REMOTE STORAGE PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINES return on or before date due. I DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE ’—_ 2/17 203 Blue FORMS/DateDueForms_2017.indd - 99.5 0-169 This is to certify that the thesis entitled Ft “furl"! TO D-tnvmjpp Why Freshman SChO I‘T‘ihin Students at Mic? lean 5:,th Ci‘lle Fail to Renew Their Sc.helq weht presented by Marvin VCl‘I‘Z'P]. has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for _ ° ’* degree in____F"~1 ““i‘fit 1'“?! W Major. professor 5-1 0 on J I. Date ry '3» 1 I'”'"" 0". l2 [31-2233 A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHY FRESHMAN SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE FAIL TO RENEW THEIR SCHOLARSHIPS BY Marvin Che sley Volpel A THESIS Babmitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Division of Education 1951 .A CU ‘3‘ 1:0 in! '15 :1'192: F 1! tieatei ‘ ‘Ihl A .‘. .v. M. Va“. '15.: t‘. g dial?“- fC.‘ :‘r O‘. l“‘. ' ‘ \‘v.!(a in tr- \ IM~ . . v‘ve‘gfii‘h‘g tr. T‘- .. - ‘o r Pzfiret In N‘ U. ‘ (V‘. .. 11 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer wishes to acknowledge his indebtedness to the many persons who have helped him in the preparation of this study. He desires eSpecially to express his ap- preciation to the members of his Committee, Professors Carl R. Gross, Guy R. Hill, Vernon G. Grove, and Cecil V. Millard for their many helpful suggestions. Special thanks are due Professor Gross, Chairman of the Committee, for his friendly counsel and abundant patience. The author is indebted to William D. Baten, Professor of Mathematics, for his constant encouragement and his material assistance with the statistical phases of this study. Thanks are due to Mr. Robert S. Linton, Registrar, for his permission to use the college records, to Mr. Kermit Smith, Assistant Registrar, and to Mr. Lyle Leisenring, Chief Recorder, for their assistance in compiling the data required for this investigation. A Special word of thanks is due the clerks in the Record's Office for their co-Operation in recording the data and to the several hundred students ‘who furnished the material for the investigation. Lastly, to Margaret, his wife, special gratitude is due for he}: constant encouragement and assistance. (‘3).- - .’-'-' r' w I‘er‘fg \_)C.J’L% ( 1'! I.) (/) A -~.\ee . .4; OAJO‘ Hon“... 3.1. :b“§te; Q... a \‘ in ‘4 "SUN 'Yi\u¢&u39kmA ,. . , w ,...,../ x A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHY FRESnMAN SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS L--- 4(§#> \ AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE FAIL TO RENEW THEIR SCHOLARSHIPS BY Marvin Chesley Volpel AN ABSTRACT OF A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF EDUCATION Division of Education 1951 W A- .. co - l \ . , 'qud. . 1? 113:2)»; 3‘4. t ‘ an.“ ”é? C 'S' 12 0“ h c. C e_£:~ ‘ lg: ah"; ‘ ‘VI..‘ b: O !a» a a“ '- te“e‘ ‘1 ‘ -L"e‘° h“ , :-€3;5 ‘. 51:"! “. 5 . 3' Ct: \. ‘ {:53 0 § 5‘54 ‘4‘ 15w) A STUDY TO DETERMINE WHY FRESHMAN SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE FAIL TO RENEW THEIR SCHOLARSHIPS Marvin C. Volpel During the academic year 1949-1950 there were 386 freshmen studying at Michigan State College under the terms of the entrance scholarship. The terms of the scholarship specify; first, that the regular tuition fees be waived upon entrance and each term thereafter, if the student maintains a one-point six (0+) average at the close of each academic year in June; and second, that no student may participate in these scholarships for more than 12 quarters. At the end of the freshman year, it was found that 41 per cent of those freshmen failed to earn a renewal of the scholarship award. This alarming figure presented a problem which warranted an investi- gation. For some long time, colleges have made tuition-free awards to deserving high school graduates but only in the .past few years have they given them in such large numbers. The problem presented here stems from this fact and con- sequently from the fact that little research has been un- dertaken.regarding the success of scholarship students. IA survey of the literature failed to uncover any study similar to this investigation. we came; [3,39 "an. _ V'snu‘ - Marvin C. Volpel “' “,‘ k. f - (1% r This study was undertaken to determine, if possible, why so many freshmen, presumably of good high school back- grounds, did not maintain the grade point average required for the renewal. The writer investigated the high school and first year college records of 586 students. These are divided into groups of (a) 33 students who withdrew some- time during the year, (b) 158 students whose scholarships were cancelled at the end of the year, (c) 195 students whose scholarships were renewed, and (d) 200 regular fresh- men selected at random. To supplement this material and to furnish some subjective evidence for the research, the writer administered a questionnaire to the members of the several groups mentioned. The questions which.follow serve as guideposts for the investigation to determine why 41 per cent of these freshmen failed to renew their scholarships. Is it the fault of the high school in failing to prepare its grad- uates for college work? Is it the fault of the college in failing to meet its obligations tO‘the student? Is it the fault of the student himself in failing to meet the re- sponsibilities his new environment requires? Are there other reasons why these students did not do well in college? And can anything be done to remedy the situation? The answers to these questions should prove beneficial to guidance officials in both secondary schools and colleges in order that they might promote better adjustment of college fre. The 9?; :xmerous czg 1. Here tag can frsn s: caze Ira: c 1 & HAPIL CO“‘“9W .‘UOm 2 m- . ‘A.~ Se ':. ..e earn. weresu 1'1 tr ‘N. W drd cal.e yfij ehts '9“: earrar c LUtsid“ E SC'r‘ w “3*9P5r!_‘ ""r C s n» : -¢‘1 VG»). £ “user a 7. m; «“6 q NCI‘O: Marvin C. Volpel a 7 1‘“in college freshmen. The evidence studied in this investigation revealed numerous conclusions, a few of which are summarized here: 1. More than half of those who lost their scholarships came from small high schools. The more successful students came from large high schools which were accredited by the North Central Association. 2. Those who lost their scholarships had lower high school averages and scored way below the renewal students on the Psychological Examinations. As a group they were not bright students in the first place. 3. Fifty-nine per cent of the cancellation students were dissatisfied with the comprehensive examination system. 4. The cancellation students stated that they lacked in- terest in their classes and expressed apathy in general toward college work. On the other hand, the renewal students were interested in achieving their goals and earning a renewal of the award. 5. Outside employment was definitely a cause of many scholarship cancellations. 6. Those who lost their scholarships stated that the study facilities in their respective dormitories were very unsatisfactory. 7. The scholarship students themselves attribute the loss of their scholarships to their ineffective habits of study. ~”‘., I Vb-OU .Lh YT tee-.- ‘‘0 envy- Y, Gm... ' 'I . "‘ ‘8'... ‘R-.. IV. V“... “CIA— '- I ‘3 . Isak... fi—a‘, . Amw- “I: . .J' ' :72..h.‘ l we". .- U.H"‘VJ¢»‘:.—.: £P7"’x . «1.. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER PAGE I. THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND . . . . . 1 II. PROCEDURE . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 III. REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE . . . . . 32 IV. PRESENTATION AND.ANALYSIS OF THE RECORDS OF THE 33 WITHDRAWAL STUDENTS . . . . . . 57 V. PRESENTATION AND.ANALYSIS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL RECORDS OF THE 553 STUDENTS . . . . . 66 VI. PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST YEAR COLLEGE RECORDS OF THE 553 STUDENTS . . . 108 VII. assume or THE QUESTIONNAIRE . . . . . . 141 VIII. IMPLICATIONS AND concwsxons . . . . . {193 BIBLIOGRAPHY . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215 APPENDIX 0 O O O O O O O O O O O O 0 O 223 'I:. 7 lb.“ T? TC? I Q... IV. fl? .91 C I TABLE I. II. III. IV. V. VII. VIII. IX. X. LIST OF TABLES summary of Scholarship Awards Made Available to High School Graduates by Michigan State College . . . . . Summary of Freshman Scholarship Awards, Cancellations, and Renewals at Michigan State College 1949—1950 . . Distribution by Percentages of Grades Earned by Students at Washington Square College . . . . . . . . Reasons Given by the 33 Withdrawal Students for Selecting Michigan State College . . . . . . . . . . . Type of School from Which the 38 Withdrawal Students were Graduated . . Size of High Schools from Which the Students Came . . . . . . . . . Summary of Data Regarding Size of Graduating Class . . . . . . . . Size of High School from Which All the Students Came . . . . . . . . . Distribution of Scholarship Students from Class A and Class B High Schools . . Distribution of Scholarship Students from Class C and Class D High Schools . . iv PAGE 14 19 41 58 59 69 71 76 77 78 4...: new oAQ ' 'e 3‘13“ . r\‘ be §~~ ’J. (J ( I‘) TABLE III. XIII. XIV. XVII. XVIII. XXII. XXIII. PAGE Percentage Distribution of Scholarship Students by Size of Schools . . . . 78 Distribution of the 386 Scholarship Students by Sex . . . . . . . . 81 Distribution of the Scholarship Students . by Age . . . . . . . . . . . 83 Number of Students Having Parents Deceased or Divorced . . . . . . 84 Fathers' Occupations as Listed by Students . . . . . . . . . . 86 Distribution Showing Number and Per Cent of Parents Employed . . . . . . . 87 Average Combined.Monthly Income of the Parents . . . . . . . . . . . 90 The Accredited High Schools Represented in This Study . . . . . . . . . 95 Course Pureued in High School . . . . 97 Recommendations Given by High School Principals . . . . . . . . . . 98 Grades Required for Recommendation to .College . . .w . . . . . . . . 99 An Indication of How well Scholarship Students Will Perform in College . . 99 High School Record, Principal's Action, and Freshman Averages of A Few Scholarship Students . . . . . . 101 '4 m2; '7."‘T LA! ..».. m 111;. .‘A. 5 ‘V s“. TABLE XXIV. XXVI. XXVII. XXVIII. XXIX. XXXI. XXIII. XXXIII. XXXIV. XXIV. High School Grade Point Average . . . Composite High School Averages of All Four Groups . . . . . . . . Decile Averages on the Psychological Tests Standard Deviations of the Decile Distribution . . . . . . . Frequencies of Psychological Test Scores Tabulated by Deciles . . . . . Below Average and Above Average Decile Dis- tributions on the General Intelligence Test . . . . . . . . . Below Average and Above Average Decile Dis- tributions on the General Reading Test. Honor Point Averages of the Four Groups During Their High School Years and Their Freshman Year in College . . Average Number of Credits, Average Number of Honor Points, and Grade-Point Averages Earned During the Freshman Year . . Percentage of Sample Populations in the Basic College . . . . . . . Enrollmwnt of Students by Schools . . Percentages of Sample POpulations in the School of Agriculture . . . . vi PAGE 104 105 110 111 112 115 115 117 118 123 124 125 352! Y A... III'” Aoc‘. HI. IL" Q‘. QA. P“ 9.. U) TABLE XXXVI. XXXVII. XXXVIII. XXXIX. XLI. XLII. XLIII. XLIV. XLV. XLVI. XLVII. Percentages of Sample Populations in the School of Business and Public Service Percentages of Sample POpulations in the School of Engineering . . f. . . . Percentages of Sample Pepulations in the School of Home Economics . . . . . Percentages of Sample POpulaticns in the School of Science and Arts . . . . Percentages of Sample Populations in the School of veterinary Medicine . . . Percentages of All Scholarship Students in the various Schools Who Lost Their Scholarships . . . . . . . . . FreQuency Distribution of Subjects in Which Scholarship Students Received D's and F's . . . . . . . . . Distribution of Major Fields of Emphasis Number of Students Who Returned for Their Second Year . . . . . . . Returns Received on Questionnaires . . Question 1. Your High School Sufficient to was the.Tbtal Program of Prepare One for College? . . . . . Question 2. Do You.Fee1 That You, Personally, were Prepared to Cbpe with the Demands Made on College Freshmen? vii 'PAGE 125 126 127 ' 128 128 129 134 136 140 146 147 148 niutq I‘lh '9? 'eooo XLII. LI. 9’. I Q‘. L"? LY TABLE XLVIII. XLIX. L. LI. LII. LIII. LI V. LV. Question 3. Do You Think That You Were Prepared to Meet the Academic Demands Made on College Freshmen? . . . . Question 4. was the Size of Your School a Handicap to Your Academic Achievement as a College Student? . Question 5. Did You Receive Adequate Educational Guidance in High School? Question 6. In What Areas Do You Consider Your High School Program Strong? . . . . . . . . . . Question 7. In What Areas Do You Consider Your School Program Weak? . Question 8. What Advice Can You Give to This Year's Scholarship Group Which Might Enable Them to Earn a Renewal of the Scholarship Award? (Cancellation Group) . . . . . . Question 9. What Advice Can You Give to This Year's Scholarship Group Which Might Enable Them to Earn a Renewal of the Scholarship Award? (Renewal Group) Question 9. Did the College Take Adequate Steps to Preperly Orient Ybu to College Life? . . . . . . viii PAGE 149 150 151 152 154 155 156 157 '~‘ Ul.‘. 'm.’ ‘a .0.... Ex. t-O i1 q \ § . ~u ' G ‘- 3!! ['1 l. TABLE LVI. LVII. LVIII. LI X. LX. LXI. LXII. LXIII. LXI v. Question 10. were You PrOperly Enrolled with Respect to Variety of Courses, Schedule of Classes, Etc.? . . . . Question 11. If You.Were Not PrOperly Enrolled with Respect to Variety of Courses, Schedule of Classes, Etc., What was Wuong? . . . . . . . Question 12. Was Class Size in College any Handicap to You? And If So, What Size of Class? . . . . . . . . Question 13. were You Satisfied with the Regulation Regarding the Comprehensive Examinations and Subsequent Marks in the Basics? . . . . . . . . Question 14. If Not Satisfied, What was wrong? . . . . . . . . . Question 15. For How Long a Time Had You Been Planning to Attend College? Question 16. Did Your Parents Help You Plan Your High School Educational Program? . . . . . .« . . . . Question 17. Are Your Parents in Favor of Your Attending College? . . . . Question 18. Is Your Father a College Graduate? . . . . . . . . . ix PAGE 158 159 160 161 162 162 163 164 164 0m DAI.. Ty.- LAI.I. , ’- c. u... LIII. LIX. A} i1 9 ,- r ~ Y ‘ (j fie. f r.» H In! In I 4 (n (n e‘fi h: ,1 8/ TABLE LXV. LXVI. LXVII. LXVIII. LXIX. LXX. LXXI. LXXII. LXXIII. PAGE Question 19. Is Your Mother a College Graduate? . . . . . . . . . . 165 Question 20. Did You Have a Regular Study Pragram Last Year? . . . . . 165 Question 21. Did You Make Use of the College Counseling Service Last Year? 166 Question 22. If You Made Use of the Counseling Service, for What Purpose? 167 Question 23. How Much Time Did You Spend Studying During the Daytime Last Year? . . . . . . . . . . 168 Question 24. How Much Time Did You Spend 231; M Studying in the College Library? . . . . . . . . . . 169 Question 25. was There any Class or Course Which You Let Slide Because of Lack of Interest (a) in the Subject? (b) in the Instructor? (0) or Because of Poor Instruction? . . . . . . 170 Question 26. Were Your Absences from College Classes Excessive, Moderate, or Infrequent? . . . . . . . . 170 Question 27. How Many Times per Term Did You Spend the Week-End Away from Your Regular Place of Residence? ' . . 171 0". d 7 - \I U n w a Ca lk 7‘ u: a.“ . IA TABLE LXXIV. LXXV. LXXVI. LXXVII. LXXVIII. LXXIX. LXXX. LXXXI. Question 28. Did the subjects Taken in Your Freshman Year Contribute to the Attainment of Your Plans? . . . . Question 29 (a). In What Particular Area Could Your Campus Life Have Been Improved by Yourself? . . . . . Question 29 (b). In What Particular Area Could Ybur Campus Life Have Been Improved by the College? . . . . Question 29 (c). In What Particular Area Could Your Campus Life Have Been Improved by the High School? . . . Qwestion 30. Do You Think This Improvement Wbuld Have Raised Your Marks? . . . . . . . . . . Question 31. What More Could You.Have Done During the Year to Further Your Own Academic Achievement? . . . . Question 32. Did You Seek Help from Ybur Instructors Regarding Your Work in CollegeLast Year? . . I. . . Question 33. When Sbught, Did You Get the Necessary Amount of Time from Your Instructors to Discuss Your Personal Classroom Difficulties? . . xi PAGE 172 172 173 174 176 177 177 178 9“ ) J.) I.) TABLE LXXXII. LXXXIII. LXXXIV. LXXXV. LXXXVI. LXXXVII. LXXXVIII. LXXXIX. XC. XCI. Question 34. Were the Demands of the College Instructors Greater Than Ybu Had Anticipated? . . . . . . . Question 35. were You Satisfied with the Quality of the College Instruction in General? . . . . . . . . . Question 36. If Not, What was wrong? Question 37. What Things, if Any, Handicapped You in Your College Work? (Cancellation Group Only) . . . . Question 38. What Influences, if Any, Inspired You to Do Better Wbrk Than Ybu Would Otherwise Have Done? . . Question 39. How Many Hours per week Did You Spend in Gainful Employment? Question 40. Where Did You Live While a Freshman at Michigan State College? Question 41. Was Your Place of Residence Last Year a Handicap to You as Far as Your Achievement in College was Concerned? . . . . . . . . Question 42. If So, What Was Wrong? . Question 43. Did You.Over—Participate in Extraclass Activities to the Detriment of Your Studies? . . . . xii PAGE 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 185 186 ‘AELE HYI U. . N.’ U.... 1* Y “ U. . ‘fi: - C In TABLE XCII. XCIII. XCIV. Question 44. for How Many Hours Per week? Question 45. If So, in What Areas and (To Cancellation Group) What Were the Main Reasons That You Did Not Earn the 1.6 Average Last Year? . . . . Question 45. (To Renewal Group) What Factors Contributed to Ybur Academic Success As a Freshman at Michigan State College? . O xiii PAGE 187 188 190 (pl .- .r— (C) o ‘9 §‘. 18““, ‘v-u6 .- u..~u‘- .w-.'“‘ I. “as...: t 0: «'0'». c “J. N ‘4 ‘ '0 “8.21 Cut on. 3' "- Pa a; V a‘r‘b “- xiv LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE 1. A Facsimile of Student Record Card . . . . 29 2. Distribution of Cancellation and Renewal Students from Large and Small High Schools . 67 3. Distribution of Cancellation and Renewal Students from All High Schools . . . . . 7O 4. Distribution of All Students According to Size of School from Which They Came . . . . . 74 5. Distribution of Students from 277 Homes Where Only the Father is Employed . . . . . . 88 6. Distribution of Students from 76 Homes Where 2 Both Parents Are Employed . . . . . . 88 7. Chart Sh0wing Percentages of Accredited Schools Represented by the Renewal and Cancellation Students . . . . . . . . 94 8. The Decile Distribution of Average Test Scores 109 9. Frequency Distribution of Decile Scores on the General Intelligence Test . . . . . . 113 10. Frequency Distribution of Decile Scores on the General Reading Test . . . . . . . . 114 11. Percentages of Enrollments by Schools of the Entire Freshman Class and the Scholarship Students Whose Awards Were Cancelled . . . 130 H...” I, I “in . ‘ i I. 'F‘fl ' : . 0'05 “'4t 7‘.“ as“... XV FIGURE PAGE 12. Percentages of Enrollments by Schools of the Entire Freshman Class versus Percentages by Schools of Total Scholarship Students Whose Awards Were Renewed or Cancelled . . 131 CHAPTER I THE PROBLEM AND ITS BACKGROUND Michigan State Cbllege, founded in 1855 as an agri- cultural college, has grown to the stature of a university. The founding and the expansion are a natural outgrowth of Michigan's policy of providing higher education for its youth. The legislature in 1855 provided for the purchase of land and the construction of College Hall, some farm buildings, and, shortly, four brick residences for the faculty because the State could not for long neglect its largest occupational group.1 No sooner was agriculture provided for in the state system of higher education than other groups appeared with comparable needs. As one voca- tion after another sought the advantages of college work, Michigan State College enlarged its prOgram to meet the demand. The curriculum in scientific agriculture that emerged was committed to providing a liberal education and an appli- cation of the discoveries of science in the practice of agriculture. One-fourth of the student's fifteen or twenty hours in the classroom were devoted to such subjects as English, history, philosophy, and one-half to the sciences. The first forty years of the college were precarious ii:The Seventh Census of the United States, 1850. *mmfiflfl (Washington: Robert Armstrong, Public Printer, 1853), pp. lxxalxxix. ones, but the three decades following 1895 were ones of growth in enrollment and expansion in program, due in part to the introduction of new curricula to meet new demands. Other vocational groups were seeking higher education and the emphasis here on liberal education, plus science, plus practical application, made this college a peculiarly-fit place to provide such instruction. Opened in 1885, the course in engineering was enrolling one-third of the stud- ents of the College by 1896. In response to the request of women's groups in the State, the home economics course was opened in 1896. The expansion of the curriculum to include forestry and veterinary medicine came a few years later because of the desire of agricultural students to secure more specialized training in their intended occupa- tions. The applied science and the liberal arts curricula appeared in 1921 and 1924 respectively. The growth from 400 students in 1896 to 7,000 in 1940 to 16,000 in 19482 was a reflection of the increasing capacity of the College to serve the youth of the State. To meet the demand in the last quarter century for special- ized training in other vocations, more and more curricula were added. But the major innovation of these years was the Basic College which was opened in 1944 to re-emphasize -__:_ zlnformation supplied by the Office of the Registrar, Michigan State College. n o. '! ‘ Ian's LI 59.0-13.4. U *An‘i ‘F C Q “ :“vji.051 “918 I24 T... 3681‘. CI'S'L :-:".:568 and c- 921 5.3135 1.; s :fe: en; 1 «01.95 95 ‘ :«PZOZOfe ynq‘ V"- The 3h: C '7‘ u I '29 Co‘ ,. -letg 5381C E broad 33.x intelligo‘ 80c '~”‘ 0’ ial I . . . M m we 7"" sch“ " , ‘s’in E‘.t8 ‘h 40 and re-organize the function of general education. General education has always been an ideal of the College,3 but it had been crowded by the increasing number of vocational courses and specialized courses so that few students found time for a comprehensive coverage. A compromise was effect- ed by providing a series of seven generalized and integrated courses, at least five of which are required of every stud- ent during his two years in the Basic College. Beginning with the freshman class which entered in September, 1944, all Michigan State College students have been enrolled in the Basic College during their freshman and sophomore years. The philosophy of the Basic College is best explained by the college catalog as follows: Basic general education is designed to provide a broad foundation on which students may build an intelligent interest in personal, family, vocational, social, and civic problems, a better understanding of these problems, and a greater ability to cope with them. The general education program as planned at Michigan State College should prove helpful to stud— ents who are uncertain about their educational plans and.will give Opportunity to explore broad areas of knowledge and experience, will aid them in the dis— covery of their own interests and aptitudes, and equip them better to assume their responsibility as individuals and as citizens of a democracy. 3Michigan State College Catalo 1949-1951. (East Lansing: Michigan State College, 1950;, p. 51. 4Ib1do, p. 810 the en. 1 mu 0 -Aoa for zen a: 20 38:41 elective c tie t'rL-ll' ‘3 3. Seve- of careful 113119.1: 118.”; fit-18 ‘D'Pe £1959 Progra; 6 L)" \. Own 6 e d 5.2.8 5 “e S :ifi‘ 0‘ t‘r‘ :J‘Oifin 4e taxidl 3“ ~. "' V's L " k‘fl \, u ‘. ‘s 5 *4. were 3:? ‘M I The curricula for Basic College Students includes: 1. Military science for men and physical education for men and women. 2. Required introductory courses and exploratory and elective courses to meet the requirements for either the two-year terminal or the regular four-year course.5 3. Seven comprehensive core courses* each comprisgd of carefully chosen, closely related subject matter. Michigan State College was one of the first to estab- lish this type of general education pr0gram and the Basic College program has had national recognition. Representa— tives of other institutions of higher education have come to the campus to study the plan in Operation. The areas cov- ered by these seven basic courses constitute an important segment of basic or general education. To insure wide Participation, students are required to take a minimum of five of the core courses, selected on the following basis: g 5A feature of the system of basic education at Michigan State College recognizes that over half of the Students who enter college do not complete the requirements for the bachelor's degree. Michigan State College offers a number of short courses and two—year terminal courses for these students. Among these are: 1 year course in prac- tical agriculture, 2 year terminal course in agriculture and a number of short courses, 2 year course in secretarial Beience, 2 year curriculum in home economics, and a 2 year course in food service. 6Loc. cit. *The seven basic courses that make up the depart- manta of the Basic College are: Written and Spoken English, 010gical Science, Physical Science, Social Science, Effective Living, History of Civilization, and Literature and Fine Arts. Each of the basic courses covers three quters and carries a total of nine credits. 1. Ir: ‘I‘;; n. 85"“ 5.08. 2. [31! p. ['1 ._‘I r. 2* 1 :2 o O :1 (D P t m (n O '- .5 w i on. f...) In as. in 718! of 5333151 have 13., 13:" 1933113.- tests for am 12538 fiEId, 3:11: to enrol ‘A. “1 «had state a t‘“ .. Hirh o 6 :3 Cone~ be. I. '1 01 *1 H O 1. Written and Spoken English—required of all students. 2. Either BiOIOgical Science or Physical Science. 3. Either Social Science or Effective Living. 4. Either History of Civilization or Literature and Fine Arts. ' 5. Any of the three core courses not already taken.7 In light of the increased enrollments in late years and in view of the almost universal belief that every adult should have the opportunity to enroll in an institution of higher learning, many colleges have lowered their require— ments for admission. Michigan State College has pioneered in this field, too. Now it is possible for almost any adult to enroll in college. The college catalog for 1949- 1951 states these requirements for admission: High School Requirements for Admission to the Basic. College. I. For graduates from accredited high schools: 1. A satisfactory high school record. This means meeting the I'College recommending grade” as designated by the high school.’ 2. A minimum of 15 units. (A unit meaning a subject pursued through a school year with not less than four recitation periods each week). Three or more units must be in 1m , p. 82. “The application for admission blanks filed in the Rec301‘ds Office of Michigan State College revealed cases 1"1161‘s this requirement was not met and the applicants were a“knitted regardless. c a» I. eh T. 9|. 1 3 e English, and seven chosen from the follow— ing groups: foreign language, mathematics, sciences, and social studies. Three addi— tional units either from the subjects just mentioned or from vocational studies, such as agriculture, home economics, commercial, or industrial are required. Music may be presented. The other units presented may be from any subjects accepted by the high school toward graduation. 3. Satisfactory recommendation from the high school principal or other proper adminis- trative officer as to attitudes, habits, emotional stability, general conduct, character, ability, and capacity to indi- cate that the candidate will make a suit— able college student. II. Ebr those not qualified for admission under the terms of I. l. The applicant must have passed his eight- eenth birthday except in the case of high school graduates. 2. Entrance examinations from the following areas will be required: a. Communications b. Biological Science 0. Physical Science and Mathematics d. History and Social Studies e. Literature and Fine Arts The Board of Examiners will determine which of these examinations will be required. 3. The results of the entrance examinations, the applicant's previous records, and the results of intelligence and aptitude tests will be used by the Board of Examiners in judging the candidate for admission.8 Other colleges in Michigan have become very lenient, 'too, in the matter of admissions and.since 1946 have accept- ed graduates from accredited high schools in Michigan \_ 8Ibid., p. 83. itcsoective\ as the tegi. several new c I." .. e are at him men-fie On Sore ”351! adopted 1. I: the Richly engages" b1 sczool no: low in Sec: 13 88 £011: The C01] 3”“ Pm‘s: tee of se] are IBCOQE "went; 1: This 3‘3: 86‘1th t: 'hich they irrespective of the subject matter patterns followed. This was the beginning of the Cbllege Agreement Plan, one of the several new college admission plans in operation today. There are at this date 123 high schools and.36 colleges in Michigan members of the College Agreement Plan.9 On November 7, 1946 the following proposal was unani— mously adopted‘by the Michigan College Association: 1. It is prOposed that the College Agreement of the Michigan Secondary Curriculum Study, with certain changes, be extended to include any accredited high school whose staff will make the commitments noted be- low in Section 2. The wording of the proposed Agreement is as follows: The college agrees to disregard the pattern of sub— jects pursued in considering for admission the gradup ates of selected accredited high schools, provided they are recommended by the school from among the more able students in the graduating class. This Agreement does not imply that students must be admitted to certain college courses and curricula for which they cannot give evidence of adequate preparation. Secondary schools are urged to make available such basic courses as provide a necessary preparation for entering technical, industrial, or professional cur- ricula. It is recommended further that colleges pro- vide accelerated programs of preparation for specialized college curricula for those graduates who are unable to secure such preparatory training in high school. 2. It is prOposed that high schools which seek to be governed‘by this Agreement shall assume responsibil— ity for and shall furnish evidence that they are initiating and.continuing such procedures as the follow- ng: a. A.program involving the building of an adequate personal file about each student, including testing data of various kinds, anecdotal records, personality \w 9Information secured from the Office of the Registrar or Michigan State College on July 23, 1951. inventor: staff '31" suzzary 0 college. .\ be S :- Efi?oses e d. A c tation th: the nature Specializei to devote 1 Of the pun: 3. It 1 be establii t0 reCO:e: iCCI‘dBion 4 :0 tine the on the 118‘ 8933811793 11C InStrfig 03 the 3 k s 11? ~35: 4n 0: inventories, achievement samples, etc. The high school staff would assume responsibility for develOping a summary of these personnel data for submission to the college. b. A basic curriculum study and evaluation of the purposes and.program of the secondary school. 0. Procedures for continuous follow-up of former pupils. I d. A continuous program of information and orien— tation throughout the high school courses regarding the nature and.requirements of certain occupations and specialized college courses. During the senior year, to devote special emphasis to the occupation or college of the pupil's choice. 3. It is further recommended that a joint committee be established to study application of new schools and to recommend certain of these schools to colleges for inclusion in the Agreement; also to determine from time to time whether the criteria have been met in the schools on the list. This joint committee would include repre- sentatives of the Michigan Secondary School Association, the Michigan College Association, the Department of Pub- lic Instruction, and the Department of Superintendence of the Michigan Education Association. It would be served by a part-time staff supplied from three sources: the Bureau of Co—Operation of the University of Michigan, the Department of Public Instruction, and the Inservice Committees of various Michigan colleges and universities. 4. It is understood that high schools which cannot or will not make and.observe the above commitments will continue to employ the major and minor seqpsnces for those students who wish to attend college. This plan of admission, as was stated before, has been endorsed by over 120 high schools in the State of Michigan. According to college authoritiesn many students ‘ IOWL N. Atkinson, 'College—High-Schocl Agreement in Miomgan', School and Societ , 65:145, February 22, 1947. t 11Information secured from the Office of the Regis- ra’. Michigan State College. 05.. W: A". ' Eusjé “.514 2. l‘, v ‘ . "8 collar; :, 5111: ed uric:- 3833318 16:8 2 that they were In keep 3121331011 :9 ;_r “been in 1:5 Agfeater 1112.1: m form<31 ed Since 1 30:01.23th 1 M .1 . ‘ n a .ie. ec::0~ln enter Michigan State College from these high schools under the College Agreement Plan but they still present the tra- ditional 15 units of required work in the sequential subjects. The college has no records of the exact number of freshmen admitted under this plan alone.12 0f the 586 students whose records were studied for this investigation only 8 indicated that they were entering under the College Agreement Plan. In keeping with the changes in the requirements for admission to Michigan State College there have also been changes in its program of scholarships and awards to permit a greater number of able students to take advantage of fur- ther formal education. Since 1926 Michigan State College has been awarding scholarships to students already enrolled in the college who have made outstanding scholarship records.13 In addi— tion to these scholarships awarded outright by the college there are scholarships given by individuals and organiza- tions as rewards 'or for purposes of research. These soholarships take the form of rewards for excellent work done in a field of specialization such as forestry, home economics, or music. Others are given to the outstanding k . 12Information secured from the Records Office, ‘51 Ohigan State College. 13The 1926 catalog is the first Michigan State Col- 1986 to make any mention of scholarship awards. 0;. ¢ Prare of valug II. 30 Plant EL :N‘w (”I g “' WM? 3. E q . 51:0? Frn ib‘ - 10 athlete, to the best Jewish student in the Junior or Senior class, or to the outstanding student in a sorority or fra- ternity. Examples of the industrial awards are those given by the Kroger Company, the J. W. Knapp Company, the Borden Milk Company, and Sears, Roebuck and Company. These awards are given for various types of research work which should prove of value to the donors. Other typical awards are the L. C. Plant Mathematical Scholarship Award, the Home Economics Club Scholarship Award, the Zonta Club Award, and the Varsity Club Scholarship Award. Through the years the number of scholarships has in- creased gradually so that at the present time there are over 1,000]”4 students at Michigan State College who are receiving tuition-free awards. Many of these students received their awards as entrance scholarships when they matriculated at Michigan State College. Beginning with the fall of 1926 the College offered an unspecified number of scholarships to students who had been on the campus for two years. These scholarships Waived the tuition fees for students with high academic records and with a real financial need.]-5 -_¥ 14Information supplied by the Office of the Chairman of the Scholarship Committee, Michigan State College. 15From the 1926 catalog: “Unless otherwise stated, 8‘3h<>larships are available only to students who have been in a"Hiendance at the College during the first two terms of the ye81'. Applications may be filed on or before April first W113h the Registrar, who will refer them to the pr0per com- it‘hee. I I233 .. zen, one for scholarship ’29 renewed 1': year was of 2: i231 this qm‘ ieciied that t Stuient'a em: mm.” 11 This policy was in effect until the fall of 1934 when the College offered 32 scholarships to incoming fresh- men, one for each senatorial district in the State. These scholarships waived the tuition fees for 3 terms and would be renewed for the second year only if the work of the first year was of high quality. No specification was made of what this quality should be.16 . Then in 1936 the College Committee on Scholarships decided that the award could be continued through the student’s entire course if his work continued to be of high quality.17 Beginning with the fall of 1941 the number of scholar- ships for incoming freshmen was doubled. Each senatorial district was now entitled to two scholarships making a total of 64.18 ¥ 16From the 1934 catalog: 'Almnni undergraduate scholarships. Each year thirty-two scholarships are avail- a:‘ble for freshmen, one for each senatorial district of the 8“tats of Michigan. These scholarships amount to a waiver by the College of the $32.50 course fee per term for three terms. At the discretion of the Committee on Scholarships 3 scholarship may be continued through the second year, 'hen the first year's work is of high rank. Nominations for these awards are made by alumni committees in each dis- 121:1 ct, working in co-Operation with the high school prin— °1Dals.' 17From the 1936 catalog: 'At the discretion of the committee on Scholarships a scholarship may be continued 1“Cl-rough the entire course when the student's work is of high rank.” 18From the 1941 catalog: “Each year sixty-four 8‘nilcvlarships are available for freshmen. Each senatorial (Ii-Strict of the State receives a minimum of one scholarship. (continued on page 13) 13 The State of Michigan became still more liberal with its scholarships to incoming freshmen in the fall of 1948. The State Legislature passed a resolution that at least one tuition—free scholarship should be made avail- able to every high school in the State providing there is a suitable candidate. This made more than 650 scholarships available throughout the State to graduates of Michigan high schools. The 1946—1948 Michigan State College Catalog which nmkes the announcements for the year 1948—1949 summarizes , the scholarship regulations which were in effect during the term of this study as follows: MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE SCHOLARSHIPS. By authori- zation of the State Board of Agriculture, a large number of Michigan State Scholarships have been made available. These scholarships are granted by the Faculty Committee on Scholarships on recommendation by members of the faculty and are subject to approv- al by the President. Factors given consideration in the granting of these scholarships are: need, apti- tude for and performance in college work, effective participation in extra-curricular activities which aid in rounding out a student's general education and.sontribute to the advancement of the College, and demonstration of superior qualities of citizen- Ship. Special consideration will be given to high school raduates who have shown special aptitudes in music fincluding orchestra and band), journalism, public speaking, drama, physical education, and student government; to 4—H club members; to a limited.number 18 (Cantinued) These scholarships amount to a waiver 21' $40.00 per term for three terms. . . . may be continued hrcugh the entire course...... " I I .: o. *o.e‘|' R V itate 5‘" lolly re. ate Stu: . t r (b \- ‘b #8 need and Shell co: and fees maintena; 812d, 8‘ I. additions. have can, 0011658 a record of .