, 1976.

Brotman, Herman 8. Facts and Figures on Older Americans: An Overview
l97l. Washington, D.C.: Administration on Aging, U.S.
Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1972.

 

Bryson, Lyman, ed. An Outline of Man's Knowledge of the Modern World.
New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company, Inc., 1960.

Buffer, Loretta C. Continuinngducation for the Elderly: A Report.
Columbus: Ohio DOminican College, 6"December l976.

Burgess, E. W., ed. Aging in Western Societies. Chicago: University
of Chicago, I960.

Busse, Ewald, ed. "Theories of Aging.“ Behavior and Adaptation in
Late Life. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969.

143

Butler, Robert N., and Lewis, Myrna 1. Aging and Mental Health.
St. Louis: C. V. Mosby Company, 1973.

 

Carp, Abraham, et al. "Adult Learning Interests and Experiences."
In Planning Non-Traditional Programs. Edited by K. Patricia
Cross, J. R. Valley et al. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Publishers, 1974.

Cederquist, Deanne. "Food for Life" Series, WKAR-TV. East Lansing:
Michigan State University, 1974.

Cumming, Elaine, and Henry, William. Growing Old: The Process of
Disengagement. New York: Basic Books, 1961.

 

Curtis, H. J. "A Composite Theory of Aging." The Gerontologist 6
(l966): l43-l49.

 

Daniel, David E.; Templin, Robert 6.; and Shearon, Ronald W. "The
Value Orientations of Older Adults Toward Education."
Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly 2
(January-March, 1977): 33-42.

 

DeCrow, Roger. New Learning for Older Americans: An Overview of
National Effort. Washington, D.C.: AdultlEducation
Association of the U.S.A., l974.

 

DeGabriele, Eugene H. A Review of Present Educational Programs
Available to Older AdUlts in California‘s Public Adult
Education Program. Sacramento, California State Department
of Education Report, 1967.

 

 

DeMott, Benjamin. "'Adult Ed'--The Ultimate Goal." Saturday Review
58 (December l975): 27-29.

 

Donahue, Wilma, ed. Education for Later Maturity. New York:
Whiteside, Inc., 1955.

. “Development of the 'Science of Aging.'" Speech. Lansing
Community College, Lansing, Michigan, February l975.

Ehrlich, Ira F., and Ehrlich, Phyllis D. "A Four-Part Framework to
Meet the Responsibilities of Higher Education to Gerontology."
Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly l (July-
September l976): 251-260.

Eisdorfer, Carl. "Intellectual and Cognitive Changes in the Aged."
In Behavior and Adaptation in Late Life. Edited by Busse
and Pfeiffer. Boston: Little Brown and Company, I969.

 

144

"Facts and Figures on the Greater Lansing Metropolitan Area: A Billion
Dollar Market." Statedournal, February l97l.

Felstein, Ivor. Sex in Later Life. London, England: Penguin Books,
1973. ‘

Friis, Henning; Townsend, Peter; and Shanas, Ethel, eds. Old People
in Three Industrial Societies: ‘An Introduction. New York:
Atherton Press, 1968. *‘

 

Gage, Gene. "The Nordic Example." Saturday Review 53 (9 September
1975): 1 21

 

Gleazer, Edmund J. "After the Room. . . . What Now For the Community
College." Community and Junior College Journal, December-
January l974. (Reprint)

Glick, Ruth. Continuin Education for the Elderl : A Report.
Columbus: inican‘COTTEEET‘DEEemfidFT976.

“The Coming of Age." Change 9 (February 1977): 9-10.

 

Glickman, Lillian L., and Hershey, Benjamin. Community Colleges
Respond to Elders. Washington, D.C.: Department of Health,
Education and Welfare, 1975.

 

Goodrow, Bruce A. "Limiting Factors in Reducing Participation in
Older Adult Learning Opportunities.“ The Gerontologist 15
(October 1975): 4l8-42 .

 

Grabowski, Stanley, ed. Learning_for Aging, American Adult
Association of the the U.S.A., l975.

