A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF
SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL SCHOOL
CLIMATE VARIABLES IN WHITE. AND
BLACK ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITH
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AND
ACHIEVEMENT CONTROLLED

Thesis for the Degree of :Ph. D.
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
RONALD D. HENDERSON
1972

I ,; ':»_‘~
‘ '.,.-;7‘:
7 : ' A :‘- ;—;»_;7:§;;:;
, , -:-";«;-:-:=
V ..,_ A- $ ; v o‘. -,-“-: J

I II III IIZIIIIIIII In I II III HIM I

Ml . LIBRARY

Michigan State
University

This is to certify that the ;

flwdsmufikd ‘ ”""
A Comparative_Analxsis of a
Social-PsychologiEal"8oHool Climate
Variables in White_and Black
Elementary Schools With Socio-Economic

Status and Achievement Controlled
presented by

H

Ronald D. Henderson

has been accepted towards fulfillment
of the requirements for: 3‘“ ,

 

 

Ph.D degreeinsec° Ed. G Curr.

flaw

Major professor

Date August; 7. 1972

0-7639

 

" mm av ~-
IIOAC & 8095'
BOOK BINDERY INC.

LIBRARYBI’IDER i .
gamma}, MI _ '

  
  

  
     

 

r_i—"

‘r‘ PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove thle checkout from your record.
I TO AVOID FINES return on or before due due.

I 'QATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

I

“351993
’0

 

 

 

 

 

 

—_—_.———

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MSU Is An Alfirmetlve Action/Equal Opportunity lnetltulon
0.

ans-9.1

 

 

 

vv-v V - vw‘WVI—V - ~_—-r'—vv-v—-v '7'"?
.‘ ,0

'e...

    
     
    
      

  

nammrwu I fxr ~ \ ~ ‘
_ nun“. .* - -; -
r- . 5“,:ng ._ 3

“I.
.9

x
. D
-.
'1
> I
‘ v
.w J ..
I . ‘ 1‘ 1b~
4‘ .
‘ a ‘ . If: -
L

n' " 5' ”w, V, ... \ .
.1 .TA .41.. I 1.__ 3 ._ . u.

t of U‘IJU} uh ~30. 73-: "may I" .

  

[in

I“ v
D '4 I

40.), 901%"le " woe. i'é‘sldstl ' .-o- "-134"

To 'hrcelved 7111'.“ - ”UNA; saw as . m- L ‘-'

    
  

I‘Tsr‘PCP‘JWRG ””‘F W “’N‘L‘ww- 433: A ‘7'?" WC!“ “;

, 1' Principal E.XL’-rts'-.C‘.I-‘_P.r m: 55,-; -uu‘.‘ . $§£N '5'
‘ a, ‘- ' ‘ 5.

 

”SW! Press for CrwetItiova N 'KfiVWL W ' ’ ‘ ‘wé'
”g ' I .' “gas-a; ‘
. ‘ ‘ ~ )I . 3‘ :- l . _‘

 

I ABSTRACT

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL SCHOOL CLIMATE
VARIABLES IN WHITE AND BLACK ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITH
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AND ACHIEVEMENT CONTROLLED

By

Ronald D. Henderson

The purpose of this study was to measure the difference between
I school climate in Black and White elementary schools. 0f specific
interest to this study was the extent to which school climate could
possibly contribute to the achievement differential between White and
Black elementary schools of similar socio-economic status and achieve-
ment. School climate within the context of this study was operation-
alized as a social-psychological (self-other) construct with the
following components; Reported Teacher Press for Competition or
Individual Performance (TEACHER-PRESS-COMP), Importance of Student
Self-Identity or Role (STUDENT ID), Academic Norms of the School
(NORMS), Sense of Control (SEN-CON), Self Concept of Academic Ability
(SELF-CONCEPT AA), Perceived Friend Evaluations and Expectations

 

 

 

(P-FRIEND-EE), Perceived Teacher Evaluations and Expectations
(P-TEACHER-EE), Perceived Parent Expectations and Evaluations (P-PARENT-
EE). Perceived Principal Expectations and Evaluations (P-PRINCIPAL-EE),
and Reported Student Press for Competition or Individual Performance

(STUDENT-PRESS-COMP).

 

 

-g-aai‘

Ronald D. Henderson

Ten white and six black elementary schools (fourth. fifth, and
sixth grades) were selected in a non-random manner to fill an eight
cell completely crossed design stratified by race, socio-economic
status, and achievement level. The sample population was 1,319 students
in white schools and 1,425 students in black schools. A school was
designated white or black when there was a seventy percent majority
for either race. Achievement level was high or low with the approxi-
mate determining factor being whether a school's mean achievement score
was above or below the fiftieth percentile, respectively on the Michigan
State Assessment test. Socio-economic status of a school was high or
low with a socio-economic score of forty-nine being the approximate bench-
mark for separation between the levels. Specific demarcation levels for
socio-economic status and achievement levels were not possible due to
the quasi-comparability of the White and Black schools.

Students were administered a questionnaire consisting of scales
designed to measure the components of school climate. The statistical
hypotheses were tested by using the multivariate analysis procedure;
and. the probability level selected for rejecting the null hypothesis
was at the .10 alpha level.

Comparative analysis of the White and Black elementary schools
vvith socio-economic status and achievement controlled supported the
following conclusions:

l. White elementary schools have higher mean Sense of Control
scale scores than Black elementary schools.

2. Black elementary schools have higher mean Self-Concept of
Academic Ability scale scores than White elementary schools.

3. Black elementary schools have higher mean Perceived Friend
Expectation and Evaluation scale scores than White elementary
schools.

5

 

Ronald D. Henderson

4. Black elementary schools have higher mean Perceived Teacher
. Expectation and Evaluation scale scores than White elementary
schools.

3 5. Black elementary schools have higher mean Reported Teacher
Press for Competition or Individual Performance scale scores
than White elementary schools.

The following tenable implications were derived from the conclusions:

1. Sense of control is a crucial factor in facilitating academic
performance in poor and/or minority schools. Strategies to
enhance the development of this social-psychological mind-
set within elementary schools should improve achievement.

2. The higher Self-Concept of Academic Ability in Black schools
may be a function of segregation. The scores of Black
students may result from the fact that their reference
groups are primarily racially isolated.

3. Peers are an essential aSpect of the school climate,
especially in Black schools. Indication is that peer group
norms operate against academic achievement in most poor
and/or minority schools. Perhaps peer groups can be mani-
pulated to enhance academic achievement.

I 4. The data alluded to the fact that teachers may have a greater
impact in Black schools. Students may perceive a teacher

as loving, kind, and paternal, who in actuality, has very low
. performance expectations for them compared to national norms.
I This has a crucial impact in Black elementary schools.

5. Intensive competition is structured and fostered by the

I teachers; however, the modus operandi may be different in
Black and White schools. The greater majority of the

1 students in white schools are expected to succeed; thus,
the competition is not so pronounced. Only a selected few
("the chosen ones") in black schools,however, are expected
to succeed. This is somewhat a “creaming off" and "cooling
out" process.

6. A different school climate (configuration of social-psycho-
logical variables) may manifest itself within the Black and
White elementary schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement. If this is true, the school climate must be
altered accordingly to provide a more optimal environment
for academic success.

 

 

 

   

A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL SCHOOL CLIMATE
VARIABLES IN WHITE AND BLACK ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS WITH
SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS AND ACHIEVEMENT CONTROLLED

By

Ronald D. Henderson

A THESIS

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

DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY
College of Education

., i 1;. if; 1972

 

  

DEDICATION

  

To my wife, Grace, who sacrificed endless hours of her
own time to assist me in this venture. Her moral support,
editing skill, and critical analysis helped me complete
this task. Perhaps, even more important, she was a
constant source of encouragement (significant academic
other) during anxious and/or trying moments.

To my brother, Bernard, who sacrificed his own academic
career by joining the Navy so that I could remain in school.
This personal unselfishness and his monetary support to

me and our family was a crucial factor in my being able to
attend undergraduate school.

To my mother, who under particularly adverse conditions
provided me with the tools necessary for life. Hopefully,
your anguish, patience, sleepless nights, encouragement,
toil, and prayers for your eldest of nine have not been in

vain.

Ronald D. Henderson

 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I wish to express sincere appreciation and indebtedness to the

Chairman of my Committee, Dr. Wilbur B. Brookover, who has provided me

with all the tangible and intangible aspects essential to a meaningful
doctoral program. Included in this is the role of significant other,
friend, mutual sport fan, and a genuine concern for his students and all
man-kind. My gratitude is also extended to Dr. Fred Waisanen for his
early interest in my work, friendship, and continual academic encourage-
ment. Appreciation is also extended to Dr. George Ferree who
strengthened my philosophical awareness of educational concerns and
life. Just as important, has been his role as a friend, conversationist,
social theorist, and concerned individual about the quality of life for
all. Special thanks are also extended to Dr. Lawrence Lezotte who
provided invaluable technical assistance in statistical design and
analysis and who also served as a member of the writer's guidance
conmittee.

Further gratitude and appreciation are extended to Geoff Yager
of the Office of Research Consultation, who played a major role in
I research design, computer program selection, and program write-up.
I Special thanks are also extended to Dr. John Schweitzer whose door was

always open when a question of a statistical nature needed answering.

 

 

  

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1‘. DEDICATION . . . ............ . ...........

   
  
 
 
  

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .................... . . .
LIST OF TABLES ........................
LIST OF FIGURES . . . . . ...................

,CHAPTER

I. INTRODUCTION ......................
Statement of the Problem ............ . . .
Justification for the Research ............
General Statement of Hypothesis ........... .
Assumptions .....................
Testable Hypotheses ................. .
Other Questions . ................. . .
Overview... ...... ......

THEORY . . . . . ....................
Symbolic Interaction ............... . .
Role Theory . . .......... , ...........
Structural Effects ..... . ............
Sunmary . . . .....................

.REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ................
School Climate ................. . .
Comparative Studies of White and Black Students . . . .
Research on Climate Variables ........... . .
Sumnary..... ..............

, ' :PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY . . . . . ....... . . .

} salmlle e e e e I e o I o e o e o o o eeeeee e o e

'J‘Jr‘ Instrumntationeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoeee

é _ Major Variables . . . . ...... . . . . . .....

“‘IEI- iv

413:;

ziti.
«2...

 

 

.n’ '
'I

     
  
 
 

- in I
' g {;LE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED)
lb" '_ -
f ‘.
- 'CNAPTER Page A
J I!
5 IV. Continued
. ‘t‘.
Reliability of Variables ............... 70
Design ....................... 71 .
Testable Hypotheses .......... . ...... 7l 9
Analysis ....................... 74 "
‘ Summary ....................... 75 .
v. ANALYSIS OF DATA .................... 77 i
I, Hypotheses Tested .................. 80 5
Summary of Results .................. 85 g
‘ VI. SUMMARY, FINDINGS, LIMITATIONS, DISCUSSION, IMPLICATIONS ;
,- AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................. 89 E
I' Summary ...................... 89 $2
A L Findings ................ . ..... 92 A;
, Limitations ..................... 94 g.
.f Discussion . ...................... 96
Implications ..................... 97
Recommendations ................... lOO
13f BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................... 102
1:. APPENDICES . . . ., ...................... 109
Appendix

 
 
  
  
  
  
  
  

A. Socio-Economic Status Questions Used in State

Assessnent Test l969—1970 ............. 109
B. Student Questionnaire ................ lll

C. Scale Intercorrelations ............... 123

D. Reported Student Press for Competition or Individual
Performance Scale . . . .............. 125

E. Importance of Student Self-Identity or Role Scale . . 126
F. Academic Norms of School Scale ............ l27

Sense of Control Scale . . . .I ........ . . . 129

 

  

b

H.
I.

ITNAPPENDICES (continued)

Self-Concept of Academic Ability Scale . . . . . . . .
Perceived Friend Expectations and Evaluations Scale. .
Perceived Teacher Expectations and Evaluations Scale .
Perceived Parent Expectations and Evaluations Scale. .

Peggeived Principal Expectations and Evaluations
a e I I I O O O ..... O O ........ O 0

Reported Teacher Press for Competition or Individual
Performance Scale ............. . . . .

Duncan's Socio-Economic Index Score of Schools in

Comparison with the State Assessment Socio-Economic
Score of Schools ....... . . . . ......

vi

Page

130
132
134
I36

138

I39

 

LIST OF TABLES

Page

  
    
  
  
  
  
  
   
  
  
 
   

_( Characteristics of Schools Selected for the Study--Race,
- SES, Achievement Level, and Sample N . . . . . . . . . . 63

2. Hoyt's Analysis of Variance ............... 70

3. Scale Means on Variables By Race ............. 78

' 4. Climate Variables Combinations for Multivariate Analysis . 79

’f A 5. Triple-Order Interactions . . . . ............ 80
6. Achievement by Socio-Economic Status Interaction ..... 8l

7. Race by Achievement Level Interaction ....... . . . 8l

8. Race by Socio-Economic Status Interaction ..... . . . 82
9. Race Main Effect ........ . ........... . 83‘

' ' lO. Univariate F-Ratio for Variable Group I ......... 84

ll. Variable Means and Least Square Estimated Effects As

Associated with Race ................. . 85

12. Summary of Results .................... . 87

_ .I_ I3. Achievement Main Effect ................. 88
':;£R_l4. Socio-Economic Status Main Effect ............ 88

“.'{15. Duncan's Socio-Economic Index Score of Schools in
‘ - ‘ Comparison with the State Assessment SociO-Economic
Score of Schools ................... l4l

vii

"A"... A.' U.

Lg!“

a _ . ~ ~ "’T"""‘."‘?’~'—?""-v‘”. rs“-

LIST OF FIGURES

  
 
  
 
 
  

Page

{i}... School Climate as an Intervening Variable . . . . . . . . . ll

‘ I On: s‘ ‘- ~ .
"n92. ClimateofSchool..................... 16.
.5 tjon. Tea‘ ~v .
; . Design for Sample Selection Criteria . . . . . . . . . . . 61
A“. fit 4 L jun

5'73. ehSearch Design with Schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7l

. “furtotv
""5; Cowarison of Research - Coleman, Wilson and Henderson . . 100
I E t. . nILy O."= . l

"3' n9 0! terr-

‘. .fi the 3;hmm3
I .I' .

Ig-AA. .

K: 1 deveIorfv

. ..
EdUCHLIN'. _ ‘ A
Twit-'- - --'
o' e
.'
I l
‘ I
f;
l s
t muss \
" 1‘ 3 31:16 A! I.
S. FCIr SC ' -Jޢ.:.
" ”E I“)“' I r a I"; T
V CE. r936 .
viii
.07,“ '.
7 1

 

 

V-v‘

 

 

- W“.— ~__.— fr~..—v~_——_r

CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION

One of the most perplexing problems facing this society is educa-
tion. Testimony to this fact is the frequency in which terminology
related to education appears or is heard via communication media.
Acc0untability, integration, assessment, neighborhood school, busing,
community control, cross-busing, and decentralization are only a samp-
ling of terms to which the aforementioned statement alluded. Reaction
to the school crisis has varied in the sectors of society, but trends
are developing.

Education has become an arena where everyone is a self-proclaimed
expert. This is not a sign of health and vitality. 0n the contrary,
it epitomizes the dire condition and futility that prevades the educa-
tional enterprise. Going a step further, the educational crisis illus-
trates societal frustration at a seemingly unsolvable problem.

A central aspect of the education problem is the low rate of
academic success among Puerto Ricans, American Indians, Mexican

Americans, and Blacks.‘

 

1James S. Coleman, et. al. E ualit of Educational 0 ortunit ,
U. 5. Office of Education. (Washington. U. C.: U. S. Government

Printing Office, 1966) .

Thus far, educational innovations Such as compensatory education have
not been successful. Other programs designed to eradicate and/or
eleviate educational shortcomings have not been in operation long
enough to access their value. If history is any indication, perfor-
mance contracting, voucher system, and other educational innovations
will fail like their predecessors. Even busing is held in doubt as
a possible education cure-all.

J Wilson? in his study of race/social class found that social class

. mix was more important than race. Therefore, busing solely for inte-

: gration would not improve education. Recent research by Armour3 has
indicated that busing has very little effect on the achievement level of

students. Thus, the queStion still remains how to provide each child

with the best educational experience possible.4
Statement of the Problem

The lack of educational success among minorities, especially
blacks, has resulted in numerous research endeavors. These efforts
have mainly sought to explain the differences in academic perfonmance

between Blacks and Whites. Research has focused on individual variables,

 

 

ZAlan Wilson, The Conse uences of Se re ation: Academic Achieve-
ment In a Northern Communit . (BerEIey,CaIifornia: The Glendéssary
Press,1§6§L

 

3David Armour, "The Effects of Busing," To be published in the
l972 Sumner issue of The Public Interest.

4A definition of good educational experience means that each
child is provided with all the social, emotional, and intellectual
skills necessary to function in a modal way in the total society to
the l imits of their ability.

 

41>.

jlll'l

 

family, neighborhood, and somewhat on the school social environment.

3

Mainly, the research has centered on race and/or social-economic
status as the crucial factors accounting for differences between
Whites and Blacks in school performance.

Arthur Jensen,5 noted Educational Psychologist, has indicated
that social class and racial variation in achievement can not be
accounted for by differences in environment, but must be attributed
mainly to genetic differences. Another school of thought in educa-
tion revolves around social class (SES) as illustrated by the studies
of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights6 and the Office of Education.7
For example, schools with normal or high achievement are usually middle
I class or better, whereas schools with low achievement usually indicate
lower class. Therefore, due to economic inconsistencies within America,
the greater proportions of Blacks are lower class, whereas the greater
proportion of whites are middle class.

However, the regression line indicated above does not always
hold true. It is possible to find low SES Black schools with high

achievement and high SES White schools with low achievement. Situations

N’M‘ -- v4

such as this have prompted researchers to delve into school climate/

     
   

environment. School climate is still a matter of conjecture as the

review of literature will illuminate. The concept of school climate

 

5Arthur R. Jensen, "How Much Can We Boost IQ and Scholastic
Achievement," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 39 (Winter, 1969), l-123.

6U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, Racial Isolation in the Public

Schools, (Washington, D.C.: Superintendent 0? Documents, U.S. Govern-

nent Printing Office, 1967).

7James S. Coleman, et. al., 92, git,

 

4

in this study will be of a social-psychological nature. It is the
interaction of principal, teachers, and students within the school
that produce an atmOSphere that will enhance or mitigate against
acadenfic performance. Parents also provide input into the school
climate as a significant other of the student.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the extent to which
school climate differs for Black and White schools with similar SES
composition and achievement. Specifically, this study is designed
to measure the differences or lack of between white and black schools;
and,to possibly develop a rationale that school climate is a meaning—
ful factor in achievement. In other words, if high achieving White
and Black schools have different climate configurations, educational
stragetists should be aware of and take advantage of this knowledge.
Therefore, the basic question is whether school climate is different
in Black and White schools of similar SES composition and achievement.
If there is climate difference, how would this relate to the academic
performancendeficit between White and Black schools? Climate,as
nentioned previously, is a social-psychological construct in this
research. Variables that constitute climate are as follows:

1. Reported Student Press for Individual Performance or
Competition.

2. Reported Teacher Press for Individual Performance or Competition
3. Importance of Self-Identity Student or Role

4. Reported Academic Norms of School

5. Self-Concept of Academic Ability

6. Sense of Control

7. Perceived Peer Expectations and Evaluations
8. Perceived Parent Expectations and Evaluations
9. Perceived Teacher Expectations and Evaluations

lO. Perceived Principal Expectations and Evaluations
Justification for the Research

Inquiry into the realm of racial differences in school climate is
very important. If Black and White schools differ on a variable,
educators should seek to determine how this contributes to the achieve-
ment difference between White and Black schools. It would be ludicrous
for Black schools to proceed in a manner similar to White schools if
this mitigates against student performance.

Research in this area is also crucial because studies of elementary
school climate are virtually nil. David Johnson8 speaks to this lack of
research in the following statement.

Most studies of organizational climate of schools have confined

I themselves to the college level, a few have investigated high
schools and practically none have dealt with elementary
schools.
In view of Johnson's statement, this study will be significant in that
. the thrust will be in an area in which limited research has been done
I (i.e., social-psychological aspects of the elementary school).
Additionally, the quest for equality of educational opportunity

is important. Since total integration of schools has not been realized

 

8

David W. Johnson, The Social Ps cholo of Education (New York:
Holt. Rinehart and Winston, |970), p. A.

L

..__ .. .PHA”

 

6F
'1

CT.

I

 

6

and trends indicate cross-busing may become null and void, strategies
must be formulated to arrest the dysfunctionality of black and/or
lower class schools. James 5. Coleman9 adds credence to this line of
research when he talks about equality of educational opportunity and
equal schools. What really is important, according to Coleman's theory,
is the output of the school, irrespective of the social origins of
the input. In other words, the output should be capable of competing
on equal basis with others. Thus. whether a school contains high and/
or low SES students, black and/or whites, the output should be the
same.

Another line of thought operating on a somewhat different
philosophical basis than Coleman, but utilizing Coleman's "sense of

control“ concept,is Floyd McKissick.10

McKissick agrees wholeheartedly
with Coleman that "sense of control" is the probable key to academic
achievement for Blacks. However, he indicates quite emphatically that
integration operates against Coleman's viewpoint.

. . . total reliance on integration which amounts to reliance

on acceptance by the white man--is at direct odds with the sense

of control over one's destiny that Jencks notes correlates so

directly with achievement?

Therefore, both spokesmen, along with the white/black backlash

against forced cross-busing, make it imperative that research on black/

 

9James S. Coleman, “Equal Schools or Equal Students," in Readings
on the School in Society, ed. by Patricia Sexton (Englewood Cliffs,
New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1967), pp. 122-26.

10Floyd McKissick, "Is Integration Necessary," New Republic,
December 3, 1966, pp. 33-36.

7

white differences with regard to educational attainment be researched.
Especially those differences which may be present after controlling
for key variables such as SES and achievement. Educators realize that

overall enhancement of the society from both an educational and race

relations viewpoint reside in integration. Robert L. Green}1 sums up

the above concern in the following manner:

Segregated schools foster a sense of superiority in whites and
also hate, fear, and suspicion of minorities. Minorities, in
turn, develop a sense of inferiority along with feelings of
hostility, resentment, and resignation. Consequently neither
group is able to function properly in a multiracial setting. It
is a vicious circle, but the circle must be broken. Multiracial
settings contribute to improving minority self-perception;
improvement of the minority youngsters self—image can lead to
greater academic achievement.

Esperal Statement of Hypothesis

 

The hypothesis fonnulated in this study is generally stated as

follows. There are no difference(s) in social-psychological climate

 

variables between predominately Black andppredppjnatelyLWhite schools
12

 

who

 

when SES and achievement are controlled. Dreger and Miller,
have compiled comprehensive reviews of the literature of comparative
investigations between blacks and whites since 1943, give credence to

a second general hypothesis. In their review of comparative research,

 

1]Robert L. Green "Racism in American Education," Phi Delta
Kappan, Vol. 53 (January, 1972), 276.