- 2"0 Stu. ‘01 more ‘ Tab? 9 Q 5’3"‘in club 0 g. “g 0‘ A. 1 . e826 ' " '11 th! ...... 13 of foreign students; to graduates of our Michigan State Junior Colleges, and to graduate students spec- ially recommended by the Dean of the School of Gradup ate Studies. The amount to be awarded will be determined by the Faculty Committee on Scholarships in consideration of need and the achievements of the student. Awards shall consist of waiver of part or all of the tuition and fees on a quarter to quarter basis, may include maintenance in particularly needy and deserving cases and, at the discretion of the committee, may include additional graduated awards to undergraduates who have earned fifty or more credits at Michigan State College and who have maintained a total academic record of 1.6 or better. No student may participage in these scholarships for more than 12 quarters. Table I summarizes the regulations governing the granting of freshmen scholarships from their inception in 1926 until the present. ‘ 19Michigan State College Catalo 1946-1948. (East I‘a-nsing: Michigan State College, 1946 , p. 68. 1954 :3 1336 33 1941 64 1948 Lang. 11121:: q 14 TABLE I SUMMARY or SCHOLARSHIP AWARDS MADE AVAILABLE TO HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES BY MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE' Year“I Number When How Duration Restric~ available granted allotted tions 1926 Some After 2 By No No terms committee statement state— ment 1934 32 On By 2 years High . admission senatorial rank district 1936 33 On By Entire High admission senatorial course rank district 1941 64 ~ On By Entire Hi gh admission senatorial course rank district 1948 Large On Every 12 l . 6 number admission high quarters average school in col— lege 'The table is read as follows: In the fall of 1934 1fliers were 32 scholarships available to incoming freshmen, one for each senatorial district in Michigan, and were con- inued over a two year period if the student's college work was of high rank. uThese years were chosen because they were the years When new regulations went into effect. They do not repre- Bent any class interval. 15 The policy now in force at Michigan State College is amplified by a bulletin20 released through the Co-ordinator of High School Co—Operation and distributed to all high schools in the state. Students thus learn about the avail- ability of these scholarships through their high school principals, through college career days at which time Michi- gan State College is representsd.by the Co-ordinator of High School Cc-operation or a Qualified representative, by direct communication with the college, through alumni club members, or through former scholarship holders. Most high school principals discuss college enrollment with their prospective college freshmen and are only too glad to bring this information to the attention of those concerned. The bulletin prepared by the Co-ordinator of High School Cb—Operation amplifies the Legislative Act which created “the scholarships as follows: 1. One for a graduate in cash high school and junior college on the approved list of our State Department of Public Instruction, provided there is a qualified candidate. 2. One hundred scholarships at large for quali- fied.candidates of schgpls of such size as to warrant more than one. ‘ BOMi chigan State College Entrance Scholagghipg. Bulletin from Bureau of High School Co-Operation, Michigan State College. 81Loc. cit. R .28 "' lo I: to obtaii not otne. u l ‘ Citizens” cation.“- Fr A-lB 2‘ ‘Q- egg C u a“? 0‘3 V. Lille 80:3 t; A ‘ ¢~4., Wvbee 8+‘n '4‘ “\2‘ bag. 16 The purposes of the scholarships are two-fold: 1. To assist worthy and promising young peeple to obtain educational opportunities which they could not otherwise have. ‘ 2. Th attract the state's potential leaders and citizens into the practice of continuing their edu- cation. 3 This new arrangement of awards eliminates geograph- ical boundaries and political limitations and makes it possible for worthy candidates to apply directly to the Chairman of the Scholarship Committee of Michigan State College. Such application must be made on or before. . March lst. Fbr consideration by the Faculty Scholarship Board, the applicant 1. Must have been accepted for admission to Michigan State College by the Registrar. 2. Must be among the more able students scholas- tically for the entire high school period. 3. Must have unquestioned integrity and.a degree of social and emotional maturity necessary to satis- factory group living. 4. Must have demonstrated ability to study and carry out successful projects on one's own initiative. 5. Must have financial need.33 Some time during the spring term the Ssholarship Committee studies the applications and makes the awards. 2'zLoc. cit. 3392. cit., p. 2. 17 A Certificate of Award24 is sent to the high school princi- pals who make the presentations to the winners in any manner they deem appropriate. A follow—up letter25 is sent directly to the recipient of the award by the Chairman of the Schol— arship Committee in which he congratulates the winner and stipulates the terms upon which the award will be renewed, namely a 1.6 honor—point average.26 This new policy of one scholarship per high school was in effect for the first time in the fall of 1948. For 34Seo Appendix, Exhibit A. 25See Appendix, Exhibit B. 86In connection with the grading system of Michigan State College a system of honor points has been adOpted. The plan Operated as follows during the time of this inves— tigation: 3 points are allowed for each credit of “A” grade 2 points for each credit of 'B" grade, one point for each ‘0' and.no points for work of "D“ grade. Grades of “F“ are given one negative point for each credit.v Points equal ‘to the number of credits are required for graduation. In 1950 the plan was stepped up one point. To find a student's honor-point average, the total number of points is divided by the number of credits car- ried. Thus if a student earned all "A's" during his fresh- man year he would have a 3.0 (three point zero) honor-point average, while a student with a record of all ”C's” would lurve a 1.0 average. If a freshman earned 12 credits of ”A' grade, 18 credits of 'B' grade, and 20 credits of “C” grade, “he would have earned 50 credits for a total of 92 points and.a grade-point average of 1.84. 1.e. 1213 {C1813 + 20x1 = 36 + 36 + 20 a 2g_- 1.84 50 50 50 A scholarship student with this record would auto- matically have his scholarship renewed. 18 several reasons inherent in the inauguration of a new policy27 there were not too many applications for these scholarships and only 180 awards were made to incoming freshmen that year. By the next year, however, students learned of the availability of the scholarships and there were several hundred applications. There were 400 scholarships awarded to incoming freshmen in the fall of 1949. Of this number 27 young folks were unable to accept the award because of poor health, lack of finances, or general disinterest. Alternates had been named for some of these 27 and scholarship awards were made to 13 of these alternates after they had enrolled at Michigan State College and when it was definitely estab- lished that the recipients could.not accept the award. This meant that 386 freshmen were admitted to Michigan State College in September 1949 on tuition-free scholarships. Of this number, 33 withdrew from the institution sometime during the academic year leaving 353 in school for the entire year of three terms. Of the total, 353, who re- .mained in college for the entire year, 158, or 44.8 per cent of them did not earn the 1.6 average and consequently lost their scholarships to Michigan State College. The ________.7.____ 3 Time to put the Some of these reasons might be: administrative machinery into operation, inability to get the information before the graduating seniors, and general apathy of high school principals toward.the program. scholarships L ye= 3:8 and v‘:- I”, of the n‘lz'c-e of inability Safare‘zip 3 :18 is an al« Table 1 "‘ ‘ \ ’ 19 scholarships remain in effect for one, two, three, or four years and when once lost are not renewed.88 There were originally 386 scholarships awarded, and of this number, the 158 who lost their scholarships because of inability to meet the academic standards set by the Scholarship COmmittee, constitute 41 per cent of the total. ,This is an alarming figure: Table II summarizes very clearly the data which furnish the springboard for this investigation. TABLE II SUMMARY OF FRESHMAN SCHOLARSHIP AIARDS, CANCELLATIONS, AND RENEWALS AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE 1949-1950 W Nmmber of scholarships awarded . . . . . . . . . . . . 400 Number of scholarships not used . . . . . . . . . . . 27 Number of scholarships granted later . . . . . . . . . 13 Tbtal number entering Michigan State College on scholarships . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386 Number of scholarship students who withdrew sometime during the first academic year . . . . . . . 33 Number of scholarship students who earned a renewal of their scholarships . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 Number of scholarship students who lost their scholarships at the end of the first year . . . . . . 158 1Percent of total who lost their scholarships . . . . . 41 28Five students whose scholarships were cancelled at “the end Of the freshman year had them renewed.by the Scholar— Bhdp Committee. The reasons for this were not given in the records in the students' folders. 20 FOrty—one per cent of those who entered.Michigan State College on scholarships lost their scholarships at the end of the first year. High school and college ad- ministrators would like to know the reasons for this high percentage of scholarship losses. An attempt to find out why so many of this group of scholars did not earn a re- newal of their scholarships is the underlying purpose of this study. CHAPTER.II PROCEDURE During the academic year 1949—1950 there were 386 freshmen studying at Michigan State College under the terms of the entrance scholarship.1 All but 17 of these were from high schools in Michigan.2 The terms of the scholar- ship specify: first, that the regular tuition fees will be waived upon entrance and each term thereafter, if the studp ent maintains a one—point six (1.6) academic average at the close of each academic year in June,3 and, second, that no student may participate in these scholarships for more than 12 quarters.4' ' It was pointed out on page 18 that the year 1949- 1950 was the first in which the scholarships were used in any great numbers. At the close of this academic year it 1From the Office of the Chairman of the Scholarship Committee, Michigan State College. 3These 17 were excellent high school athletes and were admitted to Michigan State College because of their athletic ability. Only 5 earned the renewal. 3This is explained in footnote 26, Chapter 1. 4Michigan State Collegg Catalog 1946—1948. (East. Lansing, Michigan State College, 1946), p. 68. 22 was discovered that 41 per cent of those freshmen admitted on scholarship did not attain the 1.6 average necessary for automatic renewal. It was necessary for Mr. A. J. Clark, Chairman.of the Scholarship Committee, to write letters to 158 freshmen informing them that their scholarships were no longer available.5 Most of these 386 students were admitted to Michigan State College because of financial need and because of high academic achievement in high school. The fact that 41 per cent of these students did.not earn a 0+ average (equiva- lent to the 1.6 average) during their first year in college alarmed college authorities. Those most concerned with the problem, in addition to Mr. Clark, were Mr. Robert Linton, Registrar of the College, and Dr. Guy H. Hill, Cb—ordinator of High School Co-operation. They were interested in rea- sons for this high mortality. This problem came to the attention of the writer one dmy in the summer of 1950 when he was conversing with Dr. Hill regarding the duties of his office. The latter ex- plained that among other things it was necessary for him Inst that day to orplain to a high school principal why his valedictcrian had lost her scholarship at Hichigan State College. In view of the high mortality among scholarship students he feared that he might be asked the same question L 58cc Appendix C. 23 again during the summer. Having only meager data on the problem he suggested that a study of the problem should be undertaken to determine why 41 per cent of the scholarship students lost their scholarships. It was then that this investigation was begun. The writer has always been interested in high school and college relations, in student adjustments during their first year in college, and in academic records generally. He sought permission of the Registrar to use the records of the college and when this was granted the investigation was undertaken. The underlying purpose behind this study is to de- termine, if possible, why 41 per cent of the scholarship students lost their scholarships. Is it the fault of the high school in failing to prepare its graduates for college work? Is it the fault of the college in failing to meet its obligations to the student? Is it the fault of the student himself in failing to meet the responsibilities his new environment requires? Are there other reasons why these students did.nct do well in college? And can anything be done to remedy this situation? These questions serve as guide posts throughout this study and have consequently divided the study into three main phases: First: the analysis of the academic records of the stuhents during their high school days. This will include 24 courses taken in high school, average grades received, extra class activities participated.in, and similar data. Second: the analysis of the academic records of the students during their first year in college. This will include courses taken in college, grades received, psychological test scores, student activities, and similar data. Third: the analysis of data from a questionnaire administered'by the writer. This questionnaire will be discussed fully in Chapter VII. The scholarship students are divided into three groups: Group 1. The 33 students who did not remain in college a full year. These will be known as the ”with. drawal group”. . Group 3. The 158 who did not earn the renewal of the scholarship. These will be known as the "cancel- laticn group“. Group 3. The 195 who earned.the renewal of the scholarship. These will be known as the “renewal group”. The 33 students who did not complete the freshman ‘Year are studied as a group by themselves. To make the study scientific it was deemed advis— able to obtain some information about the regular or general college group and thus match records and achieve- ‘ment of the scholarship students with the records of the 25 regular group. This fourth group which will be represent- ative cf the regular freshmen will consist of 200 students and will be known as the ”regular group“. The original list of scholarship students for 1949 which was prepared by the Secretary to the Chairman of the scholarship Committee contained exactly 400 names. This list was used as the basis for drawing the 200 regular students at random and the drawing was accomplished in the following manner. The names of the even numbered students were used from the list of-4OO and for each one of the scholarship group another was drawn from the entire fresh- man class personnel. Students were matched according to sex and size of home town. This was accomplished by the use of the Student Directory of Michigan State College.6 If the second student on the list was a boy whose name began with ”A” and was from a Class A.high school,7 the writer selected a freshman boy whose name also began with 'A' and.was from a school of approximately the same size. The alphabetical pairing had.ncthing to do with the sta— tistical data'but made it easier to make the pairings. Sometimes it was impossible to find the correct alphabet- ical pairing so this phase of the selection was not ‘ 6Studehtgirectcry 1949-1950. (East Lansing: Michigan State College, 1949). 7 A school with more than 800 students in the upper four grades. 26 followed too closely. Eflth this procedure a boy from Rock- ford was matched with a boy from Centerline, a boy from Marshall with one from Sturgis, a girl from Birmingham with -one from Cadillac, and a boy from St. Johns with one from St. Louis. In this manner a group of 300 average students was drawn. This regular group does not contain members of the Freshman Class who entered on scholarship. Since the scholarship students comprise only about 11 per cent of the Ventire Freshman Class, the 200 students selected at random from among all the non-scholarship freshmen closely ap- proximates a random sample of the entire Freshman Class.8 The data for this study were obtained from four principal sources: 1. The application forms to the Registrar for admission to Michigan State College. 2. The application forms to the Scholarship Com— mittee for a scholarship to Michigan State College. 3. The academic records on file in the Records room. 4. A questionnaire submitted by the writer. . Other items of information for the study were sup- ‘plied by the Offices of counselor-for-Men, Counselor-for- _ 8From information secured from the Office of the Registrar, Michigan State College, there were 3,708 new freshman registrations at Michigan State College in Sep— teamer'1949. 87 Women, and the Counseling Clinic. The Men's and Women's Counselors supplied information regarding reasons for with. drawing from college and times of withdrawal from college while the Counseling Clinic Office supplied the scores which Freshmen obtained.on the American Council Psycholog- ical Examination. There were 586 students whose records are analyzed in this investigation. The writer prepared a data sheet9 for each of these 586 students on which he recorded the following information from the application forms for ad- mission:10 Name Box Home town Ase ' High school attended High school course pursued Credits earned Average mark in each of the 7 subject groups11 School in which the student enrolled at college Agency by which the high school is accredited Recommendation, whether clear or otherwise The application forms for scholarship13 were on file gees Appendix D. 108cc Appendix E. 11These are English, Language, Mathematics, Science, Social Science, vocational, and.Miscellaneous and.sre listed on page 8 of the Application for Admission to Michi- gan State College. 12366 Appendix F. 28 in the office of the Chairman of the Scholarship Committee and were need to supplement the application forms for adp mission. These, naturally, were not available for the 300 regular freshmen group, for they were not scholarship students. From these application forms the writer obtained the following information: Occupation of the father Occupation of the mother Combined monthly income of the parents Rank in high school graduating class Extra-class activities pursued in high school13 Principal's opinion regarding type of college work the prospective freshman will perform Influence which led to the choice of Michigan State College This information was added to the data sheet. A card, 5 inches by 8 inches, a facsimile of which is reproduced in Figure 1, shows what information was re- corded.by the clerks in the Records Office for each of the 586 students. * 13Fromthe student's autobiography on the applica— tion for scholarship. 29 Student's name Home address Student's number College major Courses, credits, grades, and honor points for Fall 1949 Winter 1950 Spring 1950 Disciplinary action Total credits Total honor points Figure 1 A FACSIMILE OF STUDENT RECORD CARD The data from these three sources were then assembled by the writer on a large analysis pad with sheets 34 inches by 14 inches and gave the following information about each student:14 Name Home town Age Sex College status second year Marital status Father living Mother living Father's occupation Mother's occupation Combined monthly income of the parents Reasons for selecting Michigan State College 14See sample page in Appendix G. Size isaocia: Princ freshman High Sigh High i 3.18.5 : he : nlgn g a ' \ t-n- sa“'.‘ V .: ..- so. [‘8 \- a High Place 9 Pros; Kunbe. Hunter D . crane- A w-sco: Quantitat * L—ecc: Luann: Total 0011889 3' L800: recogniti. 800: 8Deed School in which he is enrolled Agency by which high school is accredited Type of course pursued in high school Kind of recommendation by his principal Rank in high school graduating class Number in high school graduating class Size of high school accogding to Athletic Association classification1 Principal's opinion of type of work prospective freshman will perform. High school average in English High school average in Languages High School average in Mathematics High School average in Science High school average in Social Science High school average in vocational subjects High school average in miscellaneous subjects High school grade-point average High school extra-class activities Place of residence as a college freshman Prospective college major Number of credits earned as a freshman Number of honor points earned.as a freshman Grade-point average as a freshman Qbscore on the Psychological Examination, quantitative thinking L—score on the Psychological Examination, linguistic thinking .Total score on Psychological Examination, general college ability VLscore on Psychological Examination, vocabulary recOgnition Rescore on Psychological Examination, reading speed C—score on Psychological Examination, level of comprehension Total score on Psychological Examination, general reading ability Freshman marks in Basic written and Spoken English Freshman marks in Basic Biological Science Freshman marks in Basic Physical Science Freshman marks in Basic Effective Living Freshman marks in Basic History of Civilization Freshman marks in Basic Literature and Fine Arts Number of Honor points gained or lost in the basic subjects due to the regulation governing comprehensive examinations 158cc footnote 3 on page '75. 31 Courses in which freshmen received marks lower than ”C“ The problem under investigation is vital to the welfare of the scholarship students and the high schools which it concerns and.to Michigan State College where the problem actually exists. The purpose of the investigation is to determine why so many scholarship students fail to earn a renewal of their scholarships at the end of the freshman year with the aim of remedying the condition if possible. _ ' The study will be concerned with the high school and first year college records of three groups of students: (1) 158 who lost their scholarships, (2) 195 who renewed their scholarships, and (3) 200 regular non-scholarship students. For additional factual data and some subjective evidence the writer administered a questionnaire to members of the above—mentioned groups. These data will be pre- sented and analyzed in succeeding chapters. The next chapter will review the literature which is pertinent to this investigation. CHAPTER.III REVIEW OF RELATED LITERATURE The United States is the land of opportunities. One of these is the free public school cpen to all. One way that has been suggested to make educational opportu- nity effectively equal to all is to establish a broad scholarship program that reaches down into the high school and extends through college and graduate work. Scholar- ships must be available for teen-agers when they begin to drop out of school for financial reasons. The number of scholarships should be large enough to care for about 5 per cent of the boys and girls of high school age and 3 or 3 per cent of the youth of college age who are poor but able students. Such a program will be costly enough to call for support from the federal government.1 Scholarships from other sources of revenue are of course a familiar feature in the college scene. Scholar- ships are given for many reasons. Some are given as memorials, some as gratuities to the college, some in out- right attempts to promote higher education, and.some for miscellaneous reasons. New York university has —_ lLloyd w. Warner, Robert J. Havighurst, and lMartin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated? (New York: Harper and Brothers, 194 45, p. 165. 33 established the “Gold Star Scholarships" for sons and daughters of graduates of the University who lost their lives in world war II. The scholarship would cover full tuition for any course leading to the baccalaureate degree and have a value of approximately 31600.2 The Pepsi-Cola Company is conducting the largest, and, it hopes, the most effective sCholarship program out— side of government subsidy. It demonstrates how private industry can contribute significantly to the development of the country through the education of talented youth.:5 The National Wholesale Druggists' Association awards two fellowships annually at Ohio State University to students to study costs and efficiency of wholesale distri— tation.4 The College of Agriculture at Ohio State University offers 20 scholarships each year paying $300 annually and renewable throughout the student's undergraduate study.5 3New York University Establishes Gold-Star Scholar— ships,“ School and Societ , 59:72, January 39, 1944. 3Johan. Stalnaker, “Pepsi—Cola Scholarship Board Activities,” School and Society, 66:396, November 22, 1947. 4'Research Opportunities at Ohio State University," School and Societ , 63:322, March 30, 1946. 5 Loc. cit. 34 Ryan says that the conditions of most scholarship awards are based on two philosophical principles: one, that the student's abilities should be developed for the benefit of himself and society and two, that if he is in need of financial help to that end, he should have it.6 The award is usually on a competitive basis and usually stipulates that there is evidence of need for financial assistance. Ryan says further: About 30 per cent of secondary school graduates go on to college and about half of these earn the baccalaureate degree. Less than 6 per cent of Americans are college graduates. Estimates vary as to the per cent who could graduate but never enter college. It is quite probable that another 10 per7 cent have the ability to earn the college diploma. In this complex society, the individual's education represents social values which outweigh his own welfare. This is another way of saying that often the individual's education is worth more to his fellows than to himself. Ryan furthers his argument by saying: Time was when a college student could earn his own way. In the thirties, one large mid—west uni— versity reported that a third of its students were getting along on $500 a year or less, and earning all of it. Twenty years earlier, expenses were less than that. But with the adyent of the forty- cent dollar the fear of earning one's way through —-—_ 6H. H. Ryan, "Government Scholarships for High fghool Graduates," The Clearing_Hou§g, 23:372, February, 49. 71:00. Cite 35 college has changed from a creditable achievement to something bordering on the miraculous. It would seem, therefore, that any subsidy from national funds to college students should take ac— count of these undeveloped resources. It should be selective, not only on the basis of the individual's intellectual promise, but also in terms of his need for financial assistance. The writer is not building a case for federal sub- sidization of education but is merely presenting a point of view. However, we must not lose sight of the fact that institutions of higher education award hundreds of scholar- ships each year. Michigan State College is privileged to award more than 650.9 The University of Michigan has a similar privilege, but differs in that it restricts its scholarship awards to graduates of accredited high schools. Harvard.University ' gives very large scholarships to several freshmen. These scholarships are worth $1,000 for the first year and $1,200 for each of three succeeding years, if the student is unable to pay any of his expenses.10 The Harvard award stipulates that "the student must nuke honorable grades in his freshman year and that the 8Ryan, loo. 1 . H 9Information secured from the Office of the Co- ordinator of High School Cb-operation, Michigan State 00118860 10”Harvard's National Scholarships Six Years After 13381: Inception,‘ SChool and_Society, 54:435, November 15, 36 granting of the scholarship thereafter is not by the number of A's he makes bum by the originality and seriousness he ”11 The regulations state brings to bear on his work. further that 'the Committee insists on intellectual dis- tinction coupled with a correspondingly high development of character and personality.'12 The acquisition of know- ledge and the development of character should be the primary objectives of the college student, and when these two objectives are realized to the fullest, Harvard Uni- versity rewards the student with a scholarship grant. Harvard University launched out on an enlarged scholarship program in 1946. Stipends as high as $1,300 are offered ”based on global needs to Americans with ade- quate knowledge of foreign countries.'13 The program is definitely of an experimental nature and it is hoped that it will prove inviting to veterans of the last world War ‘who have had service overseas and have become interested in diplomatic service as a career. The scholarship would be continued throughout the college course and.into gradup ate work if high honor records are maintained. 11Loo. cit. 12Loc. cit. 13uA New program and an Expansion of the National Scholarships at Harvard,” School and Society, 63:77-78, February 3 , 1946 . 37 The University of Chicago has enlarged its scholar— ship program in order to reach brilliant high school students before they graduate from high school. Special examinations would be given to students in the 10th grade and above if they ranked.in the upper 10 per cent of their class. Boys and girls who pass this test would then be able to enter the University of Chicago at the age of 14 or 15 and receive the bachelor's degree at 18 or 19.14 A group of seven women's colleges in the East have formed a conference for the distinct purpose of providing ways and.means to encourage students from the west to matriculate at their colleges.15 One method of encourage- ment is the awarding of scholarships on a competitive basis. All students may compete and.if the winners main- tain high records in college, the college will expect to renew the scholarship until graduation. The award pays a ndnimum of $100 plus a variable amount, based.on the stud- ent's need, sufficient to cover the cost of tuition and board and.room. 14"Scholarships Available for ‘New—Plan' Students, ‘University of Chicago,“ School and Societ , 58:405, INovember 20, 1943. 15"Seven Eastern women's Colleges Will Offer INational Scholarships,” School and Society, 58:453, December 11, 1943. 38 The Board of Regents of the State of New York has approved a new comprehensive examination to be given to high school applicants for the 750 University scholarships awarded each year.16 From the foregoing information it appears that most scholarships are awarded on the basis of intellectual ability and the amounts of the scholarships are determined by financial need. The scholarships awarded by Michigan State College are given on the basis of financial need and academic achievement in high school. Phearman made a comparison of high school graduates who go to college with those who do not go to college and found that the economic factor is probably one of the most important factors preventing talented youth from continu— ing their education. He states: One out of three youth of those who ranked in the upper quarter scholastically are denied a college education because their families can not afford it. If the group who indicated a desire to earn their own money is added to the ones that can not afford to go to college, nearly one out of two do n25 attend college because of financial reasons. 16“University-Scholarship Examinations," School and Societ , 57:151, February 6, 1943. ‘ 17Leo T. Phearman, IComparison of High School Gradup ates Who Go to College With Those Who do Not Go to College,“ (Uhpnblished Doctor's dissertation, The University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1948), p. 70. 39 Barber18 interviewed 110 high school graduates to determine why they did.not go to college. He found that a lack of finances was the most important single factor for not going to college. Thirty-four per cent fall into this classification. Other reasons given were: lack of academic interests, preference for work experience, and lack of serious purpose. Inasmuch as the lack of finances is a major reason why able high school graduates do not attend college, the Michigan State College program of awarding scholarships to able students of financial need appears justifiable. But the need also is present among good risks who cannot com— pete in scholarship. What are the characteristics of these students who are admitted to higher institutions on scholarship and what is the quality of their academic achievement? These two questions are the guide posts for this investigation. Studies dealing with the college achievement of scholarship students are extremely limited. One such 18Leroy Edward Barber, 'Wh Some Able High School Graduates do Net Go to College,“ Unpublished Doctor' 8 dissertation, The University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1950), p. 63. study was made in 1932 by Krugman19 who analyzed the dis— tributions of grades for all students and for scholarship students in Washington Square College over a two year per- iod from September, 1928 to June, 1930. The study sought to answer two questions: first, How does the distribution of grades for the college as a unit compare with the nor- mal distribution? and second, How does the distribution of grades by the various departments compare with the distri- bution by the college and with the normal distribution? Krugman found that the distribution of grades for scholarship students was considerably higher than both the normal and college distributions in percentage of A's, somewhat higher in percentage of B's, and considerably lower in percentage of C's, D's, and F's. The following table presents the distribumion by percentages of marks earned by the entire college popu— lation and.the scholarship students as compared with the marks of a normal distribution. _ 19Abraham Krugman, 'A Comparison of Grades of Scholarship Students and All Students in the thhington Square College of New York University,” (Unpublished Master's thesis, New York University, New York, 1932), p0 390 41 TABLE 11130 DISTRIBUTION BY PERCENTAGES CF GRADES EARNED BY STUDENTS AT WASHINGTON SQUARE COLLEGE j fl Percentage of total marks Group A B C D F Total All college 10 28 4O 16 8 100 Normal 7 24 38 24 7 100 Scholarship figg55 34 10 l 0 100 E44 ii; :# L 2.“ 4...... These data definitely show the academic superiority of the scholarship students over the entire college popu- lation for 55 per cent of all their marks were A's. Eighty— nine per cent of the marks earned by the scholarShip people were either A's or B's and.99 per cent of all their marks were C's or better. Krugman adds further that of the 101 scholarship students whose records constituted the basis for the study, 45 were admitted to Phi Beta Kappa.21 The findings in regard to the second question were as follows: Krugman, 22, cit., p. 39. 81Loo. cit. 42 For all students, most of the departments varied widely from the normal distribution. Simi- lar results were found for the distribution of scholarship grades. The highest marking depart- ments as to percentage of A's and B's for all students are Sociology, Fine Arts, Music, Italian, Classics, and German. The scholarship students ranked highest in the German, Mathematics, Fine Arts, and Spanish departments.z Krugman also reports a study made at Hunter College in New Ybrk to learn whether the aims of New Ybrk State in granting scholarships for college study have been realized. Two groups of scholarship students were selected, 507 of Hunter College (1926-1929) and 1,126 State scholars (1913— 1921), and.compared with an equally large sample of non- scholarship students entering Hunter College the same year. The conclusion reached was that “The scholarship of State scholars at Hunter College amply justifies the State in awarding the scholarships, and that the scholarship study ents are markedly superior to the regular students in their studies“.23 An evaluation of scholarship and character of college students was made by Stephens at the University of Chicago in 1941 to determine what factors contribute most to students' success. He concluded: 43 The truth seems to be that there are so many different factors, any one of which, or any group- ing of which, may determine the result, that it is impossible to be dogmatic and insist that it is this more than that. That scholastic aptitude is impor- tant is recognized. There seem to be limitations to the possible intellectual achievements of a ten percentile mind. But there are so many other factors that might work in compensating fashion that it is not enough ior individual guidance to know just that score.2 Stephens venturedto make certain suggestions con- cerning the less tangible factors that influence college achievement. Important among the positive factors are: definite vocational goal, sense of personal re- eponsibility that often is associated with earn- ing a considerable part of one's college expenses, good health, a Christian conviction or philosophy of life that tends to integrate the personality, and experience in self-direction. On the negative side would be listed: home backgrounds in which young people are controlled by prohibition rather than by teaching them dis- crimination, emotional instability, absence of vocational goal, too great a burden of self; support, a course of study that does not challenge because it does not meet the student's interests, and.moral weakness. It is Stephens' final suggestion that the educa- tional responsibility of collegaaextends to the concern for the entire personality.36 24Theodore P. Stephens, “An Evaluation of Scholar- ship and.Character of College Students,I (unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1941) , p. 166. 