Graney, Marshall J., and Hays, William C. "Senior Students: Higher
Education After Age 62." Educational Gerontology: An
International Quarterly l (October-December 1976): 343-359.

Gutman, David. "The Psychology of Aging." Speech. Lansing Community
College, Lansing, Michigan, March l975.

Handbook of Data and Definitions in Higher Education. A Service of
the Joint Commission on Data and Definitions in Higher Education
sponsored by the American Association of Collegiate Registrars
and Admissions Officers, l962.

Hanighurst, R. J. Journal of Gerontology l3 (3l October I957),
Supplement.

. "Leisure and Aging." In The Daily Needs and Interests of
Older People. Edited by A. M. HOffman. SpFingfield,’Ill.:
Charles C. Thomas, 1970.

 

 

145

Hart, MaryRose. Consortium for Agingpand Retirement Education.
Lansing, Mich.: Lansing Community College, 1975.

Hayflick, L. "Human Cells and Aging." Scientific American 218
(1968): 32-37.

Hendrickson, Andrew, ed. The Role of Colleges and Universities in
the Education of the Aged. Columbus: Ohio State University,
1964.

Hesburgh, T.; Miller, P.; Wharton, C. Patterns of Life Long Learning.
San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1973.

 

Heyman, Dorothy K., and Polansby, Grace H. "Social Casework and
Community Services for the Aged." In Behavior and Adaption
in Late Life. Edited by Busse and Pfeiffer. Boston: Little,
Brown and Company, 1969.

 

 

Hiemstra, Roger. "The Older Adult's Learnin Projects." Educational
Gerontology 1 (October-December 1976?: 337-341.

Hoffman, Betty Hannah. "Growing Older Is Not the Same as Being Old."
Woman's Day 37 (September 1974): 50.

 

Hulicka, Irene, and Wheeler, Douglas. "Recall Scores of Old and Young
People as a Function of Registration Internals." Educational
Gerontology: An International Quarterly 1 (October-December
1976): 361-372.

 

"Images of Aging." WITF-TV, Robert Larson, Producer. Hershey,
Pennsylvania, 1975.

Isaac, Margaret, and Byrum, Jack. "Adult Education; Dilemma Or Bonanza
for Our Colleges." Adult Leadership 25 (April 1977): 235-237.

Jacobs, H. Lee. "Education for Aging." The Daily Needs and Interests
of Older People. Edited by A. M. Haifman. Springfield, 111.:
Charles C. Thomas, 1970.

Jeffers, Frances C., and Verwoerdt, Adriaan. "How the Old Face Death."
Behavior and Adoptation in Late Life.) Edited by Ewall Busse.
Boston: Little, Brown andlCompany, 1969.

Kallmann, F. J., and Jarnik, L. F. In Handbook of Aging and the
Individual. Edited by J. Birren. Chicago: University of
Chicago, 1959.

Kasl, S. "Physical and Mental Health Effects of Involuntary Relocation
and Institutionalization on the Elderly: A Review." American
Journal of Public Health 62 (1972): 377-384.

146

Kidd, J. R. How Adults Learn. New York: Association Press, 1959.

 

Korim, Andrew S. Older Americans and Community Colleges: A Guide
for Program Implementation. Washington, D.C.: American
Association of Community and Junior Colleges, 1974.

 

Older Americans and Community Colleges: An Overview.
Washington, D.C.: American AssoCiation of Community and
Junior Colleges, l974.

 

Kubler-Ross, Elizabeth. On Death and Dying. New York: The Macmillan
Co., 1969.

 

Labouvier-Vief, Gisela. "Toward Optimizing Cognitive Competence in
Later Life." Educational Gerontology: An International
Quarterly 1 (January-March): 75-92.

Lansing Centennial, Souvenir Historical Program. Lansing Centennial
Year, Inc., Lansing, Michigan 1959.

Lawton, M. P. "Assessment, Integration, and Environments for Older
People.“ The Gerontologist 10 (1970): 38-45.

London, Jacob. "The Social Setting for Adult Education." In Handbook
of Adult Education. Edited by Amith, Aker and Kidd. New York:
Macmillan Co., 1972.