. 12Ralph M. Dreger and Kent S. Miller, "Comparative Psychological
Studies of Negroes and Whites in the United States," Psychological

Bulletin Monograph Supplement, Vol. 70 (September, 196 —

eh-

v1:

-4.“

t
e
n
l

 

8

they indicated that the intricate nature of Blacks and Whites in
relationship to SES and achievement in America necessitates inter-
action analysis. In other words, because race, SES, and achievement
are highly correlated, statistical procedures must be sensitive to

any interaction that may occur. With this in mind,the following
hypothesis is formulated. There is no significant interaction between
race2 achievement, and socio-econpmigfistatpg with [gggrd to the school

climate variables.

Assumptions

Research in school climate(s), though minimal, permits the

following tenable assumptions with regard to climate variables.13

 

13Robert L. Sinclair, "Elementary School Educational Environ-
ments: Toward Schools that are Responsive to Students,“ The National
Elementary Principal, Vol. 49 (April, 1970), 53-58. ""““"‘

 

Edward McDill, Edmund Meyers, and Leo Rigsby, "Institutional
Effects on the Academic Behavior of High School Students," Sociology

of Education. Vol. 40 (Summer, 1967), 181-199

James Davis. “Intellectual Climates in 135 American Colleges and

Universities: A Stu in Social Psychophysics" Sociology of Education,
Vol. 37 (Winter, 1963 110-128.

Richard Gigliotti, "The Expectation Pattern: Analysis of
Elementary School Social Environment" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1972).

I
i
Q
I

 

9

The lmw achievement schools will score higher on reported
student press for competition scale than the highachievement
schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the importance
of self-identity or role scale than the low achievement schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the academic
norms of the school scale than the low achievement schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the sense of
control scale than the low achievement schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the self-
concept of academic ability scale than the low achievement
schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the perceived
best friend expectation and evaluation scale than the low
achievement schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the perceived
teacher expectation and evaluation scale than the low achieve-
ment schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the perceived
parental expectation and evaluation scale than the low achieve-
ment schools.

The high achievement schools will score higher on the perceived
principal expectation and evaluation scale than the low achieve-
ment schools.

The low achievement schools will score higher on the reported
teacher press for competition scale than the highachievement
schools.

Major Hypothesis It Black and white schools of similar socio—economic

status and achievement level will not differ on school climate variables.

Sub-Hypotheses:

1.

Black and white schools of similarsocio-economicstatus and
achievement level will not differ on reported student press
for competition.

Black and white schools of similarsocio-economicstatus and
achievement level will not differ on importance of student
self-identity or role.

 

10

Black and white schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on reported academic
norms of the school.

Black and white schools of Similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on sense of control.

Black and white schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on self-concept of academic
ability.

Black and white schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on perceived best friend
evaluation and expectation.

Black and white schools of similar socio—economic status and
achievement level will not differ on perceived teacher
evaluation and expectation.

Black and white schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on perce1ved parent
evaluation and expectation.

Black and white schools of similar socio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on perceived principal
evaluation and expectation

Black and white schools of similarsocio-economic status and
achievement level will not differ on reported teacher press
for competition.

Major Hypothesis II: No interactions between race, achievement level,

and socioeconomic status with regard to the school climate variables.

1.

No triple- -order interaction between race, achievement level,
and socio-economiCstatus with regard to the school climate
variables.

No interaction between achievement level and socio-economic
status with regard to school climate variables.

No interaction between race and achievement level with regard
to school climate variables.

No interaction between race and socio-economic status with
regard to school climate variables.

r

11
Other Questions

The following questions are not of primary interest in this
study but will be examined because of possible confounding effects in
this study.

1. High and low socio-economic status schools will not differ
on the school climate variables.

2. High and low achievement level schools will not differ on the
school climate variables.

In view of the information presented above, a study concerning
a comparative analysis of black/white differences in elementary school
climate configurations, when SES and achievement are controlled, is
significant. Research in this area is crucial to provide information
in the following areas:

1. That school climate is a probable causal variable in school
achievement that should be given parity, if not priority
over race and SES as a powerful determinant of achievement.

2. The concept of achievement being a process that usually
requires race, SES, and school environment to interact in

some fashion will negate current modes of thought about
direct causation being the result of one primary variable.

. SCHOOL CLIMATE AS AN INTERVENING VARIABLE
_
\ <———-»'*

B = Black +SC = Positive School Climate

W = White -SC = Negative School Climate
' H(SES) = High SES

L(SES) = Low SES

HAA = High Academic Achievement
LAA = Low Academic Achievement

LAA
HAA

II II

FIGURE 1

 

12

3. A systematic inventory of comparative analysis of social-
psychological school climate variables between whites and
blacks will be given which could provide insight into the
differences of respective student population with regards to
school climate.

4. Lastly, but perhaps most importantly, insights into the
academic performance difference between Black and White
schools may be found.

Overview

The study will follow the following format. Chapter I includes
the introduction, justification for research, statement of the problem,
general statement of the hypotheses, basic assumptions, and specific
hypotheses to be tested.

In Chapter II, theoretical aspects will be presented. Theory for
this research will be extrapolated from symbolic-interaction, role
theory, and structural effects.

Review of the Literature is presented in Chapter III. This
includes a brief mention of traditional comparison of blacks and whites
(i.e., mainly intelligence and SES studies). Main emphasis will be on
the limited research on elementary school climate and an attempt to
forward literature on social psychological variables that constitute
the school climate in this Study.

The design of the study and modus operandi followed in the
research are reported in Chapter IV. Information in this chapter
includes sample, instrumentation, pre-testing, questionnaire adminis-
tering, design, testable hypotheses, modes of analysis and rationale.

Chapter V, concerns the results as it applies to the major

RYPOtheses. The findings are presented in tables.

13

Summary, conclusions, limitations of study and implications for

further research are presented in Chapter VI.

 

 

CHAPTER II
THEORY

School climate for the purpose of this research is in the realm
of symbolic interaction (self-other interaction). Meaning, it is the
individual's interpretation of others (teachers, students, principal,
and parents) expectations and behavior which govern his action within
the school. Role theory also lends itself to this line of logic. The
self is a perceptive entity which is affected by and structured from
the interaction of the individual and his environment. Symbolic inter-
action and role theory in the fonnulation of school climate are
strengthened by structural effects. Meaning, the normative patterns that
develop in a community, group, or other institution which an individual
adhers to regardless of personal feelings. Within this chapter, an
attempt to assimilate these concepts into a construct of school climate
is presented. Conceptual cohesiveness in this direction is aided by

Brookover's social-psychological conception of learning.

Sympolic Interaction

The school can be pictured as a system within which an interchange
of observation, reaction, and modification occur in the environment of
which all the actors are a part. Symbolic interaction theory, as

formulated by George Herbert Mead1 and Charles Cooley,2 would be

 

 

. 1George Herbert Mead, Mind, Self, and Society, (University of
Chicago, 1934).

2Charles Horton Cooley, Human Nature and the Social Order, (New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902 .

l4

 

 

15

applicable to the concept of a school constituting an environment

(climate). John W. Kinch,3 utilizing the ideas of the aforementioned

theorists, posits the symbolic interactionist theory of the self.4

1. The individual's self-concept is based on his perception of
the way others are responding to him.

2. The individual's self-concept function to direct his
behavior.

3. The individual's perception of the response of others toward
him reflects the actual responses of others toward him.

4. The way the individual perceives the responses of others
toward him will influence his behavior.

5. The actual response of others to the individual will deter-
mine the way he sees himself (his self-concept).

05
o

The actual reSponse of others toward the individual will
affect the behavior of the individual.

Johnson5 summarizes what he calls an excellent example of formal theory
in the following statement:
The actual responses of others to the individual will be important
in determining how the individual will perceive himself; this

perception will influence his self-conception which, in turn,
will guide his behavior.

A model (Figure l) to illustrate the above concepts would be in order.

Theconceptual springboard for this model is drawn from an illustration by

 

3John W. Kinch, "A Formalized Theory of Self-Concept," American
Journal of Sociology. Vol. 68 (January, 1963), 481-486.

4Johnson, op. cit., p. 84-85.

5Johnson, op. cit., p. 85.

 

16

CLIMATE OF SCHOOL

Perceived Response

Ill/,r’” of others

    
  
 
   
 

Self-Concept
Principal Actual Response of
thers

., “r;nActual Response Self-Concept Student
at; of Others
3.01 k//// 3
F- I
g 2 3 \ Behav1or ,7’ g
0:; of / gm
U-v-u / ms.
oi...” Student :22
P430 P
0:“ F0
(DO P (U
3- 39-
G! \ +30
:1. 0
\ <:
\
\
U 1'— OJ
in O (n
C .2 g
Sin. 0 o.w
"t. m at ..
.3: O (2.:
+3 u-aa +: I»
8° 0'0 '30 0
>9— LS- >Q- L-
'I‘O on: "-0 O
" :8 8 ‘;
2 no: S- (U
l} A: d) .c
G. 0: a d)
Inn- on
a
I
I
I
W
O
In
a a:
8.2 Q
" o 8 e
..23 <a u
3"- as
3° ..._
:E. 33
‘\\\s “(,1Perceived Response 4/”
of others ‘K\\

Behavior
$:f7:\$ of ,,zzza

‘ Principa]

FIGURE 2

17

Michael Auer,6 who in turn extrapolated his model from John W. Kinch.
This model is an attempt to depict the dynamic interaction that occurs
within the school. In the theoretical tradition of symbolic interaction,
each actor is indeed a product of the interplay between the environ-
ment and himself. A unique aspect of this model is the parents, who

are included, with regard to their input into the school environment

and their subsequent behavior in return.

The most poignant aspect of this model is that conceptualizations
of the school climate facilitating maximal or minimal student performance
can be seen as a realistic phenomenon. Barring organic and innate
barriers, climate configurations could be a crucial factor with regard
to academic achievement. An important aspect of this research is that
the comparative analysis between Black and White schools climate may
indicate some reasoning for the lack of Black schools achieving on a
comparable level with White schools. Meaning.that school climate as

A operationalized in this research may illuminate possible climate
variables that contribute to the discrepancy in achievement levels

between Black and White schools.

Role Theory

William James,7

Charles Horton Cooley,8 and George Herbert Mead9

are the principal contributors to the constructs that constitute role

 

6Howard Joseph Michael Auer, "Self-Concept of Academic Ability
' of West German Eig th Grade Students" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1971), p. 21.

7William James, Psychology: Briefer Course, (New York: Henry
Holt 1892).

8Cooley. op. cit.
9Mead, op. cit.

 

I
I 18

theory. Foundation for the concept of a school climate can be
gleaned from the following statement by Deutsch and Krauss:10

Role theorist, far more than those of other theoretical persuasion,
have developed and employed the concept of the self as a

cognitive structure which emerges from the interaction of the

human organism and its social environment.

Herein is acknowledgement of the interplay between an organism and his
environment resulting in the emergence of self.
Role is generally composed of three operational definitions.H
1. Prescribed role consists of the system of expectations which
surround the occupant of a position and his behavior toward
occupants of a complementary position.
2. Subjective role consists of those particular expectations
the occupant of a position perceives as applicable to his

behavior when he interacts with the residents of some other
position.

3. Enacted role consists of a particular overt behavior of the

occupant of a position when he interacts with the occupant of
- some other position.

Although slightly different, the conceptualization presented above
depicts the same underlying phenomenon. Empirically, the concepts would
all be closely correlated.12 Deutsch and Krauss present this close

relationship in the following manner.13

 

IO

Morton Deutsch and Robert M. Krauss, Theories in Social Psychology
(New York: Basic Books, Inc., 1965), p. 81.

1]Ibid.. p. 175.

; 'Zrbi .. p. 175.

13Ibid., p. 175-6.

   

ab

ef

/ (if?

19

. . . .., in a coherent and well—integrated social system, the
members correctly perceive the social norms that govern their
behavior: their subjective roles are similar to the prescribed
roles. Similarly, peoples' actual behavior tends to correspond

to what they believe is expected of them: the enacted roles and

the subjective roles coincide.

Emerging, as in symbolic interaction theory, is the dynamic
interplay between an organism and his environment. Specifically, role
theory provides additional theoretical credence to the concept of a
unique climate in schools as a product of the actors within that particu-

lar situation.

Structural Effects
Additional credence for the theoretical formulation presented

‘4 concept of "structural

above can be extrapolated from Peter Blau's
effects.“ Structural effects, according to Blau, are the patterns of
conduct and/or values held by a group or connunity which an individual
adheres to irregardless of his idiosyncracies. Additionally, people
conform to norms of a group because of possible guilt feelings and
social approval. Nonconformance would elicit disapproval and possible
negative sanctions by the group. Hanan Selvin, Warren Hagstrom,15

Arnold Tannenbaum, and Jerald Bachman16 were others who recognized the

phenomenon of structural effects as forwarded by Blau.

 

14Peter M. Blau, "Structural Effects," American Sociological
Review, Vol. 25 (April, 1960), 168-193.

15Hanan Selvin and Warren Hagstrom, "The Empirical Classification
I gggFopmal Groups," Ampyican Sociological Review, Vol. 28 (June, 1963)
-4 l.

 

16Arnold Tannenbaum and Jerald Bachman, "Structural Versus Individual
Effects," he American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 69 (May, 1964) 585-595.

 

20

Blau17

elaborates on "structural effects" by presenting distin-
guishable types.
1. Direct Structural Effect of Common Value
Conduct 0? an ind1viaual is motivated By his value system
and the social pressures from members of the group.
2. Inverse Structpral Effects of Cannon Values
Group values prechitate nonnat1ve constraints that counteract

individual psychological reaction that are not commensurate
with group values.

3. Contin enc Effect of Common Values
Correlat1on Between 1naiv1aua| value construct and a third
value is influenced by value configuration in a group.

4. Direct Structprgl Effects of Relatipppl Network
Individuals‘ personal relationships or social status is
separated from the abstract supportiveness or constraining
forces exerted by the organization in regards to interplay
between participant and subgroups in a collectivity.

5. Inverse Structural Effects of Relational Networks

Status hierarchy or network in a group may 5e qu1te unlike that
of an individual social status or social relationships.

6. Contin enc Effects of Rational Networks
REIationsfiip of individual soc1aI posit1on and another variable

depends on the distribution of social position or relation
in the collectivity.

Thus, "structural effects" can be seen as a crucial factor in the
behavioral manifestation of a group's members. Irregardless of supposed
individualistic inclinations, all actors within the social system
experience this phenomenon.

Symbolic Interaction, Role Theory, and Structural Effects all
forward the dynamic interplay between an actor, his environment and
subsequent behavior. Indications are that an environment (climate) can

’ .

. be quite independent of particular individuals, relationships and/
o

I

 

‘7D1au, op. cit., p. 190-193.

 

21

or status. To grasp the significance of the above mentioned concept
of a climate, perhaps a simplistic example is in order. Sociology
departments, all have norms, values, and expectations for students
and faculty. Irregardless of personnel whims, ideology, ideas, and
values which exist in the constituency. a public blast of colleagues,
plagiarism, data fudging, lowered standards, and blanket grading
usually do not occur.

18

Brookover sums up the concept of school climate from the

preceding discussion of symbolic interaction, role theory, and
structural effects in what is called a Social-Psychological Conception
of Learning. Herein, Brookover posits that it is not the actual
behavior of others that determines an individual's behavior; but, the
interpretations of the expectations and actions ofothers. Additionally,
learning occurs in a social situation. Learning varies from one
situation to another. Rationale for differential learning, seemingly,
would rest with the social context (environment/climate) in which it

19 is as follows:

occurs. Brookover's theory
In this context, the self is the intervening variable between
the nonnative patterns of the social group or the role expecta-
tions held by the significant others, on one hand, and the
learning of the individual, on the other. We hypothesize that,
for the expectations of others to be functional in a particular
individual's behavior, they must be internalized and becone
part of the person's conception of himself. Although we recognize

 

18Wilbur B. Brookover and Edsel L. Erickson, Societ Schools and
Learning (Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc., 1969), p. 15-16.
19

Wilbur B. Brookover and David Gottlieb, SOCIOIOgy of Education
(New York: American Book Company, 1964),p 69

 

 

E

22

the relevance of self in all aspects of human behavior, our
interest at this point is in a particular aspect of self as it
functions in the school learning situation. We postulate that
the child acquires, by taking the role of the other, a perception
of his own ability as a learner of the various types of skills
and subjects which constitute the school curriculum. If the
child perceives that he is unable to learn mathematics or some
other area of behavior, this self-concept of his ability becomes
the functionally limiting factor of his school achievement.
Functional limit is the term used to emphasize that we are
speaking not of genetic organic limits on learning but rather of
those perceptions of what is appropriate, desirable, and possible
for the individual to learn. We postulate the latter as the
limits that actually operate, within broader organic limits, in
determining the nature or extent of the particular behavior

earne .

Brookover20 sums up the postulates presented above in this cogent

statement:
Such a conception of human learning has been identified as a
social interaction theory because the individual acquires both
the perceptions of appropriate behavior and his ability to learn

in interaction with others who are important or Significant to
him.

Summar

An attempt has been made to give theoretical credence to the
concept of school climate. Social-psychological theories--symbolic
interaction, role theory, and structural effects all have been used to
illustrate the feasibility of a school with a climate unique to that
building. Brookover's postulateswerepresented to sum up how such a
construct could be a factor in learning. The Social-Psychological
Conception of Learning illustrated clearly the connection between a

school climate and its possible effects on learning.

 

zoBrookover and Erickson, op. cit., p. 16.

   

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER III
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE

The literature related to elementary school climate is reviewed
in this chapter. As indicated, in Chapter I, the concept of school
climate has not been the subject of intensive research. In fact,
elementary school climate is literally virgin territory with regard to
research endeavors. Comparisons of blacks and whites in this sphere are
virtually nil. Due to the paucity of literature available, the following
format will be used.

Section I will review the available research on school climate,
with special emphasis on the very limited literature dealing with
elementary schools. Section II is addressed to a sanpling of the
comparative studies of blacks and whites predominant in the literature.
Section III is an attempt to review literature concerning aspects of
school climate which are operationalized in this research. Basically,
the review of literature presented will be quite tangential due to the
lack of research on elementary school climate utilizing social—
psychological components. However, an attempt will be made to present
a schemata in the general direction of the thrust inherent in this

research.

23

 

 

24
School Climate

Numerous research attempts under the rubric of school climate have
been attempted. These, for the most part, involved colleges and a few
highschools as their realm of investigation. Basically, the concern
of these studies were of the school as an organization which has norms
and goals that constitute the overall climate of the school. Other
research in this direction has investigated school climates in
relationship to student behavior, attitude, and achievement. The
aforementioned description depicts the organizational and sociological
flavor to the work done on school climate, heretofore. Walz and Miller,1
the progenitors of the above dialogue further add that research endeavors,
thus far, have indicated somewhat the nature of norms, values, and goals
held by institutions which, in turn, effect school climate and its
participants. Walz and Miller provide a capsule of the various types
of research endeavors that constitute climate research of some type.

Only where the literature is crucial to the thrust of this research
will deviation from the sunmary/format be presented.

The only category not presented was Adolescent Social Climates
which is more closely akin to the research being developed. Reviews
in this area will be presented shortly. Climate,as portrayed by the
research presented, is mainly concerned with colleges from an organiza-

tional, personality-like facilities available, and quasi-sociological ‘4

1Carry Walz and Juliet Miller, "School Climate and Student
Behavior: Implications for Counselors Role,“ The Personnel and Guidance
Journal, Vol. 47 (May, 1969), 859-867.

‘_

25

perspective. Issues dealt with, under the aegis of climate. range in
such diverse areas as student development, deviance, student types,
college characteristics, student subculture, and open and closed
climates. This is an indication of the lack of systematic research
efforts in this area. What constitutes a school climate is still a
matter of conjecture or an individual researcher's whim.
School Climate as used in the context of this paper is more of a
Social-Psychological phenomenon as substantiated in Chapter II. David
W. Johnson2 perhaps provides the most succinct statement regarding the
concept of a school climate from a Social—Psychological perspective.
Education, from a social-psychological point Of view, is carried
on in an organized social environment largely through interpersonal
processes. How a student responds in the classroom, for example,
will depend upon such factors as the organizational structure and
climate of the school, the nature of the students goals and the
goals of his teacher, and the reaction he thinks his peers,
parents, and friends will have to his behavior. It is rimaril
within the extended teacher—student and student-student 1nteraction
in the classroom that education takes place.
Need-Press Studies
Pace and Stern3 developed a method of assessing and viewing college
environment through use of personality theory. Activity Index and

College Characteristics Index were developed,respectively;to measure

 

2Johnson, op. cit., p. 231.

3C. R. Pace, The Influence of Academic and Student gubcultures in
College and Universit es and Env1ronments, Un1ver51ty o a 1 orn a,
Los nge es: . . ice 0 ucat1on and Social Science Research
Council Cooperative Research Project, 1964.

G. G. Stern Studies of colle e environment, Syracuse University,
Syracuse, N. Y.:‘ U.S. Office of Egucation and Social Science Research

Council Cooperative Research Project, 1964.

r. X’-
LJ—inhu ‘

 

 

26

personal student needs and environment press measurement. Stern posits
that colleges differ in student clientele; and, needs-press measures can
assess student difference and the resultant climate.

Some of the findings concerning differences between college
climates, indicated that schools, fell under several patterns.

1. Intellectual - Humanism

2. Intellectual - Scientific

3. Practical and applied Humanities and Scientific emphasis.
(practical - status)

4. Individual res onsibility to fellow students and society.
(group welfare)

5. Rebellion against conservatism (rebellion).

Student Development in Small Colleges
Chickering,4 in a study of how the students' development is

influenced by the organization of the college which he attends,
examined such factors as autonomy, teaching practices, curriculum, and
responsibilities. The students' personalities were the object of

an Omnibus Personality Inventory. Student types used were Intellectual
Altruists, Practical Conservatives, and Altruistic Conservatives.
Results indicate students tend to choose colleges in congruence with

their personality.

 

4A. W. Chickering, "Institutional Differences and Student
Characteristics." (Speech prepared for the annual meeting of the Mental
Health Section of the American College Health Association, San Diego,
California, May 3, 1966).

 

27

College Student Cultures and Deviance

Newcomb5 concerned himself with students who deviate from the
norms of a particular college. Two types of deviants were hypothesized.
The Collegiate students, who are involved in peers structure, recognized
as deviants, are less likely to change behavior; and, will usually
remain in school. Non-Collegiate groups do not adhere to any nonns or
belong to any groups. Chances are Non-Collegiate types will not have
any friends and will move toward modal behavior or leave school. The
testing of hypotheses in the Bennington College studies proved the

above statements to be true.

Taxonomy of Student Types

Clark and Trow,6 followed by Mauss,7 forward models of student
subcultures which deal with college and junior college respectively.
The college subcultures are Academic Group, Collegiate Group, Non-
Conformist Group, and Vocational Group. The junior college subcultures
include Academic Group, Vocational Group, Incipient Rebel Group, and
Perpetual Teenager Group. Each group is supposedly based on two
factors; the students' identity with school and the students' concern

with ideas.