853193. Cite zeStephens, 22¢ Cite, p. 1610 44 Sheldon made an investigation of the personality and emotional characteristics of forty students in the Academic Methods Program of Syracuse University who were having scholastic difficulties. The Academics Methods Program is the name given to a program develOped at syraouse which is concerned with the improvement of the reading habits and study skills of underclassmen. These students voluntarily sought more help than was to be ob- tained in the classroom situation. The case study method was applied, and when the diagnosis for the 40 students was completed, only 16 remained in the University to benefit from subsequent therapy. The other 24 left school.27 Sheldon drew the following conclusions: 1. That the forty students ranged in intelli- gence from normal to very superior. 2. That these forty individuals were severely disturbed emotionally. 3. That these students had been handicapped in their scholastic careers since their elementary days even though they had adequate intelligence and wide interests. 4. That these students were significantly less able to read when compared to normal college fresh- men s 5. That hese students revealed no visual anomalies. _______§?______ William Denley Sheldon, “A Study of College Stud” cuts with Scholastic Difficulties," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Syracuse, Syracuse, 1948), po‘ 22. ' ZBSheldon, pp. cit., p. 328. 45 A number of studies have been undertaken to deter- mine reliable means of predicting success in college. Goforth's‘?’9 study was undertaken to find out what rela- tionship exists between the grades of freshmen entering Alabama Polytechnic Institute during the year 1937—1938 and their previous high school records. Such factors as the size of class and type of the school from which they came, sex, and the ability of the pupil as shown on the standardized tests were considered in relation to fresh- men grades. Many factors entered in: intellectual ability, social adjustment, habits, methods of work, and special interests. Goforth found an average correlation of .42 between subjects taken in high school and the same subjects taken in college and a correlation coefficient of .51 between psychological test scores and average college grades. He concluded further that there is a definite tendency for graduates of small high schools to earn lower than average grades and a definite tendency for graduates of the large high schools to earn better than average grades in college. In a study to determine the relation of size and location of high schools to achievement of their 29Malcolm Emerson Goforth, "A Comparison of Fresh- man Grades with High School Grades and Psychological Scores of the Class Entering Alabama Polytechnic Institute in.1937,' (Unpublished Master's thesis, The Alabama Poly- technic Institute, Auburn, 1939), p. 2. students, Stuart found that 'the larger high schools not only offer a much more varied and flexible curriculum to meet the varying needs of pupils entering high school at the present time but also that the larger schools donors effective work in the field of instruction.“30 His data were taken from the responses of 10,000 applicants to schools of nursing throughout the United States during the year 1943-1944. Ely conducted a similar study and feels that al- though his findings are not conclusive they are suffi- ciently so to offer a strong argument in favor of the large high schools.31 Jorgensen reported that his investigation showed that ”rural pupils are retarded on the average about one— half of a school year compared with the urban group.'32 Eicher studied the success of North Carolina high school students in four North Carolina colleges with 36 . Clinton Stuart, 'The Relation of the Size and Location of High Schools to the Achievement of Their Students," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, New York University, New York, 1946), p. 6. . 31Wayne H. Ely, I'The Scholastic Success of Students from Small High Schools versus Students from Large High Schools,‘ (Unpublished.Master's thesis, Indiana State Teachers' College, Terre Haute, 1929), p. 40. 32A. W; Jorgensen, 'A Comparison of Rural and.Urban Children,I Wisconsin Journal 23 Education, 5:241, January, 1939. 47 special emphasis on the size of the high schools from which the students came. Generally speaking, students from small schools tended to make high marks in high school and low marks in college, and the contrary is true for students from large high schools.33 A report by the faculty of Leland Stanford Junior University stated that students from large high schools made better showing on grade point averages than did those entering from small high schools.34 The findings from these studies clearly indicate that students from large high schools receive higher marks in college than the students from small high schools. Innumerable studies have been conducted to deter- mine the most reliable bases for predicting success in college. Many investigators find the high school record to be the best single measure for predicting college grades. Eicher found high correlations between freshman college marks and high school marks for each of the four colleges and six of the larger high schools in North Carolina. The average for all four colleges was .641 33Franklin C. Eicher, “The Success of North Caro— lina High School Students in Four North Carolina Colleges," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Duke University, Durham, 1942), p. 156. 34Report of Sub—Committee of Committee on Student Ability, (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 1923), p. 37. 48 which is highly significant.85 In the total averages for all high schools he found a simple correlation coefficient of .55 between freshman college averages and high school averages.36 He concluded that average high school marks or high school rank in most cases provides a better cri- terion than do mental tests.37 Seyler studied the value of rank in high school graduating class for predicting success in college.38 He found that a high school percentile rank of 58 was neces- sary to predict a probable average of 'C' for a student entering the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences at the University of Illinois. This statistical prediction was found to be wrong in approximately one-fourth of the cases; and 16 per cent of the students having a percentile rank below the 15th percentile made at least a '0' average in college. He adds further: Hewever it is concluded that it is possible to predict that the lowest quarter of a high school graduating class will fail scholastically in the ssEioh-er, 220 Oitd’ p0 1490 36lbid., p. 6. 37Ibid., p. 14. 33s. C. Seyler, “The Value of Rank in High School Graduating Class for Predicting Freshman Scholarship," American Associagion‘g£_Collegiate Registrars' Journal, 15:9, October, 1939. 49 first year of college, although there will be some iifilifiifiolifififi 333.323‘333 'h° "“1 “a“ ”“3" Potthof found that the correlation between average high school grades in academic subjects and the first two years in college was .620 while there was a correlation of only .435 between these same college grades and.scores on entrance tests.4o Some investigators believe that college grades themselves are the best index of future college grades. Stright found correlations between first semester college grades and four years' averages as high as .81.41 Stewart discovered that the first—year grade point averages do have validity for predicting successful work in the junior and senior years in the major fields in the College of Arts at Syracuse University. The writer found a correlation of .71 between first year History and simi- lar courses taken in the upper two years, a correlation of .70 between freshman mathematics and subsequent courses in mathematics, and correlations in the neighborhood of 3938yler, 220 Cite, po 90 4oEdwardPotthof, "A Statistical and Analytical Study of the Selective Admission of College Students,“ (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1928), p. 126. '411saao L. Stright, llThe Prediction of Success in Baldwin-Wallace College,“ (Unpublished Doctor's disser- tation, western Reserve University, Cleveland, 1946), p. 16. .66 for most all other subjectfields.42 Most of these studies indicate that a student's high school record.and.his rank in high school graduating class are the best criteria for predicting academic suc— cess in college. One of the most valuable studies relating to pre— diction of success in college was carried out by Froehlich at the University of Wisconsin in 1941. He concluded that the American Council Psychological Examination, which re— quires approximately one hour for administration, is on a par with the average of high school marks covering a period of three and.one-ha1f to four years, as a basis for predic- tion of success at the University of Wisconsin; but added that percentile rank in high school graduating class is a better basis for such prediction.43 ' This study verified the conclusion that rank in graduating class is as good a measure of university 4aMaude A. Stewart, "First Year Grade Point Average as a Measure for Predicting Academic Attainment in the Junior-Senior Years in the Major Fields of the College of Liberal Arts of Syracuse University," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Syracuse, Syracuse, 1947), p. 157. 43Gustav J. Froehlich, llThe validity of the Wis- consin Achievement Test as an Instrument for Predicting Success at the University of Wisconsin," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1941), p. 35. 51 success as any of the other available measures. On the other hand, the study offers another measure, the Wisconsin Achievement Test score which is just as good as rank in class and has the added advantage of being uniformly and objectively obtainable for gll incoming freshmen at the I expense of only one 101 minute period.44 In conclusion Frcehlich states: The best possible Combination of predictive indices is composed of the total score on the Wisconsin Achievement Test, the rank in secondary school graduating class, and the total score on the 1938 edition of the American Council on Edu- cation Psych010gica1 Examination. This combi- nation yields a multiple R of $7164 with the first semester grade point average. Most of the investigations concerning the scholar- ship of freshman college students have dealt with the relationship between housing and academic suCCSss to determine which type of housing, if any, contributes to the best scholarship. Practically none have dealt with the scholarship of 'scholarship' students. The most extensive study was made at the Univer- sity of Minnesota in 1940 by Van Alstine.46 He attempted to determine the effect of residence on scholarship and. 44lbid., pp. 152—153. 45Ibid., p. 153. 46Frank'L. Van Alstine, FThe Relation Between the Housing of Students and Their Scholarship at the Univer- sity of Minnesota,“ (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1941), p. 73. 52 to test whether or not the presumed effect was real. Four types of housing were studied; namely, home, private resi- dence, dormitory, and fraternity. He studied the relation between the housing of students, including upperclassmen, and their scholarship in the Colleges of Medicine, Law, Engineering, Business, Education, and Pharmacy. He con— cluded that there was no significant relation between housing of students and their scholarship in any of the Colleges except the College of Pharmacy. This advantage 'was in favor of those freshmen who lived in a private residence as compared with those freshmen who lived in any other type of residence. However, in the College of Pharmacy the records of only 95 students were studied and so the evidence seems neither conclusive nor noteworthy. Walker found a positive correlation between housing and student success at the University of Chicago. Stup dents living in dormitories ranked first; those living at home, second; and those living in rooming houses and fra— ternities, third.47 Butts conducted a similar study at the University of Wisconsin and found that students living in dormitor— ies and chapter houses ranked .098 grade points higher ‘ 47Ernest T. Walker, "The Relation of the Housing and Success of Students in a university,” (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, university of Chicago, Chicago, 1935), p. 74. 53 than those living in rooming houses or at home.48 Peterson conducted a three year study at Davis College of the University of California. He concluded that the aver— age student will do better scholastically in a dormitory than if he lives in a fraternity or a rooming house. In desirability he listed the places of residence in this order: dormitory, co—operative house, rooming house, at home, and fraternity.49 Grote investigated the housing conditions at western Illinois State Teachers' College between 1926 and 1929. She concludes: The important factor in housing is not the loca- tion-- in the house, in the dormitory, or in the home-- but it is the living condition that prevails there....... Those who live in their own houses in the college town rank first, and the dormitory group ranks second in academic achievement and that these two types of housing are favorably and increasingla affecting academic achievement from year to year.5 Moulton, in a study to determine the distribution of low grades among women working for board and room in 48Porter Butts, "Some Implications of Housing," Journal of Higher Education, 8:31-32, January and Feb- ruary , 1957. 49Basil H. Peterson, “The Scholarship of Students Housed in Various Living Quarters,“ School and Societ , 57:221-224, February 20, 1943. 50Caroline Grote, "Housing and Living Conditions of WOmen Students,“ No. 507, Bureau of Publications, Teachers' College, Columbia University, Nengork, 1932, p. 960 54 private homes, women doing light housekeeping, and.those living in dormitories, found that the academic standings of students living in dormitories are higher than those of students living under other conditions. Her study indi- cated that the rank of housing situations studied as regards scholarship was, first, dormitories; second, light house— keeping; and.third, working for room and board in private homes.51 Both of the last two mentioned studies were carried out more than 30 years ago and their findings are somewhat questionable in light of our present day philosOphy of education. Hansen made a similar study at the University of Chicago with an emphasis on the type of room in its rela-. tion to scholarship. Of the entire group of 1164 students, 647, or 55.6 per cent made grades above the predicted grades determined for them at entrance to callege. Of this group, 59.4 per cent lived in single rooms and 40.6 per cent lived in double rooms. A comparison of the dif- ference between the actual and the predicted grades of the students in the three ability groups were in each case in favor of the groups of students living in single 51Ella Lee Houlton, 'Dormitory Values for Stud- ents,” School and Society, 29:363, March 16, 1929. 55 rooms 0 53 A survey of the literature related to the quality of academic achievement in college reveals that most of the investigations skirt the problem relating to the aca- demic achievement of those students Who are admitted to college on scholarship awards. The majority of the theses related to this problem are grouped around the f011owing headings: 1. Prediction of success in college. 2. Number and size of scholarships available. 3. Preparation of high school graduates for college. 4. Performance in college. 5. Relation of housing to scholarship. The problem of the present investigation is to de- termine the characteristics of those students who are admitted to Michigan State College on scholarship, to determine the quality of their academic achievement, and to determine why 41 per cent of those admitted fail to earn a renewal of their scholarships at the end of the first year. An examination of the literature on the general topic of ”scholarships” failed to uncover any investigations of this specific_nature. That is perhaps the primary reason why the writer undertook this study. He believes that the investigation will be very beneficial to guidance officials in both secondary schools and 52 Minna Hansen, “Some Factors in the Housing of Students Related to Success in College," (Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1942), p. 80. 56 colleges in order that they might promote better adjustment of college freshmen. CHAPTER.IV PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE RECORDS OF THE 33 WITHDRAWAL STUDENTS The preceding chapters have served to introduce the subject of this investigation. They presented the background of the problem, the procedure for the investi- gation, and a review of the pertinent literature. This chapter is the first one devoted to an analysis of the data of the investigation beginning first with the infor- mation available on the 33 withdrawal students. These students withdrew frOm college at different times through- out their first year in residence. Some did not complete their first term and hence earned no credits. Since their records are so incomplete they are treated.in this chapter as a group by themselves. Some of the information will be repeated in tabular form in the next chapter. These 33 are divided rather evenly as regards sex for there are 17 males and 16 females and all of them are unmarried. Of these 33, only 7, or 21 per cent, re- entered.Hichigan State College at a later date to make further use of the scholarship. The occupations of the fathers are quite varied with 4 being farmers, 3 teachers, 5 machinists, 7. ‘businessmen or salesmen, and one each of the following: 58 janitor, truck driver, miner, sheriff, secretary, super— visor, and railroad man. All of the mothers are housekeepers except 6 who gave the following as their chief occupation: nurse, secretary, typist, laborer, teacher, and clerical worker. The combined average monthly income of the parents is $280 per month according to the figures supplied by the students in their applications for scholarships. The reasons for selecting Michigan State College were varied.and are summarized as follows in Table IV. TABLE IV REASONS GIVEN BY THE 33 WITHDRAWAL STUDENTS FOR SELECTING MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE _- I Reason Frequency The courses offered at H S C . . . . . . . . 10 The scholarship award itself . . . . . . . . Influence of friends (students or alumni) . . Visits to the campus (band, 4—H, Boys State) Reputation of the college . . . . . . . . . Desirable location . . . . . . . . . . . . . .a r4 04 o: -c «q No reason given . . . . . . . . . . . . . . W ' The 33 students came from the following types of high schools: 59 5 from Class A schools like Kalamazoo, Mt. Clemens 12 from Class B schools like Allegan, Three Rivers 11 from Class C schools like Brighton, Paw Paw 5 from Class D schools like Colon, Brooklyn1 TABLE V TYPE OF SCHOOL FROM WHICH THE 33 WITHDRAWAL STUDENTS WERE GRADUATED “a: :‘fi '- A B C D Tbtal NDMDSI 5 13 ll 5 33 Per cent 15.1 36.4 33.3 1501 99.9 Thirty-two.of'these schools represented by with- drawal students were accredited by the University of Michigan, while one was not accredited at all. Twenty- one of these schools were also accredited by-the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools.2 Thirty of these students pursued a college preparatory course in high school, one followed the college agreement 3 plan, and two took the non-college curriculum in high 1366 footnote 3, page 75 for an explanation of the Athletic Association classification. 3This organization is the highest accrediting agency in M10111 gan. 3This is explained.on page 7. 60 school. The records of the latter three students are very interesting. The student who did not follow a subject- matter pattern in high school, whom we shall call Student A, was a girl from a Class D high school. She was vale- dictcrian of her class of 21 graduates with practically an all "A" record. She scored in the first decile4 in both the total general college ability section and the total general reading ability section on the American Council Psychological Examination administered by the college at the time of matriculation. She left college sometime during the fall term of 1949 because of "lack of interest" in college.5 The two who followed the nonpcollege curriculum we shall call Student B and Student 0. Student B, a girl, was the valedictcrian of a Class 0 school with 36 gradu— ates. She had practically an all "A“ record in high school and scored in the 5th decile in both the total gen— eral reading ability and the total general college ability on the Psychological Examination. She withdrew sometime during the fall term of 1949 because of financial reasons.6 4First decile represents the lowest 10 per cent of the group, 10th decile represents the highest 10 per cent. 5Information supplied by the Office of the Counselor for WOmen, Michigan State College. 6Loc. cit. 61 Her high school principal stated that she would do I'excel-- lent' work in college, but she did not stay long enough to earn any credits. Student C was a boy who ranked 42nd in a class of 146 graduates in a Class B school. He had a 1.87 average in high school, scored in the first decile in total general college ability, and.in the second decile in general reading ability. He left school at the end of the fall term.having earned only 8.5 credits for a total of negative 1.5 honor points.8 The reason for his withdrawal is not known, though it was assumed to be scholastic diffi- culties.9 lhen a student fails to return to the campus the next term for further study the reason is seldom.known. When he withdraws during a term he usually consults with his counselor and then the reason for the withdrawal is given. Since 19 withdrew during the time that classes were in session the reasons fer their withdrawal are known. The Counselor for Men and the Counselor for women have stated that 5 withdrawals were due to financial reasons, 4 were due to the fact that the student lacked interest in college, 3 due to illness, 2 because of employment opportunities, _VThis means a 0+ or a B— average. 8See footnote 26, Chapter I. 9Student C earned one B, two C's, one D, and two F's during his first term. He earned 8.5 credits for -1.5 honor points for an honor-point average of -.1. 62 and one each because of wrong courses, improper adiustment, and desire to transfer to another college. Also, one girl left college to get married and one girl left college to play baseball. In the general college ability test the withdrawals averaged in the 5.485 decile which is in the middle of the fifth decile, while in the general reading ability test they averaged in the 5.121 decile or just past the fifth decile grouping. Their scores are compared with the scores of the other scholarship students in Table XXVI on page 110.' Thirty—one of the 33 students were recommended for college by their high school principals, the other two applications for admission were left unmarked in this category. Three principals said that their high school graduates would probably do excellent work in college, 19 stated their graduates would do satisfactory work in col- lege, and 11 said that their students would do average work at Michigan State College. Eight of the 33 students remained on campus only one full term while 6 remained 2 full terms. The entire group had a grade-point average of 2.26 in high school,10 but since their college records are so irregular, their 10in 'A' was assigned a value of 3 points, a 'B' . was given 2 points, and.a 'C' was assigned one point. No value at all was given for grades of 'D' or lower. 63 college averages are of little value. These students earned an average of 15.3 credits per person at Michigan State College with an honor—point average of 1.17. This compares favorably with the all—freshmen average of 1.19.11 At the time of enrollment the student is asked to state a preference for his major field of emphasis. It is interesting to note that 7 of the 33, or 21 per cent of the total, did not have any particular goal, they were listed with I'no--preference" majors. Consequently they were listed as being enrolled in the Basic College only. Their “nodpreference' category might be one of the main reasons why they did not remain in college. The other 26 were enrolled in the following Schools: 3 in the School of Agriculture, 4 in the School of Business and.Public Service, 3 in the School of Engineering, 3 in the School of Home Economics, 10 in the School of Science and Arts, 3 in the School of Veterinary Medicine, and 7 in the Basic College. Four of the 33 were majoring in English, 3 in Home Economics, 3 in Pre-Veterinary Medicine, and 2 each in Foreign Language, Political Science, and Business Administration. At the time of withdrawal, only 2 of the 33 11Information secured from the Office of the ‘Registrar, Michigan State College. 64 students in this group had earned the 1.6 average reguired to insure a renewal of the scholarship. One of these, whom we shall call Student E, was a girl who scored in the highest decile in every section of the Psychological Exami— nation. It was necessary for her to withdraw because of financial reasons. At the time of withdrawal she had earned 40 credits for a grade—point average of 1.8. The other student, Student F, was a girl, too, who scored in the 7th and 9th deciles on the all college ability and general reading ability sections of the Psychological Examination. She had to withdraw from college because of illness at home. At the time of her withdrawal she had earned 36 credits for a 1.8 average. Both of these stu- dents returned to Michigan State College in the fall of 1950 to take further advantage of their scholarship grants and thus continue their college education. This information regarding the withdrawal group does not reveal why scholarship students at Michigan State College do not maintain the 1.6 average. It is summarized here just to complete the study of the group of those 400 students who were initially awarded tuition-free scholar- ships to study at Michigan State College. Among the study of the records of these 33 students the following facts seem to summarize their status: 1. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 65 Eight per cent of those awarded scholarships withdrew before finishing their freshman year. Seventy per cent of the withdrawal students came from Class B and Class 0 high schools in Michigan. Seventyetwo per cent of them selected Michigan State College either because of the courses offered here, the scholarship award, or the recommendation of friends. 31 of the 33 students were recommended by their high school principals. 19 of the 33 students withdrew from college during the time classes were in session. The reasons most fre- quently given for withdrawal were illness, 15 per cent, financial difficulties, 25 per cent, and lack of inter— est in college, 20 per cent. The latter should be investigated as a problem for further study. 21 per cent of the 33 enrolled without any preference for a college major. 7 of the 33 returned to the campus in the fall of 1950 to make further use of the annual scholarship award. 4 of the 7 returnees withdrew during their first year because of illness, 1 left school to travel, and 2 left without giving any reason. 5 of the 7 returnees had declared a college major upon matriculation. CHAPTER V PRESENTATION AND.ANALYSIS OF THE HIGH SCHOOL RECORDS’OF THE 553 STUDENTS The preceding chapter dealt with someof the char- acteristics of the 33 scholarship students who withdrew from college during their first year. This chapter will be devoted to an analysis of the high school records and the first year college averages of the 158 ”cancellation“ students, the 195 “renewal“ students, and the 200 “regu- lar'I students. The underlying question guiding the writer in the analysis of these data will be, “Why did 41 per cent of the scholarship students admitted to Michigan State College in the fall of 1949 fail to earn a renewal . of the award?" The writer will analyze the characteris— tics of the cancellation group in an effort to determine in what ways and to what extent they are different from those students who earned the 1.6 average and, conse- quently, the renewal. The first problem analyzed relates to the size of the high school from which the students were graduated. Does the size of the high school from which the students come have any bearing on the student's success in college? Williams made a study of the academic success of 100 freshmen at the University of Michigan and.conc1uded $0.11 «boo 60“ 50" 40b 20" 10‘ 67 Can. Ren. Can. Ren. From Small From Large Schools Schools FIGURE 2 DISTRIBUTION OF CANCELLATION AND RENEWAL STUDENTS FROM LARGE AND SMALL HIGH SCHOOLS 68 that the size of the high school from which a student graduates is not a determinant of his success in the Uni- versity.1 His study was based on only 100 cases. This writer has found evidence which shows that the size of the high school is definitely related to the success of schol- arship students. A ' It was found that 50 per cent, or just exactly half of those who lost their scholarships, were from.high schools having 60 or fewer graduates in June, 1949. About 18 per cent of these 158 came from large high schools. having more than 200 members in the senior class. In the renewal group 24.6 per cent of the 195 students were from small high schools with fewer than 60 members in the gradu- ating class while 30 per cent of them were from large high schools with more than 200 graduates. It will be recalled that the members of the regular group who were drawn at random were selected by matching sizes of schools as nearly as possible. It develops that this distribution very closely approximates the distri- ‘bution of the renewal group. The distribution showing the size of high schools from which the students came is given in Table VI. 4 1Robert L. Williams, "Letter to Schools“, (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan,June, 1950), p. 2. 69 TABLE VI SIZE OF HIGH SCHOOLS FROM WHICH THE STUDENTS CAME W Size of Cancellation Renewal Regular graduating group group group class June 1949 Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per Cent 1-20 9 5.7 7 3.6 7 3.5 21-40 37 23.4 25 12.8 29 14.5 41.60 33 20.9 16 8.2 32 16.0 61—80 15 9.5 25 12.8 15 7.5 81-100 12 7.6 17 8.7 15 7.5 101-120 9 5.7 16 8.2 12 6.0 121-140 4 2.5 7 3.6 9 4.5 141.160 2 1.3 7 3.6 9 4.5 161-180 3 1.9 7 3.6 e ‘ 3.0 181-200 6 3.8 10 5.1 6 3.0 over 200‘ 28 17.7 58 29.7 60 30.0 Totals 158 195 200 Average size of class 107.15 178.5 167.32 Standard deviation 98.9 148.5 141.5 ._______~ ____J____L____J_.____._ I'The 28 large schools represented by the cancellation students averaged 301 graduates, the 58 schools represented by the renewal students averaged 397 graduates, and the 60, schools represented by the renewal students averaged 374 high school graduates. HOW (+500 70 40! Cancellation students ---- Renewal students 30f I A A A O 21 41 61 81 101 121 141 161 181 over 20 4O 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 200 Number of high school graduates FIGURE 3 DISTRIBUTION OF CANCELLATION AND RENEWAL STUDENTS FROM ALL HIGH SCHOOLS 71 Table VII summarizes the essential data from Table VI and extends it to include the standard deviation of the mange TABLE VII SUMMARY OF DATA REGARDING SIZE OF GRADUATING CLASS *1 t * -Ir Formula2 Cancellation Renewal ' Regular Mean 2:: :1 a 107.15 563 - 173.53 is = 167.22 , N St da (1 1 T ‘ an 1' x 6' a 98.90 (a = 148.5 141.5 on") H deviation N 1 Standard ~ deviation (R- 6- z: 7.91 6' = 10.61 0’ : 10.04 ‘TN'" "1 "a ’55 of the means mgmmwmam. The formula for the standard error of the difference between the means is _ a. + 0—; “Ex—i1) 2 1303 (WA-L) = g 12. 7 G-(ig- i3) = 14. 9 2From William D. Baten, “Elementary Mathematical Statistics", (New York: John Wiley and ns, Inc., 1938). 72 One of the most important applications of these statistical tools is testing for significance between the means. This is done by working cum the_critical ratio, 3, which is the ratio of the difference between the means to the standard error of this difference: , t - 11 - 12 . 0—51.53) We set up a null hypothesis that there is no dif- ference between the true means of the samples we are comparing; that is, we temporarily assume that they come from the same population and, therefore, have the same mean. Since we are trying to test the significance of a difference between the two sample means, we shall see if there is any evidence that this hypothesis is probably false and that the samples probably come from different populations. (a) 551,323, - 107.15 2178.53 = .. 5.41 "’ "' 7 — 7 2 = - 407 (b) $143) 10 ,151 .16 , 2 5 (c) - - 178.5§_- 167.22 a .76 t2"2"".‘10 "' 14.9 An interpretation of the 3 values reveals that for 300 and 400 degrees of freedom' we may expect on the average a value of t_as large as 2.59, or larger, only one ’0. F. =- n1 f n3 - 2. The degrees of freedom for these analyses would b e 351 and.393 respectively. 73 time in 100. Therefore the probability of getting t = 5.41 or t 8 4.73 is certainly much smaller than .01. we can thus reject the hypothesis that the class size means are equal and.conclude that there is a significant difference between the class size means of the cancellation and the renewal groups, and the cancellation.and the regular groups. The samples do not appear to come from the same parent popu. lation. When comparing the class size means of the renewal and the regular groups we obtain a t_va1ue of .76.. We can accept the hypothesis and.ccnclude that the means of these two groups are the same, that they represent the same parent population. This statistical analysis verifies the conclusion drawn earlier that the students of the cancellation group represent a size of high school different from the size of high school represented by the renewal group. In other words, the size of high school is definitely related to the success of scholarship students at Michigan State College. A second classification of size of schools is the classification set up by the Michigan High School Athletic Association for purposes of greater equality among schools HQ‘U «boo HO’U d'UQO 74 34 ”_" 35. . 30 30 P 4 e 25} 1‘ 2a 6 n L 13 .__. t 15‘ . F_—_ 10 104 5 O """ D B C D Classes Classes Withdrawal Group Cancellation Group 3047 P 50L 4 e ”—7 r . (—7 25“ 25» c 20. "_T e 20% n t 15, 15‘ 10. 10 5 L H O 0 e A B C D A B C D Classes Classes Renewal Group Regular Group FIGURE 4 DISTRIBUTION OF ALL STUDENTS ACCORDING TO SIZE OF SCHOOL FROM WHICH THEY CAME 75 in athletic competition.3 This classification verifies the previous conclu- sion that the majority of cancellation students came from small high schools. Fifty-one per cent of them came from Class C and Class D schools while 27 per cent were from Class A high schools. In the renewal group we find 27 per cent from Class C and Class D schools with 36 per cent from Class A schools. It appears that the students from the smaller schools are greater risks scholastically than those from the larger high schools. 3There are 5 classifications as follows: Class A. 800 or more students in the upper 4 grades Class B— 325—799 students in the upper 4 grades Class C- 150-324 students in the upper 4 grades Class D— Less than 150 students in the upper 4 grades Class E— Less than 75 students in the upper 4 grades in the Upper Peninsula only. This information is taken from Michigan High School Athletic Association Bulletin, November (supplement) 1950, Lansing: Department of Public Instruction, p. 182. 76 TABLE VIII SIZE OF HIGH SCHOOL FROM WHICH ALL THE STUDENTS CAME Group Number A B C D E lithdrawal 33 5 12 11 5 0 Cancellation 158 43 34 58 23 0 Renewal 195 71 72 40 12 0 Regular 200 74 55 59 11 1 Totals 586 193 173 168 52 1 Let us next apply the 1X? (chi-square) test to determine whether the differences between the theoretical and the observed frequencies can reasonably be attributed to chance variations in sampling. Is there close agree- ment between the observed frequencies and the expected frequencies by means of the y? test? In other words, are the students in the various groups distributed.in the same proportion as the totals are distributed? From the formula 702 = (to .. ft)3 where fo is the observed ft frequencies and It the theoretical frequencies, we obtain a 76 of 35.52. In this particular problem we throw the single frequency in cell E into cell D making a 4 X 4 table with 9 degrees of freedom. If we look up the/x? we find that P is less than .01. This means that a value of 77 793 as large as 35.53 would occur not more than once in 100 samples if our hypothesis were true. Therefore we reject the hypothesis that the students are distributed in the same proportion as the totals are distributed and con— clude once more that there is a difference in the size of the high schools from which the students came. TABLE IX DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS FROM CLASS A AND CLASS B HIGH SCHOOLS Group Number Per cent of total Withdrawal 17 7.2 Cancellation 77 32.5 Renewal 143 60s 3 Total 237 100.0- Out of 237 students from Class A and Class B schools who entered.Michigan State on scholarship, 60.3 per cent of them renewed their scholarships at the end of the first year. TABLE X 78 DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS FROM CLASS C AND CLASS D HIGH SCHOOLS G Per cent of total roup Number Withdrawal 16 Cancellation 81 Renewal 52 Total 149 10.7 54.4 34.9 100.0 Out of 149 students from Class C and Class D high schools who entered.Michigan State on scholarship, 54.4 per cent of them failed to earn a renewal of the scholar— ship. TABLE XI PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS BY SIZE OF SCHOOL Group Classes A.and 8 Classes C and D Withdrawal 17 out of 33 - 51.5% 16 of 33 a 48.5% Cancellation 77 out of 158=-48.7% 81 of 158 - 51.3% Renewal 145 out of 195:.- 73.4% 52 of 195 a 86.6% W: I .4 Out of 195 students who renewed their scholarships, 73.4 per cent of them were from Class A or Class B high schools. 