 

Londoner, Carroll H. Enrichin the Lines of Older Adults: New
Dimensions in Program anning. Lincoln: The University
of Nebraska, 1971. llMimeographed)

 

 

Lorge, Irving. "Capacities of Older Adults." In Education for Late
Maturity. Edited by W. Donahue. New York: Whiteside, 13%.,
1955.

 

Maddox, G. L. "Activity and Morale: A Longitudinal Study of Selected
Elderly Subjects." Social Forces 42 (1963): 195.

 

Maeroff, Gene. "From Mel Brooks to 'Medicine '75.'" Saturday Review
58 (20 September 1975): 24-26.

Manney, James D. Aging_in American Society: An Examination of
Concepts and Issues. Ann Arbor, Michigan: The Institute
of Gerontology, 1975.

 

Masters, William H., and Johnson, Virginia E. Human Sexual Response.
New York: Little, Brown and Co., 1966.

McClusky, Howard Y. Education: Background and Issues. White House
Conference on Aging. Washin ton, D.C.: Government Printing
Office, 1970. (Mimeographedl

147

Position Paper on Education for the White House Conference
on Aging. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office,
1971a. (Mimeographed)

. Education and Agigg, Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan, 1971b. (Mimeographed)

"Education for Aging: The Scope of the Field and
Perspectives for the Future." In Learning for Aging.
Edited by Grahowski and Mason. Adult Education Association
of the U.S.A., 1974.

 

. "Education and Aging." Speech. Lansing Community College,
Lansing, Michigan, February 1975.

Michelsen, Olaf. Vitamins and Aging, 1976. (Mimeographed)

Michigan Comprehensive Plan on Aging. Office of Services to the
Aging, Lansing, Michigan, 1975.

Miller, Stephen J. "The Social Dilemma of the Aging Leisure
Participant." Older People and Their Social World.
Edited by A. Rose anle. Peterson. Philadélphia:
F. A. Davis, 1965.

Moody, H. R. "Philosophical Presuppositions of Education for Old Age.“
Educational Gerontology 1 (January-March 1976): 1-16.

Neugarten, 8. L., et al. Personality in Middle and Late Life.
New York: Atherton, 1964.

Never Too Old to Learn.. Norman Auburn, Project Director. New York:
Academy for Educational Development, Inc., 1974.

Newell, David S. "Social-Structural Evidence for Disingagement."
In Growing_01d. Edited by Cummings and Henry. New York:
Basic Books, 1961.

Okun, Morris A., and Siegler. "The Perception of Outcome-Effort
Covariation in Younger and Older Men." Educational
Gerontology: An International Quarterly 2l(January-March
1977): 22-32.

 

"The Old in the Country of the Young.‘I Time, 3 August 1970. PP- 49'54-

Palmore, Erdman. "Sociological Aspects of Aging." In Behavior and
Adaptation in Late Life. Edited by Busse and Pfeiffer.
Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969.

 

148

Peterson, David A. "Life-Span Education and Gerontology." Ipp_
Gerontolqgjst 15 (October 1975): 437-441.

 

. "Educational Gerontology: The State of the Art."
Educational Gerontology 1 (January-March 1976): 61-73.

Peterson, James A., and LaBlanc, Jerry. "Myths about Elderly Challenged
by Survey." Detroit Free Press, 30 November 1973.

 

Pfeiffer, Eric. "Sexual Behavior in Old Age." In Behavior and
Adoptation in Later Life. Edited by Busse and Pfeiffer.
Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1969.

 

 

Philibert, Michel. "Philosophies of Aging." Ann Arbor: Institute
of Gerontology, 1975.

Reichard, S.; Linson, F.; and Peterson, P. C. Aging and Personality.
New York: Wiley, 1967.

 

"Retirement Education Studies." Research News 26 (November and
December 1976): 13.

 

Riley, Matilda White, and Foner, Anne, eds. Aging and Society.
Vol. 1. An Ipyentory of Research Findings. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1969.