 

5T. M. Newcomb and R. Flacks, Deviant Subcultures on a Colle e
Canpus, University of Michigan, Ann ArBDr: U.S. Office of Educat1on

ooperative Research Project, 1964.

68. Clark and M. Trow, "The Organizational Context," in Colle e
Peer Groupg, ed. by T. Newcomb and E. Wilson (Chicago: Aldine, 1966),
7A. L. Mauss, "Toward an Empirical Typology of Junior College
Student Subcultures." (Paper presented at the annual meeting of the
Pacific Sociological Association, Long Beach, California, March, 1967).

 

 

28

College Institutional Characteristics

Two major studies by Astin in 19658 and 19679 were to determine
the effect(s) of college environment on the student's development.
Thirty-six variables of their study were categorized into four sectors:
classroom environment; peer environment; administrative environment;
and physical environment. The relationship between these variables and

attrition were significant in twenty—one of the thirty—six variables.

College Environments

The American College Testing program, as reported by Skager,10
used student self-ratings in relationship to their college experience.
Any change or lack Of change was related, supposedly, to the environ—
ment of the college. Colleges were characterized by two dimensions--
Institutional and Environmental. Student changes were categorized in
the following manner: scholarship, expressiveness, practical-mindedness,
popularity, sensitivity to others needs, and self-confidence. Research

indicating changes in students, resulting from college attendance are

linked to college environmental factors.

 

8A .W. Astin, Who Goes Where to Colle e? (Chicago: Science
Research Associates), 1965.

9A. W. Astin and R. J. Panos, Attrition Amon Colle e Students,
American Council on Education Research Report, 196;.

10R. Skager, Chan es in Self-Rating and Life Goals Amon Students
at Colleges with Different Characteristics, American College Iesting

rogram esearch Report, No. 14, Iowa City, Iowa: American College
Testing Program, 1966.

 

29

Classroom Climate

 

Walberg and Anderson'sn model of school climate, developed in
connection with the Harvard Physics Project, was hypothesized as one
factor facilitating achievement in Physics classes. Climate was

composed of structural factors (role expectations held by students for
their own behavior) and the affective factor (students inclination to

act in idiosyncratic ways). Data indicated Isomorphism and organiza-
tion, which are structural factors, predict learning better than coaction
(coercion by teacher); and,Synergism (affective factor involving inter-
personal relations among class) predicted better than Synality (affective

factor which is the individuals student's identification with group goals).

Open and Closed School Climate
A significant part of the work done on school climate has dwelled

in the use of Halpin's and Croft's12

Organization Climate Description
Questionnaire (0CDQ). This mode of inquiry suggeststhat school climate
is analogous to the open and closed personality structure. Open school
climate is characterized by open communication and concern for each
other. Closed school climate is characterized by little commitment

to group and paucity of communication among staff.

 

11H. J. Walberg,and G. Anderson, Classroom Climate and Individual
Learnin , Harvard University, Cambridge, Mass.: Research REport off
Harvard Project Physics in cOOperation with Carnegie Corporation of New
York, National Science Foundation, Sloan Foundation, and U.S. Office
Of Education, 1967.

12A. W. Halpin and D. Croft, The Dr anizational Climate of Schools,
Utah University, Salt Lake City: U S Office of Educatibn Project,
1959.

30

The mode of investigation utilizes the instrument - OCDQ which is
administered to the school staff. Two groups of scales for staff and
leader are scored in the following manner. Staff is depicted in the
degree of disengagement, hindrance, espirit, and intimacy. Leader is
characterized by degree of aloofness, production emphasis, thrust, and
consideration exhibited. The initial development of the OCDQ was in
elementary schools. Six types of school climate were identified:
open, autonomous, controlled,familiar, paternal, and closed. For the
remainder of section 1, literature which has a social-psychological
emphasis in regard to school climate, or seemingly in accord with the
research topic, will be presented.

Coleman13

, in a study of ten midwest highschools, examined the
various aspects of adolescent subculture. The purpose was to determine
the effects of student subcultures and what caused them to be present.
Data indicated that athletics were important for boys no matter what type
Of school was considered. Social success with boys was extremely
important for girls. Academic achievement received varied amounts of
rewards and, even punishment in the different schools. Family background
was found to be quite important in schools where a lot of upper-middle
class children attended. Research also led Coleman to forward the idea
Of interscholastic academic competition, analagous to sports, rather

than inter-personal competition within the school. Rationale was the

overall climate of the school would support achievement rather than

mitigate against it.

 

* 13James Coleman, The Adolescent Society(New York: Free Press of
Glencoe, 1961).

31

Davis]4

used a sample of 33,982 students at 135 colleges and
universities to determine if a given value, when viewed by group members
as characteristic of their group, is a linear function of the propor-
tion of the individuals who hold the value. Results were that high
quality, private, and small institutions, have a high proportion of
seniors endorsing intellectual values. On the other hand, lower quality,
public, and larger institutions have a lower proportion of seniors sanc-
tioning intellectual values. Additionally, intellectual values were
quite low for seniors who attended technological schools.

Somewhat different from the Davis research is an endeavor by
Michael15 in which the effects Of social class on school climate and
subsequent college plans were examined. The sample was composed Of 500
public highschools and 35,000 students. Seniors were classified by
aptitude tests and family background data. School climate was determined
solely by the percentage of senior-class members whose family status
ranked in the two top categories of the SES index. Results were that
SES was more predictive of college attendance in the poorer school
climate (greater proportion of lower class) and ability was more a
factor in better school climate (greater prOportion of upper class).

This means that a school climate determined by SES composition

(e.g. high SES or low SES usually means a positive or negative school

 

14James Davis, op. gi_i_:_. 110-128.

15John A. Michael, "High School Climates and Plans for Entering
College,“ Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 37 (Winter, 1961), 585-595.

32

climate respectively in relationship to academic performance) in
Davis's research substantiates the Coleman Report. This refers
especially to the sector concerning integration to enhance the school
climate for black children. Improvement would ensue from the resulting
social class mix that would raise the SES level of the schools involved.
Perhaps one of the most noteworthy and controversy - provoking

16

documents in education is the Coleman Report. This survey was

designed to investigate the inequality of educational opportunity among
six racial and ethnic groups (Puerto Ricans, Blacks, American Indians,
Mexican Americans, Oriental Americans, and Whites). Some results of this
study which involved a sample of 573,512 students, 65,902 teachers,

and 4,090 principals were as follows:

1. White students generally attended schools with more resources
than non-whites.

2. Schools for the most part are segregated in regard to racial
composition, which also indicates that schools were for the
most part segregated by social class. This was found to be
more pronounced at the elementary level.

3. Teachers in Black schools were found to differ from White school
teachers in college training, vocabulary scores, and attitu-
dinal factors.

4. In all measurements of achievement, the Whites and Orientals
achieved at comparable levels in all grades tested (1, ,8,
9, and 12); other minorities achieved at a lower level with
Blacks and Puerto Ricans lowest of all.

 

16James Coleman, g3, 21,, Op. cit.

33

5. In assessing the factors related to achievement,the powerful
effect of family background was substantiated. School
factors found to be most significant in order of highest
amount of variance were students' peers, teacher charac-
teristics, and other school characteristics (per-pupil
expenditures, books, facilities).

6. Other results germane to the research being reported,in
addition to teacher characteristics and peers,were data concern-
ing sense of control and self-concept. Sense of control was
found to be highly correlated with achievement as was self-
concept. However,the manifestation of these variables differed
between Blacks and Whites. White and/or advantaged children's
achievement or lack of was closely related to self-concept.
Whereas,Black and/or disadvantaged children's achievement or
lack of was closely related to sense of control.

7. Another result particularly important to Blacks in the Coleman
Report was that as the proportion of Whites inthe school increased,
the child's Sense of Control of environment increased, and
his Self-Concept decreased. It has been suggested that the
Self-Concept decrease is only a temporary factor resulting
from the change in reference group by the students. Sense of
Control data provided by Coleman illuminates an area of
concern for integrationists,segregationists, and community
control advocates. This is because Sense of Control is a
strong correlate of academic achievement among Black and/or
diiadvantaged students; but,the direction of causation is
un nown.

School climate as a function of race/social class composition was

the focus of an interesting study by Wilson17

in the Bay Area of
California. Wilson sought to illustrate that the social class composi-
tion of a school significantly affects achievement. The sample consisted
of 5,545 students in eleven junior and senior highschools. Population
was stratified by sex, race, school, and grade level. Random samples
were drawn from each stratum and subjected to regression and covariate

analysis. The results indicated the following:

1. School climate makes a significant difference in academic
achievement in higher grades.

2. The development of black or white students, academically, in
a racially integrated or segregated school are affected by
the social class composition of the school.

 

17Wilson, op. cit.

34

3. When students of the same social class are racially mixed,
' little difference in academic perfOrmance occurs for either
racial group.

4. Sense of control is affected by social class segregation. To
separate social class facilitates a feeling of hopelessness.

Wilson's research could be considered a clarification and

extension Of the Coleman data. Coleman18

found that sense of control
was highly correlated with achievement among black and white students.
Additionally, a direct relationship was found between sense of control
and integration for black Students. Meaning, that as integration
increased so did sense of control and vice versa. However, Wilson
posits this was a function of social class. In light of the economic
facts present in America, the findings of Wilson are noteworthy.
Race and social class are highly correlated in America (blacks-lower
class and whites-middle class). ‘

Another study which illustrated the effect school climate may

have on achievement was done by McDill, Meyers, and Rigsbylg.

Their
sample was composed of a non-random sample of twenty highschools,

which included 20,345 students and 1,029 teachers. The results
indicated that all of the climate aspects except one were more strongly
related to achievement than SES. When SES composition and intelligence
are controlled, the climate effect still maintains some explanatory power.

Inferences from this study, as well as the others presented, indicate the

underlying question of causality in regards to the school climate/SES

 

18Coleman, pt. 91., op. cit., p. 288-289, 320-325.

19
McDill, Meyers, and Rigsby, op. cit., 181-199.

35

context. The crucial concern is whether a school climate conducive to
achievement is a direct function of SES, or can a positive climate be
structured in any situation? McDill, Meyers, and Rigsby indicate
strongly that contextual SES is not a valid indicator of climate,
especially for schools which occupy the intermediate positions in the
SES range. Additionally,it is possible to postulate that schools in
the middle SES range could structure a school climate conducive to
optimal student performance. However,schools at the high and low SES
extremes climate may not be as amendable.

Indications are that some low SES schools do have positive school
climates. Jones,20 in a historical study Of an inner-city Detroit high
school, sought to explain the success of educating students who mainly
came from the lowest socio-economic group. Data was obtained through
questionnaires, comprehensive record search, and personal interviews.
The findings indicated that the teachers mentally toughened the students
and were highly empathetic. Manipulation of social, economic, and
political institutions were also taught by the teachers. Miller High
School, the subject of this research, is one of a number of high schools
in low SES areas that seem to have considerable success in educating
students. What those factors are, that explain the unusual success of
such schools, have escaped research attention. This charge is somewhat

the intent of the parent project from which this research is a part.

 

2°c1oyze11e Karrelle Jones, "The Historify of Sydney D. Miller
High School with Particular Exploration into those Factors which Resulted
in the Inordinately High Incidence of Pupil Successes Considering, and
Despite, Existing Socio-Economic Factors which are Perceived as Being
Prime Predictors of High Incidences of Pupil Failure," Dissertation
Abstracts, Vol. 32 (July, 1971), 161.

 

36

As cited previously, school climate has not been the realm of
intensive research, especially at the elementary school level. Therefore,
the recent work on elementary schools are of particular interest.

Sinclair,21

in a study of 12,000 students from 100 elementary schools,

used factor analytic techniques and five dimensions emerged. Pace's

terminology was adapted: Practicality, Community, Awareness, Propriety,

and Scholarship. Schools were found to cluster in several categories.
1. Practicality - Schools that are scholarly, yet rebellious.

2. Practicality - Schools that are scholarly, warm, and accepting
with a higher score on Propriety.

3. Schools characterized by emphasis on student conformity and
politeness.

4. Schools which are academically rigorous and have little concern
for Practicality.

5. Schools low on Scholarship and Practicality form this cluster.

6. Rebellious schools which are also low on awareness make up
this cluster.

7. Schools which are cold and rebellious, somewhat like jails.
Sinclair did not relate these factors to achievement. The intent was
to provide a taxonomy of elementary school climate characteristics.

Sadker and Sinc1a1r22

, in a follow-up study, identified six new
environmental dimensions. They were: Alienation, Humanism, Autonomy,

Morale, Opportunism, and Resources.

 

21Sinclair, op. cit.

22David Sadker and Robert L. Sinclair, "Dimensions of the Elementary
School Educational Environment: A Factor Analytic Study" (paper pre-
sented at American Educational Research Association Meetings, Chicago,
Illinois, April, 1972).

37

Thus far, the literature presented has only been tangentially
connected to the thrust of this research. Theoretical base for the
most part has not been symbolic-interaction or role theory, although
structural effects seemingly appears. A few comparative studies
between Blacks and Whites involving school climate have been done. A
sampling of these will be presented.

Owens and Steinhoff23 developed a factor profile of schools
involved in the More Effective Schools (MES) project in New York. The
factors used in these profiles are outlined below.

A. Development Press
. Intellectual Climate
. Achievement Standards
. Practicalness (friendliness)

. Supportiveness
Orderli ness

m-wa—l
e

8. Control Press (Reflection of factor 1 & 2).

C. Impulse Control - high level of constraint and organizational
restrictiveness.

The clustering of schools on factors had characteristics as identified
below:

1. Schools whose faculties perceived a high Development Press
(Factor 1 through 5) had a high concentration of Puerto Rican
and white pupils.

2. In schools with a high percentage of black pupils,a significant
proportion of the teachers indicated they perceived a high
level of Impulse Control (Factor 6).

 

23Robert G. Owens and Carl R. Steinhoff, "Strategies for Improving
Inner-city Schools," Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 50( January, 1969), 259-263.

 

38

3. Practicalness (Factor 3) is significantly correlated with
ethnic composition. There was positive correlation to the
white and Puerto Rican pupil population and negative
correlation to the black pupil population. Also, there was
positive correlation with pupil achievement.

These results indicated a different climate configuration within
each school. Whether they are a function of social class or race is
difficult to determine. Indications are that all were probably
lower-class since this wasa project to improve schools.

The Halpin and Croft instrument has been used in comparative

investigations between black and white samples. Davis24

investigated
the relationship between the academic achievement level of elementary
schools and their respective faculty characteristics. The sample was
comprised of thirty-two elementary schools stratified by race and
achievement level. Results showed that the black and white sample
differed significantly on the Organization Climate Description
Questionnaire (0CDQ).

l. Faculties of Black and White schools differed on these
aspects--degree of disengagement, hindrance, espirit, and
intimacy.

2. Another finding was the reversed trends of White and Black
schools of similar SES composition on the factors under
investigation.

Another climate comparison between black and white schools was

done by Gentry and Kenney.25

The purpose of the investigation was to
see if the organizational climate of white and black schools differed

significantly as perceived by their respective faculties.

 

24Joseph Williard Davis, "The Relationship Between Achievement
Levels of Elementary Schools and Various Faculty Characteristics: An
Investigation," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol. 30 (May, 1970), 4712A.

25Harold W. Gentry and James B. Kenney, "A Comparison of the
Organizational Climates of Negro and White Elementary Schools," ng_
Journal of Psychology, Vol. 60 (July, 1965),l7l-l79.

 

39

If differences were present, where did they lie? The population
consisted of elementary school teachers in urban school districts in
the southeast. Results which were obtained through t-testing between

means were as follows:

1. Forty percent of the black schools as perceived by their
faculties saw their school as having a closed climate; whereas,
only six percent of the white schools regarded the same.

2. Forty-one percent of the white faculties saw their school as
having an open climate as compared with thirteen percent of
black faculties who regarded the same.

3. In the schools classified as open-climate by the faculties of
both races, the Black school faculties perceived themselves
as being significantly lower on espirit and significantly
higher on disengagement and production emphasis than did the
faculties of the white schools.

4. Perception of the principal also differed. Black teachers view
the principal as emphasizing production, with modest considera-
tion for faculty. On the other hand, white faculties tend to
have higher morale and view the principal as hard working and
considerate.

Even though the comparison of black and white climates presented
are organizational in nature, the value to this dissertation is still
present. Indications are that climate, teacher characteristics, and
principals differ in the black and white schools. Whether this is true
from the perception of students will be the major difference in the
research forwarded by this dissertation. Additionally, methodology,
such as control for achievement and socio-economic status, will be an
improvement.

The greater part of this review has been concerned with school
climate in serveral realms; organizationl, social class determined,
personality, student cultures, student types, administration types,

college environment, classroom environment, values, race/social class,

and norms. Only a couple of studies compared school climates between

40

black and whites. Additionally, only the research of Wilson, Coleman

and McDill approach the nature of this dissertation. Basically, the
literature presented has related various conceptions of climate from
varied perspectives and theoretical stances. However, this dissertation
will attempt to present a concept of school climate based on symbolic-
interaction, role theory, and structural effects. As mentioned in
Chapter II, perception of the students are the means by which the climate
is measured. Also, the major thrust is a comparison between black

and white students on climate variables.

41
COMPARATIVE STUDIES OF WHITE AND BLACK STUDENTS

Comparative studies of white and black students have been in areas
such as I.Q. testing, environmental effects, learning patterns, and
other standardized tests. Research by Jensen,26 Shockley,27 and a review
of literature by Shuey28 indicate the intelligence superiority of whites

as measured by I.Q. tests. On the other hand, research by Scarr-

29

Salapatek validates the I.Q. differential between blacks and whites.

However, the noteworthy aspect of her inquiry was the masterful review of
the twin studies which indicated environmental effects, rather than

heredity, being the reason for black-white I.Q. differences. Other

30 31 32 33

research done by Rose, Deutsch and Brown, Gage, and Green all

forward the strong effect that environment can have on measured intelligence.

 

26Jensen, op. cit.

27William Shockley, "Dysgenics, Geneticity, Raceology: A Challenge
to the Intellectual Responsibility of Education," Phi Delta Kappan,
Vol. 53 (January, l972),297-307.

28Audrey M. Shuey, The Testing of Negro Intelligence (New York:
Social Science Press, 1966).

29Sandra Scarr-Salapatek, "Race, Social Class, and 1.0,"
Science, Vol. 174 (December, 1971;1285-1295.

 

30Arnold M. Rose, "Characteristics of Socio-Economic Status Among
Whites and Non-whites," in Urban Education, ed. by Herbert C. Rudman and
Richard L. Featherstone (New York: Harcourt Brace & World, Inc., 1968),
p. 151-175.

31Martin Deutsch and Bert Brown, "Social Influences in Negro-White
Intelligence Differences," Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 20 (April,
1964),24-35.

32N. L. Gage, "I.Q. Heritability, Race Differences, and Educational
Research,“ Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 53 (January, 1972),308-312.

33Robert L. Green, "Intellectual Development Among Disadvantaged
Youth," in Rudnan and Featherstone, op. cit., p. 177-195.

 

42

Further research involving learning patterns by Stodolsky and

34 Richmond,35 Semler and Iscoe,36 and Musgrove and Lawson37

Lesser,
all provide data to indicate a strong environmental effect on learning
patterns. These learning patterns are probably an intervening variable
in I.Q. testing. This line of logic can be developed from the prior
mentioned research and from the investigatiOn by Tulkin and Newbrough.38
They sought to control for sex, race, and social class on an intelligence
test which is considered almoSt culture-free, (Raven Standard Progressive
Matrices). The sample was composed of 356 fifth and sixth grade

students stratified by social class, race, and sex. The

results indicated that social class showed more variance than race.
Additionally, this depicted the need for careful methodological techniques

in comparison of black and white students.

 

34Susan S. Stodolsky and Gerald Lesser, "Learning Patterns in the
Disadvantaged," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 37 (Fall, 1967),546-593.

35Bert 0. Richmond, "Creative and Cognitive Abilities of White and
Negro Children," The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 40 (Spring,l97l),lll-115.

 

36Ira J. Semler and Ira Iscoe, "Comparative and Developmental Study
of the Learning Abilities of Negro and White Children Under Four Conditions,"
Journal of Educational P§ychology, Vol. 54 (February, l963),38-44.

37Walter J. Musgrove and John R. Lawson, "A comparison of Lower
Class Negro and White Children on Three Standarized Tests," The Journal
of Negro Education, Vol. 40 (Winter 197l),53- 55.

38Steven R. Tulkin and J. R. Newbrough, "Social Class, Race, and
Sex Differences on the Raven (1956) Standard Progressive Matrices,"
Journal of Counseling and Clinical Psychology, Vol. 32 (August 1968),
400-406.

 

43

The above sector was an attempt to summarize the various types Of
comparative research done on black and white students. Additionally,
the need for adroit methodology is indicated by the many factors that
characterized the black-white situation in America. The comparative
analysis in this dissertation has sought to compensate for these factors,

as will be presented in the chapter on methodology.

Research on Climate Variables

 

Section I was composed Of a sampling of the various constructs
which are categorized as school climate. Theoretical framework for these
varied types of school climates was in many realms. Section III is
composed of those variables which will be operationalized as school
climate in this dissertation. Theoretical framework for these variables
all stem from either symbolic interaction, role theory, or structural
effects. Therefore,the following section will also substantiate the
concept of a school climate as developed in this research.

Re orted Student Press for Individual Performance or Competition and
epgrted TEacher Press for Individuél Performance or Campetitién

In the classroom context the use of competition or cooperation has
not been the subject of intensive research. In fact, the investigations

are usually those simulated within a laboratory or experimental situation.

39

The following reviews are extrapolated from Johnson's excellent review

40

on this topic. Deutsch investigated the effects of cooperation and

competition grading systems in experimental sections of a college

 

39Johnson, op. cit., p. 160-166.

40M. Deutsch, “An Experimental Study of the Effects of Cooperation
and Competition Upon Group Process," Human Relations, Vol. 2 (1949),
199-231.

 

44

psychology class. In half of the sections, students received grades
based on group performance. Whereas, the grades of the other sections
were based solely on individual performance. Results indicated that in
groups stressing cooperation, the discussions were much friendlier. A11
class members were more satisfied and secure in class. On the other
hand, in competitive classes, students behaved in a more aggressive and
oppositional manner. Students were less courteous and responsive to
each other. In Spite of the differential behavioral manifestations,
no significant differences in learning were found.

Another study by Haines and McKeachie4] sought to replicate
Deutsch's findings and extend it to determine under what conditions
would cooperation enhance achievement more so than competition. The
investigators hypothesized that in learning situations which create
tension, cooperation was best for the students. The sample was
comprised of four classes of students. Two classes received the coopera-
tive treatment first and two received the competitive treatment first.
Each was also submitted to an achievement anxiety task in each situation.
The results were similar to those of Deutsch. Students in the competitive
treatment were more anxious, nervous, self-oriented, and less secure.
Whereas, students in the cooperative situation were much more calm,
effective, and respectful of others. Differences in achievement were not
significant. However, it was found that anxiety or tension producing
tasks were best handled in cooperative situations. Therefore, the

hypothesis was supported.