79 Let us calculate the standard error of the differ- ence between the cancellation and the renewal percentages to ascertain if they are significantly different. This interpretation is carried out in the same way that a standard error of a sample mean is interpreted. The formula is «(pl- pg) IVE? t 9.3.3.3. where p + q - l. qpl" D?) I AL487A (LE—LEI + £07342 £02662 : .050 158 195 we calculate the critical value of t in the same manner as before and obtain t . p1‘- P3 _ .487 - .734 . GET—7%) " .050 -4.94. we have set up the null hypothesis that the percent- ages are not significantly different but in view of the large value for 3 we must reject the hypothesis and con- clude that the percentages are significantly different. All the evidence of this investigation points to the fact that the size of the high schools from which the scholarship students were graduated has a definite relation to the type of success pattern they were able to establish in college. The scholarship students from the Class A and Class B high schools achieve greater academic success in college than do the students from Class C and Class D high 8011001 B. 80 Goforth reached the same conclusion that students from large city schools tended to receive higher grades in college than other freshmen. He states: There is a definite tendency for graduates of small high schools to earn lower than average grades and a definite tendency for the graduates of the large high schools to earn better than average grades in larger preportion than graduates of smaller high schools. The second factor to be analyzed in this investi— gation is the distribution of the scholarship students by sex. Of the 386 scholarship students who were on campus for the entire year the distribution is fairly equal for there were 171 men and 182 women. Half of the men, 85 of them, and 40 per cent of the women, 73 of them, failed to earn a renewal of their scholarship awards. Though Scott found that girls who plan to go to college are markedly superior in scholastic.accomplishment to boys who plan to go to college5 and Barker concluded 'that girls as a whole are superior in scholastic ability to the boys in all types 4Goforth, pp, cit., p. 5. 5Don Averill Scott, 'The Scholastic Ability of Iowa High School Graduates in Relation to Their Intended Edu- cational, Vbcational,and Professional Careers and to the Institutions of Higher Education They Plan to Attend,“ Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, (University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1935), p. 12. 81 of institutions of higher learning except teacher's col- leges's, the evidence of this investigation_indicates that there are many unseen factors which makes the analysis be- tween the abilities of the sexes difficult. A chi-square test carried out on the data of this investigation to de- termine if the distribution of scholarship students by sex corresponded with the eXpected distributions, produces a chi-square value of 2.93 which for one degree of freedom gives a probability of something between .05 and .10 and hence leads us to conclude that scholarship is not entirely independent of sex. TABLE XII DISTRIBUTION OF THE 386 SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS BY SEX ” A j: .- Group Male Female Withdrawal 17 16 Cancellation 85 188 73 198 Renewal 86 199 Regular 95 105 J— r m 6Richard W. Barker, “The Educational and Vocational Careers of High School Graduates Immediately Following Graduation in Relation to Their Scholastic Abilities,“ Un- published.Master's thesis, (University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1937), p. 51. 82 Another factor to investigate in this study is average age of the several groups. This study concerns freshmen who entered.Michigan State College in the fall of 1949 and since this date is 4 years following the close of world war II there are no veterans among this group of scholarship students. The average age of the cancellation students is 19.5 years and the average age of the renewal students is 18.9 years. The average age of the random regular group is 19.6 years. When the §,test is carried out to determine if the means of the two groups are the same we obtain t - 10. which clearly indicates that there is significant difference between the mean ages of the cancellation and the renewal group. Those students who lost their scholarships were, on the average, .6 of a year, or more than 7 months older than those who renewed their scholarships.“ The conclusion to be drawn from these figures is that as a student gets older his scholastic achievement decreases. Goforth cites the same conclusion in a study of students from about 120 institutions of higher learning which included 2,000 fresh- men. He found a negative correlation between marks and age showing that as the student increases in age the lower will be his achievement score or mark.7 ?G‘Of0rth, 92s 01 e, p. 5. 83 Not a single member of the scholarship group was over 21 years of age and not one was married at the time of matricudation. Of those drawn at random for the rogue lar group, 21 students were past 21 years of age and 9 out of the 200 were married. TABLE XIII DISTRIBUTION OF THE SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS BY AGE Grey “"17 ;8 1‘9 20 £921 2‘8 Ever 52 Withdrawals O 0 27 6 0 O O Cancellations 0 16 127 14 l 0 0 Renewals 2 25 153 14 l 0 0 Regulars 0 23 24 10 8 13 -___ 121 J —:‘_‘ r To what extent does instability in the student's family life contribute to his lack of success in college? An analysis of this situation revealed that 13 students of the cancellation group of 158 had one parent deceased and 7 students of 158 had.parents divorced. Among the renewal group of 195, 12 students had one parent deceased and only 2 had parents divorced. Among the regular group 26 stu— chnts had one parent deceased and only 2 had parents divorced. From the cancellation group, 13 per cent of the students came from homes where one parent is deceased or the parents divorced. From the renewal group only 7 per cent of the students came from homes where one parent is 84 deceased or the parents are divorced. These data, though meager, indicate that the cancellation students may be handicapped by being children in broken homes. TABLE XIV NUMBER OF STUDENTS HAVING PARENTS DECEASED OR DIVORCED Group Father Father Mother Mother Parents Number Living deceased living_deceased divorcedw Withdrawal 33 3O 3 32 1 6 Cancellation 158 149 9 154 4 7 Renewal 195 186 9 192 3 2 Regular 200 185 15 ’ 189 ll 8 The occupations of the students' fathers were tabu— lated to determine if there is any relation between success in college and occupations of the fathers among the scholar- ship group. Were there any differences in the types of jobs held by fathers of the various groups? Among the cancel; lation group we find the following listed as the occupations of the fathers: 30 farmers, 14 laborers, 14 teachers, 13 business-men, 8 engineers, 7 foremen, 7 inspectors, 6 mechanics, 5 book-keepers, 4 clerks, 4 real estate men, and several classifications listed fewer than four times. Among the renewal group we find that the students have listed the occupations of their fathers as follows: 25 farmers, 20 teachers, 17 business-men, 12 engineers, 85 9 laborers, 8 manufacturers, 7 managers, 8 salesmen, 6 toolmakers, 6 carpenters, 6 clerks, 5 real estate men, 5 cashiers, 4 mechanics, and several classifications listed fewer than four times. Among the regular group we find the fathers' occu- pations as follows: 30 business-men, 21 farmers, 14 engineers, 12 salesmen, 10 doctors, 10 executives, 9 machinists, 6 contractors, 5 real estate men, 5 office managers, 4 insurance men, and several classifications listed fewer than four times. The writer has used the same grouping of occupations as was used by Phearman in his doctoral dissertation.8 Whearman, QR. cit., pp. 70—76. 86 TABLE XV FATHERS' OCCUPATIONS AS LISTED BY STUDENTS Group Occupation; wuth— Cancel- drawal lation Renewa;__ Regular 1. Professional workers 4 17 40 45 2. Farmers and farm managers 4 33 27 '22 3. Proprietors, mans agers, officials 4 14 35 63 4. Clerks, salesmen 5 13 24 18 5. Craftsmen and foreman 1 36 35 10 6. Operators 0 3 0 10 7. Service workers 5 7 9 4 8. Laborers l 20 14 6 9. Not listed 9 15 11 22 If there is any advantage which one group has over the other it appears among the renewal group. Forty of the 195 students had fathers who were professional men such as doctors, teachers, lawyers, etc. Among the cancellation group there were only 17 whose fathers were professional men. At the other end of the scale we find that a higher per cent of the cancellation group (13%) than of the re- newal group (7%) came from homes where the father is an un—~ skilled laborer. The problem is sociological in nature and 87 requires further study but it appears that the occupation of the parent plays an important role in the scholarship student's academic success. This problem is amplified in Chapter VII in the dis- cussion of the formal education of the parents of the scholarship students. There are many families today where both parents are employed either to raise the standard of living, or because of economic need. Does the fact that both parents are away from home working have any effect upon the quality of work done by their children when they get to college? The figures show that of those who lost their scholarships 42 were from homes where the mother was employed. _This number constitutes about 27 per cent. There were 34 students from the renewal group whose mothers were employed. This con- stitutes only 17 per cent. TABLE XVI DISTRIBUTION SHOWING NUMBER AND PER CENT OF PARENTS EMPLOYED Only one rent working_ Bothparent§_working_ Group Number Per cent Number Per cent withdrawal ' 27 81.8 6 . 18.2 Cancellation 116 73.4 42 26.6 Renewal 161 82.6 34 17.4 Regular 167 83.5 33 16.5 Total 471 80. 4 115 19.6 88 58 % renewed their 42 % lost their scholarships scholarships FIGURE 5 DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS FROM 277 HOMES WHERE ONLY THE FATHER IS EMPLOYED 45 % renewed their 55 % lost their scholarships scholarships FIGURE 6 DISTRIBUTION OF STUDENTS FROM 76 HOMES WHERE BOTH PARENTS ARE EMPLOYED 89 There were 277 scholarship students whose fathers only were employed. Of these, 161, or 58 per cent, re- newed their scholarships. There were 76 students admitted from homes where both parents were employed. Of these, 34, or 45 per cent, renewed their scholarships. The scholarship student whose mother and father were both employed seemed to have less chance of renewing his scholarship than the. student whose mother listed her occupation as “housewife”. These facts are shown graphically in Figures 5 and 6. The more successful scholarship students at Michigan State College came from homes of high economic status. This is based on the fact that the average combined monthly income of the parents of the renewal groups is higher than the monthly income of the parents of the cancellation group. A.1 test carried out to determine if there is a significant difference between the means of the 2 groups givest B 1.6 which reveals no significant difference. These income figures are supplied by the students themselves on the applications for scholarship and might not be too reliable. 90 TABLE XVII AVERAGE COMBINED MONTHLY INCOME OF THE PARENTS Group E 5; ¢§ Withdrawal $280. 03 $112. 70 $19 . 77 Cancellation 307.35 102.50 8.13 Renewal 325.32 108.50 7.75 The purpose of the scholarship is to make it pos- sible for able students of limited financial means to secure a college education. Yet an examination of the previous table reveals that the scholarships are renewed for those whose parents have the highest average monthly income. .The most needy were denied the continuation of the benefit be- cause they fell below the 1.6 average. As one student put it, “The '0' student needs the education just as much as the ‘A‘ student does.“ Ryan has proved that there is a high correlation between the high school graduate's probability of going to college and the economic status of his family.9 And Phearman gave as one of his conclusions that, “The economic factor is probably one of the most important factors pre- venting talented youth from continuing their education."10 I 0 Ryan, 22. Clte, ‘po 3720 lOPhearman, 9_p_. cit., p. 76. 91 Inasmuch as the scholarships are granted to able students of financial need and inasmuch as more of the low income group lose their scholarships it appears that the standards set by the Scholarship Committee defeat the very purpose for which the scholarships were established. The first part of this chapter has been devoted to a discussion of some of the vital characteristics of the students involved. .The part which follows will present an analysis of their high school background and.their first year college record to determine to what extent the schol- arship student is prepared for college work. The academic background of the students whose records are studied here is presented first by an analysis of the types of high schools from which they came. By types of schools is meant whether they are accredited by the North Central Association, the University of Michigan, or approved by the Michigan State Department of Public Instruction, or neither or all. An accredited high school, is one whose course offerings, physical facilities, and instructional staff meet certain standards set by the State Department of Public Instruction and the University of Michigan is the official accrediting agency in the State.11 A high school which is accredited by the North Central k IIInformation secured from.the Registrar, Michigan State College. 92 Association is supposedly a superior high school.12 There are 244 high schools in Michigan accredited by the North Central Association and 611 high schools acoredited.by both the Nerth Central Association and the University of Michigan.13 All of the high schools but 10 represented in this study were accredited by the University of Michigan. Out of 586 students represented in this study, 397, or 68 per cent, came from high schools accredited by the North Central Association. From the group of 158 who lost their scholarships, 85, or 54 per cent, were from North Central accredited schools. From the renewal group of 195 students, 152 or 78 per cent were from North Central schools. These data clearly show that scholarship students from North Central accredited schools have greater chances of survival in college. The students who retain their scholarships evi— dently come from high schools which more adequately pre— pare their graduates for college work. These schools, lz'The criteria for accreditation of a secondary school today recognize the fact that, in addition to meet- ing certain standards such as qualification of personnel, adequacy of building, equipment, library, and length of school year, the school should meet the needs not only of those continuing their formal education, but also those who will drop out or end their formal education upon gradu- ation.“ From the Annual Report of the Bureau of School _§ervices', University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1950, p. 11. 131.00. cit., p. 18. 93 generally speaking, are those accredited by the North Central Association of Secondary Schools and Cblleges. 0f the 386 students represented in this study of scholarship students, 380 of them came from schools which were accredited by the University of Michigan. From this number, 191 schools were represented by a student who did not renew his scholarship. This constitutes exactly 50 per cent of the schools accredited by the University of Michigan represented.by at least one student who did not earn a renewal of his scholarship award. This is shown graphically in Figure 7. .P. e .04 . 94 A | 157 or 45 % lost their scholarships 85 or 57 % r" lost their gf‘ scholarships 191 or 55 % 152 or 65 % renewed their renewed their scholarships scholarships 348 students from .237 students from schools accredited schools accredited by the University also by the North of Michigan Central Association FIGURE 7 CHART SHOWING PERCENTAGES OF ACCREDITED SCHOOLS REPRESENTED BY THE RENEWAL AND CANCELLATION STUDENTS 95 TABLE XVIII THE ACCREDITED HIGH SCHOOLS REPRESENTED IN THIS STUDY Group U of‘M N C A Neither Tbtal Withdrawal 32 21 l 33 Cancellation 157 85 l 158 Renewal 191 152 4 195 Regular 196 139 4 200 Two hundred fifty—eight students came from schools which were accredited by the North Central Association. From this number, 85 schools were represented by a student who did not renew his scholarship. This constitutes 33 per cent. It appears that students from the North Central Asso- ciation schools have a greater chance of renewing their scholarships than do students coming from schools not ac- credited by this agency. Eicher reached a similar conclur sion in his study relative to the college success of students from North Carolina high schools. The highest accrediting agency in North Carolina is the Southern Associ- ation and Eicher states that, "The college achievement of students from Southern Association Schools is in general superior to that of students from non—member schools.'14 l4Eicher, 9_p_. cit., p. 122. 96 Colleges in the past specified certain courses or sequences of courses under the heading of ”college entrance requirements“ and high schools offered but two high school‘ curriculums; the college preparatory and the non-academic. At present it is pessible for students to graduate from high school with a minimum number of required subjects and a choice of several curriculums. Since 1946 it has been possible for graduates of accredited high schools in Michigan to enter college under the college agreement plan. This plan is explained on page 7 and disregards the pattern of subjects pursued. Some high schools will permit stup dents to graduate with vocational or technical curriculums which are distinctly non-academic and do not necessarily prepare students for college. The students whose high school records are reviewed in this study are classified as having pursued one of three courses: (1) the college preparatory course, (2) the col- lege agreement plan, or (3) the non—college course. The student's application for admission to college provides a space for the high school principal to indicate the type of curriculum pursued. In many instances the principal neglected to fill in this part of the application. Prac- tically every student pursued the college preparatory course in high school. Only 5 of the total entered Michigan State College under the College Agreement Plan while 6 of the scholarship students entered college having taken the 97 non—college course in high school. Four of the latter 6 failed to renew their scholarships at the end of the freshman year. TABLE XIX COURSE PURSUED IN HIGH SCHOOL sa======================== College College Non—college No Group Preparatory Agreement Course Comment Withdrawal 30 l 2 0 Cancellation 140 2 4 12 Renewal 167 2 2 24 Regular 169~ l 10 20 The high school principal is also asked to recom- mend his graduates for college. Occasionally we find an inconsistency between the grade needed for recommendation and the actual recommendation for some principals do not follow their own codes. Every high school sets up a standp ard of achievement necessary to receive the recommendation of the administrator for college work. The principal is asked to recommend the graduate in one of the fellowing categories: (1) clear, (2) with examinations, or (3) not to recommend him at all. An examination of Table xx reveals the fact that principals were very reluctant to mark the ”not—recommended“ column so made no comment at all. If we assume that failure to mark either of the 3 categories was equivalent to not— 98 reCommending the graduate at all, then 38 of the students admitted on scholarship were not recommended for college by their high school principals. TABLE XI RECOMMENDATIONS GIVEN BY HIGH SCHOOL PRINCIPALS With Not No Group Clear examination recommended comment Withdrawal 31 0 0 2 Cancellation 141 1 0 16 Renewal 175 o o ' 20 Regular . 147 25 4 19 _.______L.________L_________..______ Table XXI reveals that about one—fourth of the schools require a "B” average in high school and two-thirds require a '0' average in order to be recommended to college. The writer discovered that many principals disregard the “grade required for recommendation to college” when they mark the recommendation category. 99 TABLE XXI GRADES REQUIRED FOR RECOMMENDATI ON TO COLLEGE B rade C rade D rade No comment Group 11* /a n 2% n 7o n cancellation 51 330 3 95 60.1 5 30 2 7 4. 4 Renewal 54 27.7 133 6707 3 1.5 6 301 Regular 1 25.5 144 72.0 4 2.0 1 .5 ’n represents number There is a place on the application-for-admission blank which asks the administrator to state his opinion of the quality of work he thinks the student will perform in college. Table XXII summarizes these opinions. TABLE XXII AN INDICATION OF HOW WELL SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS WILL PERFORM IN COLLEBE MW Group Excellent Satisfactory Average Inferior Failure Withdrawal 3 19 11 0 0 Cancellation 10 97 33 \ 1 .k\0 Renewal 50 127 17 ’L‘ o 'o About one-fourth of those scholarship students who were expected to do excellent work in college failed to re— new their scholarships and 40 per cent of all scholarship 100 students who were expected to do satisfactory work in col- lege on the basis of their principal's recommendation failed to renew their scholarships. The students who re- newed their scholarships at the end of their freshman year had higher prediction ratings by their principals than did the students of the cancellation group. The principal's recommendation and the principal's prediction of quality of work are not true indices of college success. An examination of the table which follows reveals a few of the inconsistencies between the principal's recommendation, his expectations, and the actual performance of the student. 101 mwmnmpm =0: n ma w>¢ scmtpu o.H whoops eds unmacmpm ma w>¢ pmmlpo o.m m.H H.m es.eem +0 shoeosamehem a mmm\mm em w. o.m as.oom m auoeeecmapem m sm\am ma m. m.a as.oom 552 o shoposamaesm a mmm\se sma m.H o.m es.obm o pebaaooam o me\H «ma m. o.m es.ebm o eebaamoam n mm\m mna o. m.a as.omm m omshee<_ m soa\mm mma m. o.a as.oem m eemssoe oz 0 mm\mm awe H.H H.H .sb ache com o soaheaeH m mwa\mm oma H.H s.H as.oeh 502 m assumes. m nma\em was s. w.a es.oom m ewehoea o en\s soa ¢.H m.H 68.0mm m muopommmapmm o 04\0H Hm o.H o.H e.seoa 502 m asoeoeamaesm o mn\o om n.a m.m as.omm o eebaabeam a ooa\m ma m.a m.m as.oom m peoaaeesm o mM\e cm s. e.a e.soeh 502 m smasher a mm\m Hm n.H m.m as.eem o hemaaooxm o me\e mm mam pcmupo w>< cmmncw coapom and.soomm ed on Hoomom mmeHo hmbEmz emoaaoo Hooaem ewem m.HseseeHsm soc mamas amoebaxm we seem as seem heoeshm mesmepem mHmmrahomom ass a so mmeammee zasmmmma n24 .ZOHaoe.m.qamHoszm .nmoomm geomom meHm HHHxK mamde 102 Table XXIII presents a thumb-nail summary of the records of a few scholarship students showing rank in graduating class, size of high school, principal's predic- tion and.principal's action, high school grade—point average, and college grade-point average. The table is read as follows: Student Number 90 ranked 6th in his class of 35 which is a Class C school, was expected to do satisfactory work in college, attained a ”0+” average in high school, was not recommended by his high school prinn cipal,for he had not attained the grade of "B" which is necessary for recommendation to college. He was admitted on scholarship and earned a 1.0 average in college which is a straight '0“ average. Because he did not attain a 1.6 average the scholarship award was not renewed for this student. A Is there any significant difference in the high school background or preparation of the members of the two groups of scholarship students? As has already been pointed «out, 51 per cent of the cancellation group came from Class C and Class D high schools,while 60 per cent of the :renewal group came from Class A and Class B high schools. The marks earned in high school were taken from the student's application blank to the Registrar of the College. A value of 3 points was assigned for every ”A“ received in high school, a value of 2 points for every “3", a value of 103 1 point for every "C", no points for the “D's“, and a minus 1 point for each failing mark. The total number of points was divided by the total number of credits earned to obtain a grade point average. In other words, the average is determined by dividing the number of honor points by the total number of marks.15 When this is done for all the 586 students we find quite a variation among the scholarship students. The members of the renewal group were much superior to the members of the cancellation group as far as their high school preparation is concerned when measured in terms of high school marks. The cancellation students had a grade point averageof 2.199 while the renewal students had a grade point average of 2.546. The members of the regular group had a high school average of 1.730 while the members of the withdrawal group averaged 2.260. The high school grade point averages are summarized in Table XXIV. 15For example, if a student had 17 A's, 8 B's, 7 C's, and 2 D's, his average would be figured as follows: (17 x 3) 4. (8 x 2) 4 (7 x l) 4- (2 x 0) a 74 points. The total number of points, 74, is now divided by the total Inmnber of marks, 34, to obtain the grade point average. In this case we obtain an average of 2.2. 104 TABLE XXIV HIGH SCHOOL GRADE POINT AVERAGES Group Average Withdrawal 2.260 Cancellation 2.199 Renewal 2.546 Regular 1.730 0n the transcript of credits which is forwarded to the Registrar of the College, the student's high school marks are grouped into 7 categories. These are: I, English; II, Languages; III, Mathematics; IV, Physical Sciences; V, Social Sciences; VI, Vbcational; and VII, Miscellaneous. Many of the transcripts studied showed that students did not necessarily take subjects from all of these categories. An analysis of these marks was made on the fol— lowing basis: If a student had more A's in a subject than B's, he was given an An average, if he had more B's than A's, he was given a B+ in that subject, and if he had the same number of A's, B's, and C's in the same subject he was given a B average in that subject. In this way the marks of all the 586 students were averaged.16 These marks were summarized in marks of A, B, C, D, and F only and are presented in Table XXV. 16Fbr a break—down of marks into the 7 categories see Appendix H. TABLE XXV COMPOSITE HIGH SCHOOL AVERAGES OF ALL FOUR GROUPS Number of Group students -Number 9f marks A B 0 pp. F Withdrawal 33 66 115 26 0 0 Cancellation 158 277 551 135 6 0 Renewal 195 688 513 42 5 0 Regular 200 168 498 427 95 3 Tbtals 586 $199 1677 630 109. 3 Let us apply the chi-square test to determine whether the differences between the theoretical and the ob- served frequencies of marks can reasonably be attributed to chance variations in sampling. In other words, are the marks of the students in the various groups distributed in the same preportion as the total marks are distributed? In this table we throw the frequencies of the last call into cell D making a 4x4 table with 9 degrees of freedom. From these data we obtain a chi-square of over 959. This means that a 7L? as large as 959 would occur not more than‘once in 11X) samples if our hypothesis were true. Therefore we re- ject the hypothesis that the marks of the students are distributed in the same preportion as the total marks and conclude that there is significant difference in the marks 106 obtained by the members of the various groups of students. It was pointed out previously that not every stu- dent had taken subjects from each of the 7 subject fields. This fact was most noticeable in the language section where it was discovered that only 66.5 per cent of the cancellation students had studied foreign language in high school while 83.5 per cent of the renewal students had taken one or more languages in high school. This may indicate one of two things; either those students who studied language in high school were very superior students scholastically, or that because these students studied foreign language in high school they were able to earn the 1.6 average in college and thus retain their scholarships. There is not enough evidence to sup- port either of these conjectures, and the statistics at hand are not adequate to prove that scholarships are re- newed because the students studied foreign language in high school, or that scholarships are cancelled because the students did not study language in high school. The college grade point averages were obtained for all mem- bers of the groups who had studied language in high school and for those who had not studied language in high school. In every one of the 4 groups of students we find higher grade point averages for those students who studied foreign language in high school.‘ Eicher's study revealed that students who studied Latin and French in high school showed 107 the best achievement in college.17 However, he did not show that the high scholarship achievement in college was due to the fact that the students studied foreign language in high school. The data presented.and analyzed in this chapter concern the high school backgrounds of the 586 students whose records are one of the main sources of information for this investigation. Inasmuch as the conclusions of this study are given in a chapter by themselves, it is sufficient to state here that the academic success of freshmen in college is definitely related to the size of high school from which they were graduated. The chapter which follows will be devoted to a presentation and analysis of the first year college records of the scholarship students. This is the second phase of the investigation. 17 mCher, 0.120 913., p0 7110 CHAPTER VI PRESENTATION AND ANALYSIS OF THE FIRST YEAR COLLEGE RECORDS OF THE 553 STUDENTS The discussion so far has presented the background of the scholarship students leading up to their matricula- tion at college. Characteristics relating to their social and academic records have been analyzed. This chapter will present an analysis of the academic success of these stup dents during their freshman year atMichigan State College. This analysis will reveal how well these students were pre- pared for college by their respective high schools and how well they adjusted themselves to college life. The first data that can be presented to throw light on this subject are the scores which these students made on the American Council Psych010gical Examination adminis- tered by the college during the week of registration. The test is composed of the following sections: Q—score: Measures abilities in quantitative thinking L—score: Measures linguistic abilities Total score: Measures general college ability V—score: Measures general reading vocabulary Rpecore: Measures speed of reading and comprehension C—score: Measures level of student‘s ability to read Total score: Measures general reading ability fit )I .m, .‘a 109 median . _ 9. ob c'.d J (a) (b) (e) (d) 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 D e c i 1 e 3 represents general reading average for the cancel- lation group, 4.6 decile represents general intelligence average for the cancellation group, 5.1 decile represents general reading average for the renewal group, 7.4 decile represents general intelligence average for the renewal group, 7.5 decile FIGURE 8 THE DECILE DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGE TEST SCORES 110 The scores which the students obtained on this test were tabulated by deciles1 from which the following con- clusions were drawn: (1) the members of the renewal group were highly superior to all other groups on the basis of these intelligence scores, (2) their general reading abil- ity and their general intelligence level both averaged in the 7th decile, (3) the members of the cancellation group were no better than the regular group for they ranked in the 5.1 decile in general intelligence against a rank of 5.0 for the regular students, and (4) the cancellation group ranked in the 4.6 decile in reading ability against a 5.2 ability for the regular group. TABLE XXVI DECILE AVERAGES ON THE PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS 'General General Group Intelligence Reading Withdrawal 5.485 5.121 Cancellation 5.108 4.639 Renewal 7.526 7.354 Regular ' 5.021 ' 5.154 The tenth decile contains the upper 10 per cent of 1A decile grouping represents 10 per cent of the total group. A first decile rating places an individual in the lowest 10 per cent of the group. 111 the students and the fifth decile contains those students ranking between the 40th and 50th percentile. Thus anyone ranking in the fifth decile is just below the median of the group. Figure 8 reveals graphically that over half of the cancellation students scored in the lower 40 per cent of the entire Freshman Class on the general reading test. Table XXVII shows such a big difference between the means of the two groups that we must test the difference between the means. TABLE XXVI I STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF THE DECILE DISTRIBUTIONS General Intelligence General Reading, Group E 0's: i a} Cancellation 5.108 0197 4.539 0803 Renewal 7.526 .166 7.354 .163 The t test between the standard errors of the means of the general intelligence examinations gives a t_value of £3.37 and.the t test between the standard errors of the means of the general reading examinations gives a 3 value of 10.44. Botli of these results are highly significant at the 1 per cent level of confidence and clearly reveal that the students iil'the cancellation group are below average in both general intelligence and general reading ability on the PsycholOgical Examinations administered to 3708 freshmen. 112 TABLE XXVIII FREQUENCIES OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TEST SCORES TABULATED BY DECILES Below average i Above average Deciles 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Withdrawal Intell. 5 1 4 4 4 2 4 0 4 5 Reading 5 5 2 3 2 3 o 5 4 3 Qgpcellation Intell. 10 14 26 23 12 17 .28 10 11 6 Reading 18 25 14 20 22 14 17 17 7 4 Renewal Intell. 3 5 5 ll 11 16 23 42 32 45 Reading 1 2 11 15 14 19 25 25 41 39 Regular Intell. 22 23 26 24 21 8 21 25 13 12 Reading 22 24 16 23 19 27 28 12 13 15 The table above clearly shows the superiority of the renewal group over any other group but.is shown still more emphatically in the break-down which follows. NO "106852 ac+bcbcbfic+u 50r 40’ 20' 10- 113 Cancellation students ---- Renewal students 1 2 5 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 D e c i l e s FIGURE 9 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF DECILE SCORES ON THE GENERAL INTELLIGENCE TEST HO ROGER-72 uc+5 <3 3: <3 0: <3 c> :4 s4 14 c> cm a: .a a: <3 a: (A .3 31 31 29 29 24 17 8 15 11 12 8 10 5 12 3 16 18 14 3 12 3 14 10 24 9 21 20 11 6 8 7 11 10 4 8 9 2 O 1 1 3 1 2 6 10 l 1 4 O 4 5 O 2 3 2 2 3 1 O O W 137 The basic college plan provides that every freshman at Michigan State complete a year's work in a choice of five of seven fields of study as described on page 4. At the end of the year, or sooner if he is able and.obtains permission, the student writes off the comprehensive exami- nation for credit in the course. The term-end grade, which is the mark received at the end of the third term, is the mark recorded for the student for his year's work. If a student has two terms of "B“ work in written and Spoken Emglish for example, and receives a “C” at the end of the third term he receives 9 hours credit of “C“ work. Con- versely, if a student receives a “C" and a ”B“ and then receives an “A“ for the final term he will receive 9 hours credit of "A“ work. The system of marking has both advan— tages and disadvantages, both proponents and Opponents, and has earned some disfavcr among the students.4 It has been suggested by both faculty and students “that if the marks given out for the separate term's work Yvere used as the basis for determining the renewal of the eschclarship, then many of those whose scholarships were (zancelled would not have had them cancelled. It has been (alaimed that this marking system is one of the reasons why so many students lost their awards. 4See results of question 13 in the next chapter. 138 An examination of the marks given out in the basic subjects reveals that if the marks given for the separate term's work were used instead of the comprehensive mark for determining a student's honor point average, then 16 scholarship students who lost their scholarships would not have lost them. These 16 students would have earned the 1.6 honor point average and with it the continuation of the tuition—free award. In like manner, if the marks for the separate terms were used for all the other scholarship students then 16 of those whose scholarships were renewed would have lost enough honor points to bring their honor point average below the 1.6 required for renewal and they would have lost their scholarship awards. Thus, were the system changed for the purpose of determining the requirements for the renewal of the scholarships, there would be neither a gain nor loss as far as this group of 386 scholarship students ‘16 concerned. The percentages of cancellations and re- liewals would remain the same. Therefore the comprehensive Inarking system is not a cause of scholarship cancellations fbr while it jeopardizes some, it favors others. This chapter presents the records of the scholarship students through their freshman year. These records ‘1nc1ude the scores made on the Psychological Examinations, the average number of credits and honor points earned during the year, examples of students' entire academic 139 records for the year, enrollments of the students by Schools, distribution of "D's" and ”F's" by Schools and by courses, analysis of the students' declared majors, and analysis of the comprehensive marking system as it affected these scholarship students. Inasmuch as the conclusions of this study will be listed in Chapter VIII they will not be summarized here. There is one more statistic that ought to be pre— sented here though it has no direct bearing on the study. The records of these students were obtained in the fall of 1950 and it was convenient to determine which students re— turned to Michigan State for their second year. The in— vestigator wanted to know how many of these students who, having lost their scholarships, returned to the campus to further their education. Among the cancellation group, 116 returned for their sOphomore year. This constitutes 73 per cent. These students were able to return to study at Michigan State without the tuition-free award. Does ‘this mean that they would have come as freshmen if the scholarship award had not been granted them? Are there several students studying at State under the scholarship ‘system who are financially able to pay all of their own ‘way? Among the renewal group there were 169 out of 195 'wmo returned the second year. This is a percentage of 86.7. Among the regulars this percentage was 69.5. Inasmuch as 73 percent of the cancellation students returned 140 to Michigan State College the second year,it appears that the loss of the scholarship did not prove a financial handicap, neither did it abate their desire for an edu- cation. The table which follows presents this information and concludes the chapter. TABLE XLI V NUMBER.OF STUDENTS WHO RETURNED FOR THEIR SECOND YEAR Total Number Per Cent Group number returning of total Cancellation 158 116 73.4 Renewal 195 169 86.7 Regular 200 139 69.5 CHAPTER VII RESULTS OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE Since the purpose of this investigation is to find out why 41 per cent of the freshmen admitted to Michigan State College on scholarships fail to renew them at the end of the first year, the writer felt that perhaps the best source of information regarding causes for these shortcomings was the student himself. With this end in mind the writer prepared and sent a total of 462 question— naires. It was stated at the outset that this investi— gation would be divided into three phases. The adminis— tration of the questionnaires is the third phase. The questionnaires were prepared in the following manner: lst step: The writer arranged for interviews with 10 scholarship students who had lost their scholarships but Ihad returned to Michigan State College as sOphomores. These interviews usually took place in the reception room <3f the student's dormitory by appointment and were held immediately fellowing the evening meal. The interviewer informed the interviewees of his purpose and discussed in- formally the following subjects: place of residence . during the freshman year, study habits and study facilities, 142 social activities, courses, major field of study, college administration, outside employment, emotional instability, likes and dislikes, counseling, high school background, and college life in general during their first year in college. The students were very much at ease and offered many help- ful suggestions to the writer. 