 

Robinson, Phileon B. "Socio-Cultural Characteristics of Senior Citizen
Participants in Adult Education." Adult Leadership 20 (January
1972 : 2 .

 

Rose, Arnold, ed. "The Subculture of the Aging: A Framework for
Research in Social Gerontology." Older People and Their
Social Worlds. Philadelphia: F. A. Davis, 1965.

 

 

Rosenberg, G. S. "Age Poverty and Isolation from Friends in Urban
Working Class." Journal of Gerontology 23 (1968): 533-538.

Rosow, Irving. Social Integration of the Aged. New York: The Free
Press, 1967.

"Seminar in Social Gerontology." Presenters: Clark Tibbitts and
Andrew Korim, Lansing Community College, Lansing, Michigan,
1975.

Shock, N. W. "The Physiology of Aging." Scientific American 206
(1962): 100-110.

 

Simmons, Lea W. "Aging in Preindustrial Societies." In Handbook
of Social Gerontology. Edited by Clark Tibbits. Chicago:
University of Chicago, 1960.

 

149

Simon, Alexander. "Aging: The Psychiatrist's Perspective." In
Aging: Prospects and Issues. Edited by Richard H. Davis.
LoslAngeles: University of Southern California Press, 1976.

Smith, K. U., and Smith, F. G. Cybernetic Principles of Learning and
Educational Design. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston,
965. .

Sonneborn, T. M.‘ ”Breeding Systems, Reproductive Methods and Species
Problems in Protogoa." In The Species Problem. Edited by
E. Mayr. Washington, D.C.: AmericanlAssociation for
Advancement of Science, 1957.

Stetar, Joseph M. “Community Colleges and the Educational Needs of
Older Adults." Journal of Higher Education 45 (December 1974):
717-721.

 

Streib, Gorden F. "Are the Aged a Minority Group?" Applied Sociology.
Edited by A. W. Gouldner and S. M. Miller. New York: The
Free Press, 1965.

, and Orback, Harold L. "Aging." In The Uses of Sociology.
Edited by P. F. Lazarsfeld, W. H. Swell, and H. L. Wilensky.
New York: Basic Books, 1967.

 

Swartz, Frederick. "Medical Aspect of Aging." Speech. Lansing,
Michigan, February-March 1975.

Sweeney, Sean M. Working with the Senior Citizen as an Adult Learner.
Durham, N.H.: Cooperative Extension Service, March 1973.
(Mimeographed) '

Tibbitts, Clark, ed. "Origin, Scope and Fields of Social Gerontology."
Handbook of Social Gerontology. Chicago: University of
Chicagojll960.

Toward a National Policy on Aging; A Report on Michigan's Preparations
for the White House Conference on Aging. Lansing: State of
Michigan, 1971.

Trent, Curtis, and Trent, Melody Ann. "Education for Aging--Imperative
for the Future." Adult Leadership 25 (April 1977): 231-233.

 

Tukey, John W., and Cornfield, Jerome. "Average Values of Mean Squares
in Factorials." Annals of Mathematical Statistics 27 (December
1956): 907-949.

Tunstall, Jeremy. Old and Alone: A Sociolo ical Study of Old People.
London: Routledge and’Kegan Paul, 1 662

150

Wass, Hannelore. "Views and Opinions of Elderly Persons Concerning
Death." Educational Gerontology: An International Qparterly
2 (1977): 15-26.

Wasserman, Ira. “The Educational Interests of the Elderly: A Case
Study." Educational Gerontology: An International Quarterly_
1 (October-December 1976): 323-330.

"White Hair College." Time, 11 March 1974, p. 75.

Woodruff, D., and Walsh, 0. "Research in Adult Learning: The
Individual." The Gerontolpgist 15 (OCtODEF 197 )3 423-430.

 

U.S. Bureau of the Census. County and City Data Book, 1972.
Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. *lA Statistical
Abstract Supplement.)

. Statistiggl Abstract of the United States: 1975. 96th ed.
' Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1975.

nrcwmnw STATE UNIV. LIBRARIES
llllllllllllllllll lllllll llll lllllll lllllll ll llllllll
31293101246423