 

1 410. B. Haines and W. J. McKeachie, "Cooperative versus Competitive
Discussion Methods in Teaching Introductory Psychology," Journal of

Educational Psychology, Vol. 58 (December, 1967), 386-390.

 

45

Johnson forwards that ambiguities were present in the afbre-cited.
research due to confounding of competition among groups and cooperation
among individual group members. Julian and Perry42 clarified Johnson's
concerns, somewhat, in research that involved effécts of purely coopera-
tive condition and the competitive cooperative conditon. Subjects were
157 college students randomly assigned to teams. Results indicated that
students were more highly motivated and productive in individual and
intergroup competition, than in purely cooperative situations (no
competition of any type).

Coleman43

posits the pOssible positive effects of intergroup
competition rather than interpersonal competition. Credence is drawn
from the tremendous popularity of athletics in the sample of schools
selected in his study. Scholastic achievement could be handled in an
intermural set-up between schools somewhat like interscholastic competition
in sports.

. to shift from interpersonal competition, with its conflict-

producing effects, to intergroup competition, in which group
rewards reinforce achievement.4

 

42James Julian and Franklyn A. Perry "Cooperation Contrasted with
Intra-Group and Inter-Group Competition," Sociometry, Vol. 30 (March,
1967), 79-90.

43Coleman, op. cit.

 

44Ibid., p. 322.

46

The subject of cooperation, competition, intergroup competition,
and pure cooperation should become an area of increasing research in
true classroom situations. Investigations, thus far, have mainly been
of the laboratory simulated type. Highschools and elementary schools
should become the site of such inquiry. Indications are that this
realm could provide valued strategies to enhance achievement in schools.
Importance of Self-Identity Student or Role
This variable was developed at Michigan State by Gigliotti.45
Gigliotti forwards that in a highly stratified society, an individual
will have many roles Or self-identities. These roles or self-identities
will be ordered in terms of importance to the individual's self-esteem
maintainence process. Thus, the identities of an individual, which
he regards as important, will receive a considerable investment of self.
"Therefore, the individual who regards his self-identity as a student as
being important theoretically, will consciously strive to perform at a
level which will maintain a high self-esteem. This construct was
originally developed in a longitudinal study of self-concept by Brookover
and associates (1965). The scale items were modified and refined by
Gigliotti in the preliminary phases of the present study. Results
indicated that Importance of Self-Identity Student or Role is positively
associated with the level of school achievement.

This variable has not been subject to extensive research. Gigliotti

suggests further structuring and overall improvement may be needed.

 

45Richard J. Gigliotti, “A Matrix of Social and Personality
Variables for the Prediction of School Achievement" (unpublished M.A.
thesis, Michigan State University, 1969), p. 7.

47

Reported Academic Norms of School

Nonns exist where there is agreement or consensus in behavior

that members should adher to, and the means by which this behavior

is controlled. Johnson46 speaks to the concept of norms and the schools

in the following manner:

Norms have the general function of tying people into the social
system so that they remain within the system and carry out their
role assignments. Thus, within the classroom, the roles of teacher
and student are integrated by the school norms that make explicit
the fonms of behavior appropriate for them. . . . Norms develop
around and derive their support from the dominant ongoing func-
tions of the social system; they give cognitive support and
structure to the behavior in which system members are engaged.
Sherif,47 49

Festinger,48 and Asch have illustrated the powerful

effect of group norms on behavior. This influence, with regards to

50 in their

academic behavior, is forwarded by McDill, Meyers, and Rigsby
discussion of the factor academic emulation. Out of the six factors that

emerged, after factor analysis in the data from twenty schools, academic

 

46Johnson, op. cit., p. 212.

47M. Sherif, The Psychology of GrogppNorms (New York: Harper &
Row, 1936).

 

48L. Festinqer, "Informal Social Communication? Psychological
Review, Vol. 57 (1950), 271-282.

495. E. Asch, Social Psychology (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice
Hall, Inc., 1952).

50

 

McDill, Mayers, and Rigsby, op. cit.

48

emulation had twice the explanatory power of SES in explaining academic
achievement. Additionally, when SES and intelligence were controlled,
the climate variables (academic emulation included) still had explanatory
power.

Other research by Coleman51 exemplifies the manner in which norms
can mitigate against achievement. Those students who chose to work

52 found that

hard in school found efforts unrewarded by peers. Wilson
social class segregation can expedite an atmosphere within schools that
facilitates delinquent behavior.

The above cited research illustrates that norms can facilitate or
mitigate against academic achievement. Perhaps, here lies an area of

inquiry that may provide valued input to the ongoing quest for strategies

to enhance academic achievement.

Self-Concept of Academic Ability

 

The variable Self-Concept of Academic Ability is the same

construct developed by Brookover et. al. in the longitudinal studies53

 

51Coleman, 0 . cit.

52Wilson, op. cit.

53Wilbur B. Brookover, Ann Paterson, and Shailer Thomas, Self-
Concept of Apiljtyand School Achievement, U.S. Office of Education,
Cooperative Research Project No. 845, (East Lansing: Office of Research
and Publication; Michigan State University, 1962).

Wilbur B. Brookover et. al., Self Concept of Ability_and School
Achievement II, U.S. Office of Education, Cooperative ResearcfiiProject
No. 1636, (East Lansing: Bureau of Educational Research Services,
'College of Education, Michigan State University, 1965).

Wilbur B. Brookover, Edsel L. Erickson, and Lee M. Joiner, Self-
Conggpt of Ability apg_School Achievement III, U.S. Office of Education,
Cooperative Research Project No. 2831, (East Lansing: Educational
Publication Services, College of Education, Michigan State University,

967 .

49

of a secondary school class. Therefore, for this review, only a

summary of the research as presented in Self-Concgpt of Ability and

 

School Achievement, III will be presented. Brookover's et. al. noted

 

works in this line of research provides reasoning enough for this
type Of procedure.

Self-concept of academic ability refers to the definition an
individual has Of his academic ability as compared to others in his
school class. The longitudinal studies cited the correlation between
self-concept and grade point average as being .48 to .63. Therefore, the
relationship between self-concept and academic performance is empirically

54

validated. Brookover, notes a line of clarification in this finding.

The relationship of self-concept of academic ability to achieve-

ment, . . ., is considered to be necessary but not a sufficient

condition. Self-concept of ability is a “threshold concept."

Within the academic limits imposed on a student by his self-concept

of academic ability, language development and other factors such

as self-identities which specify appropriate role behavior are

assumed to determine the level of academic accomplishment attempted;

it does not account for variation in achievement within those limits.
Another noted finding of Brookover et. al. was that self-concept of
academic ability intervened between perceived evaluations and school
achievement. This notes the weighty contribution of self-concept of
academic ability to school achievement through the evaluations of others,
which is transformed into school behavior, which facilitates academic
achievement.

Perhaps a more crucial finding was the minimal effect of measured
intelligence or socio-economic status on self-concept of academic
ability's relationship to grade point average. But, when socio-economic

status or measured intelligence is partialed out, the relationship

 

54Ibid., p. 12.

50

between self-concept of academic ability and grade point average is
not greatly effected. Therefore, evidence points to the crucial role
of self-concept of academic ability in academic achievement.

Data from this on-going research was used for many studies. An
important one for this dissertation was a comparative study of black
and white students' self-concept of ability and school achievement by

Morse.55

Morse found that self-concept of ability is significantly
higher among whites than blacks. Also, self-concept of ability is a
better predictor of achievement for blacks than I.Q. In fact, I.Q. had
very little explanatory power with regards to achievement. Morse's findings
are noteworthy in the possible role of self-concept of ability as a
better predictor of academic performance than I.Q. measures. However,
because of the small number of blacks in the sample (114 blacks and
1482 whites) and their obvious miniority status, results may be tenable.

An exception to this caution is self-concept being a predictor of

academic performance of blacks. Epps56

in a survey of northern and

southern black highschool students found self-concept to be the strongest

correlate of academic performance. This substantiates Morse's findings.
This seminal longitudinal research by Brookover et. al. is

testimony to the importance of self-concept of academic ability to

 

55Richard J. Morse, "Self-Concept of Ability, Significant
Others and School Achievement of Eighth-Grade Students: A Comparative
Investigation of Negro and Caucasian Students" (Unpublished M.A. thesis,
Michigan State University, 1963).

56Edgar G. Epps, "Correlates of Academic Achievement Among Northern
and Southern Urban Negro Students." Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25
(Summer, 1969), 55-70.

51

academic achievement; especially the strong predictive power for academic
achievement among blacks. This variable will be examined closely
because the data for this study has a large number of blacks in majority

school situations.

Sense of Control

 

This variable has become the foci of numerous studies seeking to

explain the lack of academic achievement among black and poor students.

Coleman et. al.57

explains sense of control in the following manner:

If a child feels that his environment is capricious, or random,

or beyond his ability to alter, then he may conclude that

attempts to affect it are not worthwhile, and stop trying. Such

a response to one's environment may be quite unconscious, but

merely a general attitude that has developed through long experi-
ence. The particular relevance of this factor for groups that

have been the subject of discrimination is that they have objectively
had much less control of their environment than have members of

the majority group.

58

In the Coleman report, blacks and other minorities had a lower

sense of control than whites. Also sense of control was found to

59 obtained

correlate positively with academic achievement. Wilson
the same results with social class. Students who were middle class had
higher sense of control and subsequent high academic achievement.
Whereas, those of lower class had lower sense of control and substandard

60

academic performance. Heath, in a comparison of black and white

junior and senior high school students, with regards to sense of control,

 

57Coleman et. al., op. cit., p. 288.

581bid., p. 288-290, 320-325.

59Wilson, op. cit.

60Louis G. Heath, "The Control Identities of Negro and White Students
in a California City," Journal of Secondary_Education, Vol. 45 (May, 1970),
209-213.

 

52

found significant difference between black and white students with blacks
having less sense of control.

The above cited information is quite important because the
Coleman data also illustrated that sense of control increased as the
proportion of white students increased in the school. Considerable
exploratory research is vitally needed to find means of increasing

the sense of control regardless of school population characteristics.

Perceived Peer Evaluation and Expectation

The increasing role of the school in socialization is quite
evident, due to the evolving structure of the American family. A key
factor in this realm is the peer group. Parsons51 spoke to the
crucial role of peers in providing a source of non-adult approval and
acceptance. Without proper support from parents or peers, alienation

62

may result. Coleman's classic study of highschools illustrated

the influence of the peer groups. Athletics, cars, and dates were
considered more important than academic achievement. Thus, any

student who chose to excell academically did so without peer approval.

Peer importance is also alluded to in the studies by Coleman et. al.63

64 65

and Wilson . Coleman et. al. forwards that disadvantaged pupils

 

6lTalcott Parsons,"The School Class as a Social System: Some of
Its Functions in American Society," Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 29
(Fall, 1959) 297-318.

 

62Coleman, g3, 21,. op. cit.
53Ibid.
64

Wilson, op. cit.

65Coleman, et. al., op. cit.

53

would be enhanced academically by going to school with white students.
Wilson speaks to the same point as Coleman; only he addresses himself
to social class rather than race as the criteria for school integration.
Peer groups'effects are important to academic achievement, as
illustrated above. Perhaps research should be undertaken to devise
strategies for revamping peer groups in undeSirable school settings. A
poignant example of the possible role of peer groups in education is

Offered by the Russian system of education.

Perceived Parent Evaluations and Expectations

The influence of parents on school performance has undergone varied

66

periods of prominence. Coleman's study of adolescent society illustrated

the decreasing influence of parents and concomitant increasing role of

peers in academic behavior. Brookover et. al.,67

in a study of significant
others expectations of student's abilities, found parents to be the most
important to students. Coleman et. al., in a national study of

Eguality of Educational Opportunity, also forwarded the significant
contribution of parents to academic performance. An interesting

68

study in this realm was done by Erickson. Data was from the Brookover

Self-Concept of Ability studies. Findings were as follows:

 

66Coleman, op. cit.

67Brookover, Paterson, Thomas, op. cit.

68Edsel Erickson, "A Study of the Normative Influence of Parents

and Friends Upon Academic Achievement" (unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1965);

54

1. Greater proportion of friends than parents were perceived as
not being concerned about academic performance.

2. Parents were significant academic others, rather than peers.

3. Parents were perceived as placing npre emphasis on academic
perfonmance than peers, regardless of perceived achievement
level expected of the student, or the achievement level of
the student.

4. Parents were perceived to hold the students under what is
called "surveillance", rather than peers with regard to
academic behavior.

These findings are not intended to negate the influence of peers; only
to illustrate that parents are still a major factor. Research, by

Thomas,69

indicated the possible role of parents in facilitating better
academic performance of students. By using established significant
others, parents, and counseling them on school achievement, significant
increases in self-concept of academic ability and academic achievement
were found in low-achieving students.

The role of parents and peers in academic achievement still needs
extensive research, especially with regard to blacks and poor students.
Perhaps peer groups are more important to the disadvantaged student as

opposed to parental involvement. Further inquiry is needed in this

area to clarify which of the two is more important to academic achievement.

 

69Shailer'Thanas, "An Experiment To Enhance Self-Concept of
Ability and Raise School Achievement Among Low Achieving Ninth Grade

Studints" (Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University.
969 .

55

Perceived Teacher Expectations-and Evaluations

Parent and peer influences on academic performance have been
submerged somewhat by the heightened emphasis on teacher behavior.
This line of research is crucial Since parents are often estranged from
the school or feel powerless. Additionally, peer group norms,
especially in elementary schools,may be a reflection of teacher

70 Davidson and Lang71 forward the importance of student

expectation.
perception of teachers in a study of elementary school children. Findings
were that the children's perception of their teachers' feelings toward
them correlated positively and significantly with their self perception.
Also, the more positive the children's perception of their teachers'
feelings, better was behavior and academic achievement. Additionally,
the mean favorability index declined along with a decrease in achievement
performance.

A provacative, often criticized, but seminal study in this realm

was done by Rosenthal and Jacobson.72

A random sample of students from an
elementary school was chosen as the experimental group. All students

had previously been given an intelligence test, which teachers had been

 

70David E. Lavin, The Prediction of Academic Performance (New
York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1965).

7lHelen H. Davidson & Gerhard Lang, "Children's Perceptions of
Their Teacher's Feeling Toward them Related to Self-Perception, School
Achievement and Behavior,"Journal of Experimental Education, Vol. 29,
(December, l960),108-l7.

 

72R. Rosenthal and L. Jacobson, Pygmalion in the Classroom (New
York: Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968).

56

told would indicate spurters during the school year. The intelligence
test was given at the end of the year and the experimental groups'

average I.Q. performance was 12.2 points. The control group of students,
or those not designated as spurters, only averaged an 8.5 I.Q. point

gain over the year. This study prompted the usage of the "self-fulfilling

73 adds credence to the

prophecy with regards to teacher behavior. Rist

aforementioned research in a longitudinal participant observation

study. Data indicated the emergence of a stratification system, based

on teacher expectations related to behaviorial and attitudinal charac-

teristics of the children which stem from socioeconomic status factors.
Perception of teachers are particularly important if Lavin's

concept of elementary school peer group norms being structured by

teacher expectations are valid. Also, teachers can often have a profound

effect on students in the most trying of conditions as cited, in the

historical study of Miller highschool.74

Teacher expectations, whatever
the role they play, will continue to be a controversial realm of educa-

tional research.

Perceived Principal Expectations and Evaluations

 

The last climate variable is perceived principal expectations and
evaluations. Research in this area was not found. In research endeavors,
the only reference made to the principal was with regard to teacher

behavior.

 

73Ray C. Rist, "Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations:
The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education," Harvard Educational
Review Vol. 40 (August, 1970). 411-451.

74Jones, Op. cit.

57

Whether students, especially at the elementary level, have any
clear notion of the principal is a matter of conjecture. Sometimes in
black or poor schools, he may be pictured as a disciplinarian. Whether
this has any bearing on school performance is doubtful. Inclusion in
this study is to see whether blacks and whites view the principal
differently. No claim as to what this observation means is made.
Further inquiry into the principal's role as perceived by students is

needed.
SUMMARY

The literature reviewed in this chapter had a three fold purpose.
Since there was hardly any research involving a comparative analysis of
black and white schools with regards to school climate, intent was to
present a summary of school climate literature that was available.
Secondly, to summarize the comparative studies on blacks and whites that
generally are done in education. Thirdly, to provide a selective review
of literature of variables that constitute the construct of school
climate in this dissertation.

School climate is still somewhat muddled in that a clear definition
of the concept is not available. Reviews of the literature showed school
climate to have many theoretical bases such as: organizational, social
class determined, personality, student cultures, student types, college
environments, classroom environment, values, race/social class, and
norms. These numerous conceptions of school climate, nonetheless,
allude to characteristics of a school which cause and/or are the result

of student behavior.

58

School climate, as used in this dissertation, is developed mainly
from symbolic interaction theory with strong support from role theory
and structural effects. This social-psychological nature was intended to
examine the self- other context in schools. Brookover sums this up
best in what he calls a social-psychological conception of learning.
The variables reviewed all lend themselves to research in this sphere.
When taken in a holistic sense, a schemata of school climate composed of
these variables is realized.

An additional sector of this review of literature is a brief

summation of literature that pertains to black-white comparisons in

educational research. The literature mainly involves I.Q. testing,
environment, learning patterns, and other standarized tests. This is

intended to conceptualize the nature of inquiry in this area.

Two climate studies of a black-white comparative nature are
presented; however, both are organizational in scope. Meaning,
a systematic social-psychological comparative (black-white) evaluation
of these climate variables has not been attempted. Therefore, this
dissertation is a comparative analysis of social-psychological climate
variables in black and white elementary schools. This research is also
an attempt to improve on the measures utilized in previous studies and
to provide insight as to whether differences exist in the school climate
variables. If this is true, then which variables make the difference
between black and white schools? This was accomplished by:

l. Attempting to systematically control for SES and
achievement and,

2. Multivariate analysis was the statistical tool used to measure
the differences between groups on several dependent measures.

CHAPTER IV
PROCEDURES AND METHODOLOGY

In this chapter, the sampling population will be described, the
instrumentation employed will be operationally defined, and the research
design presented. Also included, will be the hypotheses stated in

testable form, and the data analysis technique explained and justified.

Sample

Data were collected during the school year of 1970-1971 from a
selected sample of elementary schools in Michigan. Non-random
selection was based on three factors--race, achievement, and socio-
economic level. Criteria for a school to be designated black or white
was a seventy percent majority for either race. Achievement was based
on the state assessment test1 percentile scores. Schools scoring above
the mean of fifty were considered achieving above average and designated
high achieving. Those scoring below the mean of fifty were considered
achieving below average and designated low achieving. This was true with
the exception of one black school which was designated high achieving
with a percentile score of 49.6. Socio-economic status was obtained

from the assessment test. A battery of items was included to

 

, 1Educational Testing Service and Michigan Department of Education,
Technical Report of Selected Aspects of the 1969-70 Michigan Educational
Assessment Pro ramTLansing, Michigan: PubTished—EYTMichigan’Department

of Educatibn, .

59

60

estimate the socio-economic status of each school. (Appendix A).
Due to the continual controversy surrounding socio-economic status
measurement, a detailed explanation of State Department procedures

will be presented.

To properly assess the contribution of each item to the
socioeconomic status scale, factor analysis of a systematic sample
of 7,000 seventh-grade students was utilized. Weights depicting the
contribution of each item to the scale was developed in the following
manner:

l. Matrices of factor coefficients were normalized by columns
and multiplied by varimax transformation matrices.

2. A priori weights were used to calculate the mean item
response and its associated standard deviation.

3. Mean item responses and their standard deviation were then
used in conjunction with the weights derived from the
factor analysis to obtain the socioeconomic status score
for each of the fourth and seventh grade students who
participated in the program.

4. Individual's score for the scale was computed in the
following manner. For each item, the mean item response
was subtracted algebraically from the a priori weight assigned
to the student's response, and the difference was divided
by the item standard deviation to obtain a standardized
response score. The quotient was then multiplied by the
factor weight to determine the contribution to the scale of
that particular response to that particular item. These
products, one for each item in the scale, were added to
obtain the students score for the scale.

5. Missing data, a constant problem in socioeconomic status
measures, was handled in the following manner. By comparing
the sum of the absolute values of weights that would have been
used if the student had answered all the questions in the scale.
If the sum of the absolute values of the weights used in
computing an individual's score was less than half of the sum
that could have been used, that individual's score on the
scale was rejected. If the sum of the absolute values of
the weights used was equal to or greater than half of the sum-
absolute values of the weights for the scale, the individual's
score was divided by the sum of the weights used. This was
the raw score contribution of that individual.

61

6. School and district measures were obtained by adding the raw
scores together and obtaining a mean score for the appro-
priate classification desired.
Therefore, high and low socioeconomic status was above and below the
mean of forty-nine, respectively. Even with the above procedures, measures
obtained should only be cited as estimates. Actual selection for

the sample was to fill the following cells.

FIGURE 3
DESIGN FOR SAMPLE SELECTION CRITERIA

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Black White
High
S.E.S.
High
Achievement
Low
S.E.S.
High
S.E.S.
Low
Achievement
Low
S.E.S.
1L

 

 

 

 

Certain allowances had to be made in the Black sample due to the paucity
of high achieving and/or high socioeconomic status schools. Therefore,
the cell criteria for black schools is not completely congruent with

white schools. Selection made,however, was to maximize comparability

I‘ll
. .. . L

 

El, 55%

62

taking into account these differences. Table l list the schools,
achievement rating, socio-economic status, and N of fourth, fifth,
and sixth graders who participated in the survey. Due to conmunity

factors, data collection at school ll was not possible.2

 

2The situation that confronted the research team in this
Black community necessitates further comment. Due to the continual
develOpment of Black consciousness and community cohesiveness, perhaps
the following points may be used as a possible researcher's rule of
thumb in Black communities.

1. The research team should include or acquire the services
of an aware Black researcher. Contrary to societal
beliefs, a Black who is considered or perceived as not
acting in the best interests of the community will not
be accepted. Therefore, an Oreo (black on the outside,
white on the inside) will be rejected, perhaps more
vehemently than a White researcher.

2. If personal contacts at the administrative or grassroots
level are available, efforts should be made to obtain
an appraisal of community attitudes toward research.
An additional aspect of this inquiry is where the decision-
granting power resides to allow research privileges.
This is necessary due to present phenomenon of school
district administrators granting research privileges and
the Black community reacting violently and not allowing
the research team to collect the data.

3. If no contacts are available, the following procedure should
be seriously considered before entering the community. An
exploratory visit to the community, and/or consultation with
researchers who have been in the community, and/or contacting
of public officials. Perhaps the best method, however,
would be to initially meet with key community people, if at
all possible.

4. In summary, going to administrative personnel is not always
the best mode of entry into Black Schools. Perhaps the best
procedure will involve getting community consensus first,
then obtaining school district clearance.