2nd step: Following the interviews the writer drew up a trial questionnaire with questions grouped under the fol- lowing main headings: (a) Preparation by the high school (b) Application to college studies (0) Quality of college instruction (d) Environment of the campus The names of 12 members of the cancellation group were selected at random and the trial questionnaire sent. A letter of explanation1 and a self addressed stamped envelope accompanied each questionnaire.2‘ Within two weeks replies were received from 8 of the 12 students. 3rd step: After careful examination of these results and lanalysis of the suggestions made thereon, the questionnaire 'was revised.and submitted again to another group of 12 cancellation students selected at random. Again a letter 1For copy of the letter see Appendix I. 2For copy of the questionnaire see Appendix J. 143 of explanation3 and a self addressed stamped envelope ac- companied the questionnaire.4 This time 9 replies were received. 4th step: The results from the 9 replies seemed to indi- cate that the questionnaire was ready for distribution to the members of the cancellation group. To make certain that there were no ambiguities in the questionnaire it was submitted to a jury of 7 professors at Michigan State Col- lege and to the Assistant Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Michigan. A few minor changes were suggested and.the alterations made. 5th step: The questionnaire5 was mimeographed and sent with a letter of explanations and self addressed stamped envelope to all 158 members of the cancellation group on March 1, 1951. Within two weeks 72 questionnaires had been completed and returned. 6th step: On March 15, 86 one—cent postal cards were sent to those who had not returned the completed form.7 3For copy of the letter see Appendix E. 4For cepy of the questionnaire see Appendix L. 5For 60py of the questionnaire see Appendix M. 6For copy of the letter see Appendix N. 7 For copy of the postal card.message see Appendix 0. ' 144 7th step: Between March 15 and.March 29 the writer re— ceived 39 additional completed forms. On the latter date he sent postal cards again to 20 individuals who had not returned to study at Michigan State College and made 24 telephone calls to students living on or in the vicinity of the campus. By April 8, 1951, the writer had received 125 usable replies out of 158 questionnaires sent. This constitutes a return of 79.1 per cent on the questionnaires sent to those students who did not renew their scholarships. Four of the replies were not usable. One mother wrote that her son was in the army, one informed the writer that her daughter had passed away during the summer, one girl told the writer over the telephone that she was “most unwilling to co-operate,“ and one mother wrote that her son did not lose his scholarship but left Michigan State College because of a misunderstanding with the foot-. 'ball coach. However the College Record Office reveals evidence that her son had a 1.1 average in high school, 'was recommended to be admitted to college by examination, ‘was expected to do inferior work in the opinion of his high school principal, and finished the freshman year with 46% credits and 49% honor points for an average of 1.1 honor points per credit hour. His scholarship was not renewed. 145 The questionnaire was not sent to the members of the withdrawal group because of their irregular periods of attendance at Michigan State College. These students would be unable to answer many of the questions on the questionnaire and since the information would be incom- plete it was considered.inadvisable to send the question- naire. With a few minor changes, however, it was applicable to the members of the renewal group and the regular group. On April 9, 1951, Fbrm 2 of the questionnaire8 was sent to the 169 members of the renewal group who had re— turned to the campus for further study. It was felt that those who had not returned to make use of their awanmzwere probably in the armed forces and couldn't be reached easily. However, the 169 constitute 87 per cent of the entire group, so the questionnaire reached seven-eighths of the members of this group. The percentage of questionnaires returned is directly proportional to the type of individual receiving ‘them. The writer sent 169 questionnaires to the students <3f the renewal group and received 153 replies. This con- :stitutes a return of 90.5 per cent and.was accomplished ‘wdthout any kind of follow-up whatsoever. This may be another indication of the favorable type of individual the 8See Appendix P. 146 renewal scholarship student really is. Of the 200 regular students whose records are studied in the investigation, only 139, or 69.5 per cent, returned to the campus to study the next year. On April 23, 1951, the questionnaire,9 with minor changes, was mailed to 136 students and from them only 77 replies were received. This constitutes 56.6 per cent and is about what is expected statistically from any type of survey. TABLE XLV RETURNS RECEIVED ON QUESTIONNAIRES y’— i—w Number Number Per cent Group sent returned returned Cancellation 158 125 79.1 Renewal 169 153 90.5 Regular 136 77 56.6 Total 463 355 76.7 The over—all average of 76 per cent return on the questionnaire appears to be highly satisfactory. The remainder of this part of the study will be de- voted to an analysis of the questions and the replies to the questions by the members of the various groups. Inasmuch 9 See Appendix Q. Kl 147 as both the questions and the distribution of the replies to the questions must be recorded in this section of the study it appears advisable to combine both into tabular form. Therefore, each title of the following tables will be in question form. TABLE XLVI QUESTION 1. WAS THE TOTAL PROGRAM OF YOUR.HIGH SCHOOL SUFFICIENT TO PREPARE ONE FOR COLLEGE? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 71 56.8 54 43.2 Renewal 153 120 78.4 33 , 21.6 Regular 77 46 59.7 31 40.3 All groups 355 237 66.8 118 33.2 Though 56 per cent of the cancellation students were satisfied with their high school pragram of studies we find that the 3 test gives us a value of t n 3.93 and definitely proves that there is significant difference between the cancellation and renewal groups in this category. 148 TABLE XLVII QUESTION 2. DO YOU FEEL THAT YOU, PERSONALLY, WERE PREPARED TO COPE WITH THE DEMANDS MADE ON COLLEGE FRESHMEN? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 80 64.0 44 35.2 Renewal 153 138 90.2 15 9.8 Regular 77 55 71.4 22 28.6 All groups 355 273 76.9 81 22.8 There is significant difference between the cancel- lation group and the renewal group at the one per cent level, for we obtain a t.va1ue of 5.24. There is signifi— cant difference between the renewal and the regular groups for we obtain a 3_value of 3.36. But there is no differ- ence between the cancellation and the regular groups for we obtain a 3_value of 1.12 which is not significant. It ap- pears that over 90 per cent of those who renewed their scholarships felt prepared to meet the responsibilities and the demands made on college freshmen, while only 64 per cent of those whose scholarships were cancelled felt that they were prepared to do likewise. 149 TABLE XLVIII QUESTION 3. DO YOU THINK THAT YOU WERE PREPARED TO MEET THE ACADEMIC DEMANDS MADE ON COLLEGE FRESHMEN? WW“. Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 95 76.0 30 24.0 Renewal 153 142 92.8 11 7.2 Regular 77 57 74.0 20 26.0 All groups 355 294 84.8 61 15.2 This question is similar to the preceding one but stresses the preparation to meet the class—room demands of their college classes. Ninety-two per cent of the re- newal students felt that they were prepared to do the work required of them in college and only'76zof the cancel- lation students were confident to do the same. Statistic- ally there is significant difference between the two groups for we obtain a t,value of 3.11. It is interesting to note that over 84 per cent of the entire group interviewed felt that they were prepared to carry out the academic demands of their college program. QUESTION 4. TABLE XLIX 150 WAS THE SIZE OF YOUR SCHOOL A HANDICAP TO YOUR ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT AS A COLLEGE STUDENT? W Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 47 37.6 78 62.4 Renewal '153 24 15.7 129 84.3 Regular 77 16 20.8 61 79.2 All groups 355 87 24.5 268 75.5 -‘__ -; Thirty~seven per cent of the cancellation students felt that the size of their school we. a handicap to them. All 87 who answered this question in the affirmative stated that their high school was too small. It was shown in Chapter V that 51 per cent of the cancellation group came from Class C and Class D high schools. The 3_test of signtficance gives a §,va1ue of 4.06 and reveals significant difference between the cancellation and the renewal groups. P 151 TABLE L QUESTION 5. DID YOU RECEIVE ADEQUATE EDUCATIONAL GUIDANCE IN HIGH SCHOOL? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 74 59.2 49 39.2 Renewal 153 102 66.7 48 31.2 Regular 77 46 59.7 31 40.3 All groups 355 222 62.5 128 37.5 —__——_—L_-—__._— There is no significant difference between the can- cellation and renewal groups. we obtain a 3 value of 1.34 which is not significant. Only 39 per cent of the cancel— lation students said that they did not receive adequate educational guidance in high school against a percentage of 31 for the renewal students. In the over—all group we find that 37.5 per cent of the students did not receive adequate educational guidance in high school. This means 3 out of every 8 students involved were not satisfied with their high school guidance prOgram. QUESTION 6. TABLE LI 152 IN WHAT AREAS DO YOU CONSIDER YOUR HIGH SCHOOL PROGRAM STRONG? Number of times mentioned by Fhe Area Cancel- lation Renewal Regular Total ro .grggpp agroup group Mathematics 36 47 24 107 Engli sh 24 44 22 90 Science 26 36 12 74 College Preparatory 8 32 5 45 Social Science 9 l4 3 26 History 13 7 5 25 Commercial . 12 7 6 25 Ex-Class Activity 5 8 4 17 Heme Economics 10 2 2 14 Literature 3 5 4 12 Language 4 4 3 11 Chemistry 2 5 3 10 Physical Education 7 0 2 9 Guidance 1 3 4 8 ateech l 2 4 7 Agriculture 2 3 1 6 Vbcational 2 3 0 6 Music 1 4 l 6 NOne l l 4 6 Good teachers 1 3 1 5 Biology 2 2 O 4 Good variety 1 2 1 4 Physics 3 0 O 3 General Courses 0 2 0 2 Miscellaneous 6 9 6 ‘21 (1 each) . This table reveals that Mathematics, English, Sci- ence, and the College Preparatory subjects generally were considered by the scholarship students to be the strongest in their respective high schools. A look at the next tabu— lation reveals that these same subjects were listed as 153 being the weakest in the high school program, too. One of the implications which can be drawn from these data is the‘ fact that students still judge a school program in terms of the basic academic subjects: namely, Mathematics, English, and Science. Then, too, these subjects enroll a very high percentage of the entire high school pepulation and so should receive a large amount of commendation and criticism. QUESTION 7. IN WHAT AREAS DO YOU CONSIDER YOUR TABLE LII SCHOOL PROGRAM WEAK? 154 Area Number of times mentioned by Cancel- lation Renewal Regular Total (group group group .group English 30 22 14 66 Science 14 14 10 38 Mathematics 14 11 11 36 History 13 10 30 Social Science 11 14 28 Speech 12 24 Guidance 14 23 Language 13 21 How to Study 16 None 13 Chemistry 12 Literature Manual Training College Prep. Physical Educ. Commercial Responsibility Limited Curric. Grammar Home Economics Teaching ‘ School Adminis. Art Testing Program Too easy All How to read Physics How to think Soc'l Activity Spelling Miscellaneous (1 each) momoor—amoth-Joowomtummmcncsmu00410000 (IDOONNNHOOHPOJHOJHNONOPMCJJODO) @NOOOOOHWNOHHNNHPNGHUNNNI—‘I—‘thJ-xl pmmmmmmcepaeammmmqmmm H 155 TABLE LIII QUESTION 8. WHAT ADVICE CAN YOU GIVE TO THIS YEAR'S SCHOLAR— SHIP GROUP WHICH MIGHT ENABLE THEM TO EARN A RENEWAL OF THE SCHOLARSHIP AWARD? (CANCELLATION GROUP) Suggestions Number of times mentioned Establish effective means of study . . Set up a daily study schedule . . . . Take an easy schedule the first year . Seek help from instructors . . . . . Prepare thoroughly for the exams . . Take only a few basics the first year Try to adjust quickly . . . . . . . Take the right couISeS o o c o o o 0 Start studying early in the year . Realize that you are "on your own" Don't worry about your studies . . Try to concentrate when studying . Take only a few extra-class activit Put forth an extra effort . . . . Make use of the college library . Have properly balanced social life Remain on campus week-ends . . . . Do some outside reading . . . . . Stay'loose'........:.. StUdy With Others 3 o o 0 Take lots of Math. in high school Have seriousness of purpose . . . Know that success is an individual Improve Your ability to read . . . e a t r o o o o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o c o o o o o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o e o o e o o o o o o c o c c o o o o o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o e omeooooooeoooooocooooooo 8 t chooooooool—boooo An analysis of these remarks reveals that the major suggestion is in regard to the student's study program. Most of these students realized the importance of an effective program of study and offer as their best advice to other students the establishment of an effective program of study. 156 TABLE LIV QUESTION 8. WHAT ADVICE CAN YOU GIVE TO THIS YEAR'S SCHOLARSHIP GROUP WHICH MIGHT ENABLE THEM TO EARN A RENEWAL OF THE SCHOLARSHIP AWARD? (RENEWAL GROUP) Suggestions Number of times mentioned Keep your assignments up to date . . . . 43 Study hard 0 O O O O O O 0 O O O O 0 O O 28 Don't cut classes . . . . . . . . . . 11 Be interested in your class work . . . . 11 Balance your class and extra-class so i i i s . 11 Establish good study habits . . . . . . 10 Learn how to study-. . . . . . . . . . . Bear doWn the first year . . . . . . . . WOrk to your full capacity . . . . . . . mn‘tWOIIYOO 3.0030000 00 Take good notes in class . . . . . . . Take few extra—class activities . . . . Take advantage of all college service Wbrk hard on the comps . . . . . . . Try to adjuSt QUiCkly o c o o o o 0 Budget your time properly . . . . . Learn to relax e e o O o o o O o o 0 Speed up on your reading . . . . . . Make it your duty to earn a renewal Study courses as a whole . . . . . Grow up and try to be serious Be busy all the time . . . . . Keep above the l. 6 average . . Aim high . . . . . . . . . . Don' t do outside employment. . Study 3 hours weekly per credit Study at the library 0 o o o 0 Live on the campus . . . Take easy schedule the first year Take few basics the first year . . Try to get the general concepts . Don' t cram . . . . . . . . . . . Realize that learning is an individual matter .0000... cooooooocooooooooomoooocoeds... 000.000000000000000300000004000. cocoa-00003000000000.oooood-oooe 0.000.000.0030successooooomoooo O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O OOOOOOOOOOCOOOOOOCOOOOO0.0.00.... O o o o o o o o o o e o e o o 0 e o o o O o o o o o o o o o e o o o o o c o o o o o o c o o o c c o o e o O o o o o o o o o o e o o e e o o o o o o o o o o 0 0 o o o c o o o o o o o o o o o o c o o o o o o o o e o o o o o o o o o o o o O o o c o o o o o o O o o o HHHHHHHHHHHmmmmmacammmmmmmm 157 The students in the renewal group realize the im— portance of keeping up to date on required work and make this their primary suggestion to students studying on scholarships. Forty—three students stressed the importance of doing the tasks when they are assigned. The other sug- gestions high on their list were: to study hard, to attend classes regularly, and to establish good study habits. These are commendable suggestions. TABLE LV QUESTION 9. DID THECOLLEGE TAKE ADEQUATE STEPS TO PROPERLY ORIENT YOU TO COLLEGE LIFE? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 91 72.8 32 25.6 Renewal 153 120 78.4 30 19.6 Regular 77 62 80.5 14 18.2 All groups _ '355 273 76.9 76 21.4 L=====a=r aim—i=3“— The t test for significance between the cancellation and renewal groups gives a value of 1.12 which shows that there is no difference between those groups. It appears that over 70 per cent of each group were satisfied with the college orientation program. 158 TABLE LVI QUESTION 10. WERE YOU PROPERLY ENROLLED WITH RESPECT TO VARIETY OF COURSES, SCHEDULE OF CLASSES, ETC.? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 89 71.2 35 28.0 Renewal 153 132 86.3 21 13.7 Regular 77 64 83.1 12 15.6 All groups 355 285 80.3 78 19.1 Though 71 per cent Of the cancellation students felt that they were properly enrolled, we find that 86 per cent of the renewal students were satisfied in this respect. There is significant difference between the groups for we obtain a §_value of 3.08 which is significant at the one per cent level. 0f the total group, 80 per cent stated that they were properly enrolled. Those students who were not satisfied with the en- rollment procedures were asked to state what was wrong. These remarks are tallied in the following table. The cancellation students said that their load was too heavy and the renewal students stated that they thought the en— rollment officers lacked the pr0per information for enrollment purposes. TABLE LVII 159 QUESTION 11. IF YOU WERE NOT PROPERLY ENROLLED WITH RESPECT TO VARIETY OF COURSES, SCHEDULE OF CLASSES, ETC., WHAT WAS WRONG? :1 Comments r Number of times mentioned Can. Grasp Ren. Group Reg. Group Load too heavy Enrollment officers lacked the necessary information Lack of personal interest Enrolled in wrong courses Too many hours in classes Wrong type of counselor Enrolled in 4 basics Difficulties with registration Improperly advised Given wrong major Given wrong schedule Too light a load Too big a spread in locations Schedule too tough Too much free time Hurried through registration No variety of subjects . No time left for Frosh basketball, 6 HHOHNHHHNHONPWWCAO 1 OOOOOOHHNOWHHNNNG l oowoooowommwomwww As was pointed out previously, over 80 per cent of the group studied were satisfied with the enrollment pro- cedures. Therefore,the statistics presented in the previous table are too meager for any conclusive evidence. These statistics are given here because they should be of value to the enrollment officers of Michigan State and other col- leges. The evidence also proves that the students are well satisfied with the enrollment procedures. 160 TABLE LVIII QUESTION 12. WAS CLASS SIZE IN COLLEGE ANY HANDICAP TO YOU? AND IF SO, WHAT SIZE OF CLASS? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 28 22.4 96 76.8 Renewal 153 29 19.0 124 81.0 ' Regular 77 11 14.3 65 84.4 All groups 355 68 19.2 285- 80.3 The t_test between any two groups reveals no signifi— cant differences. The cancellation students were not handicapped by the size of class in which they were enrolled. Of those who answered yes, 13 of the cancellation students, 17 of the renewal students, and 8 of the regular students merely said that large classes were a handicap. 0f the re- maining 30 responses, 5 students said that classes over 30 were a handicap, 7 students said that classes over 50 were a handicap, and 4 students said that classes with more than 100 students were a handicap. 161 TABLE LIX QUESTION 13. WERE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE REGULATION REGARDING THE COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATIONS AND SUBSEQUENT MARKS IN THE BASICS? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 51 40.8 73 58.4 Renewal 153 93 60.8 59 38.6 Regular 77 42 54.5 34 44.2 All groups 355 186 52.4 166 46.8 There is significant difference between the cancel- lation and the renewal groups, for we obtain a 3_value of 3.45. It appears that only 41 per cent of the cancellation students are satisfied with the basic comprehensive system against a percentage of 61 for the renewal group. This dis- satisfaction with the basic marking system might be a contributing cause of poor work in those subjects. Those who do criticize the system state that it is unfair to base 9 credits of work on just one examination. They feel that too much weight is placed on the final exami- nation and no credit given at all for the marks which stu— dents earn at the ends of the separate terms. In this way they state that the system isnmfair. Their remarks are summarized in Table LX which follOws. 162 TABLE LX QUESTION 14. IF NOT SATISFIED, WHAT WAS WRONG? Number of times mentioned Comments Can. Ren. Reg. Group Group Group Too much weight on one examination 30 20 13 Unfair 5 6 9 Comps not related to class work 4 9 3 Whole marking system 14 9 8 Can't prepare for the comps 6 2 3 The courses are poor 4 4 3 Physical surroundings are bad 2 1 0 General attitude is bad 4 0 2 Big gamble re marks 2 2 0 TABLE LXI QUESTION 15. FOR.HOW LONG A TIME HAD YOU BEEN PLANNING TO ATTEND COLLEGE? Periods of preparation Group 6 yrs 4 yrs 2 yrs 1 yr 6 mo 3 mo 1 mo Cancellation 32 37 20 16 14 5 2 Renewal 64 58 10 6 11 3 1 Regular 28 27 7 11 O 3 C All groups 124 122 37 33 25 ,4 11 3 W a ”*4 163 It appears inadvisable to find averages for the various groups in view of the unequal intervals of time. It is sufficient to say that the members of the renewal group had been preparing for their college careers for a much longer time than the cancellation students were. Only 69 of the cancellation students had been preparing for college for at least 4 years while among the renewal group there were 122 out of 153 who knew all during their high school years that they were going to college some day. TABLE LXII QUESTION 16. DID YOUR PARENTS HELP YOU'PLAN YOUR HIGH SCHOOL EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 46 36.8 79 63.2 Renewal 153 58 37.9 95 62.1 Regular 77 37 48.1 39 50.6 All groups 355 141 39.7 312 60.0 The t test shows no significant difference between any two of the groups. QUESTION 17. TABLE LXIII 164 ARE YOUR.PARENTS IN FAVOR.OF YOUR ATTENDING COLLEGE? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 123 97.6 3 2.4 Renewal 153 151 98.7 2 1.3 Regular 77 76 98.7 0 0.0 The t test shows no significant difference between any two of the groups. QUESTION 18. TABLE LXIV IS YOUR FATHER A COLLEGE GRADUATE? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 27 21.6 97 77.6 Renewal 153 46 30.1 107 69.9 Regular 77 25 32.5 51 66.2 All groups 355 98 27.6 255 71.8 The t test shows no significant difference between any two of the groups. 165 TABLE LXV QUESTION 19. IS YOUR MOTHER A COLLEGE GRADUATE? Group‘ Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation -125 32 25.6 93 74.4 Renewal 153 38 24.8 115 75.2 Regular 77 18 23.4 58 75.3 All groups 355 88 24.8 266 74.9 The t test shows no significant difference between any two of the groups. TABLE LXVI QUESTION 20. DID YOU HAVE A REGULAR STUDY PROGRAM LAST YEAR? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 27 21.6 98 78.4 Renewal 153 54 35.3 99 64.7 Regular 77 26 33.8 50 64.9 All groups 355 107 30.1 247 69.6 as? A fij Only 21 per cent of the cancellation students had a regular study program during their freshman year. The‘t test shows significant difference between the cancellation and the renewal groups at the 5 per cent level. It is ob— served that 35 per cent of the renewal students maintained 166 a study schedule as freshmen. This fact has been expressed as a strong contributing factor both for the success of the renewal students and for the lack of success on the part of the cancellation students. Both groups state that new stu- dents should certainly set up a program for study and stick to it if they wish to renew their scholarships. TABLE LXVII QUESTION 21. DID YOU MAKE USE OF THE COLLEGE COUNSELING SERVICE LAST YEAR? Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 39 31.2 86 68.8 Renewal 153 64 41.8 89 58.2 Regular 77 30 39.1 46 59.7 All groups 355 133 37.5 221 62.3, The 3 test shows no significant difference between any two of the groups. It is interesting to note that the scholarship students did.not make much use Of the counsel- ing service at the college during their freshman year. Only 31 per cent of the cancellation students made use of this service while almost 42 per cent of the renewal stu- dents used the service. Of the entire group surveyed we find that 37.5 per cent, or 3 out of 8 students, made use of the Counseling service at the college. The distribution which follows shows the uses which students made of the service. TABLE LXVIII QUESTION 22. IF YOU MADE USE OF THE COUNSELING SERVICE, FOR WHAT PURPOSE? .3 Reason for using service 167 Frequencies by_grouns Can. Reno Reg. To take aptitude tests To discuss selection of a major To change major For needed guidance For adjustment purposes To discuss credits To select courses To check courses To discuss marks For information For personal help To discuss Speech difficulty To discuss veteran's problem To try to vary program of studies "Had no luck at all" H H 14 C) <3 <3 C) <3 a: ca .p P‘ a: .a e- O? 15 17 11 8 3 3 3 O l 1 l l O 1 O OOHONNHOJNOOOIrP-NCD QUESTION 23. TABLE LXIX 168 HOW MUCH TIME DID YOU SPEND STUDYING DURING THE DAYTIME LAST YEAR? Group Replies Frequencies by hours 0 1 2 3 4 5.. Avg hrs 0’5; Cancellation 125 11 20 48 29 13 4 2.2 .11 Renewal 153 13 48 56 26 6 3 1.8 .09 Regular 77 5 17 27 16 9 1 2.1 —- All groups 355 gf9 85 131 71 28 8 2.0 .— The statistics reveal that the average amount of time spent studying during the daytime was 2 hours for the entire group. The t test shows that there is no significant dif- ference between the cancellation and renewal groups for we obtain a t_value of —.4. It is assumed because the averages are so near alike that all three samples come from the same parent pOpulation. TABLE LXX 169 QUESTION 24. HOW MUCH TIME DID YOU SPEND PER WEEK STUDYING IN THE COLLEGE LIBRARY? M i” kw Frequencies of hours Group Replies 0 l 2 3 4—5 6—7 8+ Avg Cancellation 125 28 26 22 23 17 5 3 2.2 Renewal 153 42 34 32 20 14 3 6 1.9 Regular 77 20 15 15 12 9 3 2 2.0 All groups 355 90 75 69 55 40 ll 11 2.0 mmlmwmlgmlhm The interesting statistic obtained from this question reveals that these freshmen students whose records are studied in this investigation Spent on the average of 2 hours studying in the library per week. The t test shows no sig— nificant differences between any two of the groups. QUESTION 25. TABLE LXXI 170 WAS THERE ANY CLASS OR COURSE WHICH YOU LET SLIDE BECAUSE OF LACK OF INTEREST (a) IN THE SUBJECT? (b) IN THE INSTRUCTOR? (0) OR BECAUSE OF POOR INSTRUCTION? (a) (b) (c) Group - Yes NO Yes No Yes No Cancell. 8C or 71%' 33 64 or 81% 40 81 or 78% 26 Renewal 77 or 54% 65 78 or 48% 78 65 or 48% 71 Regular 55 or 77% 16 33 or 53% 29 36 or 58% 26 All groups 212 114 157 147 182 123 *Percentages are baséd on total replies to the ques- tion. The majority of these students answered in the affirm- ative in 7 of the 9 categories. In the total group picture we find that in all three instances the students were inat- tentive to their college work because of lack of interest and because of faulty instruction in some particular class. QUESTION 26. TABLE LXXII WERE YOUR ABSENCES FROM COLLEGE CLASSES EXCESSIVE, MODERATE, OR INFREQUENT? Group Replies Excessive Moderate Infrequent Cancellation 125 3 32 90 Renewal 153 4 44 105 Regular 77 l 25 49 All groups 355 8 101 244 From these data it Seems safe to conclude that 171 absences from classes did not contribute to the cancel- lation of scholarships. QUESTION 27. HOW MANY TIMES PER TERM DID YOU SPEND THE TABLE LXXIII WEEK-END AWAY FROM YOUR REGULAR PLACE OF RESIDENCE? Frequency of number of times Group Replies 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 12 Cancellation 125 16 9 26 29 21 5 9 l l 1 2 4 Renewal 153 14 22 35 45 15 8 5 0 l 3 4 0 Regular 77 7 8 7 19 16 10 2 2 1 3 O 0 All groups 355 B? 39 68 83 52 2:5 18 :5 3 7 6 4 The averages in the respective groups are 3.22, 2.82, and 3.30 with a mode of 3 times per term for each of the three groups. respectively 6.7, 3.6, and 4.2 with standard deviations of 2.6, 1.9, and 2.1. significant differences between any two of the groups. The variance( 0'1) for the three groups are The 1 test of significance shows no TABLE LXXIV QUESTION 28. 172 DID THE SUBJECTS TAKEN IN YOUR.FRESHMAN YEAR CONTRIBUTE TO THE ATTAINMENT OF YOUR PLANS? Group Replies Yes Per centT No Per cent Cancellation 125 69 55.2 55 44.0 Regular 77 43 55.8 28 ‘33.8 This question was not included on the questionnaire to the renewal students for it was felt that they would be quite well satisfied with their academic program. It ap- pears from these data, that the cancellation and.the regular students were satisfied, too. The 3 test reveals no sig- nificant difference between these two groups. TABLE LXXV QUESTION 29 (3). IN WHAT PARTICULAR AREA COULD YOUR CAMPUS LIFE HAVE BEEN IMPROVED BY YOURSELF? Number of times mentioned by Suggestion Can. Gp Ren. Gp Reg. Gp Having more social activity 25 62 26 Having more organized study 16 15 7 By studying more 16 ll 10 By living on the campus 6 2 2 By showing more interest 6 4 2 Better self discipline 4 3 1 By wiser use of time 5 9 3 Doing more outside reading 1 3 2 By taking easier subjects 1 l 1 By developing my memory 1 2 3 By adjusting quicker 3 6 0 By joining religious group 0 3 0 By establishing goals 0 3 0 By living my own philosophy 0 =====£i====i====41===. W 173 TABLE LXXVI QUESTION 29 (b). IN WHAT PARTICULAR AREA COULD YOUR CAMPUS LIFE HAVE BEEN IMPROVED BY THE COLLEGE? Number of times mentioned by Suggestion Can. Gp Ren. Gp Reg. Gp Stress the individual 6 3 3 Change the comp system 5 l 1 Improve the basic courses 4 3 4 Decrease the social activities 3 2 1 Obtain better instructors 4 8 2 Demand more from students 3 2 1 More social life 3 2 2 Course in "How to Study" 2 4 1 Better living conditions 2 4 1 Improve counseling service 0 4 2 Decrease amount of homework. l 2 2 Have smaller classes 0 4 1 More intra—mural sports 1 , 4 0 Teach broad educational aspects 1 2 l fi.________L_______ 4;- J c ._._.__..____._J....j TABLE LXXVII 174 QUESTION 29 (c). IN WHAT PARTICULAR AREA COULD YOUR CAMPUS LI FE HAVE BEEN IMPROVED BY THE HIGH SCHOOL? Suggestion Number of times mentioned by Can. Grp Ren. Grp Reg. Grp Better preparation for college Prepare students for transition Offer harder program Have better instructors Teach students how to study Teach students how to take test Teach students how to take note Teach students how to read Present more creative work Require more themes Teach students to face issues Give speech training Better vocational guidance Improve all courses Teach students how to meet people Eliminate cliques, if possible Teach students how to adjust to college Better extra—class activities Require mathematics 2| 14 11 000 CO OOHmmr-‘mmpmmm P oem mm mmpowmmmoqomem N001 OH HUONCAHHNOMOOWO) —: :1 The tabulation of the answers-to question 29 is self- explanatory but it is interesting to note that the sugges— tion mentioned most frequently by the students themselves which could have improved their campus life was to have more social activities. Sixty-two of the renewal group made this suggestion but in the question which followed, only 42 per cent stated that their combined suggestions,if they had been carried out, would have improved their marks. 175 The second ranking suggestion made by the students was related to their study programs. Many suggested more time devoted to study and the develOpment of more effective means of study. If these suggestions had been carried out during the year, 73.6 per cent of the cancellation stu— dents claim that their marks would have been improved and 60.6 per cent of the regulars made the same claim. The 3 test reveals a significant difference between the renewal group and each of the other groups. The suggestions which are made for the improvement of the high school program are diversified but the cancel- lation students suggest better preparation for college in the way of better courses, better instruction, and better preparation of students for the transition from high school to college. They also stress the importance of knowing how to study, how to take tests, how to take notes, and how to read effectively. QUESTION 30. TABLE LXXVIII DO YOU THINK THIS IMPROVEMENT WOULD HAVE RAISED YOUR.HARKS? 176 Group Replies Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 125 92 73.6 16 12.8 Renewal 153 65 42.5 62 40.5 Regular 77 45 60.6 23 29.9 All groups 355 202 56.9 101 28.5 The 3 test shows a significant difference between' the cancellation group and each of the other two groups. It is significant to note that many of these students who indicated one or more suggestions were hesitant to state whether this improvement would alter the final academic achievement. Opinion that it wouldn't make any difference at all. Only 28.5 per cent of the total were of the The next question is similar to question 29 but it stresses the improvement which the students could have made along academic lines. was that they could have studied more and could have established more effective study habits. gestions were very diversified and were mentioned infrequently. The comment made most Often The other sug- TABLE LXXIX 177 QUESTION 31. WHAT MORE COULD YOU HAVE DONE DURING THE YEAR TO FURTHER YOUR OWN ACADEMIC ACHIEVEMENT? Suggestion Number of times mentioned by Can. Gp Reg. Gp Study more Establish better study habits Have more interest in classes Use tutoring service Decrease social life Do more outside reading Be 1888 confident Quit athletics Make use Of the library Enroll in the right courses Live away from home Participate in class discussion Study more with others Take lighter load Stay on campus week ends 38 15 NHCJJCANVP-OJNNOJQWCD 29 ll NMNHNNHHNNNNU‘ TABLE LXKX QUESTION 32. DID YOU SEEK HELP FROM YOUR INSTRUCTORS REGARDING YOUR WORK IN COLLEGE LAST YEAR? - Number of times mentioned Group Frequently Infrequently Never Cancellation 17 82 35 Renewal 18 4O 95 Regular 9 55 11 ‘tm It appears that 141 out of the total group for a per- centage of 40 per cent did not consult their instructors at all for help regarding their class work. Ninety-five 178 of the students who earned a renewal never solicited help from their instructors. There were 35 in the cancellation group who said that they never sought aid. It might have been to their advantage to get some help from their in- structors and consequently earn a renewal of the scholar- ship award. TABLE LXXXI QUESTION 33. WHEN SOUGHT, DID YOU GET THE NECESSARY AMOUNT OF TIME FROM YOUR INSTRUCTORS TO DISCUSS YOUR PERSONAL CLASSROOM DIFFICULTIES? -:2 WW Group Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 80 76.9' 24 23.1 Regular 57 85.1 10 14.9 *Per cent of those who answered the question. TABLE LXXXII QUESTION 34. WERE THE DEMANDS OF THE COLLEGE INSTRUCTORS GREATER THAN YOU HAD ANTICIPATED? Group Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 58 44.8' 69 55.2 Renewal 28 13.8 125 86.2 Regular ‘ 18 24.3 56 75.7 All groups 92 26.9 250 73.1 *Per cent of those who answered the quesIIOn. 179 The t test shows significant differences between the cancellation group and the regular group and between the cancellation group and the renewal group. The renewal and the regular groups appear to represent the same parent pOpulation. Almost 45 per cent of those cancellation stu— dents who answered this question felt that the college academic prOgram was too rigid for their experience and background. TABLE LXXXIII QUESTION 35. WERE YOU SATISFIED WITH THE QUALITY OF THE COLLEGE INSTRUCTION IN GENERAL? Group Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 89 72.4* 34 27.5 Renewal 119 79.4 31 20.6 Regular 84 85.3 11 14.7 All groups 272 78.2 76 21.8 E.“ *Per cent of those who answered the question. TABLE LXXXIV QUESTION 36. 180 IF NOT, WHAT WAS WRONG? .1: m Number of times Suggestions mentioned by Can. Gp Ren. Gp Instructors in the basics are poor 13 16 Instructors show no personal interest 14 5 Instructors have ndon't care" attitude 8 6 They try to teach too much 8 6 Instructors not trained in methods 9 2 Instructors are unreasonable 3 2 Instructors ridicule students 1 1 Instructors devoid of personality 1 6 Instructors have poor diction . 2 4 Instructors repeat the text material 1 3 The tabulation of what was wrong with college in- struction is self-explanatory and reveals that there was no one particular criticism on the part of these students. The renewal students did state 16 times that the instructors in the basic subjects were poor. The cancellation students felt that the instructors took no personal interest in their students, that they tried to teach too much, and that they were not too well trained in instructional methods. TABLE LXXXV 181 QUESTION 37. WHAT THINGS, IF ANY, HANDICAPPED YOU IN YOUR COLLEGE WORK? (CANCELLATION GROUP ONLY) Suggested handicap V“ Frequency Lack of goals Financial difficulties Outside employment Athletic participation Family troubles Excessive dating Place of residence wrong associates Feeling of insecurity Poor health WOrry about examinations Inferiority complex Lack of interest in classes went home too much Too many bull sessions Not knowing how to study Over-participation in activities Miscellaneous items of one frequency each 3O 24 23 11 mmmmmmaammqmw The cancellation students felt that the greatest handicaps to their college work were lack of goals, finan— cial difficulties, and outside employment. The question was asked, too, of the regular students but their answers were spread over such a wide range of notions that they were too difficult to summarize. However, 10 stated that financial difficulties handicapped.them, and 15 stated that they had no handicap at all. Not a single item had a frequency greater than 4. 182 TABLE LXXXVI QUESTION 38. WHAT INFLUENCES, IF ANY, INSPIRED YOU TO DO BETTER WORK THAN YOU WOULD OTHERWISE HAVE DONE? = J Number of times mentioned Influences by Can Grp Ren Grp Reg Grp Parents and other members of the immediate family 49 92 36 The schOlarship award itself 36 104 xx Friends both on and off the campus 20 4O 18 High school and college instructors 14 32 1 Athletic and scholastic eligibility 14 5 16 Studious room-mates 8 Personal pride or ego 4 12 9 My boy friend 3 3 Desire for an education 2 6 Threat of the army ' 2 l l The coach 1 1 None at all 1 6 1 Miscellaneous items of one frequency The influences which had the greatest effect on the scholarship students were their parents, their friends, and' the scholarship itself. Two—thirds of the renewal students said that they were spurred on by a desire to win a renewal of the scholarship while only 28 per cent of the cancellation students said that they tried hard to earn the renewal. TABLE LXXXVII QUESTION 39. SPEN'D IN GAINFUL EMPLOYMENT? HOW MANY HOURS PER WEEK DID YOU 183 Cancellation Renewal Regular group group group Number of replies received 125 153 77 Number Of students employed 59 59 28 Per cent of total employed 47.5 38.5 36.1 Range of hours employed 2-40 2-30 2—30 Average number of hours employed per person 15.9 14.1 12.2 Standard deviation of the means 1.00 .88 __ The 3 test for significance between the means of the cancellation and the renewal groups reveals a 3_va1ue of 1.4 which is not significant. From this information it appears that outside employment was not a significant cause of the high mortality among the scholarship students. QUESTION 40. FRESHMAN AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE? TABLE LXXXVIII WHERE DID YOU LIVE WHILE A 184 Frequencies Group At Dormi- Local Quonset home tory residence Village Cancellation 12 101 26 20 Renewal 19 123 25 28 Regular 27 109 27 27 m ‘fi‘J L fiL nun—— m The figures in Table LXXXVIH were obtained from data in the Record's Office. This accounts for the fact that the total number of frequencies varies from the total number of questionnaires returned. It was pointed out in Chapter III that there is little or no relation between place of residence and aca- demic achievement as far as college students are concerned. However, according to the evidence presented in the next table the cancellation students felt that their place of residence was a definite handicap to their academic achieve- ment 0 In giving their reasons why their place of resi- dence was a handicap academically the students said that the place was too noisy, that study facilities were not at all adequate, that there was always too much confusion abounding, and that pleasures were too easy to get. 185 TABLE LXXXIX QUESTION 41. WAS YOUR.PLACE OF RESIDENCE LAST YEAR A HANDICAP TO YOU AS FAR AS YOUR ACHIEVEHENT IN COLLEGE WAS CONCERNED? Group Yes Per cent No Per cent ' Cancellation 56 45.2 A 68 54.8 Renewal 42 27.8 109 72.2 Regular 28 39.5 _ 43 60.5 - 111 BE:- Forty—five perscent of the cancellation students felt that their place of residence was a handicap to their academic achievement in college against a total of 28 per cent of the renewal students. The test of significance shows no difference between these two groups for we obtain a t_va1ue of 3.05. TABLE XC QUESTION 42. IF SO, WHAT WAS WRONG? =z=:‘x A 44444 :5- AJ: 4 Frequency of answers by Comments Can. group Reg. group Too noisy 25 11 Poor facilities for study 18 11 Pleasures too easy to get 6 Distance factor detrimental 4 4 High school pals still available 3 1 Unco-operative room-mate 3 3 The place is too big 2 3 Family disturbances 3 0 186 In order to find causes for the large number of scholarship cancellations the writer asked if there had been any over—participation in extra—class activities. It appears, however, that this is not a contributing Cause Of the scholarship cancellations in the opinion of the students themselves for only 17 per cent of them stated that they spent too much time with outside activi— ties. TABLE XCI QUESTION 43. DID YOU OVER-PARTICIPATE IN EXTRACLASS ACTIVITIES TO THE DETRIMENT OF YOUR STUDIES? Group Yes Per cent No Per cent Cancellation 20 17.1‘ 97 82.9 Regular 15 p 31.9 32 68.1 Both groups 35 21.3 129 78.7 -_-.-.--'-—.__:‘ A m *Per cent of those who answered the question. QUESTION 44. TABLE XCII 187 IF SO, IN WHAT AREAS AND FOR HOW MANY HOURS PER WEEK? Cancellation group Hours Regular group Hours Employment 40 Rel Organ and Fbotball 26 Dancing 20 Athletics 18 Bull sessions 10 Fbotball 18 All activities 10 Basketball 16 Too many activ 8 Sports 16 Intramurals 8 Drama 15 Fraternity 8 Basketball 15 Publications 7 Basketball 12 Drama 6 Home Econ. Club 12 Intramurals 6 Hockey 12 Athletics 5 Baseball Manager 12 Spartan Guard 4 Hockey 10 Bull sessions 4 Sports 10 Yes, a lot of 'em 3 Sports 10 Spartan Guard 2 Boy Scouts 10 Bull sessions 2 Dramatics 8 Dating 8 Lecture Concert 8 Dating 6 Phys. Educ. Activ. 4 A W S 4 Church Activities 3 Spartan Guard 2 Table XCII shows that only 20 members of the cancel- lation group stated they had spent too much time on outside activities, however 24 items were listed. Among these we find that athletic activities of some kind are listed 13 times. It appears from the data supplied by this question— naire that participation in extra-class activities was not detrimental to the academic success of the students involved. TABLE XCIII QUESTION 45. (TO CANCELLATION GROUP) 188 WHAT WERE THE MAIN REASONS THAT YOU DID NOT EARN THE 1.6 AVERAGE LAST YEAR? Reasons Frequencies Poor study habits 58 Poor adjustment to college 30 Lack of interest 9 27 Low marks on the comps 26 Poor high school preparation 14 Improperly enrolled 13 Lack of goals 13 Dormitory a handicap 12 Specific courses 10 Too much outside activity 9 Fear of loss of scholarship 8 The comprehensive system 7 Poor reading ability 7 Faulty instruction 6 Nervous on examinations 6 Outside employment 5 No extra-curricular activities 4 Lack of enough time 4 The last question on the questionnaire furnishes the subjective evidence of why over 41 per cent of the scholar- ship students failed to renew their scholarships. This is perhaps the most important table in this chapter for it summarizes the students' own Opinions of why they did not earn the 1.6 average during their freshman year. These students placed the blame upon their failure to establish good habits of study. Forty-seven per cent of them said that they had not set up a study schedule, had not applied themselves fully to their work, that they put off doing assignments, and had poor work habits in general. 189 Twenty—seven per cent of them attributed their poor fresh- man record to the comprehensive examination system as it operates in the Basic College. These students obtained low marks in the basic subjects and found fault with the system generally. Twenty-four per cent said that they found it very difficult to make the proper adjustment from high school to college and 21 per cent of them stated that they lacked interest in their work. Ten per cent stated that they had not set up pre-determined goals and 10 per cent said that the conditions Of their dormitory were not inducive to study. About the same number attributed their poor record in college to their poor high school prepara— tion and an equal number placed the blame on one specific college course for which they were not pIOperly prepared. A11 in all the students listed 49 different causes with varying frequencies. Some of these are presented in the preceding table. 190 TABLE XCIV QmSTION 45. (TO RENEWAL GROUP) WHAT FACTORS CONTRIBUTED TO YOUR ACADEIIC SUCCESS AS A FRESHMAN AT MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE? Factors Frequencies Good study habits 42 Good high school background 38 Desire to do well in college 36 Interest in college courses 35 Desire to renew the scholarship 28 Family expectations 24 Helpful instructors in college 24 Assistance of other students 21 Proper balance and poise l5 Definite goal in mind 14 Easily and quickly adjusted to college 12 Liked the college and college life 11 Lots of hard work 10 Well balanced program 10 General intelligence 10 Wide eXperience in pre-college days 9 Participation in outside activities 9 Sheer luck 5 Comprehensive system 4 Financial need 4 The scholarship students who renewed their awards at the end of the freshman year attribute their success to their excellent high school backgrounds, their general interest in college, their resourcefulness in knowing how to use all the facilities at their command, their ability to establish good habits of study, their desire to please their parents in earning the renewal, plus their own personal de- sire and determination to perform well in college. The survey of the records of the scholarship stup dents and the study of the Opinions which they have 191 expressed clearly indicate to the writer that one of the major differences between those who renew their awards and those who don't is the factor of motivation. Though the records show that the renewal students attained a higher grade point average in high school than the cancellation .students, those who renewed their scholarships in college ‘ have shown and expressed an earnest desire to succeed which is not evident on the part of the members of the can— cellation group. The renewal students had a strong deter- mination to succeed. The last Question put to the renewal students was, "What advice can you give to beginning college students?" There were 39 different suggestions offered with frequen~ cies ranging from 21 down to one. The three suggestions offered most frequently were: first, have a definite study plan, second, keep up to date on your assignments, and third, learn to budget your time effectively. Other sug- gestions mentioned were: learn to look after yourself, seek the help of your instructors and classmates, and try to get off to a good start. These suggestions appear to be sound advice. The administration of the questionnaire revealed some interesting data regarding these scholarship students. Since these facts are summarized in tabular form throughout the chapter and will be repeated in the final chapter they 192 will not be stated here. The implications, too, from this material which should prove beneficial to the guid— ance programs of both the high schools and the colleges will be presented in the following chapter. CHAPTER VIII IMPLICATIONS AND CONCLUSIONS The writer has attempted in this study to make an analysis of the academic achievement of those freshmen who were admitted to Michigan State College in the fall of 1949 on tuition free scholarships for the primary purpose of discovering why so many of them failed to earn a renewal of their awards at the end of the freshman year. The pur— suit of this objective led to a study of the high school records, a study of the first year college records, and to the administration and study of a questionnaire. This investigation revealed many characteristics of the schol- arship students and uncovered the factors which contributed either to the success or detriment of those students in their academic pursuits. A summary of this investigation follows. 1. During the Spring and summer of 1949, Michigan State College granted 400 tuition free scholarships to prospective freshmen students. As a result of the early losses and subsequent alternate appointments, 386 freshmen enrolled at the College to make use of the award. Of this number 33 students, or 8 per cent, withdrew sometime during the school year and 158, or 41 per cent, failed to earn a renewal of the scholarship award at the end of the 194 year, for they failed to meet the 1.6 grade point average required for the renewal. Seventeen of these 386 stu— dents were from out of the state and of these, 12 failed to renew the scholarship grant. . 2. Colleges all over the United States are en— larging their scholarship programs to make it possible-for able students of limited financial means to continue their formal education. The literature reveals that the economic factor is one of the most important factors preventing talented youth from continuing their education. The pro— gram in this respect at Michigan State College is in line with that of other colleges which each year are giving more and more scholarship awards. At the present time there are over 1,000 students studying at Michigan State College under the tuition waiver plan. 3. A review of the literature pertinent to this investigation revealed not a single study parallel to this one. Krugman made a similar study of scholarship students to determine how the marks earned by them in college approached the normal curve and the curve of marks Obtained by the whole college group. His study revealed that scholarship students earned higher grades than the other students, and as a whole were much superior students. Other studies show that there is a positive 195 correlation between high school subjects and grades of the same subject when pursued in college, that graduates of small high schools do poorer work in college than gradu- ates of large high schools, that the student's high school record is the best single means of predicting success in college, and that there is conflicting evidence regarding the relation of place of residence to success in college. The evidence of the several studies reviewed is not strong enough to favor one type of housing. 4. This investigation revealed that 70 per cent of the withdrawal students came from Class B and Class C high schools. 5. Seven of the 33 withdrawal students returned to Michigan State to make further use of their scholarship grant. 6. Fifty per cent of the cancellation students came from high schools having less than 60 members in the high school graduating class,while only 24.6 per cent of the renewal students came from the same size high school. Fifty-one per cent of the cancellation students came from Class C and Class D high schools against 27 per cent of the renewal students from the same size high schools. 7. Half of the men and 40 per cent of the women scholarship students lost their scholarships at the end of the year. 196 8. The cancellation students averaged .6 of a year older than the renewal students. 9. Of the cancellation group, 13 per cent came from broken homes against a percentage of 7 per cent for the renewal group. 10. Only 17 of the cancellation students had fathers who were professional men, while 40 of the 195 renewal students had fathers whose positions were of a professional nature. 11. In 27 per cent of the cases the cancellation students came from homes where the mother was employed against a percentage of 17 per cent for the renewal group. 12. The more successful scholarship students come from homes of a higher economic status. 13. The more successful scholarship students come from schools which are accredited by the North Central Association of Colleges and Secondary Schools. 14. The members of the renewal group attained a higher high school grade point average than the members of the cancellation group (2.5 to 2.2). This fact, plus the evidence submitted in Conclusion 16, might lead one to suspect that renewal students had higher Intelligent Quotients to begin with and therefore were expected to do better work in college. This investigation offers no evi— dence of comparative I. Q.'s. 197 15. Students, both regular and scholarship, who studied foreign language in high school did better work in college than those who did not study foreign language in high school. 16. On the Psychological Examinations administered by the college the renewal students were superior to the cancellation students by about two and one-half deciles on both the general reading ability and the general intelli- gence scores. The average scores of the cancellation I students were almost the same as the scores of the 200 regular students who were selected at random. 17. The academic record of the renewal students was much superior to that of the cancellation students for the former averaged 2.06 honor points per credit hour while the latter earned an average of 1.095. The regular students averaged 1.098 honor points per credit hour and this is superior to the average of the cancellation students. The scholarship average for the cancellation students did not even equal the average for the entire Freshman Class. 18. It appears that the Schools of Engineering and Home Economics furnished more than their proportionate share of the number of cancellation students. 19. Of all the “D‘s" and "F's" received by the scholarship students, 74 per cent of them were obtained by the students in the cancellation group. The courses in which these students lost honor points were Mathematics, Hilitary 198 Science, Chemistry, and Physical Education for both men and women. 20. Of the scholarship students majoring in Home Economics, Agriculture, Business Administration, Physical Education, or having no major at all, over half of them failed to renew their scholarships. 21. There was significant difference between the cancellation and the renewal groups in regard to their opinions of their high school preparation. Only 57 per cent of the cancellation students felt that they were adequately prepared while 78 per cent of the renewal students stated that they were prOperly prepared.' 22. Ninety per cent of the renewal group against 64 per cent of the cancellation group felt that they were prepared to cope with the demands made on college freshmen. When the same question was asked stressing the academic demands the percentages were respectively 93 and 76. Sta— tistically there is significant difference between the two groups in both areas. 23. Thirty-eight per cent of the cancellation stu- dents against 16 per cent of the renewal students said that the size of their high school was a handicap to their aca- demic achievement. This difference is significant. 24. Regarding the program of educational guidance in high school there was no difference in achievement be— tween the two groups. However, 3 out of 8, or 37 per cent 199 of the students involved in this study were not satisfied with the program as it was carried on. And 25 per cent of the members of the different groups were not satisfied with the college orientation program. 25. The students were asked to list the areas in which they considered their high school strong and weak. It is interesting to note that the same subjects head both lists. Mathematics, English, and Science, in fact, the college preparatory subjects in general, were the strong subjects in some schools and the weak subjects in others. 26. The best advice which the scholarship students could give to other scholarship students was! first, estab- lish an effective means of study, and second, keep your assignments up to date. 27. Only 71 per cent of the cancellation students felt that they were pr0perly enrolled against a percentage of 86 per cent for the renewal group. This difference is significant. The dissatisfaction came from having too heavy a load, from having to spend too many hours in classes, from being enrolled in the wrong courses, and from lack of per- sonal interest in the enrollees. 28. Neither group appeared to be handicapped by class size. 29. Regarding the attitude toward the comprehensive examination system as it operates in the Basic College, we find significant difference between the two groups. About 200 41 per cent of the cancellation students were satisfied with the system against 61 per cent of the renewal group. About E5 per cent of the regular group were satisfied. This means that 59 per cent of the cancellation students, 39 per cent of the renewal students, and 45 per cent of the regular students were dissatisfied with the comprehensive system. Those who expressed dissatisfaction stated that they thought it unfair to base the mark for an entire year's work in a course on one examination. They felt that some credit should be given for the marks earned during the separate terms,— that too much weight was assigned to one test. A few merely stated that the whole system was un— fair. 30. The students who succeeded in renewing their scholarships had been planning on a college course for a longer period of time than those who lost their awards. Of the 153 renewals who answered the questionnaire we find 122 who had known all through their high school days that they were going to college some day. From the 125 cancel— lation students we find only 69 who had been planning to attend college for at least 4 years. 31. It is observed that 22 per cent of the cancel- lation students Operated on a definite study program last year against a percentage of 35 per cent for the renewal group. There is significant difference between the two groups. The average time spent studying during the daytime 201 was approximately 2 hours for each group which means no significant difference statistically. Regarding the time Spent per week studying in the library the average is approximately 2 hours for each group of students and again there is no significant difference between the groups. 32. The majority of the cancellation students said that they were negligent in preparing their assignments because of lack of interest in their courses, or because of faulty instruction; the renewal students were somewhat divided in their opinions. Yet about 55 per cent of the members of each group felt that the subjects taken in their freshman year did contribute to the attainment of their plans. 33. It appeared that absences from classes were moderate for all students and did not contribute to the large number of scholarship cancellations. Neither did the times spent away from the regular place of residence affect the academic achievement of the cancellation group. We find that the cancellation students Spent an average of 3.22 week ends per term off campus compared with 2.82 for the renewal group. 34. The cancellation students said that they sought help from their instructors infrequently, but that when help was sought the instructors gave them the necessary amount of time to discuss their problems. About 45 per cent of the cancellation students thought that the demands 202 of the instructors were greater than they had anticipated, but only 14 per cent of the renewal students felt that the demands were too heavy. The students in all three groups felt very well satisfied with the quality of instruction in general. The cancellation students felt that the in— structors did not manifest enough personal interest in the students while the renewal students said that they thought the instructors in the basic subjects were poor. 35. The cancellation students spent an average of 15.9 hours per week in gainful employment while the renewal students averaged 14.1 hours. Forty—seven per cent of the cancellation students were employed against 38.5 per cent of the renewals. Inasmuch as a larger per cent of the cancellation students were gainfully employed and since they worked 1.8 hours per week longer than the renewal students, it appears that outside employment was one of the contributing factors for the large number of scholar— ship cancellations. 36. Fbrty-five per cent of the cancellation stu- dents against 28 per cent of the renewal students stated that their place of residence was a handicap to them. They stated that there was entirely too much "horseplay", and too many disturbing influences which made it difficult for them to study. However, the statistical evidence of this study does not favor one type of housing over any Other. 203 37. Only 17 per cent of the cancellation students felt that they had over-participated in extra-class activi- ties. uost of those who answered in the affirmative mentioned athletic activities of some kind as the area in which they spent too much time. 38. The cancellation students suggest that they could have improved their campus life by the enlargement of their social program. They suggest that the college give more attention to the individual and not place so much stress on the testing prOgram. They claim that the high schools could have prepared them more adequately for the college work they were expected to do and for the transi- tion into college life. If these suggestions were put into practice, 74 per cent of the cancellation students said that they thought their marks in college would have been higher, and 42.5 per cent of the renewal students said that it would have made a positive difference. When these students were asked what they could have done to further their academic achievement the cancellation students said that they could have established better study habits. The regular students made the same suggestion. The question was not asked of the renewal students for their achievement was highly commendable. 39. From both groups, in 37 per cent of the cases the parents helped plan the student's high school program. And in almost every case the parents favored the college 204 education. Regarding the college backgrounds of the par- ents, there is no significant difference. 40. Thirty-one per cent of the cancellation stu— dents and 42 per cent of the renewal students made use of the counseling center services the first year. 41. When asked what influences inspired the stu— dents to do better work, the cancellation studentssaid: first, their parents or other members of the family; second, their friends; and third, the scholarship award itself. These cancellation students felt that the great- est handicaps to their college work were lack of goals, financial difficulties, and outside employment. Two- thirds of the renewal students said that they were spurred on by a desire to win a renewal of the scholarship, while only 28 per cent of the cancellation students said that they tried hard to earn a renewal. The scholarship students who renewed their awards at the end of the freshman year attribute their success to their excellent high school backgrounds, their general interest in college, their resourcefulness in knowing how to use all the facilities at their command, their ability to establish good habits of study, their desire to please their parents in earning a renewal, plus their own per- sonal desire and determination to perform well in college. 42. The scholarship students who lost their scholarships placed the blame upon their failure to 205 establish good habits of study. Fifty per cent of them said that they had not set up a study schedule, had not applied themselves fully to their work, that they put off doing assignments, and had poor work habits in general. Twenty—seven per cent attributed their poor freshman record to the comprehensive examination system in the basic subjects. About 17 per cent of them said that they lacked interest in their work and 12 per cent said that they had enrolled in college without having a specific goal in mind. Another 12 per cent said that they found it very difficult to make the prOper adjustment from high school to college and 9 per cent said that the conditions in the dormitory in which they lived were not conducive to study. The same percentage attributed their poor record in college to their poor high school preparation and an equal number placed the blame on one specific course in college for which they were not fully prepared. All in all, the students listed 49 different causes with varying frequencies. In the beginning the writer stated that he believed that this investigation would be beneficial to guidance officials in both secondary schools and colleges in order that they might promote better adjustment of college freshmen. At the conclusion he is convinced that several implications can be drawn from the study which will be helpful to both the high schools and the colleges which have a mutual interest in the education of the youth of the 206 land. This portion of the final chapter will be devoted to the summary of implications, inferences, and sugges— tions gleaned from the investigation. It appears that the idea of a scholarship award has taken on an entirely new connotation in the past few years. Formerly a scholarship grant was an honorary award given only to high ranking members of high school graduating classes. The award was based entirely on scholastic achievement and hence usually was awarded either to the valedictcrian or salutatorian of the class. Now the award is based on both academic achievement and financial need and is not always given to a high ranking student. When the statement is made that 41 per cent of those students admitted to Michigan State College on scholarship fail to earn a renewal at the end of the first year, the listener is usually startled to learn that so high a per— centage of high school honor students should fail to make the grade. But when he is informed that these students are not all honor students, that some might have ranked 28th in a class of 52 or 47th in a class of 268, the fact is more readily understandable. The scholarships as they are now administered serve merely as an inducement to get students to come to college, serve as a competitive means for increasing college enrollments, and lastly, make it possible for students of limited financial resources to attend college. Because these awards have ceased to be awards for high scholarship in the secondary school they should no longer be called scholarships in the true sense. The College requires that students must earn a total of honor points equal to the total of credit hours by the end of their senior year or they will not be graduated. This amounts to saying that they must earn a 1.0 (one- point) average. The scholarship students must earn a 1.6 average in order to have their scholarships renewed. This appears to be a dual standard. It has been suggested by some educators interviewed in the process of this investi- gation that this requirement of the scholarship students is unfair. The question has been raised, “Why require them to earn a 1.6 average for a renewal when a 1.0 is all that is required for graduation?" The question poses a problem for investigation. The college grants scholar~ ships to able students of limited financial resources and then places upon them the added burden of maintaining the 1.6 average. By so doing the college cancels the scholar— ships for those who need it most. Yet when the study of the records is carried into the second year, we find that 73 per cent of those who lost their scholarships returned to the campus to continue their education in spite of the added financial burden. 0f the renewal students, 87 per cent of them returned for their sophomore year; while among the regular group whose records were studied, 70 per cent returned to continue 208 their education. A question which might be raised at this point is, "Are the scholarship students able to pay their tuition in the first place?“ A study of the records of these students for the 4 year period would prove interest— ing as well as valuable. “ In the analysis of'the data for this investigation the writer became aware of the fact that certain high schools in the State, and large ones too, were not repre- sented by scholarship students at Michigan State College. This might be due to the fact that the high school admin- istrators were not aware of the availability of the awards, were not in sympathy with the program in general, were more loyal to other schools of higher learning, or were just negligent in the discharge of their duties. The College can offer one tuition-free scholarship to each of the 650 approved high schools in Michigan; therefore, it should do all in its power to bring the literature re- garding this information before the graduating seniors in these schools. Students from the large high schools in Midhigan have a higher academic achievement than those from small high schools. Scholarship students who come from schools which are accredited by the North Central Association do much better in college than those who come from non—NCA schools. And students whose high school marks are all "A's“ and ”B's” are definitely good risks. An examination 209 of the high school averages of those who renewed their scholarships revealed practically all "A's" and "B's“. Out of a total of more than 1300 marks for these peOple there were only 45 "C's". It appears that some of the items on the applica— tion for admission blank serve no purpose except to put the high school principal ”on the spot". The writer feels that certain items of information on the application blank were of little value in this scholarship investigation and consequently of doubtful value to both the high school and the college registrars. He suggests further study of the value of the following information: 1. Quality of work the applicant is expected to do, 2. Grade average required for recommendation to college, 3. Type of high school course followed, and 4. Quality_of the principal's recom- mendation. The writer found many inconsistencies between what was recommended and What was actually done. I The students whose scholarships were cancelled were not high school honor students in the true sense of the word. They were slightly better than "B" students. Their high school averages were superior to the averages of the regular freshmen in the ratio of 2.2 to 1.7, their scores in the general intelligence phase of the Psycho— lOgical Examination were in the ratio of 5.1 to 5.0, their scores in the general reading phase of the same examination were in the ratio of 4.6 to 5.2, and their 210 honor-point averages for their first year in college were in the ratio of 1.1 to 1.2. From-this evidence it ap- pears that the cancellation students were just average students during their first year in college. The comprehensive examination system as it Operates in the Basic College has had more than its share of crit- icism since its inception. Students and faculty alike have believed that this system was responsible for the high mortality among the scholarship group. It has been shown on page 158, Chapter VI, that if the marks given out at the end of each term's work were used instead of the comprehensive mark, then 16 scholarship students who lost their scholarships would not have lost them and 16 scholarship students who renewed their scholarships would have lost them. Thus if the system were changed for the purpose of determining scholarship renewals, there would be neither a gain nor a loss as far as this group of 386 scholarship students is concerned. While the system jeopardizes some, it favors others. In this respect the results of this study indicate that the present system is_ satisfactory. A number of the students said that they did not learn how to study in high school, that high school was made much too easy for them, and that they were not pre— pared for the big jump to college and the responsibilities which college life entailed. They suggested more and 211 better educational guidance in high school for the college preparatory group. I At the same time the College must recognize its reaponsibility to the students along these same lines. The College might give material help to the students in the way of study techniques: in the form of lectures, demon- strations, discussions, or visual aids. Many stated that they did not know how to read intelligently, that they didn't know how to take notes, that they did not know how to study for examinations, and that they did not know how to budget their time effectively. Some suggested the establishment of supervised study rooms in the various dormitories. These students are still quite immature as they come from high school and are in need of sympathetic guidance and friendly counsel. Since it is the purpose of the College to imbue them with security and confidence in their endeavors, this is an area in which the College Administrators should give some thoughtful and constructive planning. The students who are admitted on scholarship are told when the award is made that they must maintain a 1.6 average in order to earn the renewal. They are told this again in a group assembly some time during their first week on campus, but somehow the responsibility of earning the 1.6 average is apparently forgotten. Soon a term has slipped by and they have dr0pped below the required 212 standard. It then becomes an uphill battle to reach the 1.6 average. Many students really lose their scholarships during the first term. They are not prepared to make the required transition, they get lost in the social whirl of the new surroundings, they get interested in the ”bull sessions" in the dormitories, and they get behind in their class-work from which they are unable to make recovery. Consequently they become more and more bewildered and fail to earn the 1.6 average required for a renewal of the scholarship. As the investigation progressed the writer became aware of the fact that one of the major differences be— tween those who renewed their awards and those who didn't was the factor of motivation. In addition to the fact that the renewal students came to college with a higher grade point average than the cancellation students, those who renewed their scholarships have shown and expressed a desire to succeed which is not evident on the part of the members of the cancellation group. The renewal students exhibited a greater interest in college, more resourceful— ness in making use of the facilities at their command, greater ability to establish good habits of study, more concern of their responsibility to the high schools from which they came and to the college at which they matricu— lated, and a greater desire to please their parents than was exhibited by the cancellation group. In other words, _ -‘—__ 213 the big difference between the academic acnievement of the renewal students over the cancellation students was in their own personal desires and their determination to per- form well in college. Over these intangible qualities the college had little or no control. In the beginning the writer sought to determine why 41 per cent of the freshmen admitted on scholarship to Michigan State College in the fall of 1949 failed to earn a renewal of the scholarship at the end of the first year of college work. The investigation was divided into three major phases: first, a study of the students' high school backgrounds, second, a study of the students' records as college freshmen, and third, an analysis of subjective evi— dence obtained from a questionnaire. The investigation un- covered much evidence from which the following are some of the more important conclusions: 1. More than half of those who lost their scholarships came from small high schools. The more successful students came from large high schools which were accredited by the North Central Association. 2. Those who lost their scholarships had lower high school averages and scored way below the renewal students on the PsychOIOgical Examinations. As a group they were not bright students in the first place. 3. Fifty—nine per cent of the cancellation students were dissatisfied with the comprehensive examination system. 214 4. The cancellation students stated that they lacked in— terest in their classes and expressed apathy in general toward college work. On the other hand, the renewal students were interested in achieving their goals and earn- ing a renewal of the award. 5. Outside employment was definitely a cause of many scholarship cancellations. 6. Those who lost their scholarships stated that the study facilities in their respective dormitories were very un- satisfactory. 7. The scholarship students themselves attribute the loss of their scholarships to their ineffective habits of study. B IBLIUGRAPHY BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Sources Books Aiken, Wilford Merton, The Story g§_the Eight—Year Study. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1942. 157 pp. Baten, William Dowell, Elementagy Mathematical Statistics. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1938. 281 pp. Campbell, William Giles, g Form Book for Thesis writing. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1939. 