63

TABLE 1

CHARACTERISTICS OF SCHOOLS SELECTED FOR THE STUDY--RACE,
SES, ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL, AND SAMPLE N

 

 

 

School Race SES Achievement Level N
01 White High - 55.1 High - 59.6 140
02 White High - 55.24 Low - 48.1 173
03 White High - 58.2 High - 54.4 244
04 White High - 54.9 Low - 47.8 202
05 White High - 50.1 High - 58.0 88
06 White High - 49.4 Low - 43.6 67
07 White Low - 43.2 High - 56.7 104
08 White Low - 44.9 Low — 44.6 69
09 White Low - 46.65 High - 55.1 151
10 White Low - 46.8 Low - 43.7 81
11 Black High - 50.0 High - 51.8
12 Black High - 49.2 Low - 37.3 149
14 Black Low - 46.7 Low - 38.0 105
15 Black High - 61.3 High - 55.1 276
16 Black High - 52.9 Low - 47.2 406
17 3186k Low - 47.0 High - 49.6 105
18 BIBCK Low - 46.7 Low - 39.6 384

 

64

Instrumentation

 

The instrument used in this study is part of a major research
project to investigate School Social Environment directed by Dr. W. B.
Brookover. The questionnaire was deve1oped by Dr. Brookover and Richard
Gigliotti. The instrument was pre-tested to check for needed revisions at

six elementary schools in a moderate sized industrial city.

Data Collection

 

Data were collected by a staff of four, including the writer,
who were trained to operate in a standarized manner during instrumenta-
tion. All data were obtained by students reading and answering the
questionnaire. Only in several isolated incidents was the reading
level such that it was necessary to read the instrument to the students.
Coding of questionnaires was by the same staff which collected
the data. In a few instances,questionnaires were not used because of
obvious repetitive pattern of responses indicating questionable
reliability. For the most part all questionnaires were retained.
Data were key punched and verified by the Data Processing office at
the Computer Lab. All analysis was by either Control Data Corporation

3600 or 6500 Digital Computer.

Major Variables

The basic instrument was the School Social Environment Study
Student Questionnaire (Appendix B). The total instrument was divided
in subscales and the scale intercorrelations for the entire sample are

reported in Appendix C.

65

Reported Student Press for Competition or Individual Performance

These items are designed to measure the press for competition and/
or individual performance in a school as reported by the student. The
operational definition of reported student press for competition or
individual performance hereafter referred to as STUDENT-PRESS-COMP,is
the sum of scored responses to the STUDENT-PRESS-COMP scale (Appendix D).
The scale consists of four multiple choice items, each item scored from one
to five. High STUDENT-PRESS-COMP is indicated by a low score on all
items except number twelve. To facilitate analysis low scores were all

linearly transformed to their high score equivalents.

Importance of Student Self-Identity or Role

Importance of Student Self-Identity or Role, hereafter referred
to as STUDENT ID, is defined as "relative degree of investment placed in
the identity student, for self-esteem maintenance." The operational
definition of STUDENT ID is the sum of scored responses to the STUDENT ID
scale (Appendix E). The scale consists of four multiple-choice items,
each item scored from one to four. High STUDENT ID is indicated by low
score. To standarize and simplify statistical analysis the scores were

linearly transformed to their high score equivalents.

Academic Norms of School

 

Norms can be defined as the "general expectation of a demand
character for all role members of an organization." Therefore, academic
norms of the school, hereafter referred to as NORMS, means the demand
within the school for academic performance as reported by the students.

This reporting by students is based on their observation of fellow

66

students in class, entire school and of their teachers. The operational
definition of NORMS is the sum of scored responses to the NORMS

Scale (Appendix F). The scale consists of five multiple choice items,
scored from one to four or five. High NORMS is indicated by a low
score on all items except number twenty-one. To facilitate analysis

low scores were linearly transformed to their high score equivalents.

Sense of Control

 

Sense of control, hereafter referred to as SEN-CON,is the child's
feeling of control over his environment. James Coleman et. al.,3 whose
development of this concept in relation to school performance.is the
locus of reference.

If a child feels that his environment is capricious, or random,

or beyond his ability to alter, then he may conclude that

attempts to affect it are not worthwhile and stop trying.
The operational definition of SEN-CON is the sum of scored responses to
the SEN-CON scale (Appendix G). The scale consists of five multiple
choice items, scored from one to four. High SEN-CON is indicated by
a high score on all items except number twenty-eight. To expedite

ana1ysis, item twenty-eight was converted to its high score equivalent.

Self-Concept of Academic Ability

 

Self-Concept of Academic Ability scale is the construct developed
at Michigan State University by Wilbur B. Brookover. Self-Concept of
Academic Ability, hereafter referred to as SELF-CONCEPT AA, is defined as
"evaluating definitions which an individual holds of himself in respect
to his ability to achieve in academic tasks in general as compared

with others in his school class." The operational definition of general

 

‘7'

3Coleman, gt, 31,, op. cit., p. 288.

67

self-concept of ability is the sum of scored responses to the SELF-
CDNCEPT AA scale (Appendix H). The scale consists of eight multiple-
choice items, each item scored varied from one to three or four or
five. High SELF-CONCEPT AA is indicated by a low score. To facilitate
ana1ysis low scores were linearly transformed to their high score

equivalents.

Perceived Evaluations and Expectations

 

Perceived evaluation and expectation of best friend, teachers,
parents, and principal are hereafter referred to, respectively, as:
P-FRIEND-EE, P-TEACHER-EE, P-PARENT-EE and P-PRINCIPAL-EE. These
scales are constructed to measure the dimensions of evaluations and
expectations defined. respectively, as follows:

1. Perceived evaluation is defined as evaluating definitions
which an individual perceives another person holds of him
in respect to his ability in academic tasfis in general as
compared with others in his school class.

2. Perceived expectation is defined as expectations which an
individual perceives another person holds of him in

respect to academic tasks,as compared with others in his
school class.

The afore-cited definitions of frame of reference is the self-other

relationships forwarded by Wilbur B. Brookover, et. al.

 

4
Auer, op. cit., p. 53.

5
Brookover, Erickson, and Joiner, op. cit., p. 60.

68

P-FRIEND-EE

 

Operational definition of P-FRIEND-EE is the sum of scored
responses to the P-FRIEND—EE scale (Appendix I). The scale consists
of seven multiple-choice items, each item score varied from one to
three or four or five. High P-FRIEND—EE is indicated by a low score
on all items except number forty-one. Scores were converted for
statistical purposes so that low scores became their high score

equivalents.

P-TEACHER-EE

Operational definition of P-TEACHER-EE is the sum of scored
responses to the P-TEACHER-EE scale (Appendix J). The scale consists of
seven multiple-choice items, each item score varied from one to three
or five. High P-TEACHER-EE is indicated by a low score on all items
' except number fifty-seven. Scores were converted for statistical

purposes so that low scores became their high score equivalents.

P-PARENT-EE

 

Operational definition of P-PARENT-EE is the sum of scored
responses to the P-PARENT-EE scale (Appendix K). The scale consists
of seven multiple-choice items, each item score varied from one to
three or five. High P-PARENT-EE is indicated by a low score on all
items except number sixty-four. Scores were converted for statistical
purposes so that low scores became their high score equivalents.
P-PRINCIPAL-EE

Operational definition of P-PRINCIPAL-EE is the sum of scored
responses to the P-PRINCIPAL-EE scale (Appendix L). The scale consists

of five multiple-choice items, each item score is from one to five.

69

High P-PRINCIPAL-EE is indicated by a low score on all items. Scores
were converted for statistical purposes so that low scores became their

high score equivalent.

Reported Teacher Press for Competition or Individual PerfOrmance

 

These items are designed to measure the teachers press for
competition or individual performance in school as reported by the stu-
dents. The operational definition of Reported Teacher Press for Compe-
tition or Individual Performance, hereafter referred to as TEACHER-PRESS-
COMP.is the sum of scored reSponses to the TEACHER-PRESS-COMP scale
(Appendix M). The scale consists of four multiple-choice items, each
item is scored from one to five. High TEACHER-PRESS-COMP is indicated
by a low score on all items. Scores were converted for statistical
purposes so that low scores were converted into their high score equiva-

lent.

7O

Reliability of Variables

Reliability estimates of the test variables were composed of
two independent trials. Each trial was a judgement sample of four
hundred students (200 black and 200 white). This procedure was necessary
due to the presence of missing data which creates problems in computer
programing. The Hoyt's analysis of variance6 reliability coefficients

for each variable are presented in Table 2.

TABLE 2

HOYT'S ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE
( 400 Subjects)

 

 

 

Variables Trial 1 Trial 2
STUDENT-PRESS-COMP (.4665 .4864
STUDENT ID .6991 .7191
NORMS .5316 .5376
SEN-CON .6476 .6495
SELF-CONCEPT AA .7641 .7563
P-FRIEND—EE .6703 .7224
P-TEACHER-EE .7091 .7170
P-PARENT-EE .7361 .7173
P-PRINCIPAL-EE .7664 .***
TEACHER-PRESS-COMP .5846 .5592

 

***P-PRINCIPAL-EE was only analyzed once due to the frequency
of missing data.

 

6C. J. Hoyt, "Test Reliability Estimated by Analysis of Variance,"
Psychometrika, Vol. 6 (1941), 153-160.

71
Design

The study design was a2 x 2 x 2 factorial design with unequal
cells. Independent variables race, socio-economic status, and achieve-
ment levels were category variables. Schools were placed in these cells
because they fit the criteria. In turn by meeting these criteria,a

school could be considered receiving that treatment.7

FIGURE 4
RESEARCH DESIGN WITH SCHOOLSa

 

 

 

 

 

I High Black White
S.E.S.
High 15 l 01, 03, 05
Achievement
Low
S.E.S. 17 07’ 09
High
Low 5-5-5- 12, 15 pp 02, 04, 06
Achievement Low
S.E.S.
14, 18 08, 10

 

 

 

 

 

 

aNumber in C9115 are school reference codes,
Testable Hypotheses
Hypotheses will be stated in testable forms in this section. A

Since this is a comparative exploratory studx,only null hypotheses

will be stated. The design employed has unequal cell sizes (non-orthogonal).

 

7

Donald T. Campbell and Julian C. Stanley, Ex erimental and uasi-
Experimental Designs for Research (Chicago: Rand McNa y o., 3

p. - 3.

 

72

so statistical tests nust be examined from the last test back to the
first tests. This is to assure that each test is not confounded by prior
significance. A direct test of any effect is dependent on whether the
previous test of an effect was significant or not. Once a significant
test has occurred, the remaining tests are not a direct test of that
particular effect. A linear combination of the previous tests and the
test of interest are all involved. To adequately provide for such an
occurrence, statistical tests are generally put in varied ordering by the
computer programmer. Thus,allowing for interpretation of results,
without accounting for confounding of prior significance.

M31 3 Hypothesis I: No interaction between race, achievement, and
socio-economic status with regard to school climate variables.
Sub-Hypotheses:

1. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to STUDENT-PRESS-COMP.

2. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to STUDENT ID.

3. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to NORMS.

4. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to SEN-CON.

5. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to SELF-CONCEPT AA.

6. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to P-FRIEND-EE

 

7. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to P-TEACHER-EE.

 

8. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to P-PARENT-EE.

9. No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-economic
status with regard to P-PRINCIPAL-EE.

 

 

10.

73

No interaction between race, achievement, and socio-
economic status with regard to TEACHER-PRESS-COMP.

 

Major Hypothesis II: There will be no difference between the set of

mean scores of climate variables for white schools and the set of mean

scores of climate variables for black schools.

Sub-Hypotheses:

1.

10.

There will be no difference between the mean score of STUDENl-
PRESS-COMP scale for white schools and the mean score of
- scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between the mean score of STUDENT
LQ_scale for white schools and the mean score of STUDENT ID
scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between the mean score of the
NORMS scale for white schools and the mean score of the
NORMS scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between the mean score of SEN-CON
scale for white schools and the mean score of SEN-CON scale
for black schools.

There will be no difference between the mean score of SELF-
CONCEPT AA scale for white schools and the mean score of
SELF-CONCEPT AA scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between the mean score of P-FRIEND-
§§_scale for white schools and the mean score of P-FRIEND-EE
scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between mean score of P-TEACHER-
£§_sca1e for white schools and the mean score of P-TEACHER-EE
scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between mean score of P-PARENT-EE
scale for white schools and the mean score of P-PARENT-EE scale
for black schools.

There will be no difference between mean score of P-PRINCIPAL-
EE,scale for white schools and the mean score of P-PRINQIPAL-
E£_scale for black schools.

There will be no difference between mean score of IEACHEB;EBE§§;
CDME.scale for white schools and the mean score of’IEACHER;
PRE - P scale for black schools.

74

Analysis

This study utilized the Finn Multivariate Analysis of Variance
program as adapted for the Michigan State University Control Data
Computer 3600.8 Rationale for selection of this procedure and computer
program will be explained in this section.

The core of this analysis was to compare social-psychological variables
between black and white schools. A secondary concern in such an inquiry
is the role of socioeconomic status and achievement of this analysis.
Statistical techniques void of the interactions that may be present denude
the data of its full meaning. Concommitantly,since the climate variables
are of a psychological nature, a more meaningful analysis is provided
by multivariate techniques. To further substantiate the use of
multivariate techniques,the following rationale is extrapolated from
Robert B. McCall:9

1. To determine whether several groups differ in any way on a

set of dependent measures, multivariate procedures may be

applicable.

2. Multivariate procedures ask somewhat broader questions than
univariate analysis and are more powerful.

3. When several variables possessing psychological cohesiveness
are examined, multivariate analysis is more appropriate than
multiple univariate test. This follows the same line of
logic that suggests analysis of variance over several t-test.

 

8Office of Research Consultation, and School for Advanced Studies,
”Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariance - Univariate and Multivariate Analysis of
Variance and Covariance: A Fortran IV Program," College of Education,
Michigan State University, March, 1970, (Mimeographed)

9Robert B. McCall, "The Use of Multivariate Procedures in Develop-

mental Psychology" in Carmichael's Handbook of Child Ps cholo Vol. II,
Ed. by Paul Musson (New YorE: Wiley, 1970), p. |366-|377.

75

The Finn Multivariance Computer Program is used for two reasons;
it is best suited to perform multivariate analysis of variance and
it allows for unequal cell sizes or incomplete experimental designs.
Referring back to the research design in this study, such a computer
program is needed to compensate for the unequal cells, especially
the cell with just one school. The Finn Program will provide the
following statistical information; multivariate F, univariate F,
and least square estimate of effects. The multivariate F is the
overall F test of all the dependent variables in combination. The
univariate F is the F test of each dependent variable within the multi-
variate group. The least square estimate gives the direction and
magnitude of the effect of the independent variables. Probability level

selected for rejecting the null hypothesis was .10 alpha level.

Summary

Ten white and six black elementary schools (fourth, fifth, and
sixth grades) were selected in a non-random manner to fill an eight cell
completely crossed design stratified by category variables race,
socio-economic status, and achievement level. The sample population was
1,319 students in white schools and 1,425 students in black schools.
Dependent variables which are the subject of comparative analysis
between black and white schools in this study are Reported Student Press
for Competition (STUDENT-PRESS-COMP), Importance of Self-Identity Student
or Role (STUDENT ID), Academic Norms of the School (NORMS), Sense of

76

Control (SEN-CON), Self-Concept of Academic Ability (SELF-CONCEPT AA),
Perceived Friend Evaluation and Expectation (P-FRIEND-EE), Perceived
Parent Evaluation and Expectation (P-PARENT-EE), Perceived Principal
Evaluation and Expectation (P-PRINCIPAL-EE) and Reported Teacher Press

for Competition (TEACHER-PRESS-COMP). The hypotheses were tested by using
the multivariate procedure, and the probability level selected for

rejecting the null hypotheses was .10.

CHAPTER V
ANALYSIS OF DATA

In this chapter an analysis of the data is reported. This

chapter is divided into two sections: hypothesis tests and summary.

Hypothesis Tests

 

The statistical hypotheses were tested using a three-way multi-
variate analysis of variance procedures. Mean scale scores on STUDENT-
PRESS-COMP, STUDENT ID, NORMS, SEN-CON, SELF-CONCEPT AA, P-FRIEND-EE,
P-TEACHER-EE, P-PARENT-EE, P-PRINCIPAL-EE, and TEACHER-PRESS-COMP were
used as the dependent variables. The independent variables were race,

socio-economic status, and achievement level. Race was the independent

 

variable of major importance to this study. All hypotheses were tested
using the .10 alpha level with the appropriate degrees of freedom. A
summary of the analysis of race scale means on dependent variables is

reported in Table 3.

Hypotheses

 

The small number of schools in the sample prevented the multivariate
testing of all ten climate variables simultaneously due to degrees of free-
dom. Therefore, the variables were placed in two groups, listed in Table
4. These groups were not decided on in any a prior manner since this
was an exploratory analysis. Unless prior rationale for ordering of
dependent variables is developed, any grouping or ordering can be used
in exploratory multivariate analysis.

77

78
TABLE 3

SCALE MEANS 0N VARIABLES 3v RACEa

 

 

Variables White Schools Black Schools

 

STUDENT-PRESS—COMP
STUDENT ID

NORMS

SEN-CON
SELF-CONCEPT AA
P-FRIEND-EE
P-TEACHER-EE
P-PARENT-EE
P-PRINCIPAL-EE
TEACHER-PRESS-COMP

14.16 14.29
13.28 12.98
17.13 17.00
15.44 14.81
22.19 23.40
20.42 21.32
21.66 22.64
22.91 23.56
18.22 18.54
13.28 14.53

 

aHigher scores on scale means indicate positive direction.

Lower scores on scale means indicate negative direction.

79

TABLE 4
CLIMATE VARIABLE COMBINATION FOR MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS

 

 

 

Variable Group A Variable Group B
NORMS STUDENT-PRESS-COMP
SEN-CON 'STUDENT-ID
SELF-CONCEPT AA P-PRINCIPAL-EE

P-FRIEND-EE
TEACHER-PRESS-COMP
P-TEACHER-EE
P-PARENT—EE

 

Before reporting any research findings, the following information
in Chapter 4 regarding methodology should be reiterated. Any results
of interactions or main effects must be interpreted with the knowledge

that the Black schools' achievement levels and socio-economic status are

 

not exactly comparable to the White schools. In other words, the white
schools usually have higher achievement levels and socio-economic status.
Therefore, the matching for comparisons was relative. This type of
sample selection may have prevented some of the statistical results that
may have surfaced if the Black and White school samples had been more
comparable.

The analysis of these combinations will be presented simultaneously
via tables. The testable form of the major hypothesis for significant

interaction of independent variables is stated as follows:

80

Null Hypothesis - No significant triple-order interaction
between race, achievement, and socio-economic status with
regard to school climate variables.

Results of the triple order interaction are reported in Table 5.

TABLE 5
TRIPLE-ORDER INTERACTIONS

 

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less

Group F Value Freedom Than
A 1.200 7,2 .526*
B .727 3,6 .572*

 

*No Significant difference.
The Multivariate F ratios for groups A and B reported in Table 5
indicates there is no significant triple-order interaction between race,
socio-economic status, and achievement in the variable groups. There-
fore,the null hypothesis of no significant three way interaction was not
rejected. This means that the effects of race, socio-economic status,
and achievement level on the dependent variables is not specific to
individual combinations of levels of the independent variables.

Finding no significant three way interaction permitted the testing
of each of the two way interactions.

Null Hypothesis - No significant interaction between achievement

livelbapg socio-economic status with regard to school climate

Results of the achievement level by socio-economic status interaction

are reported in Table 6.

81

TABLE 6
ACHIEVEMENT BY SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS INTERACTIONS

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less

 

 

Group F Value Freedom Than
A 1.197 7,2 .527*
B .490 3,6 .702*

 

*No significant difference.
The Multivariate F ratios for groups A and B reported in Table 6 indicates
there is no significant interaction between achievement level and socio-
economic status in the variable groups. Therefore.the null hypothesis
of no significant achievement level by socio-economic status interaction
was not rejected. This means that the effects of socio-economic status
and achievement level on the dependent variables is not specific to
individual combinations of levels of the independent variables.

The next two-way interaction examined was race by achievement
level.

Null Hypothesis - No significant interaction between race and
aChievementFTevel in regard to school climate variables.

Results of the race by achievement level interaction are reported in

Table 7.

TABLE 7
RACE BY ACHIEVEMENT LEVEL INTERACTIONS

 

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less

Group F Value Freedom Than
A .943 7,2 .604*
B .395 3,6 .762*

 

*No significant difference

82

The Multivariate F ratios for Groups A and B reported in Table 7
indicates there is no significant interaction between race and
achievement level in the variable groups. Therefore,the null hypothesis
of no significant race by achievement level interaction was not rejected.
This means that the effects of race and achievement levels on the
dependent variables is not Specific to individual combinations of
levels of the independent variables.

The last two-way interaction to be examined was race by socio-

economic status.
Null Hypothesis - No significant interaction between race
and socio-economic status in regard to school climate
variables.

Results of the race by socio-economic status interactions are reported

in Table 8.

TABLE 8
RACE BY SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS INTERACTIONS

 

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less
Group F Value Freedom Than
A 2.915 7,2 .279*
B .713 3,6 .579*

 

*No Significant difference.
The Multivariate F ratios for Groups A and B reported in Table 8
indicates there is no significant interaction between race and socio-

economic status in the variable groups. Therefore,the null hypothesis

83

of no significant race by socio-economic status interaction was not
rejected. This means that the effects of race and socio-economic
status on the dependent variables is not specific to individual
combinations of levels of the independent variables.

The lack of Significant higher order interactions allows the
main effects to be interpreted without possible confounding. Main
effects are differences between achievement levels, socio—economic
status and race,respectively,in regard to climate variables. Race is
the main effect of primary interest in this study. The main effects of
differences between achievement levels and socio—economic status,respec-
tively,will be reported in the summary of this chapter.

Race main effect (differences between blacks and whites) is the
hypothesis which is the core of this study.

Null Hypothesis - There will be no difference between the

mean score of Climate variables for white schools and the

mean score of climate variables for black schools.
Results of the race main effect multivariate tests are reported in

Table 9.

TABLE 9

RACE MAIN EFFECT
(Difference between the Races)

 

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less

Group F Value Freedom Than
A 22.358 7,2 .043**
B .393 3,6 .763*

 

**Significant at or above the .10 alpha level.
* No significant difference.

84

The main effect of race was found to be significant in one climate
variable group. A report of the univariate F ratios to see which

contributed to the multivariate significance is presented in Table 10.

TABLE 10
UNIVARIATE F-RATIO FOR VARIABLE GROUP I

 

 

Variables Between Mean Univariate F Probability
Squared
NORMS .2245 .5501 .4795*
SEN-CON 3.4536 5.0009 .0558**
SELF-CONCEPT AA 4.1160 5.0087 .0556**
P-FRIEND-EE 1.5042 5.3455 .O496**
TEACHER-PRESS-COMP 5.9252 27.6991 .0008**
P-TEACHER-EE 2.2118 7.5085' .0255**
P-PARENT-EE .6816 2.0967 .1857*

 

Degrees of Freedom for Hypothesis 1
Degrees of Freedom for Error 8

**Significant at or above the .10 alpha level.
*No significant difference.

An examination of the univariate F ratios on each of the seven
dependent measures associated with the significant multivariate F ratio
reveals that four variables seem to account for the significance. The
significant univariates are TEACHER-PRESS-COMP, SEN-CON, SELF-CONCEPT AA,
FL-FRIEND-EE, and P-TEACHER-EE. Table 11 presents the estimated effects

for-the cells associated with the difference between races.

85

TABLE 11
VARIABLE MEANS AND LEAST SQUARE ESTIMATED EFFECTS AS ASSOCIATED WITH RACE

 

 

 

Variables White Means Black Means Estimated Effects
TEACHER-PRESS-

COMP 13.28 14.53 -l.15
SEN-CON 15.44 14.81 .67
SELF-CONCEPT AA 22.19 23.40 -l.ll
P-FRIEND-EE 20.42 21.32 -.79
P-TEACHER-EE 21.66 22.64 -.90

 

Table 11 illustrates that white schools differed from blackschools by
having a higher SEN-CON. Whereas black schools differed from white
schools by scoring higher on TEACHER-PRESS-COMP, SELF-CONCEPT AA,
P-FRIEND-EE and P-TEACHER-EE.

Summary of Results

 

Two major statistical hypotheses, each consisting of ten sub-
hypotheses, were formulated and tested. Each hypothesis was tested
using the three way multivariate analysis at the .10 level of
confidence for determining significance. One major hypothesis and its
ten sub-hypotheses were generated to determine whether any interaction
between race, achievement level, and socioeconomic status were present
in the school Climate variables. The other major hypothesis and its
ten sub-hypotheses were formulated to determine whether white and black

schools differed on the school climate variables. A summary of results

86

of the statistical analysis is presented in Table 12. Additionally.
in Table513 and 14 the results of multivariate analysis of achievement
level and socioeconomic status in this study will be presented. A

discussion of the findings and their possible implication is in Chapter

VI.

87

TABLE 12
SUMMARY OF RESULTS

Null Statement of Rejection
Hypothesis or Non-Rejection

 

1. No significant triple-order interaction

between race, achievement level and socio-

economic status with regard to school

climate variables. Non-Rejection

2. No significant interaction between
achievement level and socio-economic status
with regard to school climate variables. Non-Rejection*

3. No significant interaction between race
and achievement level with regard to school
climate variables. Non-Rejection*

4. No Significant interaction between race
and socio-economic status with regard to school
climate variables. Non-Rejection*

5. There will be no difference between the mean

scale score of climate variables for white schools

and the mean scale score of climate variables for

black schools with socio-economic status and

achievement controlled. Rejection**

6. There will be no difference between the mean

scale score of climate variables for high achieve-

ment level schools and the mean scale score of climate

variables for low achievement level schools with

socio-economic status and achievement controlled. Non-Rejection*

7. There will be no difference between the mean
scale score of climate variables fbr high socio-
economic status schools and the mean scale score
(If low socio-economic status schools with socio-
economic status and achievement controlled. Non-Rejection*

 

**Significant at or above the .10 alpha level
* No significant difference.

88

TABLE 13

ACHIEVEMENT MAIN EFFECT
(Difference between the Achievement Levels)

 

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less
Group F Value Freedom Than

A 2.3765 7,2 .328*

B .339 3,6 .798*

 

Degrees of Freedom for Hypothesis 1
Degrees of Freedom for Error 8

TABLE 14

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS MAIN EFFECT
(Difference between the Socio-economic Status Levels)

 

 

Variable Multivariate Degrees of P Less
Group F Value Freedom Than
A 1.4258 7.2 .472*
8 1.138 3,6 .407*

 

Degrees of Freedom for Hypothesis 1
Degrees of Freedom for Error 8

**Significant at or above the .10 alpha level
* No significant difference.

CHAPTER VI

SUMMARY, FINDINGS, LIMITATIONS, IMPLICATIONS, AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Summar
The purpose of this study was to compare white and black

elementary schools on social-psychological school climate variables.
If significant differences were present, indications of which group
surpassed the other were presented. A noteworthy aspect of this com-
parative analysis was methodological in that achievement level and
socio-economic status were controlled through use of State Assessment
data.

Review of the literature was as comprehensive as possible. Section

I of the review presented the available research that dealt with school
climate; even though it was mostly tangential to the line of research

in this study. Additionally, the limited research available on
elementary School climate and school climate of black and white
elementary schools were presented. Section II was addressed to a
sampling of the garden variety comparative studies of blacks and whites.
Section III forwarded a review of the literature pertaining to school
climate variables operationalized within this study.

Generalizations from the literature were as follows:

1. School Climate is discussed under numerous rubrics such as
organizational, social class determined, personality-type,
student cultures, student-types, administration types,
college environment, classroom environment, values, race/

social class, and norms. Therefore, the concept of school
climate is still somewhat a muddled issue.

89

90

2. Literature on school Climate variables utilized in this
research indicate the possibilities of a school climate
being a reality.

3. The comparative analysis of blacks and whites in education
usually revolve around IQ testing, environment, learning
patterns, and other standarized tests.

4. Research in the realm of elementary school Climate is
practically nil in elementary schools. Concomitantly,
comparative analysis between black and white in this realm
are virtually non-existent. Those Studies which have been
done indicate differences between black and white schools
with regard to school climate.

Therefore, the literature indicates the paucity of research in the
study of elementary school climate. Also, it indicates the feasibility
of school climate being present in schools. Lastly, the minimal
research available forward a difference between black and white schools
in relationship to school Climate.

Data were collected from a sample of ten white and six black
elementary schools. Selection was based on race, achievement level,
and socio-economic level. This information was obtained from the
Michigan Educational Assessment Program. The sample population
consisted of 1,319 students from white schools and 1.425 students from
black schools.

The instrument designed for this study was to determine the
social-psychological climate present in each school. Variables which
make up school climate. as measured by the instrument,are Reported
Student Press for Competition (STUDENT-PRESS-COMP), Importance of
Student Self-Identity or Role (STUDENT ID), Academic Norms (NORMS),
Sense of Control (SEN-CON), Self-Concept of Academic Ability (SELF-

CONCEPT AA), Perceived Friend Evaluations and Expectations (P-FRIEND-EE),

91

Perceived Teacher Evaluations and Expectations (P-TEACHER-EE), Perceived
Parent Evaluations and Expectations (P—PARENT-EE), Perceived Principal
Evaluations and Expectations (P-PRINCIPAL-EE), and Reported Teacher
Press for Competition (TEACHER-PRESS-COMP). These scales were sub-
stantiated by Hoyt's Estimate of Reliability formula.

The administering of the questionnaire was the same at all
schools. Data were collected and coded for the most part by the same
personnel, including the author. Results of the data collected, by
the School Social Environment instrument, indicated differences between
the white and black Schools on school climate variables.

Seven statistical hypotheses were formulated and tested. Each
hypothesis was tested using the multivariate analysis procedure, at
the .10 level of confidence for determining significance. Four hypo-
theses were generated to determine whether any "interaction effects"

between race, achievement level, and socio-ecOnomic status were manifested

 

 

 

in school climate variables. Three additional hypotheses were fbrmu—
lated to test the main effects of socio-economic status, achievement

level, and race. Race was the effect of major interest to this study.

 

Interpretation of the findings presented below must keep in mind
the relative comparability of Black and White schools in regards to
achievement levels and socio-economic status. This methodological
problem constantly surfaces in Educational research. Therefore,
statistical results that may have been present in better matched
samples are controlled out by the type of sample selected in this

study.

92
Findings
Hypothesis 1: There will be no triple-order interaction between race,

achievement level, and socio-economic status with regard
to school climate variables.

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 1, it was found that there
was pp_significant triple-order interaction between race, achievement
level and socio-economic status with respect to school climate variables.
Hypothesis 2: There will be no interaction between achievement level

and socio-economic status with regard to school climate
variables.

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 2, it was found that there
was pg_significant interaction between achievement level and socio-economic
status with regard to school climate variables.

Hypothesis 3: There will be no interaction between race and achievement
level with regard to school climate variables.

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 3, it was found that there

 

was pp_significant interaction between race and achievement level with
regard to school climate variables.

Hypothesis 4: There will be no interaction between race and socio-
economic status with regard to school Climate variables.

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 4, it was found that there was

 

pp_significant interaction between race and socio-economic status with

 

regard to school climate variables.

Hypothesis 5: There will be no difference between the mean scale score
of climate variables for white schooTS and the mean scale
score of climate variables tar blaEk SEhools with socio-
economic status and achievement controlled.

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 5, it was found that there

 

 

 

 

 

was a significant difference between the mean scores of school climate
variables in black and white schools. The data show that a clear

distinction between black and white schools is present on the followipg_

93

school climate variables: Reported Teacher Press Competition, Self-

 

Concept of Academic Ability, Sense of Control, Perceived Friend

 

Evaluation and Expectation, and Perceived Teacher Evaluation ang_

 

Expectation. Furthermore, the data reveal that Black mean scores
on Reported Teacher Press for Competition,pSelf-Concept_of Academic
Ability, Perceived Friend Evaluation and Expectation and Perceived

Teacher Evaluation and Expectation are higher than white mean scores

 

on the aforementioned variables. Whereas, the mean score of whites on

 

sense of control is higher than the mean score of blacks on the_prior

 

mentioned variable.

 

Hypothesis 6: There will be no difference between the mean scale score
of climate variables for high achievement level schools
and the mean scale score of climate variables for low
achievement level schools with socio-economic status and
achievement controlled.

 

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 6, it was found that there

was pg_significant difference between the mean scores of high achieve-

 

ment level and low achievement level schools with regard to climate
variables.

Hypothesis 7: There will be no difference between the mean scale
score of climate variables for high socio-economic
status schools and the mean scale score of climate
variables for low socio-economic status schools with
socio-economic status and achievement controlled.

 

Therefore, with respect to Hypothesis 7, it was found that there
was pp_significant difference between the mean scores of high socio-
economic status schools and low socio-economic status schools on the

climate variables.

94

Limitations

 

This study is comparative and will only forward the existence of
commonalities or differences as they appear in relation to the schools
selected for this study. All statements regarding the results are
based on inference, not fact. Although the limitations of this study
are many, utility is still claimed. This is an exploratory study
to compare the social-psychological variables in black and white schools.
If differences are present in the quasi-matched samples, impetus
for future studies may result. Meaning, further in-depth explora-
tion of the differencesfound in this study would be a germinal area
for continuing research effort.

The design of this study is intended to control those factors
which confound comparative investigations of blacks and whites within
the school context. This procedure coupled with non-random assignment
necessitates the qualifications of any results which might emerge.
Framework for these limitations will be in the spirit of Campbell and

Stanley.1

 

1Campbell and Stanley, op. cit., p. 5-6.

95

The validity of the instrument can be questioned with regard
to elementary school children responses to the questionnaire.
The assumption is that students can actually assess the
feelings of their significant others and respond accurately
to attitudinal questions. Whether or not the student is
actually reporting what he truly feels is a matter of
continual conjecture.

A continual internal validity limitation is achievement

levels in elementary Schools. This situation is heightened
when black schools are surveyed. A garden variety achievement
test can at best provide only an estimate of the achievement
level in black schools.

Socio-economic status is always a "pandora's box" when
students are used as the loci of reference. Questionable
validity in this realm is substantiated by the high non-
response rate, especially in black Schools on the item used
to cross-validate the socio-economic status. Even with the
high frequency of missing data in this study's socio-economic
status question, the Duncan scale scores compared favorably
with the rating provided by the State Assessment Test on
socio-economic status (Appendix N).

Due to the schools not being randomly assigned, differences
between groups can tentatively be attributed to differential group
experiences (somewhat like a treatment), Any differences

found in the students' may be the result of different

student characteristics when they entered the groups.

A staggering limitation could possibly be mortality. There
is no systematic procedure to account for missing data. The
black sample is particularly conSpicuous in this regard
(i.e. missing datak,therefore a systematic bias may operate.
For example,perhaps only the better students completed the
questionnaire. This bias could then possibly distort the
resu ts.

A limitation to external validity or generalizability of
the study is due to non-random assignment. Findings are
applicable only to schools in which the selection criteria
match those in the study.

Another limitation to external validity is a possible inter-
action between selection and the experimental variables.
Schools were not chosen randomly; thus, it is possible that
the fact of being a certain type school may facilitate the
subsequent climate configurations. Specifically, being black,
lower-class, and low-achieveing may prompt a low climate
variable configuration.

96

Discussion

 

The question of major interest in this study is to determine
whether school climate variables in black and white elementary schools
differ. School climate variables for the purpose of this study was
composed of the following dimensions: STUDENT-PRESS-COMP, STUDENT-ID,
NORMS, SEN-CON, SELF-CONCEPT AA, P-FRIEND-EE, P-TEACHER-EE, P-PARENT-
EE,P-PRINCIPAL-EE, and TEACHER-PRESS-COMP. Results illustrated that
SELF-CONCEPT AA, P-TEACHER-EE, P-FRIEND-EE and TEACHER-PRESS-COMP was
higher in black schools than in white schools. The mean scores were
significantly higher in black schools than in white schools. On the
other hand, SEN-CON was higher in white schools than in black Schools.
The mean score was significantly higher in white schools than in black
schools. However, a note of caution in interpreting these results is
necessary (refer back to limitations).

Additionally, it should be noted that this study can not
emphatically support the contention that these results will be the same
under Similar conditions. Due to the non-random selection criteria,
missing data, and age of reSpondents, the necessity for replication of
this study is heightened.

The basic question underlying this study was answered by the data
collected. Support was given that black and white schools differed on
school climate as measured by the social-psychological climate variables.
Out of a total of ten climate variables, black and white schools were
found to be significantly different on five dimensions. The variables

of TEACHER-PRESS-COMP, SELF-CONCEPT AA, P-FRIEND-EE and P-TEACHER-EE

97

were found to be higher in black schools than white schools. Whereas,
SEN-CON was found to be higher in white schools than black schools.
The variable distinguishing the strongest between black schools and

white schools was TEACHER-PRESS-COMP.

Implications

 

As cited previously, this study has staggering limitations.
Nevertheless, the writer feels that this study has broad implications
for the educational process as it relates to segregated and racial

isolated school settings. Referring back to Brookover's Social-Psycho-

logical Conception of Learning.2

Such a conception of human learning has been identified as

a social interaction theory because the individual acquires
both the perceptions of appropriate behavior and his ability
to learn in interaction with others who are important or
significant to him.

Therefore, education can be considered as a process of social interaction.
With this theory in mind, the following implications are suggested:

1. Schools with a predominately white or black student popula-
tion of similar socio-economic status and achievement may
have a different school climate present. Meaning, a different
configuration of social-psychological variables may manifest
themselves within the school. If this is true, then school
procedures in curriculum, teacher-student interaction (i.e.
motivation), and even teaching style may have to be altered
accordingly.

 

ZBrookover and Erickson, op. cit., pp. 15-16.

98

2. Teachers in black schools emphasize competition or individual
performance among students. This process could perhaps be
called "creaming off and cooling out." Meaning, the
teachers systematically select the students who manifest the
behavior, appearance, and speech patterns most indicative of
middle-class behavior and ”cream them off" for success (i.e.,
tracking). Those who are not the "chosen ones" are'booled
out" for probable failure. This self-fulfilling prophecy, has
been empiaically validated by Rosenthal and Jacobson and
Ray Rist.

3. Teachers in white Schools stress cooperation among students.
This is a direct Opposite of the above statement. In other
words, all students are generally expected to succeed in
white schools. Thus, the "cooling out" process is not so
pronounced. A note of caution is that in some white schools
(i.e., poor white) the same phenomenon described in black
schools are probably present.

4. The peer-group effect has been postulated as an intervening 5
and/or dominant factor in school achievement in Black schools.
The finding in this research illustrates the importance of the
peer group in Black schools. Perhaps educators should
develop strategies for developing peer group support, rather
than hostility, toward academic performance in Black schools.

5. Self-Concept of Academic Ability may be a function of reference
group membership. Meaning, that black students in segregated
settings may judge their self-concept on their school setting.
This may account for their higher score on this measure.

6. On the other hand,there is reason to believe that Self-
Concept of Acadenfic Ability is a stronger pre ictor of
school performance among blacks than IQ test. With
this in mind, the writer views self-concept as a possible
true measure of academic potential among black students in
segregated settings. This stance is taken even though
blacks' self-concept drops when they are first integrated
with whites. Contention is that once the "reference group
shock" wears off, Self-Concept of Academic Ability can
still be used as a predictor of academic performance for
black students.

 

3
4

Rosenthal and Jacobson, op. cit.,

Rist, op. cit.
5Alan C. Kerckhoff, Socialization and Social Class (New Jersey:

J

Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972), p. 70-71.

6M0r593 m
Epps, op. cit.

99

7. Furthermore, this study also reinforces the following
contention by Brookover7 concerning Self-Concept of
Academic Ability and the level of achievement.

Within the academic limit imposed on a student by his self-
concept of academic ability, language development and other
factors such as self-identities which specify appropriate role
behavior are assumed to determine the level of academic accom-
plishment attempted. Self-Concept of Ability functions to limit
the learning attempted; it does not account for variations in
achievement within those limits.

Therefore, the higher level of Self-Concept of Ability among blacks than
whites is perhaps understandable; even though, the overall achievement
level among the white schools is greater.

8. Teacher expectations and evaluations can perhaps be explained
in the following manner. Students may misinterpret what the
minimal expectations and evaluations for them are by their
teachers. Meaning, although the teachers in Black schools may
go through the ritual of instruction, the performance level
expected and evaluated is lower than national norms.

9. A serious implication of this study concerns sense of control
and blagk schools. Sense of control was found by Coleman
et. al. to correlate highly with achievement. In this
study, black schools were significantly lower on sense of
control than white schools. These results could signal doom 9
for self-determination in education (i.e., community control).
Be that as it may, some means for raising the sense of control
in black schools must be found. Perhaps community control,
black-style (control of budget, personnel, and curriculum),
rather than establishment-style (de-centralization) would
provide the psychological impetus for a heighten sense of
control in black schools and subsequent academic achievement.

10. A disheartening implication to the writer is the seemingly
systematic manner in which black schools are providing a sub-
standard education for their constituents. Intent is not to
point fingers or engage in rhetoric; the message is point-
blank. Strageties must be devised to provide quality educa-
tion for all students.

 

7Brookover, Erickson, and Joiner, op. cit., p. 12.
8Coleman, g. 9.1... op. cit.. pp. 288-290, 320-325.

9McKissick, op. cit.. pp. 33-36.

11.

12.

100

Another particularly important implication is that Race may
be a factor in school achievement along with socio-economic
status. This statement is made in full realization that
race and socio-economic status are correlated. The purpose
here is to emphasize that race, alone, may mitigate or
enhance school performance in aspects yet undetermined.

A very meaningful implication is the similarity of some
research findings in this dissertation to similar findings
found in the Coleman Report and Wilson's study. The chart
below illustrates the parallelism present in the above cited
research endeavors.

 

 

 

 

 

FIGURE 4
COMPARISON OF RESEARCH - COLEMAN, WILSON AND HENDERSON
Findings Coleman Wilson Henderson
High White - Sense of Control X X X
Low Black - Sense of Control X X X
High Black - Self-Concept X X X
Importance of Peers in Black Schools X X X

 

Importance of Teachers in Black

Schools

 

Recommendations

 

The suggestions made below are based on insights gained during

the course of this study. Hopefully, these suggestions will provide

more input into the general areas of concern.

1.

This study used a non-random sample. Future research in
this area would be more definitive if a random sample is used.

The population of this sample was composed of elementary
school students. A future research endeavor may use junior
high or highschool students. Rationale for this is reviews
of the literature revealed few studies of school climate
that had a social-psychological flavor.

101

This study used school means for achievement and socio-
economic status measures. Future studies should have
individual student data for more comprehensive and meaningful
analysis.

Even though the instrumentation used seemed adequate,
continual refinement should be undertaken. The reliability
scores indicate that certain aspects of the questionnaire
could be refined.

This study addressed itself to competition and cooperation as
part of school climate. Future research inquires should
address themselves to how cooperation and competition function
with regard to school achievement in schools that are black,
white, and integrated.

Another study could determine whether Self-Concept of Academic
Ability or IQ is the better predictor of school performance.

More comprehensive studies should be undertaken to determine
the direction of causality between sense of control and
academic performance. Knowledge is lacking in this crucial
area of concern for low-achieving students, of which the
majority are black and/or poor.

Research in elementary school climate Should also be under-
taken in as many ethnic or racial areas that are possible.
Only by continual inquiry will knowledge in this field
develop to a possible level where success in revamping

school climates to promote successful achievement be realized.

A more meaningful way to truly assess the nuts and bolts of
academic achievement within schools is participant obser-
vation. Garden variety research techniques can only allow
one to speculate or make inferences about the inter-school
dynamics that facilitate achievement. The prior statement
takes on more importance when schools that exhibit all the
characteristics (poor and/or minority) of non-academic
achievement realize academic success. Therefore, the best
procedure to document why some schools succeed when all key
variables (i.e. poor and/or minority) indicate failure can
be truly understood through participant observation research.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Armour, David. "The Effects of Busing." To be published in 1972
Summer issue of the Public Interest.

 

 

Asch, S. E. Social Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice
Hall Inc., 1952. '

Astin, A. W. Who Goes Where to College? Chicago: Science Research
Associates, 1965.

 

, and Panos R. J. Attrition Among College Students. American
Council on Education REsearch Report, 1967.

Auer, Howard Joseph Michael. ”Self-Concept of Academic Ability of
West German Eigth Grade Students." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation,
Michigan State University, 1971. ’

Blau, Peter M. "Structural Effects." American Sociological Review,
Vol. 25 (April, 1960), 178-193.

Boocock, Sarane. "Toward a Sociology of Learning: A Selective
Review of Existing Research." Sociology of Education, Vol. 39
(Winter, 1966), 1-45.

 

Brookover, Wilbur B. and Erickson, Edsel L. Society Schools and
Learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, Inc. 1969.

 

; and ; Joiner, Lee M. Self-Concept of Ability and
School Achievement III. U. S. Office of'Education, C00perative
Research Project No. 2831, East Lansing: Educational Publication
Services, College of Education, Michigan State University, 1967.

 

 

., et. al., Self-Concept of Ability and School Achievement II.
U. S. Office of Education, CooperatiVe ResearEh Project No. 1636,
East Lansing: Bureau of Educational Research Services, College
of Education, Michigan State University, 1965.

 

; Patterson, Ann; and Thomas, Shailer. Self-Concept of Ability
and School Achievement. U. S. Office of Education, Cooperative
Office of Education,Cooperative Research Project No. 845, East
Lansing: Office of Research and Publication; Michigan State
University, 1962.

; and Gottlieb, David. Sociology;of Education. New York:
rican Book Company, 1964.

102

103

Campbell, Donald T. and Stanley, Julian C. Experimental and Quasi-
Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally and
Co., 963.

Chickering, A. W. "Institutional Differences and Student Characteris-
tics." Speech prepared for the annual meeting of the Mental Health
Section of the American College Health Association, San Diego,
California, May 3, 1966.

Clark, 8. and Trow, M. "The Organizational Context." *College Peer
Groups. Edited by T. Newcomb and E. Wilson. Chicago: Aldine,
1966.

 

Coleman, James S. et. al. Egualityyof Educational Opportunity. Wash-
ington, D. C.: Government Printing OffiCe,—1966.