117 pp. The Seventh Census of the United States; 1850. washington: Robert Armstrong; Public Printer. 1853. cxxxvi + 1022 pp. Thirty Schools Tell Their Story. Progressive Education Association. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1943. 802 pp. Warner, Lloyd W., Robert J. Havighurst, and Hartin B. Loeb, Who Shall Be Educated?, New York, Harper and Brothers, 1944. 190 pp. Theses Eicher, Chester F., "The Success of North Carolina High School Students in Four North Carolina Colleges." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Duke University, Durham, 1942. Froehlich, Gustav J., “The Validity of the Wisconsin Achievement Test as an Instrument for Predicting Success at the University of Wisconsin." Unpub— lished Doctor's dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1941. Goforth,Malcolm, “A Comparison of Freshman Grades with High School Grades and Psychological Scores of Class Entering Alabama Polytechnic Institute in 1937," unpublished Master's thesis, Alabama Polytechnic Institute, Auburn, 1939. 216 Grote, Caroline, Housing_and Livinngonditions gf_WOmen Students. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teach— ers College, Columbia University, 1932. 106 pp. Hansen, Minna, "Some Factors in the Housing of Students Related to Success in College." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1943. Krugman, Abraham, "A Comparison of Grades of Scholarship Students and All Students in the washington Square College of New York University." Unpublished Master's thesis, New York university, New York, 1932. Phearman, Leo T., "Comparisons of High School Graduates Who Go to College With Those Who Do Not Go to College," Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, university of Iowa, Iowa City, 1948. Stephens, Theodore P., "An Evaluation of Scholarship and Character of College Students.“ Unpublished Doc- tor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1941. ’ Stevens, Ashley., "A Study of Some Factors in the Predic— tion of Freshman Achievement at the University of Denver.“ Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Uni- versity of Denver, Denver, 1949. Stewart, Maude A., "The First Year Grade Point Average as a Measure for Predicting Academic Attainment in the Junior-Senior Years of Study in the Major Fields of the College of Liberal Arts of Syracuse University." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Syracuse, Syracuse, 1947. Stright, Isaac L., "The Prediction of Success in Baldwin Wallace College." Unpublished Doctor's disserta- tion, Western Reserve University, Cleveland, 1946. Stuart, William C., "The Relation of the Size and Location of High Schools to the Achievement of Their Stu— dents." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, New York University, New York, 1947. Van Alstine, Frank L., "The Relation Between the Housing of Students and Their Scholarship at the University of Minnesota.“ Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Uni— versity of Minnesota, Minneapolis, 1941. 217 Periodicals Atkinson, W. H., "College-High School Agreement in Michigan," School and Society, 65:144—5, February 22, 1947. "A New Program and an Expansion of the National Scholarships at Harvard,“ School and Society, 63:77—8, February 2, 1946. "Harvard's National Scholarships Six Years After Their In- ception,“ School and Society, 54:435, November 15, 1941. Moulton, Ella Lee, “Dormitory Values for Students,“ School and Society, 29:363, March 16, 1929. “New York University Establishes 'Gold Star' Scholarships," School and Society, 59:72, January 29, 1944. “Research Opportunities at Ohio State University," School and Societ , 63:222, March 30, 1946. Ryan, H. H., "Government Scholarships for High School Gradu— ates," C1earing_House, 23:372, February, 1949. "Scholarships Available for NewaPlan Students, University of Chicago," School and Society, 58:405, November 20, 1943. "Seven Eastern Hemen's Colleges Ndll Offer National Scholar— ships," School and Society, 58:453, December 11, 1943. Seyler, E. C., “The Value of Rank in High School Graduating Class for Predicting Freshman Scholarship," American Association gf_Collegiate Registrars‘ Journal 15:5-22, October, 1939. Stalnaker, John M., "Pepsi-Cola Scholarship Board Activi— ties,“ School and Society, 66:396, November 22, 1947. “The Seven College Conference National Scholarships,‘ School and Societ , 62:350, December 1, 1945. Thurston, Lee M., "The Michigan College Agreement," School and Society, 67:386-7, May 22, 1948. Welf, Ralph Robinson, "Do Scholarships Accomplish Their Pur— pose?" School and Societ , 55:732—5, June 27, 1942. 218 Bulletins Annual Report of the Bureau of Co-Operation with Educa- tional Institutions, June 30, 1949. Published by the University, Ann Arbor, Michigan. ' Annual Report of the Bureau of School Services, June 30, 1950. Published by the University, Ann Arbor, Hichigan. Michigan High School Athletic Association Bulletin, Vol. 27, No. 4 S, November, 1950. Lansing: Department of Public Instruction. Michigan State College Catalogs, for all years from 1900 to 1951. East Lansing: ”iChigan State College. Odell, Charles W., "Conservation of Intelligence in Illi- nois High Schools," Bureau of Educational Research Bulletin No. 22, University of Illinois, Urbana, l” 5. 55 pp. Student Directory, 1949-1950. East Lansing: Michigan State College. Student Directozx,19§O—1951. East Lansing: Michigan State College. Secondary Sources Books Chamberlin, Dean, Enid Chamberlin, and Others, Did They Suc— ceed in College? New York: Harper and Brothers, 1943. _§ducation for All American Youth. Education Policies Comp mission. Washington: National Education Associ- ation, 1944. 421 pp. Faunce, Roland C., Some went tg;College. Michigan Study of Secondary School Curriculum, Lansing: Michigan De- partment of Public Instruction, 1945. 42 pp. Goulden, Cyril H., Methods 9: Statistical Analysis. New York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 1959. 272 pp. {00pman, G. Robert, Alice Iliel, and Paul J. Misner, Democracy in School Administration. New York: D. Appleton-Century Company, Inc., 1943. 330 pp. IiacPhail, Andrew Hamilton, The Intelligence of College Stu! dents. Baltimore: Warwick and Your, Inc., 1924. Snedecor, George H., Statistical IIethods. Ames, Iowa: The Iowa State College Press, 1946. 478 pp. Theses Barber, Leroy E., "Why Some Able High School Graduates Do Not Go to College." Unpublished Doctor's disserta~ tion, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1949. Barker, Richard W., ”The Educational and Vocational Careers of High School Graduates Immediately Following Gradu— ation in Relation to Their Scholastic Abilities." Unpublished Master's thesis, University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1937. Blyth, Mary Isobel, "The Competence of College Algebra Stu- dents Who Studied High School Algebra." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1950. Campbell, James, "An Analysis of Factors Related to the Scholastic Success of Freshmen Engineering Students at Cornell University." Unpublished Doctor's dis- sertation, Cornell University, Ithaca, 1949. Clarke, Corcoran Frederick, "The Relationship of Science Deficiencies to Subsequent Academic Progress in the School of Engineering at Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science.“ Unpublished Doc- tor' s dissertation, H'ichigan State College, East Lansing, 1948. Dahnke, Harold L., "Analysis of the Testing Program in the Department of Effective Living, Michigan State College." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, western Reserve University, Cleveland, 1950. Davison, Hugo H., “Factors in the Scholastic Ability of College Freshmen." Unpublished Doctor's disserta— tion, Harvard University, Cambridge, 1949. Ely, Wayne H., “The Scholastic Success of Students From Small High Schools Versus Students from Large High Schools,“ Unpublished Master's thesis, Indiana State Teachers' College, Terre Haute, 1929. 220 Garrett, Harley F., "A Review and Interpretation of Inves- tigations of Factors Related to Scholastic Success in Colleges of Arts and Sciences and Teachers' Colleges.“ Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, Uni— versity of Colorado, Boulder, 1948.- Harriger, Guy N., "The College Preparatory Curriculum as an Instrument of Educational Guidance." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, 1947. Hill, Guy H., "A Study of the Difficulties of Beginning High School Teachers in Michigan.“ Unpublished Doc— tor's Dissertation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1946. Prator, Ralph, "Administration of Admission to Colleges and Universities." Unpublished Doctor's disserta- tion, University of California, Berkeley, 1947. Price, Henry V., "An Analysis of a Group of Pre—Tests for Students of First Year College Mathematics." Un- published Doctor's dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1941. Ryan, Suler E., "Some Characteristics of the 1948 Freshman Class at the University of Missouri and the Relation of These Characteristics to Academic Success." Un— published Doctor's dissertation, University of Hissouri, Columbia, 1949. Scott, Don Averill, “The Scholastic Ability of Iowa High School Graduates in Relation to Their Intended Edu— cational, Vocational, and Professional Careers and to the Institutions of Higher Education They Plan to Attend." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City, 1935. Sheldon, Udlliam, "A Study of College Students With Scho— lastic Difficulties." Unpublished Doctor's disser- tation, Syracuse University, Syracuse, 1948. Solomon, Lewis E., "Some Relationships Between Reading Ability and Degree of Academic Success in College.“ Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Colorado, Boulder, 1944. 221 Ullsvik, Bjarm R., "A Factor Analysis and Prognosis of the Scholastic Success of Freshman Engineers During Their First Semester at the University of Wisconsin." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Wisconsin, Madison, 1944. Walker, Ernest T., "The Relation of the Housing and Success of Students in a University." Unpublished Doctor's dissertation, University of Chicago, Chicago, 1935. Periodicals Barnes, Richard A., “Is High School Adequate Preparation for College?", School and Society, 55:649-651, June 6, 1942. Beckman, R. 0., ”Scale for Gauging Occupational Rank," Personnel Journal, 13:225—33, 1934. Butts, Porter, "Some Implications of Housing,“ Journal of Higher Education, Nos. 1 and 2, 8: 31- 32, January“ and February, 1937. Carter, T. M., "Effect of College Fraternities on Scholar— ship,“ Journal 9; Applied Psychology, 18:398—400, June , 19 34. Dressel, Paul 8., Effect of the High School on College Grades," Journal of Educational Psychology, 30:802— 17, November, 1939. Harris, E. P., ”Factors Affecting College Grades," Psycho— logical Bulletin, 37:125—66, Hay, 1940. Jorgensen, A. W., “A Comparison of Rural and Urban Children,” Eisoonsin Journal 9: Education, 5:241-3, January, 1939. “Library Fellowships at the University of Chicago," School and Society, 57:42, January 9, 1943. Killer, W. 8., ”The Administrative Use of Intelligence Tests in High Schools," Twenty-first Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, 1922, Part II, pp. 189-222. "New Scholarships Offered at the University of Chicago," School and Society, 57:594, May 22, 1943. Peterson, Basil H., "The Scholarship of Students Housed in Various Living Quarters," School and Society, 57: 221-224, February 20, 1943. Report of sub-Committee of Committee on Student Ability, Leland Stanford Junior University. University Press, Stanford University, Palo Alto, 1923. 37 pp. “Scholarships at the Drexel Institute of Technology," School and Society, 59: 109, February 12,1944. "State Scholarships for Prospective Teachers in Illinois go Begging," School and Society, 64:6, July 6,1946. Travers, Robert H. W., and Norman E. Gronlund, "The Meaning of Marks,“ Journal 9: Higher Education, 21:369-74, October, 1950. "University-Scholarship Examinations," School and Society, 57:151, February 6, 1943. APPENDIX 223 APPENDIX A MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE ENTRANCE SCHOLARSHIP CERTIFICATE THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT HAS BEEN AWARDED AN ENTRANCE SCHOLARSHIP TO MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE FOR THE YEAR I95_. - I95— THIS SCHOLARSHIP WAIVES TUITION CHARGES AND IS RENEWABLE YEARLY FOR THREE ADDI- TIONAL YEARS UPON SUCCESSFUL PERFORMANCE IN COLLEGE. WE HOPE YOU WILL ACCEPT THIS SCHOLARSHIP AS AN OPPORTUNITY AND AS A CHALLENGE. a , CHAIRMAN, FACULWMMIWE 0N SCHOLARSHIP: :- ' '5 . .‘a' 224: APPENDIX B MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE EAST LANSING COMMITTEE ON SCHOLARSHIPS A. }. CLARK, CHAIRMAN The Scholarship Committee of Michigan State College has just completed its survey and study of the records of nearly one thousand high school seniors who have made application for Michigan State College Entrance Scholarships. We wish it were within our province to recognize and reward each applicant with a scholarship, but we had only one scholarship per school with a small number to distribute at large, and hence, it meant selecting those young people who seemed to offer the greatest promise of development. We are happy to announce that you are one of those chosen for a scholar- ship. We congratulate you upon being selected. As you know, the scholarship will pay your course fee of $141 for the first year. If you earn at least a 216 honor point average for the year, the scholarship will be renewed for another year and may be continued on the same basis for the full four years. The scholarship will be available if you enter at the coming Spring, Summer, or Fall quarter. Let us know immediately if you accept the scholarship. This is important because if you do not accept we can then award it to some one else. Also, let us know which term you expect to enroll so we may place your name on the proper scholarship list. If you accept, nothing further need be done about the scholarship until you appear for registration. At registration time, present this letter at the scholarship desk to receive credit for your course fee. Trusting the scholarship will be a valuable aid towda your college education, I remain Very sincerely yours, / / //‘ / /’/ Arthur J lark, Chairman Faculty Committee on Scholarships 8 NOTE: You must also file application for admission to the college With the Registrar. Your principal has the necessary blanks. 225 APPENDIX C Michigan State College East Lansing Mich July 5, 1950 To Cancellation student: You have held an Entrance scholarship during the past year, but upon examination of your scholastic record we regret to find that you have not met the requirements for a continuation of this scholarship. I am sorry to have to inform you that the scholarship will not be continued for the college year 1950-51. Very sincerely yours, Arthur J. Clark, Chairman Faculty Committee on Scholarships cepy APPENDIX D ffnzdtnlt L.u13-f.‘ L-.*‘ . - n.‘-‘-'*~0---flu fififlm m e ‘.—V W-“ - . ...- o -.. -a-ou- o A ---b- 7 .- o - - o o- - - c ”7’ 1 0 home town :13 -3; g:rin;; stair: o..— " an“ — -w---— oopomfiwficfrfi" . ‘0 J- , .' . I _ e l , I- ,0 7 r ”A. \r- ‘. Fatl ‘.cr living? “other living? Ix~nuts dltercea? ”II--c- ‘ ~.~n—.—- our» wan-«m T:- "' ‘r‘x ‘ r , rather's occupation moths r s cc cup.tlcn w. M“-”Q‘OC-n \ Q ' q -. Parents combined monthly income OC‘W =-“.‘=.~'..‘-'o"I-~. ‘— "‘ " .w-_.fl“ What influences led YO“ t9 M S C? m‘.‘_-"‘ "fi. F.” '| . ‘3‘-..“ ‘_‘~ . - w ‘ 0' ‘ ‘ “Md. h—m .w--e~.- u... I...'~- h-Irgo ”an“ School applied for: Agri __ Bus Pub Ser;_ Pngin Home Ec Sci Arts Vet Red _m ~___l:‘asic —‘ ‘.—fi0 — High School attended located at --—--mm School accredited by — _- w‘flwoemw Course pursued in P3 : Col Prep Col Agree chwcol 1"“ Rank in a class of A A1 5 (‘L. r n . '7" I‘. .r e T: ’ “ - ‘,~\ etudant ex;scted to be: ancol Litre cve'; ‘.uo In olior Iaiid.3 ’ ’ A, ’ , 'Grads average required for recommendation to college__ —- . Recomnendation : clear with exams not recommeniefi “no-g .lem 0....“ Groups I II III 1V v VI VII Tmtel Ave - msé- "—— fi ._ Mm “aunt—M's.” “H“nwruw~-—~—--cumutmoo——w wtfi-om I --- nan- o» "-0 rro \-~o-.~u\nu ' - ~ 0. an. ~ I I I C re f 11. t E! (“1‘ ) 1 ._.I 5 “an.” a—v-u—n rm“. f— _-d‘n-—-.--a Les..- - my fiJum-‘A‘ ‘ ‘n'k- ~ “no. -rr..--.— , Points I I I . I _ . . b-cv‘ uni-m . tom-kuw—I .- ”- hor-n Hum-um a— 9““ Lmrmwi Deficiencies —= .\ d"- -m' “W'DCO'O *1 —v— v ____. u..- “#:h‘-“ Did student work vhile in high school hours {or tech? nun-n..- “var-ca. ”Mr- EA trafllss activities in high z-L he 03: Puxwe Athletics ~4.Mo -..-An.-...... Music Gov't Social dour; 4-3 03:;re m - u- ‘1‘-“ ma 0'» IF.", . nun-:- - '0'“ u» .. Any 1111):? 53 Vile 101’; The ":3: die“ 1359.11 51115“: :21; 1:1 17:15.11; . ,‘.~‘)Ql “ I‘I * an: aw o Oos u. g.“ Efait Very low 1cm Avv fairly hjcw .ann Vary rr-u —-— — — ao-no-m «rm-u-‘o-«L-bube v-F‘I‘U'-“-V\: '..-.-:.s-—-« tor—‘D- -...' In- Asia "u -.~--..:; :0 . us .' . ‘- ‘- .~-. nas‘A—I'I .-.a.s I I I ‘ E I I I Intell capacityk' i S I '- i “vb-O ‘ vowL-l I “00‘3“ INK. .”4 “w A.“ ’:~- -‘PM o 0 . II e" 'I.‘ ~ V' ‘ I- - ‘II q‘ '0‘. '5 -0 -U‘d" n-~‘ - Intell perfoaa I . g I I A I I .‘ 'u*.mpm-a- “In” v New... 0 ..--..o..- 3.1.- .¢ w. ..,.a‘ g... - ,4... .o. ‘ .-. .. . ....‘_ vmu'x ‘ . . .fi. .' éerir.vwres ! ’ a I 5’ " 5 "' Y *“m '“flw: OIJ i? i‘jq 1 11‘- v] { ‘3'! “.mut-U v. '.ue. v’h Q“ - If. 49-»..- a-r-nu _.. 5. ~ u.~" .-u. "L..~“.' mu (‘1. .o ”w‘... w- -2. ,,..,,."_,.__. ‘5‘ .__1-... ’.:J T I‘I‘; é t a 1’ I l 1 t_' Y “av-u-~“-0.. .fiuoifi-‘ on u O‘A.~E:.. ...,.. ... . .er-.,~.:Eo-u- . _.... . -.-v- can... 0 a} one. . Ur . .onv. ......, a.“ “Ha-.p __"._ . 15 o 3 “-IOC' ‘b‘i-~*~' av“ ‘4~ - ~B..v---‘- 1 - « mfle‘W‘s-O - ~§~“q . cor-.9 m<.s.s so- a u - u. -."-I‘0 -I' I- - ' --.:-1I ‘9 --H.- 1’ .- ~~rr . eoc hn'l m..eon i 5 a I I = t . h. --’ .BA"-'--.‘"‘ I" V‘--‘ I - Q-‘W*C- v V 0" -II' I C I-‘A‘PO'J- .l 0. ¢ ‘. ‘5" IL“‘V “ 'l‘ """- ‘1‘ “ ' I C ' ' Jhcflorvr‘avco L I " I g ‘ z ’ ; ‘ ' 1 I) C 1‘: u :15": i‘pi I" J E- “.1." . '.:« :1 1 5‘ ‘1 t" “ w‘ ‘ "1i ’ ‘q' ""‘ "‘ ""'~"—E'- ~‘ van-er o !- :o-v-u rc: alto. ub~r.‘- e... a- I: .o. 4‘! v'.‘ o u. save." -. 5 . _ l . . 1 I e . g s ‘ .fi .r.‘ y- g,. . o v ~x.-\ -r g a . ~- -¢ 227 DO NOT FILL IN APPENDIX E Year._-.... MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN entNumber APPLICATION FOR ADMISSION pAppr. sent _. .. . Application may be submitted after first semester of senior year’s work is completed. (Print your me in space above.) GENERAL INFORMATION The Basic College has been established as an educational unit in which all students will be enrolled during their freshman and sophomore years. The Basic College is designed to provide students with a sound educational foundation on which to build an intelligent interest in personal, family, vocational, social, and civic problems, a better understanding of these problems, and a greater ability to cope with them. It includes the study of man’s relationship to physical, biological, and social sciences, an increased knowledge of the historical background of present-day civilizations, and an enhanced appreciation of cultures, past and present, that have been expressed in literature, music and art. Students whose training may eventually become highly specialized need this foundation of general educational experience that each may have a greater appreciation of the relationship of his Special field to the needs of society as a whole. Specialization for the Bachelor’s degree is completed in the appropriate school. (For requirements for admission, see page 9.) INSTRUCTIONS Page: 1, 2, 8, and 5 of this blank are to be filled out by the applicant in ink; the entire blank is then to be referred to the prin- cipal of the high school from which the applicant graduated, who will fill out the remaining pages and forward the entire blank to the oflicc of the Registrar. [:3 Mr. I. Name in full“.------....,-- ...............____...._......[:1 Mrs. Date (Last) (First) (Middle) D Miss 2. Permanent home address..-.--_-.-------__ (Number and street) (City) (State) 3. Mailing address.---_. -. . -----.-----.... _-_~-_~ , .--__-l_ _._..--_.--.- _-_ . (If diflcront tram home address) (Street and number) (City) (State) (Last date you will be here) 4. (a) Birthplace- Date of Birth...---.. ...---.. .......--.--..... .---Are you a US. citizen?--_.-_,--__-_____ (Month) (Day) (Year) , (b) Are you a resident of Michigan? C] Yes—number of months.---.---.-.--.._--..--.---_, No I] (See residence regulations, page 10) 5. (a) Single --.a.--,Marricd-.__....Do you have children?“ ...... _Number .......... Husband’s or wife’s full name (b) Have you had experience in the Armed forces? C] Yes C] No Total months in service.-------.- ..--.Branch of Service.--.--._-_-.-_,. (c) Type of discharge .. ..._-.-...... ..-..... Rank when discharged Entrance dateum....-..-. ....... .-.Discharge date.._ (Name of High School) (Location) (Date of Graduation) 7, (a) Have you at any time applied for admission to Michigan State College or to any other collere or university?---.---._----------If so, give name of institution and full details of the outcome of your application..--------- --_-__-___-._ -— -.--...- .--.--_..---.- -.--.--~--o—_.---~.--.“--.._.--- .. -.-.....--.o---.--...------..--------<. ._ (b) Have you attended any college or university? .- If so, give name and location of the institution, dates of attendance, and reason for withdrawal ............. , ..... (c) If you have attended another college, ask the registrar to.send a transcript of your record or a statement of honor- able dismissal if no credit was earned to: Registrar, Michigan State College, East Lansing, Michigan. C] Regular College Program (d) Have you previously attended Michigan State College? {B :23 When...._-.-..;I.5.é;;fi§___.._5 B $33$£f§rse C] Armed Forces Program a. When do you expect to enter Michigan State College? C] Fall [:1 Winter [:1 Spring _ Cl Summer. Year ” 9a. (1) Father’s full name: 9b. (1) Mother’s full name: ‘F(L'o8:lm—-(I':l;ltlv W(filddle)mm - I (Last) (First) (Middle) (2) Living?— ..... . .......... (3) Is he an American citizen? (2) LivingP--.--....---._._- (3) Is she an American citizen? “ (4) Occupation (4) Occupation. 9c. If you have a Legal Guardian or Step-parents, give name . -- _-.__ “m “"11"” __-,_-,,,_____-_-.Relationship to you———-—--————~ Address (Street and Number) (City and State) Rev. Jan; 1951 2 10. if you have worked since graduation from high school, state poSitions held and the dates of each term of employment. 11. Give names, addresses and occupations of at least two responsible adult persons (not your former school teachers or oflicers, or relatives} as references ... 12. What influences led you to come to this College? A 13. Do you expect to complete H. Check your preference (check one): SCHOOL OF AGRICULTURE [:1 General Agriculture (Agricultural Eco- nomics, Agricultural Extension. Animal Husbandry, Dairy Production, Farm Crops, Poultry Husbandry, Pro-Theo- logy, Rural Sociology and Anthropology or Soil Science.) E] Agricultural Education (Teaching) Agricultural Engineering Series: C] Agricultural Mechanics [3 Agricultural Engineering Dairy Series: C] Dairy Production [:1 Dairy Manufactures C] Food Technology Horticultural Series: I] Floriculture [j Ornamental Horticulture C] Pomology C] Vegetable Production Landscape Series: D Landscape Architecture E] Urban Planning Conservation: Fisheries and Wildlife Forestry Wood Utilization Light Construction and Lumber Merchandising Conservation Municipal Forestry SCHOOL OF BUSINESS AND PUBLIC SERVICE Division of Business: [:1 Accounting [1 General Business :1 Food Distribution 1:] Business Education and Secretarial Studies 1:] 2 Yr. Terminal in General Business D 2 Yr. Terminal in Insurance [:1 2 Yr. Terminal in Retailing C] 2 Yr. Terminal in Secretarial Science DUDE] ‘l .J CH I] Division of Hotel, Restaurant and General Institutional Management [:1 Economics C] Journalism C] Physical Education E] Recreation Education 1.'['_'] requirements for a degree? U] the two-year terminal course only? Police Administration: C] General 1:] Police Science C] Crime Prevention Political Science and Public Administration: Political Science Public Administration Public Management Social Service SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING Agricultural Chemical Civil Electrical Mechanical Metallurgical Sanitary SCHOOL OF HOME ECONOMICS Child Development Clothing and Textiles Foods Nutrition General Home Economics and Nursing Institution Administration Related Arts Teaching in Home Economics [3 2 Yr. Terminal in Home Economics 1:] 2 Yr. Terminal in Retail Merchandising SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND ARTS (Check Major Field) Fine Arts: [3 Art [:1 Applied Music C] Music Major C] Music Theory [1 Musical Therapy 1:] Public School Music Education (Teaching): D Elementary C] Industrial Arts [3 Secondary (Check Major Field Also) UDDD DUUDDDC] DDUUDUDDD Language and Literature: check one: C] English 8 grench . _ , _ erman 3:] Foreign Languagesw“ [:1 Latin [:1 Literature D Spanish C] Speech, Dramatics and Radio SCHOOL OF SCIENCE AND ARTS (Continued) (Check Major Field) Biological Science: E] Bacteriology E] Botany C] Entomology [j Physiology C] Zoology [3 Nursing Education Physical Science: B Chemistry [:1 Geography D Geology [3 Mathematics [3 Physics and Astronomy Social Science: B Foreign Studies B History C] Philosophy [:1 Psychology C] Sociology Pr e-Prof essional : [:1 Dental [3 Law D Medical SCHOOL OF VETERINARY MEDICINE [j Pre-Veterinary Medicine Cl Veterinary Medicine {3 Medical Technology BASIC COLLEGE C] No Preference (Undecided on Major) IMPORTANT Write your name on the back of a small unmounted photograph or snapshot of yourself and attach here- Pictures will not be re- turned. Application will be con- sidered incomplete if photo- graph is omitted. THIS IS REQUIRED OF EVERY APPLICANT j FOR COUNSELOR (To be completely filled out by the applicant.) Name..-._----_----..---------. Date of Birth _. a . muffler-(33' (Fir—5135555" tin-dale Namei mass) {13:}; "(Yellow Home address.-----.--.-----..-.._-__--.. _ Single-._.__-_-_-...-_.. .__.-___ Married . Do you have any children? Number 1. IO 10. (a) Father‘s name..-.._.-._ - _ ..........W ... (d) Mother‘s name . .. ____ __ _ _W _. , __ . Last First Middle Last First Middle (b) Father‘s occupation ___..- (e) Mother’s occupation (if wage earner). . (c) Father‘s education (check if a graduate; otherwise (f) Mother‘s education, (check if a graduate; otherwise give give number of years in attendance): number of years in attendance): f M.S.C. J M.S.C. Gracie school ._ . High school .. College Grade school High school College Other-,...... i Other . Give names and relationships of relatives who have attended M.S.C., including years of attendance (:1) Have you contributed toward your support while in high school? ...... Nature of employment .. __ ._ , .Approx. number of hours per week (b) Have you been employed since graduation? .. s How long and at what work? (a) In what subject do you expect to specialize in college? ..... . Do you plan to teach? (b) Name high school subjects you liked best (c) List any particular honors, prizes, other special awards for scholarship obtained in high school. (a) Make a complete list of the sports and other extra-curricular school activities in which you participated in high school (b) What special recognition, if any, have you received in any of these activities? . -..-a——-.—-..--._._--.... ...... _-. ... .- -_- ...-.----_-..----_... -_.__..--..._ (c) Which, if any of these activities do you intend to continue in College?.- V. .. ._ a .W_ _s ,. What do you look forward to as a life work? What are your plans for financing your college course during the first year? If one year or more has passed since your graduation from high school, state whether or not and how your attitude towards higher education has changed State condition of general health, naming any illness which may have handicapped you while in high school Do you have periods of unconsciousness, convulsions, epilepsy, or fainting spells?..-----.---_-----_ (Confidential) CANDIDATES PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS (To be filled out by the high school counselor, principal, or superintendent” This sheet will be placed in the hands of the. student’s college Counselor. i. To the high school official: (a) Please indicate your judgment of the candidate by placing cheek marks on the scale of ratings given below. (b) If a rating on any trait is omitted, it will be understood that you do not have sufficient knowledge of the candidate. to express judgment. Such omissions will not put the candidate at a disadvantage. Trait Very low Low Average Fairly high High Very high Potential intellectual capacity . .. . .. .. . .. ...-_ . W . . . “----.-.. . _ k _ _,_ Actual Intellectual performance .. -..-. .. -..-----.-u.-. . - W - WW Seriousness of purpose... .. ...-WW . , __ .. -, . .. . -.. W Originality-.--. _-___ . . W. . .. ....... --....WW __ TractabilityW.......-.- .. W- . .....W...... .. . . .. - ........... . .. . - ..-W . .... Social-mindedness . . . __..____.... W .. .. .. W, . , __. Independence of effort __ .. .. ._--. . ..--.. .. --.. .. . - --. Popularity _ . WWW--.- . __ - -... . , ...... _._-.--_,_--.--._-. _.-_._-,_,_-.,..___ 2. If candidate took tests, please give: ' . . ' Norm . Name of Test . Date Given I Percentile ! Group Remarks l l r l ' s l 3. General rank in class (check one): (Best 25%).“... .- (Second 25%) (Third 25%) (Poorest 25%) .-... W ....... .. 4. (3) Has the applicant any defect of speech, sight or hearing?-.__-__-- .-.._ - -.. .---.._.....- ....— (b) Is the applicant subject to periods of unconsciousness, convulsions, epilepsy, or fainting spells? .. -., ..--_-_.._-...__ 5. State any other defects or qualities which are not covered by above- . Give any additional information which you think will be of value to us in understanding and guiding the candidate-.---”- To what degree did the candidate’s attitude towards scholastic work and application to academic subjects change during the last year or two in high school? ----.. .. -. W..- .. Describe any particular circumstances of the candidate’s environment, personality, or fortunes of life that may have been influential in determining the record made in high school.-...-..-. .. _. .-.__— - .... _. ..—-—.—._.- —---- .. ...-.-.—-—__ .. .— _.....-- --...--....—_..—._--....-.....--W-‘....a----...r“-..“.--n-.. ..--- ...W»...»..--._..._.. . — __.. --__.~-- _.— m-w~--W—- has -Slgnatt_ire ii Title 6 ( To be completed by applicant) 0!) this page, please write a short story of your life. We suggest that you include why you want a college education, your travels or experiences, interests in sports, hobbies, or plans for the future. Please include a statement on any illnesses or physical dis- abilities. (This story of your life is to be entirely original and in your own handwriting. admission officers only.) It will be used by counselors and # . - u a... u — ~— —--—-— ———- —. I . .. _—— .. —— ... .... —-‘ .. .— .. .—. _ .9" _.. cum — a ... .. _— .. F .. k ., .. .. v -.— ..._._. .__ ... u .....— u r. .... .. .—_-— - __ ‘ —- - k... ... - .— ,. 7777777 --...-_.......----—.—-..._-----_-._._ ..4.-._ ,J / ... .. _ _. ... .. _._ ...... -.....“ -.. .... - - g. .. ... _- 7 ._. _. .. .- ”-..- ... .. .. ...—.....-“ _ — .. .... ._ - .... ... -..... _ ...—....— _ ...... ——... _. —. _ ... - -— —4 ..- ...—- ..— ._. ...—... ..-..— .. .. _ ‘ —__ ‘*m—-—-— * - ” ... — -—... fl... .. - - - _.—n—.—-—--——.. fl... “ ... - ...- .. _. —.—.._ “ -- _. n- ”“u— _ u... _- - ...... _,_.__._ ”...- -... -7. -'-—v---... ....... -- o--o---—.-o-.-- . .. .. _ _. _ " --- ~‘---..-_....-—.-_ .- ...-- .. ...—... .—. -- -.-. — .... -— .. — _ _ ... ....- _ -- -‘.... ...--. .... .. .. . --.- .... I _ ____ .—- —M —. - .... m ”—4 ”—.. - -.— .. -.. o .— ---- —._ ..- .. ....— .. .— -— .. - -- _.-.__..._.- N ...—- __._ --—.--.....~...---_—..-.-...-..r- ...—..— —. .. -— _-.. e- “N —~--.._-__ _ ..-- “‘.---~ .. .....- _. - mu-_--_ -_.-<_.._e_,_. ~~_—__ ... -- M- - «e- -..... — - .. .. _ ... — -- y ._ a .- ......— “a-“ - - ...-- ” __ ... _ . __ ..— ..._... ...... ...-— - O.“ ..-... ----0---"----o—---_“--_.-_..m , .... .. .. .... .- ._ .. m - .-...-d Your Signature 6 HIGH SCHOOL RECORD AND CERTIFICATE OF RECOMMENDATION (Confidential) Do not mail application to Registrar’s Office until 12 B grades are recorded. Please make certain page 4 has also been completed. 1. High School. .. Located at 2. (a) By what recognized accrediting associations is your school accredited? ............. .- .. .. C] Yes E] No 8. Student’s name ,, . ._ _ . ----...-- a. .. _ .. a. _. a (Last) (First) (Middle) (b) Is your school a member of the Michigan Secondary School-College Agreement? . E] College Preparatory Course 4. Date of graduation , ., . . . from (check oneM [3 Michigan Special Program under “College Agreement Plan' L D Non-college Preparatory Course {:1 (a) Years in attendance- (b) Names of and years in attendance at other high schools, if any, which candidate attended and from which credits were accepted 6. Has a statement of the applicant's credits been submitted to any other college or university? . If so, when and to what Kiln-”1? 7. If candidate took tests, please give: (If given in page 4, omit here) Name of Test Date Given Percentile 5:01;: I Remarks 1".” i i z j : I 5 My 8. (a) Number in candidate’s graduation class . _ .. . __ (b) Applicant‘s rank in class (e.g.—~highest, 1; second highfsh 2) " “ (c) General rank in class (check one): (Best 25%) . . (Second 25%) a . (Third 25%) ,._ (Poorest 25%) 9. Check the group under which you think the scholastic record of the applicant may be expected to fall: I] Excellent C] Superior E] Average C] Inferior E] Probable Failure 10. Grade average or rank required for recommendation to College 11. Principal or Superintendent please check and sign the following: I hereby certify that the following transcript is a true copy of the applicant’s record . minations. i C] 1.) do oflicially recommend admission to Michigan State College as checked: D Clear. C] With an and (check one) ' C] 2.) do not otficially recommend admission to Michigan State College. Suwim‘fim om V . _e_. wwa in the senior 37‘” Note: Marked improvement during the junior and senior years and sometimes a great enough improvement t the standard ee may indicate that a pupil is ready to undertake college work even though the total average may not 11) required for clear recommendation to college. "In"? car No. of No. 01 Grades Tfkleln eks Hours Grades Pursued ( - - Per lii. V) “”5”“ Week STUDIES STUDIES 'AGRICULTURE: First Second Third Fourth First Year Year Fourth First Yr. ACCEPTED TOWARD G RADUATION CHEMISTRY No. of Hours Per Week Unit Value When Failed STUDIES FAILED STUDIES NOW IN PROGRESS {iii ;l,OGY ADV. BIOLOGY ho'l‘ANY GEOLOGY PHYSIOLOGY Passing grade of school Grading system (give numerical equivalents of letters, when letters are used.) States Length of Recitation Period Length of Laboratory Period Specify by (PG) any subjects taken subsequent to graduation. ‘Mark (L) any studies occupying double periods. 8 . . '. _ '.'. (Do. Not. W'rite ..anIThié Page)“ I Curriculum desired C] Degree Curriculum [:1 Two Year Terminal anliqh Qpeeeh Journ ................... Dramaties ........... GROUP: __________________ I ritin French German Spanish ......... GROUP: _______________ _ Algebra,_ ,,,,, Pl. Geom _____________ Sol. Geom. .........Trig. . ................... Other Math GROUP: ....,__.__. Physics _,.._..........,,_Chem. ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Biology .....Botany..... ........... Z001. Geol. ...... Physiol. . .Gen Sci. ...GROUP:.,..,__,,,,,,,__ Historyv,,_,___, ..Econ. ...... .Am. Govt. ....,.....Geog. Sociol. Civ. Social th GROUP; , 7 —Cr Agricult.w ...mmcHomc Ec ........... Coni’l ................. Indust. ............. Music GROUP; W___ MISC ...................... "midi-6;.“ Conditions or deficiencies , ........... , _____________ Transcript(s) received from ...... . _ . _ .. 1. Approved pending final semester’s grade . . . ,. . ....Date, Name of person checking units Final grades ok—Admission approved . . . . . .. ., . Date Name of person checking final grades 2. Admission approved (record complete) . .. . . .Dai.e . ,, Name of person checking units 3. Admission NOT a ) roved _ . .. .. . . . Date. . I p Name of person checking unitsv Remarks: I. 9. HIGH SCHOOL. REQUIREMENTS FOR .ADMISSION For graduates from accredited high schools: 1. A satisfactory high school record. This means meeting the “college recommending grade” as designated by the high school. 2. A minimum of 15 units.* Three or more units must be in English, and seven units (six units if four units of English are pre— sented) chosen from three of the following groups: foreign languages, mathematics, sciences and social studies. Three additional units either from the subjects just mentioned or from vocational studies, such as agriculture, home economics, commercial or indusi. 22' are required. (Music may be presented in place of vocational studies for those who expect to specialize in music.) The other units presented may be from any other subjects accepted by the high school toward graduation. Ly ()pcrniiug under “The Michigan Secondary School—College Agreement.” Michigan State College agrees to disregard the pattern of subject» pursued in considering for admissions the graduates of selected accredited high schools, provided they are recommended by the wimol from among the more able students in graduating classes. i-lvcnmlnry schools are urged to make available such courses as provide a necessary preparation for entering technical, indus- : pmfessional curricula. A lack of such preparatory courses will not prevent a student from gaining admission to Michigan State College but if preparatory courses are needed, the college will teach them under an accelerated program without college credit. Thus, in certain cases, it might take an extra term or two beyond the normal four years, or a summer school or two. during: lllé‘ normal four years, to complete the requirements for the Bachelor’s degree. ll: q) . : ' recommendation from the high school principal or other proper administrative oiiiccr as to attitude, habits, emotional stability. Irvneral conduct, character, ability, and capacity, to indicate that the candidate will make a suitable college student. For {loose not qualified for admission under the terms of I. l. Entrance examinations from the following areas will be required: Communications (English and Speech) La Biological Science ,. Physical Science (including mathematics) .... History and Social Studies Literature and Fine Arts ”9 The Board of Examiners will determine which of these examinations will be required. is? . The results of the entrance examinations, the applicant’s previous records (scholastic and experience) and results of intelligence and aptitude tests will be used by the Board of Examiners in judging the candidate for admission. For those who fail the examinations but who make scores sufficiently high to warrant a trial, a summer school admission may be recommended. M unit means a subject. pursued through a school year with not less than four recitation periods each week. REEF. { TO THE CATALOG FOR ADMISSION REQUIREMENTS TO THE SCHOOLS RESIDENCE REGULATIONS 1. No one shall be deemed a resident of Michigan for the purpose of registering in Michigan State College unless he has resided in this State six months immediately preceding the date of his proposed enrollment. 