. "Equal Schools or Equal Students.“ Readin s on the School
in Society. Edited by Patricia Sexton. Englewood Cliffs, New
Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1967.

 

The Adolescent Society._ New York: Free Press of Glencoe, 1961.

 

 

Cooley, Charles Horton. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York:
Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902.

 

Davis, James. "Intellectural Climates in 135 American Colleges and
Universities: A Study in Social Psychophysics." Sociology_of
Education, Vol. 37 (Winter, 1963L‘llO-128.

 

 

Davis, Joseph Williard. "The Relationship Between Achievement Levels of
Elementary Schools and Various Faculty Characteristics: An
Investigation," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol. 30 (May, 1970), 4712A.

Davidson, Helen H. and Lang, Gerhard. "Children's Perceptions of
Their Teacher's Feelings Toward them Related to Self-Perception,
School Achievement and Behavior." Journal of Experimental
Education, Vol. 29 (December, l960),108-l7:

 

Deutsch, M. “An Experimental Study of the Effects of Cooperation and
Competition Upon Group Process." Human Relations, Vol. 2 (1949),
199-23] 0

 

and Brown, Bert. "Social Influences in Negro-White Intelligence
fferences." Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 29 (April, 1964),24-35.

and Krauss, Robert M. Theories in Social Psychology. New York:
Basic Books, Inc. 1965.

 

Dreger, Ralph M. and Miller, Kent S. "Comparative Psychological Studies
of Negroes and Whites in the United States." Ps cholo ical
Bulletin Monpgraph Supplement, Vol. 70 (September, 19681.1-58.

104

Educational Testing Service and Michigan Department of Education.
Technical Report of Selected Aepects of the 1969-70 Michigan
Educational Assessment Program. Lansing, MiChigan: Published by
MiEhigan Department of Education, 1971.

Epps, Edgar G. "Correlates of Academic Achievement Among Northern and
Southern Urban Negro Students." Journal of Social Issues, Vol. 25
(Summer, 1969), 55-70.

 

Erickson, Edsel. "A Study of Normative Influence of Parents and
Friends Upon Academic Achievement." Unpublished Ph.D. disserta-
tion, Michigan State University, 1965.

Festinger, L. "Informal Social Communication." Eeychological RevieW.
Vol. 52 (1950), 271-282.

 

Gage, N. L. "I. Q. Heritability, Race Differences, and Educational
Research." Phi Delta Kappen, Vol. 53 (January, 1972), 308-312.

Gentry, Harold W. and Kenney, James B. "A Comparison of the Organi-
zational Climates of Negro and White Elementary Schools." jflme
Journal of Psychology. Vol. 60 (July, 1965), 171-179.

Gigliotti, Richard J. "A Matrix of Social and Personality Variables
for the Prediction of School Achievement." Unpublished M.A.
thesis, Michigan State University, 1969.

. "The Expectation Pattern: Analysis of Elementary School
Social Environment." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan
State University, 1972.

Green, Robert L. ”Intellectual Development Among Disadvantaged Youth."
Urban Education. Edited by Herbert C. Rudman and Richard L.
Featherstone. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World Inc., 1968.

. "Racism in American Education." Phi Delta Kappan, Vol. 53
(January, 1972), 274-276.

Johnson, David W. The Social Psychology of Education. New York: Holt
Rhinehart, and Winston, 1970.

 

Jones, Cloyzelle Karrelle. "The Historify of Sydney D. Miller High
School With Particular Exploration into Those Factors Which
Resulted in the Inordinately High Incidence of Pupil Successes
Considering, and Despite, Existing Socio-Economic Factors Which
are Perceived as Being Prime Predictors of High Incidences of
Pupil Failure," Dissertation Abstracts, Vol. 32, (July, 1971), 161.

105

Julian, James and Perry, Franklyn A. "Cooperation Contrasted with
Intra-Group and Inter-Group Competition." Sociometr , Vol. 30
(March, 1967), 79-90.

Kerckhoff, Alan C. Socialization and Social Class. New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1972.

 

Kinch, John W. "A Formalized Theory of Self-Concept." American
Journal of Sociology, Vol. 68 (January, 1963), 481-486.

Lavin, David E. The Prediction of Academic Performance. New York:
Russell Sage Foundation, 1965:

 

McCall, Robert B. “The Use of Multivariate Procedures in Developmental
Psychology." Carmichael's Handbook of Child Psychology Vol. II.
Edited by Paul Musson. New York: ‘Wiley, 1970.

 

McDill, Edward; Meyers, Edmund; and Rigsby, Leo. "Institutional
Effects on the Academic Behavior of High School Students."
Sociology of Education, Vol. 40 (Summer, 1967), 181-199.

McKissick, Floyd. “Is Integration Necessary," The New Repyblic,
December 3, 1966, 33-36.

 

Mauss, A. L. "Toward an Empirical Typology of Junior College Student
Subcultures." Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Pacific
Sociological Association, Long Beach, California, March, 1967.

Mead, George Herbert. Mind, Self, and Society. University of Chicago, 1934.

 

Michael, John A. "High School Climates and Plans for Entering College."
Public Opinion Quarterly, Vol. 37 (Winter, 1961), 585-595.

 

Morse, Richard J. "Self-Concept of Ability, Significant Others and
School Achievement of Eighth-Grade Students: A Comparative
Investigation of Negro and Caucasian Students." Unpublished M.A.
thesis, Michigan State University, 1963.

Musgrove, Walter J. and Lawson, John R. "A Comparison of Lower Class
Negro and White Children on Three Standarized Tests." The
Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 40 (Winter, 1971), 53-557'

Newcomb, T. M. and Flacks, R. Deviant Subcultures on a College Campus.
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor: U. S. Office of Education
C00perative Research Project, 1964.

106

Office of Research Consultation and School for Advanced Studies.
"Jeremy D. Finn's Multivariance - Univariate and Multivariate
Analysis of Variance and Covariance: A Fortran IV Program,"
College of Education, Michigan State University, March, 1970.
(Mimeographed.)

Owens, Robert G. and Steinhoff, Carl R. "Strategies for Improving
gngeggCity Schools." Phi Delta Keppan, Vol. 50 (January, 1969),
5 - 3.

 

Pace, C. R. The Influence of Academic and Student Subcultures in College
and Universities Environment. University of California, Los
Angeles: U. S. Office of Education and Social Science Research
Council Cooperative Research Project, 1964.

Parsons, Talcott. "The Social Class as a Social System: Some of Its
Functions in American Society." Harvard Educational Review,
Vol. 29 (Fall, 1959) 297-318.

Richmond, Bert 0. "Creative and Cognitive Abilities of White and Negro
Children." The Journal of Negro Education, Vol. 40 (Spring, 1971),
111-115.

 

Rist, Ray C. "Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: The
Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education." Harvard Educational
Review, Vol. 49 (August, 1970), 411-451

Rose, Arnold M. "Characteristics of Socio-Economic Status Among Whites
and Non-Whites." Urban Education. Edited by Herbert C. Rudman
and Richard L. Featherstone. New York: Harcourt, Brace and
World Inc., 1968.

Rosenthal R. and Jacobson L. Pygmalion in the Classroom. New York:
Holt, Rhinehart and Winston, Inc., 1968.

Sadker, David and Sinclair, Robert L. "Dimensions of the Elementary
School Educational Environment: A Factor Analytic Study."
Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Education
Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 3-7, 1972.

Scarr-Salapatek, Sandra. "Race, Social Class, and I. Q." Science,
Vol. 174 (December, 1971), 1285-1295.

Selvin, Hanan and Hagstrom, Warren. "The Empirical Classification of
Formal Groups." American Sociological Review, Vol. 28 (June,
1963), 399-411.

 

Semler, Ira J. and Iscoe, Ira. "Comparative and Developmental Study of
the Learning Abilities of Negro and White Children Under Four
Conditions.“ Journal of Educational Psyenology, Vol. 54 (February,
1963), 38-44.

107

Sheriff, M. The Psychology of Group Norms. New York: Harper and
Row, 1936.

Shockley, William. "Dysgenics, Geneticity, Racelogy: A Challenge to
the Intellectural Responsibility of Education." Phi Delta
Kappan, Vol. 53 (January, 1972), 297-307.

Shuey, Audrey M. The Testjpg of Negro Intelligence. New York:
Social Science Press, 1966.

Sinclair, Robert L. "Elementary School Educational Environments:
Toward Schools That are Responsive to Students." The National
Elementary Prinejpal, Vol. 49 (April, 1970), 53-58.

 

Skager, R. Changes in Self-Rating and Life Goals Among Students at
Colleges with Different CharacteriStiCs. American College
TESting Program Report, No. 14, Iowa City, Iowa: American
College Testing Program, 1966.

Stern, G. G. Studies of College Environments. Syracuse University,
Syracuse, N. Y.: U. S. Office of Education and Social Science
Research Council Cooperative Research Project, 1964.

 

Stodolsky, Susan S. and Lesser, Gerald. "Learning Patterns in the
Disadvantaged." Harvard Educational Review, Vol. 37 (Fall, 1967),
546-593.

 

Tannenbaum, Arnold and Bachman, Jerald." Structural Versus Individual
Effects." The American Journal of Sociology, Vol. 69 (May, 1964),
585-595.

 

Thomas, Shailer. "An Experiment to Enhance Self-Concept of Ability and
Raise School Achievement Among Low Achieving Ninth Grade Students."
Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Michigan State University, 1964.

Tulkin, Steven R. and Newbrough, J. R. "Social Class, Race, and Sex
Differences on the Raven (1956) Standard Progressive Matrices."
Journal of Counselingpand Clinical Psychology, Vol. 32 (August,
1968), 400-406.

U. S. Commission on Civil Rights. Racial Isolation in the Public Schools.
Washington, D. C. : Government Printing Office, 1967.

 

Valentine, Charles A. "Deficit, Difference,and Bicultural Models of
Afro-American Behavior." Harvard Educational Review, Reprint
Series No. 5 of Vol. 41 (May1971), 137-159.

 

Walberg,tL J. and Anderson, G. Classroom Climate and Individual Learning.
Harvard University, CambridgeiiMass.: RESearch Report of Harvard
Project Physics in Cooperation with Carnegie Corporation of New
York, National Science Foundation, Sloan Foundation, and U. S.
Office of Education, 1967.

108

Walz, Garry and Miller, Juliet. "School Climate and Student Behavior:
Implications for Counselors Role." The Personnel and Guidance
Journal, Vol. 47 (May, 1969), 859-867.

 

Wilson, Alan. The Consequences of Segregation: Academic Achievement
in a Northern Community. Berkely, California: TheGlendessary
Press,71969.

GENERAL REFERENCES

Banks, James A. and Grambs Jean 0. ed. Black Self-Concept: Implica-

 

tions for Education and Social Science. New York: MCGraw-Hill
Book Company, 1972.

Duncan, Otis D. "A Socio-economic Index for all Occupations" and
"Properties and Characteristics of the Socio-economic Index.”
- Occupations and Social Status. Edited by Albert J. Reiss,
Jr., New York: Free Press, 1962.

 

Green, Robert L., ed. Racial Crisis in American Education. Chicago:
Follett Educational Corporatifin, 1969.

 

Henderson, Donald. "Black Culture: A Variable in Black Education."
Paper presented at the annual meeting of American Education
Research Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 3-7, 1972.

Williams, Robert. "Some Requirements for Conducting Research in the
Black Community: A Black Psychologist Perspective." Paper
presented at the annual meeting of American Education Research
Association, Chicago, Illinois, April 3-7, 1972.

Woodson, Carter G. Mis-Education of the Negro. Washington, D. C.:
Associated Publishers Inc., 1933.

 

 

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS QUESTIONS USED IN STATE
ASSESSMENT TEST 1969-1970

109

SOCIO-ECONOMIC STATUS QUESTIONS USED IN STATE
ASSESSMENT TEST 1969-1970

General Information Questions
Does your family have a dictionary? (SES)
(A) Yes

(8) No
(C) I don't know

Does your family have an encyclopedia? (SES)
(A) Yes
(B No
(C I don't know
Does your family have a vacuum cleaner? (SES)
(A) Yes
B) No
C) I don't know
Does your family have a typewriter? (SES)
A Yes
B No
C I don't know
Does your family have a dishwashing machine? (SES)
(A Yes
8 No
(C) I don't know
How many cars does your family have? (SES) (Don't count trucks.)
A None
B One
C Two or more

Do you have your own wrist watch? (SES)

(A; Yes
B No

 

I I,lr:n .

110

Has gnyone in your family traveled in an airplane in the last year?
SES

(A) Yes
(B No
C I don't know

How much education does your father have? (SES)

A; Grade school--Grades l-8

High school--Grades 9- 12

C) College or special training after high school
D) I don't know

How much education does your mother have? (SES)

Grade school--Grades 1-8

High school--Grades 9- 12

College or special training after high school
I don9 t know

How many different schools have you gone to since you started first
rade? Count only the schoolswhich you went to during the day.
SES, Att. A, Att.B B)

(A) One--only this one
B Two

C Three

D Four

E Five or more

What is the highest grade you want to finish in school?
(SES, Att. A, Att. B, Att. C)

(A; I don't want to go to school any more

I only want to finish high school

(C I want to go to a special school, like a nursing or business school
D I want to go to college

Are you planning to go to college? (SES, Att.A, Att.B. Att.C)

3% im Yes
I'm not sure

APPENDIX B

STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

lljl

SCHOOL SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT STUDY
STUDENT QUESTIONNAIRE

Sponsored by

Michigan Department of Education
and
Michigan State University

Dr. Wilbur Brookover, Professor of Sociology and Education, Project Director

DIRECTIONS: we are trying to learn more about students and their work in schools.
We would, therefere, like fer you to respond to the following ques-
tions. This is not a test of any sort and will not affect your work
in school. Your teacher and your principal will not see your answers.
There are no right or wrong answers, we simply want you to tell us
your answer to each question.

1. Name

PLEASE ANSWER THE POLLNING QIBSTIGJS BY CIRCLING THE NMER (N THE RIG'IT OF YOUR
BEST ANSWER TO THE QIESTIGI. PICK '0'” ONE ANSWER FOR EACH QlBSTICN!

2. How old were you on your last birthday?
9 years old ...... 1.
10 years old ...... 2.
ll years old ...... 3.
12 years old ...... 4.
13 years old ...... 5.

3. Are you a boy or girl?
boy ...... 1.
girl .00... 20

4. What grade are you in?
3rd grade ...... 1.
4th grade ...... 2.
5th grade ...... 3.
6th grade ...... 4.
7th grade ...... S.
5. Please write your teacher's name.

 

6. Please write the halo of your school.

 

11- la" glafiln... ailin—

IQLZ

7. How many years have you been at this school?
Less than 1 year
2 years
3 years
4 years
5 years
6 years
7 years or more

If your father does not live with you or if he is not alive, please
answer this question fer the person in your house who makes the
most money.

8. What type of work does your father do? (Give a short description
of his job)

 

 

THE ROWING QUESTIWS ARE TO BE ANSWERED BY CIRCLING THE NIIBER (N THE
RIG-1T OF THE CORRECT ANSWER. REEFBER, NO GTE WILL SEE YOUR ANSWERS EXCEPT

THOSE OF US PROM MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, SO PLEASE TELL US JUST WHAT
YOU THINK. (Pick only one answer for each question)

9. If you could go as fer as you wanted in school, how far would you
like to go?
Finish grade school
Go to high school fer a while
Finish high school
Go to college for a while
Finish college

10. How many students in this school try hard to get a good grade on
their weekly tests?
Almost all of the students
Most of the students
Half of the students
Some of the students
Almost none of the students

11. How many students in this school will work hard to get a better
grade on the weekly tests than their friends do?

Almost all of the students
Most of the students

Half of the students

Some of the students

Almost none of the students

12. How many students in this school don't care if they get bad grades

Almost all of the students
Most of the students

Half of the students

Some of the students

Almost none of the students

000...
0.0000
e‘eaee
oeeeea

.aeeee
see...
.00...
.00...

Cosmos

T

eeeaee
ease-0
ease-e
.oeeee

l.
2.

mbuNt-I

mbuMa-I

UV-buNH
no

(nausea-

 

 

fl, ‘1’.9P....b ,

13.

14.

15.

16.

17.

18.

19.

1QL3

How many students in this school do more studying for weekly tests

than they have to?
Almost all of the students
Most of the students
Half of the students
Some of the students
Almost none of the students

If most of the students here could go as far as they wanted in
school how far would they go?
Finish grade school
Go to high school for a while
Finish high school
Go to college for a while
Finish college

If the teacher that you like the best told you that you were a
poor student how would you feel?

 

I'd feel very bad

I'd feel somewhat bad

It wouldn't bother me very much
It wouldn't bother me at all

How important is it to you to be a good student?
It's the most important thing I can do
It's important, but other things are just as important
It's important, but other things are more important
It's not very important

If your parents told you that you were a poor student, how would .

you feel?
I'd feel very bad
I'd feel somewhat bad
It wouldn't bother me very much
It wouldn't bother me at all

If your best friend told you that you were a poor student, how
would you feel?

 

I'd feel very bad

I'd feel somewhat bad

It wouldn't bother me very much
It wouldn't bother me at all

How do you think most of the students in this class react when one

of you does a bad job on school work?

Theyfeel badly and want to help him (her) do better
They feel sorry, but don't say anything

They really don't care

They are secretly happy that it happened

eoeeee

ammo-
0.

~504Mb-
.0.

20.

21.

22.

23.

How do you think most of the teachers in this school react when one

JLL4

of the students does a bad job on school work?

They feel badly and want to help him (her) do better
They feel badly, but don't really help him (her)

They get mad and tell him (her) to start working harder
They get mad but don't say anything

They really don't care

What do you think most students say when a student has done good
or better than he usually does in his school work?

He was just lucky, he won't do that good next time
Anyone could do it if they studied
I wish I could do as well as he did
I'm glad for him I hope he does as well next time

How important do most of the students in this glass feel it is to
do well in school work?

Almost everybody thinks it is the most important
thing you can do.

Most students think it is quite important to do well ....

Doing well in school work is a good thing but other
things are important too. ,

Most students don't seem to care how well they do,
but it's okay for others to do well.

Most students don't seem to care how good they do,
but they don't like other students to do good.

How important do you think most of the students in this school
feel it is to do well in school work?

Almost everybody thinks it is the most important
thing you can do.

Most students think it is quite important to do well
Doing well in school work is a good thing but other
things are importint too.

Most students don't seem to care how well they do,
but it's okay for others to do well.

Mest students don't seem to care how good they do,
but they don't like other students to do good.

PLEASE ANSWER THE FOLLOWING QUESTIONS PY CIRCLING THE NUMBER WHICH BEST
ANSWERS THE QUESTION FOR YOU. PICK ONLY ONE ANSWER FOR EACH QUESTION.

24.

Think about the boys or girls you play with at recess or after

school.

How often do they read in their free time?

Very often

Quite a bit

Sometimes, but not very much
Seldom

Almost never

ma-wNa-I

bOINb-fi

S.

R)»-

Mbb-INH

 

1.x.tv'bll.v.‘.-.. r. .2 . r . l. . 1 en.
, _ ,
. i
_ .

25.

26.

27.

280 '

29.

31.

32.

ILLS

When you and your friends are together after school or on week-
ends, how often do you talk about your school work?

Very often ......
Quite a bit ......
Sometimes, but not very much ......
Seldom ......
Almost never ......

People like me will not have much of a chance to do what we want
to in life.

Strongly agree ......
Agree ......
Disagree ......

Strongly disagree ......

People like me will never do well in school even though we try
hard.

Strongly agree ......
Agree ......
Disagree ......

Strongly disagree ......

I can do well in school if I work hard.

Strongly agree ......
Agree ......
Disagree ......

Strongly disagree ......

In this school, students like me don't have any luck.

Strongly agree ......
Agree ......
Disagree ......

Strongly disagree ......

You have to be lucky to get good grades in this school.

Strongly agree ......
Agree ......
Disagree ......

Strongly disagree ......

Think of your friends. Do you think you can do school work
better, the same, or poorer than your friends?

Better ......
The same ......
Poorer ......

Think of the students in your class. Do you think you can do

SChOOl work better, the same, or poorer than the students in

your class?
Better ......
The sale ......
Poorer ......

01:30am»-

50‘NH chuNl-i
o. o o o o o o

auNO-I

auto—-
00

éuNt-o

l.

l
2.
3

l']6

33. When you finish high school, do you think you will be one of the
best students, about the same as most of the students, or below
most of the students?

One of the best
About the same as most of the students
Below most of the students
34. Do you think you could finish college?

Yes, with no difficulty at all

Yes, as long as I work hard

Yes, but I will probably have a lot of difficulty

No, it will be too difficult

35. If you went to college, do you think you would be one of the best
students, about the same as most of the students, or below most of
the students?

One of the best
About the same as most of the students
Below most of the students
36. If you want to be a doctor or a teacher, you need more than 4
years of college. Do you think you could do that?
Yes, with no difficulty at all
Yes, as long as I work hard
Yes, but I will probably have a lot of difficulty
No, it will be too difficult
37. Forget how your teachers mark your work. How good do ygg_think
' your own work is?
Excellent
Good
About the same as most of the students
Below most of the students
Poor
38‘ What marks d° you think you really can get if you try?
Mostly A's
Mostly B's
Mostly C's
Mostly D's
Mostly 8'5

.00...

NOW WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT PEOPLE THAT YOU KNON.

ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS BY CIRCLING THE NUMBER AS YOU DID IN THE ODHER

QUESTIONS. (Pick only one answer)
39. When you do good work in school who do you most
want to know about it? mother

father
brother or sisiter......
teacher
friend
other

 

(specify)

1.
2.
3.

7‘9“.

-h{fll90d

H
O

 

C‘U‘AMNH

llf7

40. Who is the most interested in your work in school?

 

 

Mother ...... 1.
Father ...... 2.
Brother or sister ...... 3.
Teacher ...... 4.
Friend ...... 5.
Other ...... 6.
(Specify)
NOW WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR BEST FRIEND.
STOP FOR A MINUTE AND THINK WHO YOUR BEST FRIEND IS. ANSWER THESE
QUESTIONS BY CIRCLING THE NUMBER AS YOU DID IN THE OTHER QUESTIONS.
REMEMBER, YOUR BEST FRIEND WILL NOT SEE YOUR ANSWERS. (Pick only one
answer)
41. How far do you think your best friend believes you will go in
school?
Finish grade school ...... 1.
Go to high school for a while ...... 2.
Go to college for a while ...... 3.
Finish college ...... 4.
42. How good a student does your best friend expect you to be in
school?
One of the best ...... 1.
Better than most of the students ...... 2.
Same as most students ...... 3.
Not as good as most students ...... 4.
He doesn't really care ...... S.
43. Think of your best friend. Would your best friend say you can
do school work better, the same, or poorer than other people your
age?
Better ...... l.
'mesmw..n..2.
Poorer ...... 3.

44. Would your best friend say that your grades would be with the best,
same as most, or below most of the students when you graduate from
high school? '
With the best ...... 1.
Same as most ...... 2.
3

Below most ...... .
45. Does your best friend think you could finish college?
Yes ...... 1
Maybe . . 2
No .. 3
46. Remember you need more than four years of college to be a teacher

or doctor. Does your best friend think you could do that?

Yes ...... 1.
Maybe . ..... 2.
No ‘ ...... 3.

47.

le8

What grades does your best friend think you can get?

Mostly A's
Mostly B's
Mostly C's
Mostly D's
Mostly E's

NOW WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE TEACHERS IN THIS

SCHOOL.
CIRCLING THE NUMBER.

BE AS HONEST AS YOU CAN.

48.

49.-

50.

SI.

52.

ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS AS YOU ANSWERED THE OTHER ONES BY
REMEMBER, N9_TEACHER WILL SEE YOUR ANSWERS 80

Of the teachers that you know in this school how many tell students

to try hard to do better on tests?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

How many teachers in this school tell students to try and get

better grades than their classmates?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

Of the teachers that you know in this school how many don't care

if the students get bad grades?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

0f the teachers that you know in this school how many tell students
to do extra work so that they can get better grades?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

Of the teachers that you know in this school how many make the

students work too hard ?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

enc-um»...

Mwat-o

 

MAuNr-n

ngliljflaMJ
T.

53.

54.

SS.

56.

57.

58.

1LL9

Of the teachers that you know in this school how many don't care
how hard the student works, as long as he passes?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers

Half of the teachers

Some of the teachers

Almost none of the teachers

If the teachers in this school think a student can't do good
work, how many will try to make him work hard anyway?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

Of the teachers that you know in this school, how many think it

is not good to ask more work from a student than he is able to do?

Almost all of the teachers
Most of the teachers
Half of the teachers
Some of the teachers
Almost none of the teachers

Of the teachers that you know in this school, how many believe
that students should be asked to do only work which they are
able to do?

Almost all of the teachers

Most of the teachers

Half of the teachers

Some of the teachers

Almost none of the teachers

How far do you think the teacher you like the best believes you
will go in school?
Finish grade school

Go to high school for a while

Finish high school
Go to college for a while
Finish college

How good of a student does the teacher you like the best expect

you to be in school?
One of the best

Better than most of the students ...

Same as most students
Not as good as most students
She :\esn't really care

{DathD—i

MbUNH

U'lbblNe—I

1J20

59. Think of your teacher. Would your teacher say you can do school
work better, the same, or poorer than other people your age?

Better ...... l.
The same ...... 2.
Poorer 00.... 3.

60. Would your teacher say that your grades would be with the best
same as most, or below most of the students when you graduate
from high school?
With the best ...... 1.
Same as most ...... 2.
Below most ...... 3.

61. Does your teacher think you could finish college? Yes ...... 1.
Maybe ...... 2.
No 0.0... 3.

 

62. Remember you need more than four years of college to be a
teacher or doctor. Does your teacher think you could do that?

Yes 0.0... 1.
Maybe ...... 2.
No 0.000. 30

63. What grades does your teacher think you can get?

Mostly A's ...... 1.
Mostly B's ...... 2.
Mostly C's ...... 3.
Mostly 0'3 .00... 4.
Mostly E's ...... 5.
NOW, WE WOULD LIKE YOU TO ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT YOUR PARENTS.
ANSWER THEM THE SAME WAY YOU ANSWERED THE OTHER ONES.
64. How far do you think your parents believe you will go in school?
Finish grade school ...... 1.
Go to high school for a while ...... 2.
Finish high school ...... 3.
Go to college for a while ...... 4.
Finish college ...... S.
65. How good of a student do your parents expect you to be in school?
One of the best ...... 1.
Better than most of the students ...... 2.
Same as most of the students ...... 3.
Not as good as most of the students ...... 4.
They don't really care ...... S.

66. Think of your mother and father. Do your mother and father say
you can do school work better, the same, or poorer than your
friends?
Better ...... 1.
Same as most ...... 2.
Poorer ...... 3.

 

313‘... Hiatl .

Cad
.

67.

68.

69.

70.

1221

Would your mother and father say that your grades would be with

the best, same as most, or below most of the students when you

finish high school?
The best . .....
Same as most ......
Below most ......

Do they think you could finish college?

Yes ......
Maybe ......
N0 .00...

Remember, you need more than four years of college to be a

teacher or doctor. Do your mother and father think you could

do that?
Yes ......
Maybe ......
No ......

What grades do your mother and father think you can get?

MOSLIY A's oooooo
Mostly B's ......
Mostly C's ......
Mostly D's ......
Mostly E's ......

NOW WE WANT TO ASK YOU SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PRINCIPAL OF THIS
SCHOOL. REMEMBER, YOUR PRINCIPAL WILL NQI_SEE YOUR ANSWERS.

71.

72.

73.

How many students in this school do you think the principal
believes can get high grades?

Almost all of the students ......
Host of the students ......
Half of the students ......
Some of the students ......
Almost none of the students ......

How do you think your principal would grade the work of the
students in this school, compared to other schools?

Would grade it much better ......
Would grade it somewhat better......
Would grade it the same ......
Would grade it somewhat lower ......
Would grade it much lower ......

How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will finish high school?

Almost all of the students ......
Most of the students ......
Half of the students ......
Some of the students ......

Almost none of the students ......

s.
4.

MAUNH
O O

mb'uNH
o

l.
2.
3.
4.
5.

 

liZZ

 

 

74. How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will go to college?
Almost all of the students . . . 1.
Most of the students .... . 2.
Half of the students .. . 3.
Some of the students ...... 4.
Almost none of the students . . 5.
75. How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will finish college?
Almost.a11 of the students . ..... 1.
Most of the students ...... 2.
Half of the students .. . 3.
Some of the students ...... 4.
Almost none of the students ...... 5.
76. When I do a good job on my school work, I am more popular with
other students.
Yes ...... 1.
No ...... 2.
Doesn't make any difference .. 3.
77.‘ If I do well in school, it will be easier for me to get the job
I want when I graduate.
Yes ...... 1.
No ...... 2.
Doesn't matter ...... 3.
78. My parents allow me greater freedom when I do well in school.
Yes ...... 1.
No ...... 2.
Doesn't matter ... 3.
79. If you came home with a good report card, what would your parents
most likely do?
Nothing in particular ...... 1.
Praise me . . 2.
Give me special privileges . . 3.
Give me money or some special reward .. 4.
Other ...... 5.
(specify)
80. If you came home with a poor report card, what would your parents
most likely do?
Nothing in particular ...... l.
Scold me ...... 2.
Take away privileges 3.
Punish me severely in some way ...... 4.
Other ...... 5.
(specify)
81. Sometimes what you want to happen is not what you think will happen.
How far do you think you will go in school?
Finish grade school .. l.'
Go to high school for a while , 2.
inish h gh sc 001,, 3.
o to co Iege or 2 while ...... 4_
Finish college ...... 5.

APPENDIX C

SCALE INTERCORRELATIONS

 

123

SCALE INTERCORRELATIONS

Reported Student Press Competition or Individual Performance

10 1.000

11 .362** 1.000

12 -.144 .073 1.000
13 .241* .251* .022

Importance of Self-Identity Student or Role

15 1.000

16 .244* 1.000

17 .552** .305** 1.000

18 .424** .138 .405**

Academic Norms of School

19 1.000

20 .172 1.000

21 .183 -.059 1.000

22 .275** .150 -.094 1.000

23 .283** .209* —.136 .497**

Sense of Control

26 1.000

27 .347** 1.000

28 -.035 -.116 1.000

29 .281** .359** -.125 1.000

30 .237* .324** -.137 .302 **
Self-Concept Academic Ability

31 1.000

32 .434** 1.000

33 .237* .239* 1.000

34 .149 .164 .276** 1.000

35 .212* .236* .450** .231* 1.000
36 .139 .135 .236* .395** .249*
37 .257** .293** .273** .208* .307**
38 .159 .194 .229* .211* .243*

”31;.‘- 7

 

1.000
.195* 1.000
.201* .342**

124

Perceived Best Friend Expectation and Evaluation

41 1.000

42 -.157 1.000

43 -.146 .309** 1.000

44 -.200* .410** .412** 1.000

45 -.310** .280** .263** .254** 1.000

46 -.257** .224* .241* .244* .520** 1.000
47 -.245* .300** .337** .341** .335** .333**

Reported Teacher Press Competition or Individual Performance

48 1.000

49 .332** 1.000

51 .374** .281** 1.000
54 .183 .211* .227*

Perceived Teacher Expectation and Evaluation

57 1.000

58 -.195* 1.000

59 -.142 .273** 1.000

60 -.202* .360** .386** 1.000

61 -.241* .235* .240* .298** 1.000

62 -.235* .269** .238* .318** .558** 1.000
63 -.270** .319** .295** .305** .296** .328**
Perceived Parent Expectation and Evaluation

64 1.000

64 -.229* 1.000

66 -.225* .414** 1.000

67 -.170 .400** .458** 1.000

68 -.306** .282** .254** .242* 1.000

69 -.296** .220* .211* .238* .478** 1.000
70 -.281** .337** .352** .367** .306** .241*

* Significant at or above
** Significant at or above

.05
.01

APPENDIX D

REPORTED STUDENT PRESS FOR COMPETITION 0R
INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE SCALE

 

125

REPORTED STUDENT PRESS FOR COMPETITION 0R

INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE SCALE
(Student Press Competition)

How many students in this school try hard to get a good grade on

their weekly tests?

Almost all of the students ..... 1.

Most of the students ..... 2.
Half of the students ..... 3.
Some of the students ..... 4.
Almost none of the students ..... 5.

How many students in this school will work hard to get a better
grade on the weekly tests than their friends do?

Almost all of the students ..... 1.
Most of the students ..... 2.
Half of the students ..... 3.
Some of the students ..... 4.
Almost none of the students ..... 5.

How many students in this school don't care if they get bad grades?

Almost all of the students ..... 1

Most of the students ..... 2.
Half of the students ..... 3.
Some of the students ..... 4.
Almost none of the students ..... 5.

How many students in this school do more studying for weekly tests

than they have to?

Almost all of the students ..... 1.
Most of the students ..... 2.
Half of the students ..... 3.
Some of the students ..... 4.

Almost none of the students ..... 5.

‘5‘!-

 

APPENDIX E

IMPORTANCE OF STUDENT SELF-IDENTITY OR ROLE SCALE

126

IMPORTANCE OF STUDENT SELF-IDENTITY OR ROLE SCALE

If the teacher that you like the best told you that you were a poor
student How would you feel?

 

I'd feel very bad ..... 1.
I'd feel somewhat bad ..... 2.
It wouldn't bother me very

much ..... 3.
It wouldn't bother me at all ..... 4.

How important is it to you to be a good student?

It's the most important thing I can do ..... l.
It's important, but other things are just as important ..... 2.
It's important, but other things are more important ..... 3.
It's not very important ..... 4.

If your parents told you that you were a poor student, how would
you feel.

I'd feel very bad ..... l.
I'd feel somewhat bad ..... 2.
It wouldn't bother me very

much ..... 3.
It wouldn't bother me at all ..... 4.

If your best friend told you that you were a poor student, how
would you feel?

I'd feel very bad ..... l.
I'd feel somewhat bad ..... 2.
It wouldn't bother me very

much ..... 3.

It wouldn't bother me at all ..... 4.

 

APPENDIX F

ACADEMIC NORMS OF SCHOOL SCALE

 

127

ACADEMIC NORMS OF SCHOOL SCALE

How do you think most of the teachers in this school react when one
of the students does a bad job on school work?

They feel badly and want to help him (her) do better
They feel badly, but don't really help him (her) ....
They get mad and tell him (her) to start working harder ....
They get mad but don't say anything ...
They really don't care

What do you think most students say when a student has done good
or better than he usually doesirlhis school work?

He was Just lucky, he won't do that good next time ....
Anyone could do it if they studied ....
I wnsh I could do as well as he did ....
I'm glad for him I hope he does as well next time ....

How important do most of the students in this class feel it is to
do well in school work?

Almost everybody thinks it is the most important thing
you can do. ....

Most students think it is quite important to do well ....

Doing well in school work is a good thing but other
things are important too.

Most students don't seem to care how well they do,but
it's okay for others to do well.

Most students don't seem to care how good they do,
but they don't like other students to do good.

How important do you think most of the students in this school feel
it is to do well in school work?

Almost everybody thinks it is the most important thing
you can do. ....

Most students think it is quite important to do well ....

Doin well in school work is a good thing but other
th ngs are important too.

Most students don't seem to care how well they do,
but it's okay for others to do well.

Most students don't seem to care how good they do,
but they don't like other students to do good. ....

o o o
m-hWN-U'
o o o o o

AWN-d
O O O

o o 0
U" h w N-I‘
o o o o

O 0
0'! h 00 NH
O O O O

128

How do you think most of the students in this class react when one
of you does a bad job on school work?

They feel badly and want to help him (her)do better . . l.
They feel sorry, but don't say anything .... 2.
They really don't care .... 3.
They are secretly happy that it happened .... 4.

 

APPENDIX G

SENSE OF CONTROL SCALE

 

129

SENSE OF CONTROL SCALE

People like me will not have much of a chance to do what we want

to in life.

Strongly agree
Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

People like me will never do well in school even though we try
hard.

Strongly agree
Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

I can do well in school if I work hard.

Strongly agree
Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

In this school, students like me don't have any luck.

Strongly agree
Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

You have to be lucky to get good grades in this school.

Strongly agree
Agree

Disagree

Strongly disagree

th-J
o o o o

#WN—l‘
o

th-fl
o o

DWNH

 

APPENDIX H

SELF-CONCEPT OF ACADEMIC ABILITY SCALE

130
SELF-CONCEPT OF ACADEMIC ABILITY SCALE

Think of your friends. Do you think you can do school work better,
the same, or poorer than your friends?

Better .... l.
The same .... 2.
Poorer .... 3.

Think of the students in your class. Do you think you can do school
work better, the same, or poorer than the students in your class?

Better .... l.
The same .... 2.
Poorer .... 3.

When you finish high school, do you think you will be one of the
best students, about the same as most of the students, or below
most of the students?

One of the best .... l
About the same as most of

the students .... 2
Below most of the students .. 3

Do you thing you could finish college?

Yes, with no difficulty at all .... l
Yes, as long as I work hard .... 2
Yes, but I will probably have a lot of difficulty .... 3
No, it will be too difficult .... 4

If you went to college, do you think you would be one of the best
students, about the same as most of the students, or below most of
the students?

One of the best , .... l.

About the same as most of

the students .... 2.

Below most of the students .... 3

If you want to be a doctor or a teacher, you need more than 4
years of college. Do you think you could do that?

Yes, with no difficulty at all .... 1
Yes, as long as I work hard .... 2
Yes, but I will probably have a lot of difficulty .... 3
No, it will be too difficult .... 4

Forget how your teachers mark your
your own work is?

What marks do you think you really

131

work. How good do ygg_think

Excellent
Good
About the same as most of

the students ....

Below most of the students
Poor

can get if you try?

 

Mostly A's .. .
Mostly B's ....
Mostly C's ....
Mostly D's ..

Mostly E's

C O O
(II-boo N—'

O
(fl-thd

 

APPENDIX I

PERCEIVED FRIEND EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

132

PERCEIVED FRIEND EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

How far do you think your best friend believes you will go in school?

Finish grade school .... 1.
Go to high school for a while .... 2.
Go to college for a while .... 3.
Finish college .... 4.
How good a student does your best friend expect you to be in school? F——-

One of the best ....
Better than most of the students.... .
Same as most students ....
Not as good as most students ....

He doesn't really care

C
UTDWN-d

 

”[1 .

I. J"

Think of your best friend. Would your best friend say you can do school
work better, the same, or poorer than other people your age?

Better .... l.
The same .... 2.
Poorer .... 3.

Would your best friend say that your grades would be with the best,
same as most, or below most of the students when you graduate from
high school?

With the best . l.
Same as most . 2.
Below most . 3.
Does your best friend think you could finish college?
Yes . l.
Maybe .... 2.
No .... 3.
Remember you need more than four years of college to be a teacher
or doctor. Does your best friend think you could do that?
Yes .... l.
Maybe . 2.
No . 3.

133

What grades does your best friend think you can get?

Mostly A's
Mostly B's
Mostly C's
Mostly D's
Mostly E's

 

APPENDIX J

PERCEIVED TEACHER EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

 

134

PERCEIVED TEACHER EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

How far do you think the teachergyou like the best believes you will
go in school?

 

Finish grade school .... 1.

Go to high school for a while .... 2.

Finish high school .... 3.

Go to college for a while .... 4. (.9
Finish college . 5. F

How good of a student does the teachergyou like the best expect
you to be in school?

 

 

One of the best .... 1.
Better than most of the students.... 2.
Same as most students .... 3.
Not as good as most students .... 4. -i‘
She doesn't really care .... 5.

Think of your teacher. Would your teacher say you can do school
work better, the same, or poorer than other people your age?

Better .... l.
The same .... 2.
Poorer .... 3.

Would your teacher say that your grades would be with the best, same
as most, or below most of the students when you graduate from high school?

With the best .... 1.
Same as most .... 2.
Below most . 3

Does your teacher think you could finish college?

Yes .... l.
Maybe .... 2.
No .... 3.

Remember you need more than four years of college to be a teacher
or doctor. Does your teacher think you could do that?

Yes .... l.
Maybe .... 2.
No .... 3.

135

What grades does your teacher think you can_get?

Mostly A's .... 1.
Mostly B's .... 2.
Mostly C's .... 3.
Mostly D's .... 4.
Mostly E's .... 5.

APPENDIX K

PERCEIVED PARENT EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

 

136

PERCEIVED PARENT EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

How far do you think your parents believe you will go in school?

Finish grade school .... l.
Go to high school for a while .... 2.
Finish high school .... 3.
Go to college for a while .... 4.
Finish college .... 5.

How good of a student do your parents expect you to be in school?

One of the best

Better than most of the students .
Same as most of the students . ..
Not as good as most of the students
They don't really care

m-wa—i
0

Think of your mother and father. Do your mother and father say
you can do school work better, the same, or poorer than your friends?

Better .... l.
Same as most .... 2.
Poorer .... 3.

Would your mother and father say that your grades would be with the
best, same as most, or below most of the students when you finish
high school?

The best .... l.
Same as most .... 2.
Below most .... 3.

Do they think you could finish college?

Yes .... 1.
Maybe .... 2.
No .... 3

Remember, you need more than four years of college to be a teacher or
doctor. Do your mother and father think you could do that?

Yes .... l.
Maybe .... 2.
No. .... 3.

137

What grades do your mother and father think you can get?

Mostly A's
Mostly B's
Mostly C's
Mostly D's
Mostly E's

o 0
01¢de
a o o

 

APPENDIX L

PERCEIVED PRINCIPAL EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

 

138

PERCEIVED PRINCIPAL EXPECTATIONS AND EVALUATIONS SCALE

How many students in this school do you think the principal believes
can get high grades?

Almost all of the students .... l.
Most of the students .... 2.
Half of the students .... 3.
Some of the students .... 4.
Almost none of the students .... 5.
How do you think your principal would grade the work of the students
in this school, compared to other schools?
Would grade it much better .... 1.
Would grade it somewhat better 2.
Would grade it the same .... 3.
Would grade it somewhat lower .... 4.
Would grade it much lower . 5.
How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will finish high school?
Almost all of the students .... 1.
Most of the students .... 2.
Half of the students .... 3.
Some of the students .... 4.
Almost none of the students . 5.
How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will go to college?
Almost all of the students .. l.
Most of the students .... 2.
Half of the students .... 3.
Some of the students .... 4.
Almost none of the students .... 5.
How many of the students in this school do you think the principal
believes will finish college?
Almost all of the students . l.
Most of the students .... 2.
Half of the students .... 3.
Some of the students .... 4.
Almost none of the students . 5.

 

APPENDIX M

REPORTED TEACHER PRESS FOR COMPETITION OR INDIVIDUAL
PERFORMANCE SCALE

 

139
REPORTED TEACHER PRESS FOR COMPETITION OR INDIVIDUAL
PERFORMANCE SCALE

Of the teachers that you know in this school how many tell students to
try hard to do better on tests?

Almost all of the teachers . l.
Most of the teachers . 2.
Half of the teachers . 3.
Some of the teachers .... 4.
Almost none of the teachers .... 5.

How many teachers in this school tell students to try and get
better grades than their classmates?

Almost all of the teachers .... l.
Most of the teachers .... 2.
Half of the teachers .... 3.
Some of the teachers .... 4.
Almost none of the teachers .... 5.
Of the teachers that you know in this school how many tell students
to do extra work so that they can get better grades?
Almost all of the teachers .... 1.
Most of the teachers .... 2.
Half of the teachers .... 3.
Some of the teachers .... 4.
Almost none of the teachers .... 5.
If the teachers in this school think a student can't do good work,
how many will try to make him work hard anyway?
Almost all of the teachers . 1.
Most of the teachers .... 2.
Half of the teachers .... 3.
Some of the teachers .... 4.
Almost none of the teachers . 5.

 

 

APPENDIX N

DUNCAN'S SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDEX SCORE OF SCHOOLS IN
COMPARISON WITH THE STATE ASSESSMENT
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SCORE OF SCHOOLS

140

DUNCAN'S SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDEX SCORE OF SCHOOLS IN
COMPARISON WITH THE STATE ASSESSMENT
SOCIO-ECONOMIC SCORE OF SCHOOLS

When comparing Duncan's socio-economic index mean score for each

school to the State Assessment socio-economic mean score for each

school, the following information should be kept in mind.

1.

Duncan's index is based on education and income with occupa-
tion as the intervening variable. Additionally, Duncan has
computed a mean for each occupation which denudes the index
of the varying life styles which are in most cases present.

The State Assessment socio-economic score is based on consump-
tion patterns, parent's education, and aspirations. It is
composed of twelve items instead of just occupations as is

the case with the Duncan Scale.

Children in elementary school, except in some instances those
in economically advantaged situations, usually do not answer
occupation questions in a manner that allows adequate coding
by Duncan scale criteria.

Children in disadvantaged economic situations have been known
to fantasize on socio-economic questions of a consumption nature.

Therefore, with elementary school children, the state assess-
ment method of socio-economic measurement may be more reliable
because it is based on more than one item (i.e. twelve items
as opposed to the Duncan scale which is based solely on
occupation). Therefore, a better estimate of life style is
determined by the state assessment method.

141

TABLE 15

DUNCAN'S SOCIO-ECONOMIC INDEX SCORE IN SCHOOLS IN COMPARISON WITH
THE STATE ASSESSMENT SOCIO-ECONOMIC SCORE OF SCHOOLS

 

 

 

Duncan SES SES State Assessment
School Index Level SES Score
1 50.5 High 55.1
2 41.6 High 55.2
3 51.8 High 54.4
4 48.7 High 54.9
5 30.0 High 49.4
6 50.2 High 50.1
7 32.4 Low 43.2
8 26.0 Low 44.9
9 36.5 Low 46.6
10 29.0 Low 46.8
'H *‘k **-
12 17.76 High 49.2
14 18.8 Low 46.7
15 64.9 High 61.3
16 40.4 High 52.9
17 28.7 Low 47.0
18 Low 46.7

19.1

 

**School ll not available for data collection.

"I11111111711111'1111E8