2. No one may gain or lose a residence in this state while a student at the college. 3. The residence of minors shall follow that of their legal guardian except where guardianship has been established in this state obviously for the purpose of evading the fee. 4. Aliens who have taken out their first citizenship papers and have other- wise mct the requirements for residence shall be considered as eligible for registration as residents of Michigan. 5. The residence of any person, other than a legal guardian, who may furnish funds for payment of College fees shall in no way affect the residence of the student. 6. Students whose parents are not legal residents of Michigan but who own real estate in Michigan assessed on the tax rolls at $5,000 or more may be exempted from out—of—state fees. (Those wishing exemption on this basis must present a statement from the clerk of the county in which the property is located showing the assessed valuation.) l 228 APPENDIX F MICHIGAN STATE COLLEGE EAST LANSING, MICHIGAN APPLICATION Undergraduate Entrance Scholarship Date ................................................................ 19 ........ Name ................................................................................ . ..... . ..................... Student Number ............................. (Last) (First) (Middle; (1! already admitted) Address .................................................................................................................. . ....................................... . ...... (Number and Street) City ................................. - ..................................... County ...................... _ .......................... State .......................... High School .................................................. . ...................................................................................................... (Name) (City) (County) (State) Date of Birth ............................................................... Date of Graduation .................................................... 1. When do you expect to enter college? [:1 Fall [:1 Winter E] Spring C] Summer Year ........ 2. Is your father living? E] Yes D No. Mother living? [3 Yes C] No. Divorced? [:3 Yes [3 No 3. Name of father ......................................................................... - .................................................................. (First) (Middle) (Last) 4. Name of mother .......................................................................................................................................... (First) (Middle) (Last) 5. Name and complete address of parent or guardian... ...... - ............................................ - ......................... 6. Occupation of father ......... ' ................................. - ............................................................... 0f mother, if employed outside of home .................................... Approximate combined monthly income ................ 7. Number of brothers and sisters at home and dependent on family .................................................. 8. Brothers and sisters in some college .................................... Other dependents .................................... 9. This scholarship amounts to $141.00 per year. Will your parents be able to pay the rest of your expenses? ....................................................... - ............. . ................................................................................ 10. If not, how do you propose to pay them ............................................. - .................................................. ........... .-........-.— ....................................................................................................................................................... ................................................................................................................................................................................ 11. State in detail the activities in which you have taken part, such as representing your school in interscholastic contests, sports, editorships, entertainments, and offices of responsibility. Indicate any special recognition received ........... . ..................................................................................... .................................................................................................................................................. .--.a.-..-..-.-........‘ ..................................................................................................... .................................................. ................................................................................................................................ ................................................ ....................................................................................................... ............................................................................................................. .................................................................................................................. .............................................................. ........................................................................................................................... .................................................. 12. Two letters of recommendation are required. Request two peOple who are competent to evalu- ate you as a citizen and as a student, to send letters of recommendation to the Chairman of the Faculty Committee on Scholarships, 323 Administration Building. NOTICE TO APPLICANT: Attach a small unmounted photo- mph °f ”mam This ”Puma” Have you already filed an application for admission to will be considered incomplete if . . . Mlchigan State College with the Registrar? If not, photograph is omitted. see your Principal about this immediately. Write your name on the back of ' the photograph. Photographs will .. not be returned. ’ You will be notified of the decision of the Faculty Committee on Scholarships shortly after April 1. NOTE: The balance of this application is to be filled out by the principal or a person delegated by him and is to be treated as confidential information. I ‘J 1'»? - f' Following is a true transcript of the applicant’s record .................. _ ..................................................................................... (Superintendent or Principal) r I ‘ V f l f Year No. of l r . . T No. of . No. of Unit aken Hours Grades Unit Taken W 1 111(3):? Grades 1. 11, Value STUDIES IIII. IV) Puma! : Week Value STUDIES III. IV) Pursued Week 4 3 E o "O ENGLISH : First Year ‘AGRICULTURE: . i . Second Year [ ; l Third Year 5 ‘ Fourth Year L i A: 1 moms ECONOMICS: L LATIN : ' j ; Y' I. First Year Second Year Third Year ‘COMM'L WORK: Fourth Year FRENCH: . ' . First Year Second Year A 3 Third Year . Fourth Year GERMAN: . ‘INDUSTRIAL First Year Second Year i Third Year I Fourth Year SPANISH: .: ‘OTHER STUDIES ACCEPTED TOWARD GRADUATION First Year . i L Second Year 3 i MATHEMATICS: Algebra. First Yr. 1 . . Algebra. Second Yr. ‘ 7 A 1 Geometry. Plane ! *OTI-IER STUDIES NOT ACCEPTED TOWARD GRADUATION Geometry, Solid l Trigonometry [ Lec. .1. PHYSICS Lab. l L... _ CHEMISTRY Lab. No. of Lee. Unit STUDIES Hours STUDIES Year Per When BIOLOGY Lab. Value NOW IN PROGRESS Week FAILED Failed Lee. ‘ * A ADV. BIOLOGY Lab. ---..- Lee. BOTAN Y Lab. ‘MUSIC _L 4. “-1)— - "17 "t U WWW)! b» 4——)_ _— »—.!.» __ -——._ «s i ,___1,_. — - )— ——‘-———&— I l i I l l l -qy—‘fi 1p—4r... «>- Lee. ZOOLOGY Lab. Lec. GEOLOGY Lab. Lec. PHYSIOLOGY Lab. HISTORY: Q Ancient i Passing grade of school. --- World I Grading system (give numerical equivalents of letters, when letters are used.) European United States _ ->_,______.*_ _,-___,_. ___,_- __ _____..____._ -___ k English ECONOMICS: AMERICAN GOV 1": Length of Recitation Period», , ’ ———— , __,, GEOGRAPHY: SOCIOLOGY= Length of Laboratory Period, - CIVICS: Specify by (PG) any subjects taken subsequent to Motion. SOCIAL PROBLEMS: ‘Mark (L) my studies occupying double periods. High School ..................... - ............................................ Location ......................................................................... Number of students in senior class ....................................... , .......................................................................... Give approximate position of applicant in class ............................................................................................ Kindly check following points regarding the candidate: 1. Independent and thorough worker [3 Excellent [3 Good [3 Fair Cl. Poor 2. General citizenship [:1 Excellent [3 Good [:1 Fair C] Poor 3. Financial need , E] Great [:1 Not too great E) Apparently no Need Signed .............. .. .................................................................................... . .............. Position ............................. a .................... . ............ . .................................. , ......... Please hold applications from your school until all are in your hands and then send them to the address below: Chairman of Faculty Committee on Scholarships Room 323, Administration Building Michigan State College East Lansing, Michigan All applications must be filed with the Committee not later than March 1 of the year of the award. h‘n ...mJ—AM Number Name Local Address Home Town Age Marital statug Sex Father living Mother living Parents divorced Father's Business Mother‘s Occupation Parent's combined monthly income Rosana for. selecting M S G Did you return as a Sophomore? Course taken in high school 1 Type of recommendation by high school principal School accredited by N C A U of Mil ‘l 1. ) . Home Science Vet. Basic Bank inggradnating class; number of high school graduates Size of high school A, B, C. D, or E g3. figlhoipal's Eli-opinion rs- Vg'garilng type of Inf'na‘l an 301': Fail. ‘ Gradd ro’ ired for recommendation to High schoolcllege average l I. High II. sphool III. marks 1v. 1; v. 2‘1 v1. ‘53 VII. N High iizma ”chool Music activ1ties Gov't. l Social y Journ. “-3 .i I l Place oftresidence i College hajor Number of credits earnedi Number of honor POintSjearned Grade mint average Scores on the Psychological examination 111 §i ”Marks in 121 ‘ basic 131 1 ‘ i‘courses 141 151 161 171 Gains or losses in re marking ““8633 in which students obtained 3‘3 or E's ; 1 ABPfiNDIX G ma ster Tally Sheet 250 APPENDIX H DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGES IN HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT AREAS The Cancellation Group AREAS A A9 B+ B B- 0+ 0 c- D+ D~ Eng. I 35 14 I 23 61 4 6 14' o o ‘Ifi" Lang. II 30 o 11 36 4 8 12 o 2 1 Math. III 24 3 24 7o 3 12 16 1 1 2 P. Sci.IV 24 2 27 68 6 12 16 1 o o 3. Sci. v 41 7 28 56 7 6 7 1 o o Voc. VI 51 9 29 38 4 9 7 1 o 0 Misc. VII 31 _' 6 12 39 1 2 3 1 o 0 Totals 277 551 t_mlgh 6 DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGES IN HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT AREAS The Renewal Group AREAS i he B+ B B- 0+ 6 c- 9+ D Eng. I 97 17 24 50 2 4W .. "I" "”6” I “a”? Lang. II 79 8 28 4o 1 4 4 o o 0 Math. III 79 10 46 47 3 5 3 o o o P. Sci.IV 77 12 37 63 3 4 o o 1 1 8. Sci. v ' 106 19 26 39 1 1 1 2 o o Voc. VI 98 14 23 39 o 4 4 o o 0 Misc. VII 69 3 13 3o 0 1 4 o o 0 Totals 688 513 42 5 I 251 DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGES IN HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT AREAS The Withdrawal Group AREAS .A A- B+ B B- 0+ 0 C- D+ D Eng. I 12 “o 2 1.5“ o I ”3 o o""‘6"“ Lang. II 3 o 4 10 0 1 4 o o 0 Math. III 7 1 6 12 1 1 5 o o o P. Sci.IV 6 1 5 16 o 1 3 1 o o S. Sci. v 17 1 2 11 o 1 1 o o o Voc. VI 7 1 17 5 o 1 1 o o 0 Misc. VII 10 o 5 4 o 1 1 o o 0 Totals 66 115 26 o DISTRIBUTION OF AVERAGES IN HIGH SCHOOL SUBJECT AREAS The Regular Group .AREAS A A- 8+ B B- C+ c c- D+ D D- F Eng. III 16 13 14 59v? 8 23 50 3 4 4 hI»_I Lang. II 13 4 12 22 9 13 34 7 5 8 3 1 Math. III 12 4 16 37 10 23 57 5 15 13 3 o P. Sci. IV 13 2 6 52 13 So 46 7 7 15 1 1 S. Sci. V 16 9 19 64 11 17 32 7 4 7 o o Voc. VI 22 9 2o 74 5 17 29 5 1 4 o 0 Misc. VII 33 2 16 46 7 8 22 2 o o o 0 Totals 168 498 '427 III 98 ___ 232 APPENDIX I 210 Ferguson Street Lansing 12 Michigan December 26 1950 Dear fellow-student: During the academic year 1949-1950 you were a student at Michigan State College studying under a tuition-free scholarship. Nearly 40 per cent of those admitted on the entrance scholarship did not maintain an academic record high enough to have the scholarship renewed. I am interested in the causes for these scholar- ship cancellations to the extent that I would like to make this study the dissertation for a doctor's degree. You can help me and at the same time render a service to the college and to future scholarship students if you will kindly answer and return the enclosed ques- tionnaire promptly. I intend to send this questionnaire to about 200 students but before I put it in final form I have decided to give it a trial run. I'm.sending it now to 12 students to see what changes must be made before I write it in final form. I would appreciate your fullest co-Operation. Feel free to write comments where the questions are faulty or unimportant and add suggestions if you see ways to improve the value of the questionnaire. Thanking you in advance, I remain Yours truly Marvin C Volpel Dept of Mathematics l. 2. 3. 4. 6. 7. 8. 9. IO. 11. 12. 13. 235 APPENDIX J The Questionnaire was the whole program of your high school sufficient to prepare one for college? Yes No Do you feel that your high school preparation was adequate to meet the demands made on college fresh— men? Yes No Do you think that you, personally, were prepared for college? Yes No Was the size of your school a handicap to your aca- demic success as a college freshmen? Yes No "-C—d Did you receive adequate educational guidance in high school? Yes No Did your parents help you plan your educational pro- gram? Yes No Are your parents in sympathy with your plans for a college education? Yes No In what areas was your high school program strong? In what areas was your high school program weak? Did you have a regular study pr0gram last year? Yes No Did you make use of the counseling service last year? Yes No If so, for what purpose? Did you study much during the day time? Yes No 14. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 25. 26. 27. 234 Did you.make use of the library for study purposes? Yes No Did you consult your instructors for extra help? Yes No Were there any outside influences which handicapped your college work? Yes No If so, what were they? Were there any outside influences which inspired you to do better work than you would otherwise have done? Yes No If so, what were they? Was your place of residence in last year a handicap to you as far as your success in college was con- cerned? Yes No If so, in what way? Did you over—participate in extra-class activities to the detriment of your studies? Yes No If so, in what areas? In what particular areas (if any) could your campus life have been improved? (a; by yourself? (b by the college? Do you think this would have raised your scholarship average? Yes No What more could you have done during the year to further your own academic interests? was your induction into the college program all that you had hoped it would be? Yes No 88. 29. 30. 31. 33. 34. 35. 37. 38. 39. 255 Were you pr0perly advised regarding the qualifications for the renewal of the scholarship award? Yes No were you prOperly enrolled as to the variety of courses, adequate schedule of classes, hours of school work? Yes No Were you notified of the cancellation in time to pre- vent embarrassment? Yes No Did you know that you had lost the scholarship before you received the letter from the Committee? Yes No Vere the demands of the college instructors greater than you had anticipated? Yes No Was class size any handicap to you? Yes No Were you satisfied with the quality of instruction in general? Yes Io Were you satisfied with the regulation regarding the comprehensive examinations and the subsequent marks in the basics? Yes No Was there any class or course which you let slide because of lack of interest (a) in the subject? Yes No (b) in the instructor? Yes No (0) or because of poor instruction? Yes No Have you any suggestions to your high school prin- cipal? Can you give any advice to this year's scholarship Freshmen? What were the main reasons that you did not earn the 1.6 average last year? APPENDIX A 236 210 Ferguson Street lansing 12 Michigan February 12 1951 Dear fellow-student: During the academic year 1949-50 you were a student at Michigan State College studying under a tuition-free scholarship. Nearly 40 per cent of those admitted on entrance scholarships did not maintain an academic record high enough to have the scholarship renewed. I am interested in the causes for these scholarship cancellations to the extent that I would like to mass this study the dissertation for a doctor's degree. You can help me and at the same time render a service to the college and to future scholar ship students if you will kindly answer and return the enclosed questionnaire promptly. I intend to send this questionnaire to about 200 students but before I put it in final form I have decided to give it a trial run. I'm sending it now to about a dozen students to see what changes must be made before I write it in final form. I would appreciate your fullest co-Operation. Feel free to write comments where the questions are faulty or unimportant and add suggestions if you see ways to improve the value of the questionnaire. Thanking you in advance, I remain Yours truly 2’7 am 67 aggaé, Marvin C Volpel Department of Mathematics Michigan State College l. 2. 8. 10. ll. 12. 14. _,_ :. H.,MJ 237 APPENDIX L ‘ has the total program of your high school sufficient to prepare one for college? Yes Eou_" Do you feel that you, personally, were prepared to meet the academic demands made on college freshmen? Yes he ' Do you think that you, personally, were prepared to cog with the problems of adjustment and responsibility 3831 use of college freshmen? Yes 30 um...” ZFW Was the size of your school a handicap to your academic achievement as a college student? Yes no If so, was the school too large? Or too small? Did you receive adequate educational guidance in high 831.1001? Yes 350 In what areas do you consider your high school program strong? In what areas do you consider that your high school program was weak? Can you give any advice to this year's scholarship Fresh— men which might enable them.to earn a renewal of the scholarship award? . Did the college take adequate steps to preperly orient you to college life? Yes Ne * were you properly enrolled with respect to the variety of courses, adequate schedule of classes, satisfactory number of hours or work, etc ? Yes No If not, what was wrong? Was class size in college any handicap to you? Yes no If so, what size of class? Were you satisfied with the regulation regarding the comprehensive examinations and the subsequent mares in the basics? Yes no For how long a time previous to your entrance had you been planning to attend college? 6 yrs flyrs 2 yrs 1 yr ~_’6 mo 3 mo 1 m3 Did your parents help you plan‘ your high school educations program? Yes he Are your parents in favor of your attending college? Yes fl°__m, I8 your father a college graduate? Yes R0 26. 27. 28. 30. 31. 32. 258 Is your mother a college graduate? Yes No Did you have a regular study program last year? v 3 193 he Did you make use of the college counseling service last year? ' Yes 30 If so, for what purpose? How much time did you spend studying during the daytime last year? Rene 1 hr 2 hrs 3 hrs 4 hrs 5 or more hrs_mu Bow mych time did you spend per week studying in the college library last year? some 1 hr 2 hrs 3 hrs 4‘5 hrs___§-7 hrs __ 80 hrsfl__ Was there any class or course which you let slide because of lack of interest (a) in the subject? Yes No (b) in the instructor? Yes no or (0) because of poor instruction?Yes 30 Wore yourabsencos from college classes excessive_¥A 4Amoderate or infrequent? _‘ A, How frequently did you spend the seek-end at home? Every week Every 2 use Every 3 use Every 4 wks Did the subjects taken in your Freshman year at college contribute to the attainment of your plans? You No In what particular areas, it any, could your campus life have been improved (a) by yourself? (b) by the college? (0) by the high school? Do you think this improvement would have raised your scholarship average? ‘ Yes No What more could you have done during the year to further your own academic achievement? Did you seek help from your instructors regarding your work in college last year? Frequently Infrequently ¥_ Bever__ __u When sought, did you get the necessary amount of time from your instructors to discuss your personal classroom difficulties? Yes No Were the demands of the college instructors greater than you had anticipated? Yes No -_'" A" \! \J g kw . . Cd U) a 59. 40. 41. 45. 4.5. 239 v" 4.; T'( 1 a ‘l ‘1 43 " 71 " "z'\ "y‘la ~ '7 P L ' '5 r ' - ... \J ' " ‘I ~‘ 5 ‘ D .‘l u ..‘v- “V“ F ‘ J.‘-Q ‘d- V L; E'L"‘ >'\‘ ‘L - "I ‘ u u a .; .\-' ”‘1‘- ‘ CI \ . . c‘°:‘“,‘.1 z 4'; \, ...‘n- 1? 1' a... ‘ jam. u) $l an. LC .‘O i Mi ‘ n t;) - ’.'~' I V' * a- “! o. -‘ - dew‘ugp" flv“'.~~ ... .— .r‘ 1 ) - :- P \ w- -. H r ~s .- n -& I) L x J I . 0‘ '2'. '.:l x 9 .... g a) ‘ J J' .3 :3 1 .5 _, , '\ .. .. . . . , ' :5. ‘ f ‘1 .0? ‘ (NM-I; A '1' (I... 'I , ’1‘." .. '1‘! o—A- b t .- . s- 1 A..- ‘A \..:i a n «n1.\¥.~3 ' L ..\ J. \f't-A .‘~-~' ‘51..“ ... o -u ;;-1 I J \-‘»'a 1 1 t \ . ‘1 .‘1‘_ P 'v ‘8‘. q s, I r 3' \ isJ- " ‘4...) 3 (a?! «I... ‘_~, ~ui-mg‘S ‘ E ’ .‘sw 31.3‘ 9 “Av -v.. 5 uh: ‘: “Q ‘ ‘ fi A ,3. fi . L I . ,1 ( ". (‘3 f \ .2 . .0.‘ 1 X «- ' g,’ J \J 2 x (I: b g iv J J \- 9 U n“"' ‘h \' o H. or. J ‘ “J I: What influences, if any, inspired you to do better work than you would otherwise have dons? ( scholarship award, family, friends, instsuotors, fioom- mate, counselors, eligibility. etc } How many hours per week during the year difi.you spend in gainful exglcymsntt hours Where did you live while a Freshman at M s c 2 {Doru. At heme 00-0? Frat Rooming‘fiae We: your place or rasidsnce last yearna hanéioap to you as rarity youruachievemsnt 1n 6011036 was ooncornefi? Yes No uh...- ...-I.- If so, in what way? iDid you over-participate 1n extraolass activities to the detriment of your studies? Ian 30 If so, in what areas and how many hours per week? .Aotivityjrg: Hours per week _‘_¢u _ _+_ “7 What were the main reasons that you did not earn the 1.6 average last year? \ n. ’ ... , ~ ' a ; r. , ,‘aq ' o * . .. ‘ ’ ' ' 9" I ' J‘ C . ' . # t f. A ., . ,‘ ‘ .. .2 .4 , Q :4 ...j, z 1 . ' x . a.) ., \I o r 3 ' I ' ‘ - . k . ~: . 2.: r - ° 4’ .0.‘ ..~. :- ' 0' ‘ . ‘ I J uh .. ‘. \O I , - v ‘ t. .' .1- u 1 ‘z‘ a ' ';. I _ v -~~ r Q ." 0 o..- .... 'n -o V - ~ 0 . “ u .' . . ' .0 . .... s ‘ " ‘ ‘ D 4 . . . : 1 a ' , . ‘v 4' . I o \O ‘ C ‘ ‘ ’5' 0 Ir ‘ n— .9 ‘ a' I- c v . , ‘ e a ’ i .. " r -o . E! -o I I I} I '. o ~o u,- ‘l ' I ,. I I O ' . ‘ .’ ‘ i. . 9‘ ‘ 0 ‘. . ‘n‘ l '. . ' -- . . 9 . . ( .-_ z I ' 1 - vi “1"..- . Ly... usl.a... .... ’9 ..,\ ‘ "} - ' «I u» ~' I I: h. r '0: . A m;.' .c ' 4’. ... y a, -. . ... .~ - .. ... . 1" .b w. ‘ 'I . o, - ‘ u. n.‘ . t ’ U‘J'L o , ‘ - 0 ‘ . :l_'.. .l. :’ 1 ‘ '0'. " .... ‘l r: :3 ‘00 ‘ . '- u; r¢ .4 ~0L . ‘. ,— ’ a") -$- t o to 0" "I'Q‘ *u‘l'... J “\ v.3 w” dfl—a ~v‘4'3 M nu v. M a «I. a '0. I I." ' ‘ K ‘ I § : . . r r .s . . ‘ o . £ 0 ‘ '5.“ ‘ f} I; ‘.~-’ g. ' ‘ "J i. l " ' a -.L s -3 Q‘ & ‘I‘ '?‘ a Ah; l‘ .2 I, “ g' :15 t _’ ‘ "I L I" e. O ‘ “ ‘ ‘ a s “ . . F. 4. 1 " .- '3' I. .: :.° : . ‘ ’ - -- . i 1" -.. '-".’ ".‘¢~- “ ...-H‘uUVIH I. I-o. '. ‘ 9'-v u' g. . \" .‘n k. .I‘c- ”In " u-flw". av.“ sat-o " Mir-r. O Oahu.” ' -’ ’ ' Oa ‘§ ‘ .' ' ‘ ~ 1 . - ,3. ‘N ‘ ~. I o P t. g .7. .o . . a n . - .A 1." f. 9': . . 3 ..V - . ‘0' . -: ' ,... ." ‘9 9‘ , ’ ~g ‘ , I u s *".o .-..s_.‘,« 2... .".- “...UJ ' -‘ ‘1 “J. g, ,I‘ ;..‘ I .. . ‘., .50.. ‘Q t:.«_ 'u, ‘13...’ 3. M: '13 -. .. ~ .0 a o . 0 t . 5,. o, u . . . (‘V . _ In -‘ . .. .' h .' ’ » a. . . , ’ ‘ ' . . _ 'e . u ... ‘ a .. . .. ‘ ‘ '. 'r o a. a ' b .‘ .:\-.~I— v ' .'..9\ U end my .. .‘ ‘a-w‘. .3 '3 gal. " . an... M J '. .b «i .... Q..-» ‘ - L Jr“ .2-4. 3‘ Hr ‘II’. '4 I I _ . ."v. ‘3 '1... MM'.~"~I. ”who r. 7 f“ . a. . .9; c-~-.a J" 09 . , .. é‘gu‘v’ NI ~-'...o. "ab: ‘Ca °‘°‘ «(r fig". ‘ - ...- . qt!" .‘ I ,- ‘-."~-‘.-.. 1 ’--. . “ ... . .,-.i— ' "’ .9_."‘I:' “on -.31; ‘ L‘o ‘ ,2. A. '4 \ .0. a 4;", ‘J’ H 211'; q ' ‘1. 1'. § A II! /.It fit .4” ll\r..v . .1! .o. ..., 3 I! (luv. . .w‘ ... «a. H... ‘i x AQ -~u -.4 3... FL 6 «a. . I” ~ .. .5 u 1 . ll. 12. 15. 1 1... V ”A4" APPENDIX N 241 .‘ .\ . ; ,g. .. -,:‘ K , - . .. ...‘ ”.3- 2, ‘. .W , . ”£53374, .. , t "a“ , , .4 | :1 z ‘2 .10”, \ - ‘5’ a " l E. d- "o‘ .. 1 3“ 7:. ‘. ‘..(. '3 ~ .. . .‘n J .I ‘ .. ‘. L: \ .\ v \t «I - "3 \_\ ..v. . ‘T‘ ‘ ) '- ;/. J _. U U I. J- L‘ 1., (t)- “13"? 5 r. ’7 1 ._ P _‘ .0 , ‘ Q '9 v 02% 101 no- eye! 3 o no 3 _ curb- no 370 G°l 11“ 7C5: Lerscns.ily, ?'€T@ LTOTBTGQ to most the a<~co.«c d" ‘r 3 :c‘o on col;c.o irosh mon‘: :35 no 'hifli thst you, parsor.ollv, were prepared to cope with ‘ " 51218 03’."u mske u.se of 7‘" . . . 5g.- .- .1 »~‘ »‘ .‘4'i 3 ‘ '- ‘ . .a" _. \Q. a '” ‘0’ . VV _‘; . -_ -.- '1. ‘~ .~~.~~-- ': ..5 ‘ wv‘ A & .JV .-3- '3, . If so, for what purpose? ‘.‘ ~ f" 'L , ~. 5‘; .l 14);“5 u .ln‘.\-t9 :3»; .3... C‘J "-3 W cm Hos much time did you spend studying during the daytime lost your? none 1 hr 2 hrs m ...-n- — How much time did you spend per week studying in the college library last year? Hone __.1 hr _"’2 hrs Was there a.ny class or course which you let slide because of luck of interest 3 hrs (a) in the subject? (b) in the instructor? or (c) because of poor instruction? Were your absences from college classes excessive How many times per term did you spend the week-end your regular place of residence? moderate 3 hrs ___ . V .“ ~“s l or its.“ 4 hrs ___.5 or more hrs 4’5 hrs 6‘7 hrs Yes lee Yes: or infrequent? No “No No: the college counseling service last year? Yes Ho 8 hrs away from Did the subjects taken in your Freshman your at college con- tribute to the attainment of your plans? 193* New In what particular areas, if any, could your campus life have been improved (a) by yourself? (b) by the college? (0) by the high school? Do you think this improvement would have raised your schol- You“ arship average? No” tht more could you have done during the year to further your own academic achievement? Did you.seek help 1 in college last year? Frequently Infrequently Never ‘rom your instructors regarding your work When sought, did you got the necessary amount of time from our instructors to discuss your personal classroom diffi- culties? chm No“ Were the demands of the college instructors greater than you sad anticipated? Yos_ No” ()8 0 IF C) (A Q n L' O...“ 243 1‘. '-._..- . .. :t ‘ ,..‘V J- ..6 H493 33:91 13?:1L31Jm’1R 1.11 {32MB QLGéALiVF (.21 -'10 C 3'31. Leg") .111.” S 5 3‘ k. ‘9" 3 “9*Lxua in gume1al? :33 CG m ‘6’.” 7? rot, whet was wrong? 2'? Th-at th1r9e , if any, handi.capp ed you in your college work? (p on? health, dating, finances, family troubles, outside 9'.63 “mvny, aro19 aasooiatoa, lack of goals, etc ) abs-Q3 Chat inflnevces, if any, inspired you to do hettar work tzan you wauld otherwiae have dons? (acholarahip awara, family, friends, instructors, roommata, counselors, eligibility, etc ) Haw many hours per week durina the year did you spand in gainful employmsnt? . _fl1h0urfi $1999 d1 1 you live while a Freahman at a 8 C 1 Lara Co~Op At home Roaming house With relatives was your place of residsnce last gas r a hand-leap to you an $99 as your achieV9ment in college van concerned? 193” “o If an, in what way? you oven-participate in a ztraclaas activities to the 1 rlmant of your 5366103? £63 £0 :9 C; '5] 0:3' £3: 4 1f 50, in xyhat 399133 1d how manv horra per mask? ’ “ti ity Eonrs per wast A ‘A J .#;t rare the main reasons tl1at you did not earn th.e 1.6 ava9““© lest yeafi? 244 APPENDIX 0 Postal Card Message March 15 1951 I would appreciate it very much if you would fill out and return the questionnaire I sent you two weeks ago. I need it to complete my study. M C Volpel u APrENDIx P 245 . .. . '1, 14- . 4 5 r _ C . 5 u- _ ‘.- ,. . .~ L . . oh: '5 I 0‘.- .A. K." .C 3’ ‘9 MH-L - ..A .i h) Duzrirg the 5556 55510 ye9r 15-fi-l ‘EO yo -u were a froofiW .a at 51552555 Colleve etuzlying under a tui tion».frre 55.0555«W‘p. Koo are to be the award. fiouo?:r, 513055 835759 con 715175. 55‘; la te:2 for 51171115 55 need a re 7.70.351 of 4913“? nt of thee e eimitted did not ‘555 on eoaCemio record 5153 550555 to ea rn the renewal. Ae the beoie for my 5 ctor'a di5eortetion I am studying the 055555 of the scholarshipceaoolletione. In 0551;» to @2755 ooncluoiozw about this group I need some infer 2.5215155 f ..-om the ooooeeeful group. you mm help me and at the 55:55 ti.- :a 551': 51‘ 5 81552155 to tl-xe coll-eve an :‘1 to future scholarship student 8 1:? you 51.11 }:;ni 1y ens -1r and rot grn t.”i questionnaire promptly. I promise you that all information will be 21:21:. “riotly confidential. fire-4“ 05‘ 4.21 Thanking you in eflve5oe, I ere I a. v5: ... my. '7 4 40195 331.. 1:- ‘_ ’ '71.; 1‘ i fly?“ 9"110 /'., LIE/W4 . I 13755.... 55555 n C V0 1951, Dept of Lien 1. was tr 5 total prc5ram of your hi;h school suffi5155t to ? 35%}! 2:39 prehere 050 ior collzge to“..- .. pro 55.51 to 5.71351: the ae...ci-.:..‘.o 2. Bo 321521 feel titsit 3,7311 5.0175 655556J made on 5511.75 freQ A? 355 13 . 3. Do you t5 1.5; that you wane p7: 5-5i to cogse with ‘he proL .‘58 3 eta-2'. 37. t5? lies 73.0 of adjuesmant demande d of 003.1L5 ‘ ‘ $911001 any Tova yelp to your ne‘euu ti. Y’m the 53-3 of 301155151 57.: 513355 55 5 0011553 . ‘o...vr~77? 53533135 I“. 50,1753 th e 351“ 001 too 15.555 or too 5:55.11? ____ :3. Kid you receive adeque to edge guiaiz moo in 55.575 5532001? 'X'ee :20 6., In what areas do you cone ider yo 512' hi 355 52:00]. progz‘eum strong? '7. In what areas do you consider your hi 555‘ 551 5.051 pro gram 55.9.1.2? 8. What advice can you give to this yoeu '3 so o‘zoleral:..p ogrovp r.-ioh the eoholarehip 55:55:14: might enable them to earn a rene :51 of 9. Did the college take adequate stops to properly 01:15:02: you to Yes He college life? were you prOperly enrolled with reepee to variety of courses, lo. 4 . schedule 03“ chutees, mm? For; 1.30 1.1. :5 not; 515.5555 wrong? "" ...... 125 pas class size in college any handicap to you! Yes 11'. If go, what size of close? """"" ere you satisfied with the revalutlon romeiir the couyrehenwive * merke in the b55155? lee 50 s. ‘5' 65...,irlation and au‘eaemono 55: not, what was 571555.13- .-O‘Gory‘? 2""? how long a time be. you 5552:: planning to attend college? .1...‘ ". ’“I ‘J ‘ ’ 1‘9 .‘~ 9 . ‘I' . "V' 3.158 4. yrs :2 57.8 1 3:? __5 mo .2 50 1 ...) ‘35-: (ng {"- “fin-)1 7““3J3. . 1- g Q - - - 1 ,1. ”1 ',,_.]-,‘! AVV3.«J&V 4".‘%:,.l flfl ”J‘A1- g‘;1_"_:‘."-:.—‘ ..l. . a \ "' 1 7 . . . I" I _..__._ A L‘ I 1.. 4‘ Th Are yowr parents in favor of your attending college? Yes” _no _ q d ‘. ‘- & v.» 4. fi on —-.- I L- . ‘Q - , ‘. . ‘ _, e1 ‘3 ... ‘, P" 5‘ {p‘.:‘ a: I K \i' L‘ \L. C! \- I. —J < 2 : ‘4 " v" :2: ‘4‘ ‘ C a. v-\. ._ If,“ ".7 F ~ "' "'-‘ ‘ ‘2 . " ‘74?" " .‘ - . ‘7' ..-‘- w, .- ,‘v;' '-. ‘.'~ 1..le LIZ‘L J. y )0. 1‘45: 76 9. I'o‘ji, .....L 11' :1: Lu. .LJ p?‘ .17.: I .13; J,-.l A} L 5; 2.3 g. 1} . _. ...-0“”... own. {'2‘ ' ‘a I o v. -:v -: ‘1. . - _-r,- ~ . ’0 1‘ ..- v . - : 55 . 3‘ . W I» I ‘ 2” Lo ‘12 .‘. wk V's; J. 71.3..» (1'0 {’56 6'1. {4.5 L) G 5.13.1.2." 1.: ~;‘r l ..LIAL' 1:» (191‘ ‘6' 4L. 8 Ad 2: b V (3 If e 5‘ ‘3 ,5 v . \J ...-(”us- .5- o')() '3 f0 'b 5. ll 50, r the t purpose} How much time did you t“end ec‘rwin- 6.55155 tee e~ $353 1555 35 5055 1 hour__ 2 Lrs 3 bra 43:5 5 or 55.5 “£5.555 CC) (I? o w“ 5; 111.5 much time old you um. .1 5'”: 7174‘; aim-{Lying in tire 00114351: 3.733- ubv. ~.q- Cum .5 ,. last year? home 1 hr Bhre 5 hrm_ 455 5:5 657 555 8 or more _‘ fl Was there any class or coxrse 551531355 let eli55 5555555 oi‘ l.- of interest (a) in t: e albw'529 £35 £3 55 fib) in tle instructor? 353 who.‘ or because of (o ) pocr 155....510 355 no -5 o? th ‘I ‘ V: 5 t —- r'- 1‘ £0. 5555 your absences from cello 5 015.355 .- , c n. 2 - n l». "‘ ‘- .7: ....» ~41“ 6463351V63’4L295558£5L or 5515555.5L: M “CO mans—o m “a .3" d. *4. ’1 2?° 5‘; fi‘ 1‘”... fly t $1.51.“? 8 1 $31. 11 i: .5.71: C‘. .5 ’4’. ‘J ..' '3" (:43 G;xfl +3....q ‘3 €14) £'.'\':4& .8 G '0, -. A::I A. 1 '-,‘&f3. V m . "...... 1 , , ., 4' . . lg .. .- . a; remolar plaee oi r5515; co. ” ”w-nm~-mu§ “nu—monl‘t" 4v ‘J\"\ T \‘ ~ -I 5 'o , b u -- 7.- , hW" ‘3 ,4“: 1"" "' w 30 .I '. it c t I:&~I‘tl‘3$..-‘.£li‘ 2.11" . 9 11‘ 8.8.}, COLL J51; J" {1,73 C . .11: 13,58 1, , . t. .2) ‘bt3‘tn ..LI :::'CVC‘;1 .‘ * .. " I. Q 0.. ‘ g-) 5, Yuir3nll? ' 1 V ”- ... ‘.'~.I " 5.1.7, 2'0"}, tl.‘ .9 (303.5%: I)? {3} by the 1135 55505;? 5' 7‘7" _, . -'_.: 2,, .-... f. ’ ., 5., ... . _. ,r ‘.-7"‘ ‘ ‘ ' you 1.12555 twat t...33 I» _.‘=.-..‘ov-:7..;.:..‘-.t would ha: Jo 7min”: 33: .1“ ...‘J- 5 5, #1. .19., 1..-L) «:5 ‘ ' '. Ell" 7‘ QV‘JT‘HSG? ‘ urea-sue ...-saw. ~ n ~5:.i.LI-l '77“ '7‘ ' 7'7 7’ Ll 8.79" 1’ '3 f a".- «re ‘7' 3181;? ctxv. 6317.7, 1 11ij 3%: {J uvc 5.3.5.5 yd a! :C 133.513 KL“?! §ULLP .LI { .3 P U’Lif‘u $5.7.” J'.-<.:.m $5-». .3! ..K-l ":\ o. 7' \ I‘ 'J coll€';9 last year‘! «v45_my "H $1. an53 the demenoa of tle 0012.5 59 instyuotors greater than you :51 anticip8.ted? .V'4W.f...“.‘-“ <43 5014;:y0u ea tiefied tith 'he quality of inefiro‘tion in gur-~5l; -5“, 3% If not, what tau wrong? C») { 0 thyt inJ° uencee, if any, inepireo you to do better w: r5 tban you 131$;ht have done? (scholarship 5555. fami.ly, fziend s, 555.550t5.5. _- . A‘1...‘ .“ . 5505 how many hours per week duri :13; 12.72 3:: no 01 year Cid you ape: 5'.) .~. .1 0 I... A. 'r .- r" 55710 ment “cu 5 5511551 L '5" 7 ...... .... ., 17‘ "v ‘r-Jn .vv‘ 2'5 , 5m glAGrQL“d you live wh lo a 543535.258.“ an. L! S C ‘2 .I [Q -mm-vvflLa-ofim ‘ ¢ " '- 5‘ .- \ ‘ r b- ’ v -- ', ‘1 'sr,'\'- e, 'W7 -553‘vou? @1358 Of r581.NL&:Q.P~ :1rap to you atlflm’55334vx t.- ‘9 ate. cl .. ...-“W” n ..., o - .. ‘ . f5.) 5 17.... .31; “5,: 9’5 4.; Two-.5: u ... 6014.? 5,5 5'58 (‘1‘:‘1: g: '27:;5 6 _.~ _, ,4; . 5 j“:ft:?. oofiflri .113 1-.: 'J «»73 ‘s‘-.~’; ..5'«u .7 247 APPENDIX Q April 23 1951 Dear fellow-student: Your name has been selected at random for a member of a “Sampling Group". I would appreciate it very much if you would kindly fill out this questionnaire and return to me by campus mail at your earliest convenience. In September of 1949, Michigan State College awarded 400 tuition-free scholarships to incoming Freshmen. At the end of the first year 40% of these Freshmen failed to earn a renewal of the award because they did not make the 1.6 average. I am trying to find out why and would like to make this study the dissertation for my doctor's degree. In order to make comparisons and draw conclusions I must know something about the regular college group. That is why I am asking your co-oneration in this project. Thanking you in advance, I remain Yours truly Marvin C Vblpel Dept of Mathematics 1. Was the total program of your high school sufficient to prepare one for college? Yes No 2. Do you feel that you, personally, were prepared to cope with the demands made on college freshmen? Yes No 3. Do you think that you were prepared to meet the aca— demic demands made on college freshmen? Yes No 4. Vas the size of your school a handicap to your aca— demic achievement as a college student? Yes No Was your school too large or too small? 5. Did you receive adequate educ. guidance in high school? Yes No 6. In what areas do you consider your high school program strong? 7. In what areas do you consider your high school program weak? 8. Did the college take adequate steps to properly orient you to college life? Yes No 248 9. Were you properly enrolled with respect to the variety of courses, adequate schedule of classes, satisfactory number of hours of work, etc.? Yes No 10. If not, what was wrong? 11. Was class size in college a handicap to you? Yes No 12. Were you satisfied with the regulation regarding the comprehensive examinations and the subsequent marks in the basics? 13. If not, what was unsatisfactory? 14. For how long a time had you been planning to attend college? 6 yrs 4 yrs 2 yrs 1 yr 6 mo 3 mo 1 mo 15. Did your parents help you plan your high school educa— tional program? Yes No 16. Are your parents in favor of your attending college? 17. Is your father a college graduate? Yes No 18. Is your mother a college graduate? Yes No 19. Did you have a regular study program last year? Yes No 20. Did you make use of the college counseling service last year? 21. If so, for what purpose? 22. How much time did you spend studying during the day— time last year? None 1 hr 2 hrs 3 hrs 4 hrs 5 or more 23. How much time did you spend per week studying in the college library last year? None, 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 8, hours. 24. was there any class or course which you let slide be- cause of lack of interest (a; in the subject? Yes___ No___ (b in the instructor? or Yes____No____ (0) because of poor instruction? Yes___ No___. 25. 26. 27. 28. 33. 34. 38. 39. 249 Were your absences from college classes excessive moderate or infrequent? How many times per term did you amend the weehend away from your regular place of residence? Did the subjects taken in your freshman year contri- bute to the attainment of your plans? Yes No In what particular areas could your campus life have been improved (a) by yourself? (b) by the college? (0) by the high school? Do you think this improvement would have raised your marks? What more could you have done during the year to im- prove your own academic achievement? Did you seek help from your instructors regarding your work last year? Frequently Infrequently Never When sought, did you get the necessary amount of time from your instructors to discuss your problems? Yes No Were the demands of the college instructors greater than you.had anticipated? ' Yes No Were you satisfied with the quality of the college instruction in general? Yes No What things, if any, handicapped you in your college work? (poor health, dating, finances, etc.) What influences, if any, inspired you to do better work? (family, friends, eligibility, etc.) How many hours per week during the year did you spend in gainful employment? hours Where did you live while a Freshman at M S C? Dorm Co—op At home Booming house Other was your place of residence a handicap to you as far as your achievement in college was concerned? Yes No 40. 41. 250 If so, in what way? Did you over—participate in extra-class activities last year? If so, in what areas and how many hours per week? Have you any advice to give to an incoming freshman? £5.13 an s.